global warming myth or fact ? the new ice age

[torbirdie]

Originally Posted by XRQTR

Global warming my butt, we're diluting the worlds oceans with storm water run off that is pumped straight into the bays.

.

perhaps there is some truth in how there is more water run off that finds its way into the ocean, but perhaps you could back it up with numbers like the decrease in rainfall say in a city such as Melbourne and the increase of new dwellings and hard surfaces that redirect a % of this decreased rainfall into the bay.
Perhaps you are thinking on a global scale and are linking it to rising sea levels,(perhaps do the calculations for us on how many roofs at average annual rainfall would be needed to make the oceans rise 1cm) or that wont happen according you restricted ice melt theory.

When you do that, perhaps point out why that then makes global warming bunk?

[xbgs351]

Originally Posted by XRQTR

As for the ice caps melting, well duhhhh, what happens when you dilute salt water?? Salt water that helps keep ice in it's frozen state, care to guess?? No need it melts, it was an old curiousity show experiment FFS, "How can you pick up a piece of ice with a piece of string without tieing it around??" try this at home, put a cube of ice in a glass of water and lay the string over the top, then sprinkle a pinch of salt over it and carefully lift the string..... ok kiddies that's your homework, hand in your reports tomorrow

The same experiment has actually been repeated many times on other kids science shows since then, and still they don't get it, well I guess it is just a show for kids and has no real relevance in the real world.

The salt makes the ice melt and when the salt gets diluted the water refreezes.

[ltd]

Originally Posted by torbirdie

I assume you mean relevant? I think all you are doing is confirming what Greenfoam has said, that man can influence the environment in a relatively large area, such as the city of Melbourne and its sprawl.

No, I mean relative.
It is not in any way shape or form related to this topic.
Relevance on the other hand pertains to significance, bearing or importance.
Don't presume to know what I mean, I can quite capably speak for myself.

[ltd]

Originally Posted by XRQTR

Global warming my butt, we're diluting the worlds oceans with storm water run off that is pumped straight into the bays.

There was a time, before the urban sprawl, when rain water sank back into the ground and bolstered the ground water reserves, ask a borer how much deeper he's now digging before he hits water, alot more, up to 3 times deeper. Since the population explosion in this country as well as others more and more storm water is being captured and then diverted out to the ocean.

If you think that won't make a lick of difference, the septic tank at work went for 6 months before I emptied it the first time, at which point I noticed a small leak in the bathroom tap starting up, I didn't think it was much of a problem until 3 weeks later when the same tank was full. This is a 3000 litre tank and a small, tiny, miniscule leak filled it in 3 weeks, and no it wasn't all the late night kebabs, when the guy emptied it he commented on the fact that it had to be a leak somewhere because it was almost all just water with very little effluent. So if a little leak can fill a tank in 3 weeks, what have we been doing to the oceans for the last how many decades.

As for the ice caps melting, well duhhhh, what happens when you dilute salt water?? Salt water that helps keep ice in it's frozen state, care to guess?? No need it melts, it was an old curiousity show experiment FFS, "How can you pick up a piece of ice with a piece of string without tieing it around??" try this at home, put a cube of ice in a glass of water and lay the string over the top, then sprinkle a pinch of salt over it and carefully lift the string..... ok kiddies that's your homework, hand in your reports tomorrow

The same experiment has actually been repeated many times on other kids science shows since then, and still they don't get it, well I guess it is just a show for kids and has no real relevance in the real world.

Um, what do you think happens to the salt when evaporation over the oceans occurs?
As for borers, wasn't the scare a little while back about the water table being too high?
Finally, salt keeping ice frozen? BZZZZZZ - Exactly wrong.
Salt melts ice. That's why in frozen climates a salt and grit mix is sprinkled on the roads to melt road ice.

[Hardtopxb]

So ltd you actually think that all the rubbish we eject into the atmosphere does not effect the overall climatic conditions of this planet?.

[flappist]

Originally Posted by Hardtopxb

So ltd you actually think that all the rubbish we eject into the atmosphere does not effect the overall climatic conditions of this planet?.

It affects it about as much as you going for a swim raises the tide level and doing a 400m run in your XB slows down or speeds up the rotation of the planet.

The only thing that the global warming crisis will ever affect is the level of money taken from ordinary people and given to "special" groups.

Of course recent history is littered with stupid people and interest groups pushing fear uncertainty and doubt to further their agenda.

The red peril
Oil shortage
Y2K
World terrorism
Bird flu
Swine flu
Climate change

We are being wiped out completely on a daily basis........

[burnz]

lucky bundy bear with an M16 will go into bat for us hay.
first stop canberra.

[Hardtopxb]

Originally Posted by flappist

It affects it about as much as you going for a swim raises the tide level and doing a 400m run in your XB slows down or speeds up the rotation of the planet.

The only thing that the global warming crisis will ever affect is the level of money taken from ordinary people and given to "special" groups.

Of course recent history is littered with stupid people and interest groups pushing fear uncertainty and doubt to further their agenda.

The red peril
Oil shortage
Y2K
World terrorism
Bird flu
Swine flu
Climate change

We are being wiped out completely on a daily basis........

Lol,Some people can't see the forest for the trees..

[XRQTR]

Originally Posted by torbirdie

perhaps there is some truth in how there is more water run off that finds its way into the ocean, but perhaps you could back it up with numbers like the decrease in rainfall say in a city such as Melbourne and the increase of new dwellings and hard surfaces that redirect a % of this decreased rainfall into the bay.
Perhaps you are thinking on a global scale and are linking it to rising sea levels,(perhaps do the calculations for us on how many roofs at average annual rainfall would be needed to make the oceans rise 1cm) or that wont happen according you restricted ice melt theory.

When you do that, perhaps point out why that then makes global warming bunk?

I asked you all to do a science experiment, a simple experiment, none of you bothered so you all failed, big L's for all of you.

[XRQTR]

Originally Posted by xbgs351

The salt makes the ice melt and when the salt gets diluted the water refreezes.

Is that so???










salt will melt ice when it is exposed to it for very short amounts of time or for that matter concentration, explain that Einsteins.

That is all


p.s. I forgot to add

[xbgs351]

Originally Posted by XRQTR

Is that so???

salt will melt ice when it is exposed to it for very short amounts of time or for that matter concentration, explain that Einsteins.

That is all


p.s. I forgot to add

WHY DON'T YOU SUCK ON MY CHOCOLATE SALTED BALLS

and Birdie I'm saving the snag for you

The following quote was lifted straight from the CSIRO webpage on this very subject.
http://www.csiro.au/resources/salt-ice-activity.html

Your ice block had a thin layer of liquid water on its surface. When you add salt to the liquid water, the salt stops some of the liquid water molecules from re-joining the ice, but it doesn't affect the water molecules breaking off from the ice. As a result, the ice melts more quickly.

As more water melts, the salt is diluted, so it does not interfere with the liquid water joining to the ice as effectively. Eventually the salt is diluted enough that some of the water can be captured by the ice again and it freezes around the thread.

I know that you are nobody's fool, but chinup, someone may adopt you yet.

[XRQTR]

So the pics mean nothing then??

Again you need to go back to what someone else is telling you to believe because they have a PhD after their name??

If you guys are gonna argue, that's fine, but try to make it your intelligence and understanding, not one you've borrowed.

Ice in water does not re-freeze, it melts, that's why you need a top up of ice when using it to cool drinks.

[xbgs351]

Originally Posted by XRQTR

So the pics mean nothing then??

Again you need to go back to what someone else is telling you to believe because they have a PhD after their name??

If you guys are gonna argue, that's fine, but try to make it your intelligence and understanding, not one you've borrowed.

No the pictures verify what I said and what I quoted.

Why don't you try my experiment? Take one block of ice and sprinkle salt on one half of it. Wait a while and see which half melts the fastest.

[burnz]

wow all this science.
water cannot boil/freeze when under pressure.
provided the pressure is greater than the temp applied.

[torbirdie]

Originally Posted by XRQTR

Perhaps you need to get a life.

Insult those that want to discuss what you are proposing, that'll make you right every time.

Originally Posted by XRQTR

I have many seeing as I don't really recall most of my 20's and my early 30's are still a blur, hell my brothers wedding is still flashing back. Early onset dementure, nah, just a good life lived as hard as it can be for as long as I wanted to.

Interesting, but please explain how it backs up what you want to say.

Originally Posted by XRQTR

You seem to need evidence for everything, you're an educated tool, I mean fool, sorry I meant person aren't you??

Hmm, you come from the school where education is not valued and believe that I must be one of those educated fools?

Originally Posted by XRQTR

It shows as you need some form of evidence for any little thing that someone might wish to bring up that might not agree with your point of stupidity. Most educated people are as stupid as the people that print the books, because without them they are lost, having no real life experience other than those of whom they read about.

I assume from this that we should believe anything that climate change denialists such as yourself bring to the table is correct on faith alone based on the fact they didnt waste their time with an education?

Originally Posted by XRQTR

You want proof? you really want the proof?? ................. you can't handle the proof

How about you find evidence that my theory is incorrect, no?? not your thing?? easier to ask for evidence than have to search it out yourself?? Of course it is.

I asked you all to do a science experiment, a simple experiment, none of you bothered so you all failed, big L's for all of you.
.

LOL, so your home kitchen experiment disproves global warming, Im not doubting what you see, just your conclusions from it which were a little lacking in any numbers!

Originally Posted by XRQTR

read my next post then shut up and burrow back underground where you belong.

Post reported.

[flappist]

Originally Posted by Hardtopxb

Lol,Some people can't see the forest for the trees..

While others see a couple of concrete power poles painted green, scream that it must be an endangered forest because it only has a couple of trees with no leaves, declare that it must be saved and implement revinue based legislation to fund the "save the endangered forest that only has a couple of trees with no leaves" and of course a management group, marketing group, information technology group, scientific investigation group, media group and financial management group to conserve and manage the "world heritage listed endangered forest" while employing at great cost "high profile celebrities" and "academic experts" to convince naive simpletons that those who oppose the saving of "extinction level event preventing ozone friendly bio degradable polyunsaturated beats as it sweeps as it cleans anyhow have a winfield wildife warrior sea shepard endorsed world heritage hyper endangered mega forest" that:

Some people can't see the forest for the trees

[fangq]

Originally Posted by XRQTR

So the pics mean nothing then??

Again you need to go back to what someone else is telling you to believe because they have a PhD after their name??

If you guys are gonna argue, that's fine, but try to make it your intelligence and understanding, not one you've borrowed.

Ice in water does not re-freeze, it melts, that's why you need a top up of ice when using it to cool drinks.

OK..let's change a variable ( temperature ) Do the salt trick whilst the ice is still in the freezer. Let me know it it melts.
Steve

[xbgs351]

Originally Posted by burnz

wow all this science.
water cannot boil/freeze when under pressure.
provided the pressure is greater than the temp applied.

Have you been smoking the same stuff as XRQTR? That sentence makes no sense at all.

[Wally]

Originally Posted by XRQTR

So the pics mean nothing then??

Again you need to go back to what someone else is telling you to believe because they have a PhD after their name??

If you guys are gonna argue, that's fine, but try to make it your intelligence and understanding, not one you've borrowed.

Ice in water does not re-freeze, it melts, that's why you need a top up of ice when using it to cool drinks.

Without being asked to "SUCK ON MY CHOCOLATE SALTED BALLS" LOL, I think you'll find that salt does lower the melting point of ice and that the CSIRO PHDs who need books are probably correct in this instance.

Getting past all the hype, there has been clear evidence for sometime of climate change. It is chronicled in ASHRAE/AIRAH weather bin data, indicating changes in design conditions, heating degree days, cooling degree days, etc. Being professional associations they provide this data so that buildings are engineered to have adequate climate control. Undertstated ambient design conditions can translate into substantial under estimation of cooling and heating loads with the risk of installing very expensive, but deficient refrigeration plant and equipment.

I agree to some extent with your comment about deep bed aquafiers being starved. The side effect is loss of trees, which would draw from the groundwater. The loss of trees results in sub surface water rising, along with salt, killing more trees, until there is a dead swamp remaining. Gum trees are particularly useful in keeping water levels down, too good when it came to the Everglades.

[xbgs351]

Back on topic. Has anybody here read Ian Wishart's book Air Con: The seriously inconvenient truth about global warming?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=90otA..._embedded#t=13

[vik351]

Interesting Reading. If the 65% of Australians who "agree with an ETS, but admit they don't understand it" read this they may think again before being so eager to subject us to a huge and unnecessary jump in the cost in living.

Here’s a way to understand Mr Rudd’s Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme-

Imagine 1 kilometre of atmosphere that we want to rid of human carbon pollution. We’ll have a walk along it.
The first 770 metres are Nitrogen.
The next 210 metres are Oxygen.
That’s 980 metres of the 1 kilometre. 20 metres to go.
The next 10 metres are water vapour. 10 metres left.
9 metres are argon. Just 1 more metre.
A few gases make up the first bit of that last metre.
The last 38 centimetres of the kilometre – that’s carbon dioxide.
A bit over one foot.
97% of that is produced by Mother Nature. It’s natural.
Out of our journey of one kilometre, there are just 12 millimetres left. About half an inch. Just over a centimetre.
That’s the amount of carbon dioxide that global human activity puts into the atmosphere.
And of those 12 millimetres Australia puts in .18 of a millimetre.
Less than the thickness of a hair. Out of a kilometre.

As a hair is to a kilometre – so is Australia’s contribution to what Mr Rudd calls Carbon Pollution.

Imagine Brisbane’s new Gateway Bridge, ready to be officially opened by Mr Rudd. It’s been polished, painted and scrubbed by an army of workers till its 1 kilometre length is surgically clean. Except that Mr Rudd says we have a huge problem, the bridge is polluted – there’s a human hair on the roadway. We’d laugh ourselves silly.

There are plenty of real pollution problems to worry about. It’s hard to imagine that Australia’s contribution to carbon dioxide in the world’s atmosphere is one of the more pressing ones. And I can’t believe that a new tax on everything is the only way to blow that pesky hair away.

Perhaps we all need to just take a few deep breaths.


vik...

[torbirdie]

Originally Posted by vik351

Interesting Reading. If the 65% of Australians who "agree with an ETS, but admit they don't understand it" read this they may think again before being so eager to subject us to a huge and unnecessary jump in the cost in living.

Here’s a way to understand Mr Rudd’s Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme-

Imagine 1 kilometre of atmosphere that we want to rid of human carbon pollution. We’ll have a walk along it.
The first 770 metres are Nitrogen.
The next 210 metres are Oxygen.
That’s 980 metres of the 1 kilometre. 20 metres to go.
The next 10 metres are water vapour. 10 metres left.
9 metres are argon. Just 1 more metre.
A few gases make up the first bit of that last metre.
The last 38 centimetres of the kilometre – that’s carbon dioxide.
A bit over one foot.
97% of that is produced by Mother Nature. It’s natural.
Out of our journey of one kilometre, there are just 12 millimetres left. About half an inch. Just over a centimetre.
That’s the amount of carbon dioxide that global human activity puts into the atmosphere.
And of those 12 millimetres Australia puts in .18 of a millimetre.
Less than the thickness of a hair. Out of a kilometre.

As a hair is to a kilometre – so is Australia’s contribution to what Mr Rudd calls Carbon Pollution.

Imagine Brisbane’s new Gateway Bridge, ready to be officially opened by Mr Rudd. It’s been polished, painted and scrubbed by an army of workers till its 1 kilometre length is surgically clean. Except that Mr Rudd says we have a huge problem, the bridge is polluted – there’s a human hair on the roadway. We’d laugh ourselves silly.

There are plenty of real pollution problems to worry about. It’s hard to imagine that Australia’s contribution to carbon dioxide in the world’s atmosphere is one of the more pressing ones. And I can’t believe that a new tax on everything is the only way to blow that pesky hair away.

Perhaps we all need to just take a few deep breaths.


vik...

This is a common denialist argument based on nothing except that if something appears small it couldnt possibly have any effect, perhaps logical at a simplistic level.

Perhaps look at what makes up your body, in the typical human there is about 6grams of iron, about 0.006% iron(hope I got the arithmetic right there). Change that amount by even 20% up or down and you can make that person very sick.

The same thing regarding the function of CO2 in the atmosphere, its exact composition makes a big difference to the heat in versus heat out numbers
While the % is small it has increased by 40% since the industrial revolution, if your iron levels increased by that much you'd be dead.

[xbgs351]

Originally Posted by vik351

Interesting Reading. If the 65% of Australians who "agree with an ETS, but admit they don't understand it" read this they may think again before being so eager to subject us to a huge and unnecessary jump in the cost in living.

Here’s a way to understand Mr Rudd’s Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme-

Imagine 1 kilometre of atmosphere that we want to rid of human carbon pollution. We’ll have a walk along it.
The first 770 metres are Nitrogen.
The next 210 metres are Oxygen.
That’s 980 metres of the 1 kilometre. 20 metres to go.
The next 10 metres are water vapour. 10 metres left.
9 metres are argon. Just 1 more metre.
A few gases make up the first bit of that last metre.
The last 38 centimetres of the kilometre – that’s carbon dioxide.
A bit over one foot.
97% of that is produced by Mother Nature. It’s natural.
Out of our journey of one kilometre, there are just 12 millimetres left. About half an inch. Just over a centimetre.
That’s the amount of carbon dioxide that global human activity puts into the atmosphere.
And of those 12 millimetres Australia puts in .18 of a millimetre.
Less than the thickness of a hair. Out of a kilometre.

As a hair is to a kilometre – so is Australia’s contribution to what Mr Rudd calls Carbon Pollution.

Imagine Brisbane’s new Gateway Bridge, ready to be officially opened by Mr Rudd. It’s been polished, painted and scrubbed by an army of workers till its 1 kilometre length is surgically clean. Except that Mr Rudd says we have a huge problem, the bridge is polluted – there’s a human hair on the roadway. We’d laugh ourselves silly.

There are plenty of real pollution problems to worry about. It’s hard to imagine that Australia’s contribution to carbon dioxide in the world’s atmosphere is one of the more pressing ones. And I can’t believe that a new tax on everything is the only way to blow that pesky hair away.

Perhaps we all need to just take a few deep breaths.


vik...

It should read: "As a hair is to a 38 cm – so is Australia’s contribution to what Mr Rudd calls Carbon Pollution."

[MO]

Originally Posted by torbirdie

Probably just as "boring".....(snip)

I dont really think there is any point me contributing more to this thread, its all yours.

Just can't stay away now can you and also not true to your word.
As you rightly state,there is nothing you can contribute to this thread.

[Fi.ES.TA]

Erm people who think global warming is myth seriously need there heads read.
You cannot pump all that shhit into earths atmosphere and expect nothing to happen.Although i will agree i do think some scientists do scare monger the situation,but if they dont the issue would have a blind eye turned to it.
Someone mentioned something about the temps riseing a few week ago how they can remember being a teen and being out in the water surfing with no protection yet now there out in it 30 mins and burnt to shhit.
What about the gaping hole in the ozone layer,who created it ermmm that was us.It may be the equivelant of an hair over that 1 kilometre but we are still adding to it like every other country in the world.
Yes the world does work in cycles we probally will never no which way it will go but we are as a civalisation a contributing factor to global warming

But only you can make that decission
The RED pill
Or the Blue pill
The decission is your's.

[burnz]

Originally Posted by xbgs351

Have you been smoking the same stuff as XRQTR? That sentence makes no sense at all.

what dont you understand??
you cant boil water or freeze it when under pressure!!
simple realy.

[Auslandau]

Dear me .... how many black balloons have really been wasted here.





| [/url] |