Election Day 2012

[Regulus]

Global warming: the increase in Earth’s average surface temperature due to rising levels of greenhouse gases.

Climate change: a long-term change in the Earth’s climate, or of a region on Earth.

There is a difference. But they are both true for our time period. On average, Earth's temperatures are changing gradually: it's getting a little bit warmer. Yes, this is climate change. Yes, this is global warming.

The ice caps are not average. Average is average for the entire world.

[DGFone]

Global warming: the increase in Earth’s average surface temperature due to rising levels of greenhouse gases.

Climate change: a long-term change in the Earth’s climate, or of a region on Earth.

There is a difference. But they are both true for our time period. On average, Earth's temperatures are changing gradually: it's getting a little bit warmer. Yes, this is climate change. Yes, this is global warming.

Yeah, let me correct you scientifically on that: Increase of greenhouses gases? True.
Greenhouse effect? Complete nonsense. If you want to know what is actually happening, you need to dive into a few textbooks. The greenhouse effect, despite its very common use in today's media, was one of the first things to be disproven. At least, what you hear in the media was disproven.

[Regulus]

Then explain why Venus is hotter than Mercury on average, even though it is farther away from the sun.

The idea that atmospheres hold in heat is not myth. It has not been disproven once.

I've written several essays on the subject of Global Warming before. I've done my research. You are wrong, plain and simple, and that's me trying to be nice.

[DGFone]

Then explain why Venus is hotter than Mercury on average, even though it is farther away from the sun.

The idea that atmospheres hold in heat is not myth. It has not been disproven once.

I've written several essays on the subject of Global Warming before. I've done my research. You are wrong, plain and simple, and that's me trying to be nice.

Then how come our stratosphere has been cooling down, not heating up like all of these things are saying? I don't care what essays you wrote on global warming, I want to see your equations. Your science. How energy interacts with our atmosphere, and the ground.

Once again, I AM NOT DISAGREEING with climate change. But what I've seen disproven is the popular concept of 'greenhouse effect' ad global warming - that part is wrong.

So FFS, read what I am saying before disagreeing with me. I thought you knew better than that.

Here is exactly what I mean:
http://www.npr.org/2010/12/03/131785444 ... imate-Quiz

[Regulus]

Here it is, explained at a middle or high school school science level, provided by the NOAA.

http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/education/ ... Theory.pdf

You still haven't answered my question. How could Venus be hotter than Mercury, if not for its atmosphere which contains greenhouse gasses?

How could a thicker atmosphere not trap in more heat? You're asking for my equations, when you have no equations of your own, either.

And you have yet to provide a single source which states that global warming has been proved false.

[DGFone]

Here it is, explained at a middle or high school school science level, provided by the NOAA.
http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/education/ ... Theory.pdf
You still haven't answered my question. How could Venus be hotter than Mercury, if not for its atmosphere which contains greenhouse gasses?
How could a thicker atmosphere not trap in more heat? You're asking for my equations, when you have no equations of your own, either.
And you have yet to provide a single source which states that global warming has been proved false.

I recently took a class comparing the planets, so here is my answer, as taught by college professors:

Difference between Mercury and Venus: Venus has an atmosphere, Mercury has non at all. as for the greenhouse effect, here is why most people are wrong about it:

You know how much effect CO2 has on trapping heat? Close to none. The real effect comes primarily from these two: Water vapor and methane. Both of these have also increased with the industrial revolution. After all, natural gas is methane.

So while CO2 does a little bit of damage, most people are completely oblivious to the fact that it's like worrying about getting shot by a pistol in an army armed with machine guns. You want to cool the earth down? Lower H2O and methane emissions.

BTW, a bit of chemistry: What does your car produce when you drive it? You oxidize oil, a hydro-carbon. By products? CO2 (which people are afraid of) and H2O (which people don't mind). It's the water you should be afraid of...

Equation: HxCx (hydrocarbon) + O2 (atmospheric oxygen) = CO2 + H2O + heat (guess where that goes)

[FlipMode]

I can post a huge rant, but will refrain from doing so.

31 pages later....

And what does global warming have to do with the election? I could be missing something but this seems to have gone way off topic, you're barely even debating politics any more...

[Regulus]

You know how much effect CO2 has on trapping heat? Close to none. The real effect comes primarily from these two: Water vapor and methane. Both of these have also increased with the industrial revolution. After all, natural gas is methane.

That is what is disputed, not the greenhouse effect itself.

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/gases.html

As the temperature of the atmosphere rises, more water is evaporated from ground storage (rivers, oceans, reservoirs, soil). Because the air is warmer, the absolute humidity can be higher (in essence, the air is able to 'hold' more water when it's warmer), leading to more water vapor in the atmosphere. As a greenhouse gas, the higher concentration of water vapor is then able to absorb more thermal IR energy radiated from the Earth, thus further warming the atmosphere. The warmer atmosphere can then hold more water vapor and so on and so on. This is referred to as a 'positive feedback loop'. However, huge scientific uncertainty exists in defining the extent and importance of this feedback loop. As water vapor increases in the atmosphere, more of it will eventually also condense into clouds, which are more able to reflect incoming solar radiation (thus allowing less energy to reach the Earth's surface and heat it up). The future monitoring of atmospheric processes involving water vapor will be critical to fully understand the feedbacks in the climate system leading to global climate change. As yet, though the basics of the hydrological cycle are fairly well understood, we have very little comprehension of the complexity of the feedback loops. Also, while we have good atmospheric measurements of other key greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide and methane, we have poor measurements of global water vapor, so it is not certain by how much atmospheric concentrations have risen in recent decades or centuries, though satellite measurements, combined with balloon data and some in-situ ground measurements indicate generally positive trends in global water vapor.

Methane is an extremely effective absorber of radiation, though its atmospheric concentration is less than CO2 and its lifetime in the atmosphere is brief (10-12 years), compared to some other greenhouse gases (such as CO2, N2O, CFCs).

The natural production and absorption of carbon dioxide (CO2) is achieved through the terrestrial biosphere and the ocean. However, humankind has altered the natural carbon cycle by burning coal, oil, natural gas and wood and since the industrial revolution began in the mid 1700s, each of these activities has increased in scale and distribution. Carbon dioxide was the first greenhouse gas demonstrated to be increasing in atmospheric concentration with the first conclusive measurements being made in the last half of the 20th century. Prior to the industrial revolution, concentrations were fairly stable at 280ppm. Today, they are around 370ppm, an increase of well over 30 percent.

I can post a huge rant, but will refrain from doing so.

31 pages later....

And what does global warming have to do with the election? I could be missing something but this seems to have gone way off topic, you're barely even debating politics any more...

This is relevant because global warming is an issue that Obama is trying to fix, but Romney doesn't care about.

[DGFone]

And what does global warming have to do with the election? I could be missing something but this seems to have gone way off topic, you're barely even debating politics any more...

Yeah, looks like it.

It was most me ranting about when I complain about pseudoscience and EVERYONE start telling me that I am wrong, because what do you know, they believe that pseudoscience...

But mostly is started with Regulus posting that image of Obama versus Romney in terms of energy plans. You want to provide incentives for oil companies to research into alternative energy, instead of taxing them and using that to pay for research. Oil companies spend a lot more, and they KNOW how to research effectively.

Not to mention, don't get me started on how bad just about all other forms of alternative energy are. The cleanest alternative fuel? Nuclear.

That Toyota Prius you bought to save gas mileage? Fine.
That Toyota Prius you bought to save the world? Don't look at how much energy went into those batteries, not to mention the acids inside them...

So yes, Obama might be trying to save the world, and Romney not.
But as far as actually going to saving the world, in his ignorance, Romney might be better...

---

Also, about global warming: a common cited number is the temperature increase of 6% from the onset of the industrial revolution. EVERYBODY PANIC!

The real change in temperature? 0.6%. What's the difference? The pseudoscience scale used a zero of 0C. Real science uses a zero of 0 Kelvin, or -273 C.

So another hotly disputed thing in climate science is not so much how much the temperature increase is effecting the world, because it really is a very small change, as much as how much the gas disbalance is causing things to go haywire. This is exactly why I am telling you that we hardly know what is going on.

And Regulus: Methane might be less than CO2. But H20? There's a reason why your hating bill is very big... you're heating water... with Methane...

[FlipMode]

This is relevant because global warming is an issue that Obama is trying to fix, but Romney doesn't care about.

Oh. Well I would vote Obama then. All things considered, Obama has accomplished quite a lot so far and "If it aint broke, don't fix it". I think as Az mentioned, more time in presidency will let him focus on other issues that have taken a back-burner to things like War on Terrorism.

Not that I have researched it a whole lot, being in the UK. But I do know of what Obama has achieved and am quite happy with that so, yeah XD