Page 3 of 3

Posted: 8/14/2005, 5:13 pm
by nelison
Korzic wrote:Global warming has alway been the precursor to an ice age (something of which we are long overdue for)

In a nutshell... world warms up -> ice caps melt -> warm ocean currents stop -> world freezes over (and while Day After Tomorrow is a rather large exaggeration of this fact, its scientific base is very secure) The freeze will take about 100 odd years and then you can look forward to 10 to 100 thousand years of icey goodness.


Now while I agree with you I think what she is getting at is although this has happened in the past, can it be possible that we are causing this process to speed up?

I don't know enough about the environment to know the answer (really it's not something I've been interested in enough to read up on), but do we know how quickly emission levels increase in order to cause an ice age? And do we know if the increases we've seen in the past X years is comparable to the ones seen before past ice ages?

Posted: 8/14/2005, 11:40 pm
by closeyoureyes
I know this is a terrible way to think, and I don't necessarily think like it, however when I feel anxious about dying in an Ice Age, i remind myself i'll be long dead before it happens.

Posted: 8/15/2005, 3:49 am
by Korzic
J-Neli wrote:
Korzic wrote:Global warming has alway been the precursor to an ice age (something of which we are long overdue for)

In a nutshell... world warms up -> ice caps melt -> warm ocean currents stop -> world freezes over (and while Day After Tomorrow is a rather large exaggeration of this fact, its scientific base is very secure) The freeze will take about 100 odd years and then you can look forward to 10 to 100 thousand years of icey goodness.


Now while I agree with you I think what she is getting at is although this has happened in the past, can it be possible that we are causing this process to speed up?

I don't know enough about the environment to know the answer (really it's not something I've been interested in enough to read up on), but do we know how quickly emission levels increase in order to cause an ice age? And do we know if the increases we've seen in the past X years is comparable to the ones seen before past ice ages?


AFAIK, no one knows whether we are actually speeding this process up or not. Its one of those things where you have 1 group of scientists saying we are and another who says that the current rate of increase is entirely natural. Ice ages aren't the most common of events.

Posted: 8/15/2005, 8:02 am
by nelison
Ya I knew there was a split between scientists and their beliefs. I just figured maybe there was geological evidence found in Arctic ice. So I guess really to conclude that it's completely natural is false if so many scientists can't decide. Considering these people spend their lives day in and day out working on this stuff I'd think that the reason for the differing opinions is inconclusive evidence in either direction. So I think it's a bit too soon to jump on either horse.

Posted: 8/15/2005, 9:22 am
by Korzic
While there is no doubt that GW is a natural phenomenon, as to what rate it should be is anyones guess.

Posted: 8/19/2005, 9:19 pm
by Bandalero
every year i mention this and i'll mention it this year albeit way too late. Germany actually researched nuclear weapons during the world war as did Japan. germany never got the program off of it's feet and japan didn't have the vehicle (bomber) to deliver it.

to those who think it was irresponsible to for the US to use the two bombs, think now, of how other counties use nuclear weapons much more irresponsibly. india and pakistan tested nuclear bombs one after another to intimidate each other, north korea is using their arsenal to barter a better deal from the world in terms of power, and of course you have the cold war, pitting to countries against each other for no real appearant reason.

Truman thought that the bomb was actually just a bomb that went bang and didn't know of the dangers of radioactivity. scientists knew that there would be some deadly radioactivity after the bomb dropped, however, not a single one knew or thought it would be as bad as it was.

the war would have continued through an invasion even though the emperor of japan wished surrender. even after 2 bombs, radical gangs sought to continue the war keeping the emperor of Japan a prisoner in his own palace.

Hiroshima today has over 1 million people living in it. not a single one of them would live there if the levels of radioactivity would still be deadly.

Posted: 8/20/2005, 1:37 pm
by what a spectacle
So I'm in Canada and haven't been near a computer. Look how much I've missed.

Korzic wrote:Global warming has alway been the precursor to an ice age (something of which we are long overdue for)

In a nutshell... world warms up -> ice caps melt -> warm ocean currents stop -> world freezes over (and while Day After Tomorrow is a rather large exaggeration of this fact, its scientific base is very secure) The freeze will take about 100 odd years and then you can look forward to 10 to 100 thousand years of icey goodness.


Your right, it is a completely natural process, but we are speeding it up. Or rather, we're scrweing with the earth a little bit all over the globe and the effects are all adding up, whether its global warming or something else. Just look at deforistation, that does so much damage. It really bugs me when people forget that we are just another part of nature, and think that we are above it and can fuck with it.

Korzic wrote:PS

A lot of what I say may seem ignorant. But its just an alternate way of looking at things. I'm a practical man. I don't believe that utopia can or ever will exist. And as such my opinion on things reflects this view. Situation A happens, we deal with it however our current leaders deem that we do. If you don't like it you can jump up and down with thousands of others screaming blue murder but in the end, you probably wont change their position any. I play with what hand I'm given and if you don't like the rules of the game. Don't play :)


I know. The perfect world can't ever exist, and to be honest, in some ways, I wouldn't want it to. I just like to complain.

Korzic wrote:PPS

I thank you for respecting my opinion as an opinion and I return your theoretical hug with a cyber flower in the interests of more lively discussion without resorting to name calling :)


Yay flowers are awesome and name calling is childish, I'm so happy i could do a dance. :)