An Inconvenient Truth

bonzo wrote:

no it won't.

convincing argument. i guess we can all go home now. isn't it your bedtime?

Anemic wrote:

If a floating ice cap melts, how does the water level increase?

The level of water will not rise much if the very vast majority of the ice is submerged--and little visable. But, when you have floating ice with large amount above the sea level all that is above will add to the existing level.

You can see this by overflowing a glass with ice and then adding water to the cup. The cup will overflow due to the excess ice that is floating--but above the water line.

This is actually discussed in the movie.

Hahaha! Yeah, he speaks the truth. Idiot.

Al Gore's house uses a lot of energy, so global warming must be fake!

As someone who actually has actually worked in coastal development and who currently works as an environmental consultant (one who helps business understand and mitigate environmental liabilities - not an environmentalist), let me set the record straight. Almost every coastal state in the United States has laws on the books expressly prohibiting the construction of seawalls, breakwaters, jetties, etc... without extensive (to the point of prohibitive) regulatory compliance and permitting. Many, many, many private developers, insurers, and even Fortune 500 companies are very interested in repealing these laws. Why, because the are very worried about rising see levels in coastal regions and the impact of that sea level change on there existing capital infastructure.

Many have already taken out large insurance policies to hedge against such losses. However, as the various sea level rise predictive models become more robust, and their predictions more dire, the costs of such policies increases. This puts those organizations who were late to the party at a competative disadvantage relative to thier more foward thinking peers. The ability to construct seawalls or implement other means of shore armouring would offer a more cost effective means of reducing risk. Hence the desire to repeal shore armouring moratoriums.

Of course the problems, and liabilities associated with shore armouring are numerous, but thats a discussion for another day.

Solar Cycles 24 and 25 will put an end to all of this nonsense.

Also, with regards to solar cycles, expect a big - devistating - quake similar to the New Madrid Quake within the next 3 - 6 months in the New Madrid Seismic Zone.

Some say that global warming will continue, with our without preventive actions. However, this opposing view admits that the careless use of the limited natural resources can speed up the pace and impair quality of life as we know it. The developed countries may not see a catastrophe in their lifetime but we should leave something for our descendants.

The examination of an extreme example of environmental damage helps drive the message home. So anyone aware of Haiti's situation can testify that this country (the poorest in the Americas)is a virtual barren wasteland while its immediate neighbor (the Dominican Republic) is a lush tropical environment.

As water in the ocean warms, it expands. Melting ice isn't necessary to raise sealevels.

Anemic wrote:

If a floating ice cap melts, how does the water level increase?

Try putting a big chunk of ice in a glass full of water. After it melts, the water will overflow the glass.

NativeSon wrote:

Try putting a big chunk of ice in a glass full of water. After it melts, the water will overflow the glass.

You're the one who needs to try this. The glass will not overflow as the ice melts. This is because the ice cubes displace a mass of water equal to the mass of the ice cube.

not sure wrote:

convincing argument. i guess we can all go home now. isn't it your bedtime?

convincing burn. high five! you're awesome.

But really, I'm frickin dying with anticipation to find out how another degree of warming over the next ~hundred years will will end life as we know it! it will be terrible...terrible!

i hope you're buying your carbon offsets, my new hero you.

NativeSon wrote:

Try putting a big chunk of ice in a glass full of water. After it melts, the water will overflow the glass.

not a moron wrote:

You're the one who needs to try this. The glass will not overflow as the ice melts. This is because the ice cubes displace a mass of water equal to the mass of the ice cube.

Ummm, maybe you're the one who needs to try this. The water will absolutely overflow if the glass is full and there is ice that is floating and parts of the ice are above the water line--which is exactly what the ice floating around the poles are doing.

If this is the case, 100 times out of 100 the water will overflow.

jeb wrote:

{Typical uninformed conservative drivel...}

If those are your reasons to oppose caps on CO2 emissions, then you are not only an idiot, you are also dangerous.

Dauby wrote:

Ummm, maybe you're the one who needs to try this. The water will absolutely overflow if the glass is full and there is ice that is floating and parts of the ice are above the water line--which is exactly what the ice floating around the poles are doing.

If this is the case, 100 times out of 100 the water will overflow.

Now, do it with the same amount of ice in glass that is 100s of times bigger than the glass you are currently using.

Do you have any idea how much more water it would take to displace cities? You would have to melt almost all of the polar ice caps to displace coastal cities. Even if all that ice melted, it will take 100s if not 1000s of years. It's not like the world's temperature is increasing a degree a year. It's more like a degree over the last 30 years.

Also, the current global warming trend coincides with increased radiation from the sun. CO2 is about 3.6% of the greenhouse gases and only about .12% of that is man made. It is stupid to think that even doubling the man made component would cause a significant impact on global warming as the sun's radiation far out weights CO2's impact.

I'm sure none of the thousands of climate scientist, economist, business people, physicists, and policy makers who have studied climate change have ever thought of those things. Thanks for setting them straight!

Gainfully Employed wrote:

I'm sure none of the thousands of climate scientist, economist, business people, physicists, and policy makers who have studied climate change have ever thought of those things. Thanks for setting them straight!

exactly. But some anonymous internet douchebag who calls himself "wrong, wrong, wrong" is telling us that the scientific experts are "dumb". Ok, whatever he says.

(and I love how the old LetsRun rules are back: any and all threads attacking Al Gore will live on and on and on. Start a thread or even a post about G Bush sucking as president and WHAM.... the thread/post is vaporized)

Gainfully Employed wrote:

I'm sure none of the thousands of climate scientist, economist, business people, physicists, and policy makers who have studied climate change have ever thought of those things. Thanks for setting them straight!

Actually, scientists did think of those things, where do you think those arguments came from?

NEWS FLASH: THERE IS NOT A SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS THAT GLOBAL WARMING IS MAN MADE!!!

It is accepted as such because the supporters have a political agenda. Global warming support helps them pass laws which is what all politicians want to do.

People believe them because they will believe anything they read in ridiculously biased media such as the New York Times and CNN. People always jump at the next big fear. Remember how the "War on Terror" excuse helped Bush get support for the war in Iraq and the Patriot Act.

Please do some actual research before spreading lies. Here's a good place to start:

science welcome wrote:

Please do some actual research before spreading lies. Here's a good place to start:

http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=f80a6386-802a-23ad-40c8-3c63dc2d02cb

Geez, there isn't a single person in the entire world with a functioning brain that believes anything Inhofe ever said. You'd have to the biggest imbecile to walk the planet to swallow that crap. You can't possibly be so stupid to expect anyone to believe Inhofe, widely regarded as one of the dumbest people in the Senate? Are you in 2nd grade? He's a bought and paid for shill for big oil, and has been discredited so many times my calculator doesn't have enough digits.

You sir, have presented more convincing evidence that the only functioning conservative brain died a few weeks ago, and even dead it's smarter that all the remaining conservatives on earth, combined.

Wrong, wrong, wrong??

Where did you see anything that I said in regards to coastal cities being submerged?? All I said is that floating ice can cause a rise in water levels--which is completely true, genius.

And yes--I love how you're all of the sudden a leading expert on global temperature.

And a side note: Lonnie Thompson, a paleoclimatologist--who Al Gore speaks about in the movie is actually a Prof. @ my alma mater and IS the leading expert on global temperature, polar conditions, etc.

He seems to think that it's a major issue and I would say that he knows quite a bit more than you on the topic.