Thread: Do humans have any impact on Global Warming?

Where's the "Has yet to be determined" option?

I think they do. But just how much is unknown, could be negligable, could be huge.

Where is the "it is irrelevant" option?

Originally Posted by DOMS

Where's the "Has yet to be determined" option?

It's a yes or no question.

Originally Posted by NeilPearson

Where is the "it is irrelevant" option?

If humans do have an impact on it, then it's relevent.

An Inconvient Truth is a good movie.

It even won an Oscar.

Originally Posted by BigDyl

It's a yes or no question.

Next poll: Has BigDyl stopped beating his boyfriend?

Polls are only as good as their selection pool and their questions.

Originally Posted by DOMS

Next poll: Has BigDyl stopped beating his boyfriend?

Polls are only as good as their selection pool and their questions.

What ABC's?????
Not from their last altrication.....

Originally Posted by BigDyl

If humans do have an impact on it, then it's relevent.

Why? It doesn't really matter if we are having an effect right now. Even if we are we won't be having an effect in another 20 years... so it doesn't really matter.

Originally Posted by NeilPearson

Why? It doesn't really matter if we are having an effect right now. Even if we are we won't be having an effect in another 20 years... so it doesn't really matter.

Where did you hear this?

Originally Posted by BigDyl

Where did you hear this?

Lots of places. The writing is on the wall. The technology is getting there. The world needs to double it's amount of energy available in the next 20 years to keep up with growth. That is simply not achievable with fossil fuels. Nuclear is very unpopular... this means there is going to be a lot of money available for alternate energy. Solar cells are getting smaller and more efficient every year. Carbon nanotubes are starting to appear in solar cells which boosts their efficiency greatly. At that does not even mention hydrogen fuel cells.

So here is the trend... Solar is getting cheaper, more efficient and more widely available (not to mention more socially acceptable)

Fossil Fuels are getting more expensive, the quality is going down as the 'good' reserves are being used up first. They are also getting less available as we burn them and as wars make it more troublesome and expensive to extract it.

Couple that with exponentially shorter development times as technology progresses and it is going to happen. It has to... not because we want to save the environment or be responsible but because there is money to be made in alternate energy.

Take a look at this trend:

http://www.earth-policy.org/Indicato...tor12_data.htm

It's not a linear trend. Fossil fuel growth doesn't have this same kind of a curve.

Technology growth is an exponential curve made up from a series of S curves. A technology starts out slow and gradually builds then as it is begins to work and become profitable, it goes through an exponential growth period. As the limits of that technology are reached the curve slows down and you get an S shaped curve. But the amazing thing is that as that technology starts to slow down, a newer technology always emerges with a new S curve that starts to take off as the old one flattens. If you average these S curves together, you will notice that the overall trend is exponential and the new technology increases what the old one can do by several orders of magnitude.

We have seen the effects of this technology expansion on computation already. We started out with manual computations. They were slow... pencil and paper type of transactions. This lasted thousands of years. Electromechanical technology (punch cards) increased our computational power. These got faster and faster on an S curve but eventually topped out where relays took over and gave a new fresh S curve... which was replaced by S curves offered by vacuum tubes, then transistors, and eventually integrated circuits. Now as the physical limits of transistors are starting to be seem, new technologies in nanotech and quantum computing are starting to emerge promising to carry on the exponential scale

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:PPTMooresLawai.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acceler...rating_Returns

This is not just in computing. This trend can be seen in ALL forms of technology... it is just the most obvious in computing since that technology is the furthest along in its exponential curve. Many of the curves that look kind of linear are really exponential, they just look like the start of the curve we saw in early computing. It is exponential, though... and that will be much more obvious in the next 20-50 years.

The same kind of curve is now obvious in wireless computing.

And in 20 years, it will be obvious in energy production too. We are simply at a shifting point between fossil and clean energy production.

Great post!

I'm really glad to see an original subject pop up that hasn't been discussed before!

Stop global warming before Greenland thaws out...again.

Originally Posted by DOMS

Next poll: Has BigDyl stopped beating his boyfriend?

Polls are only as good as their selection pool and their questions.

Originally Posted by DOMS

Next poll: Has BigDyl stopped beating his boyfriend?

Polls are only as good as their selection pool and their questions.

There is someone you should meet, Big D!

Originally Posted by the nut

There is someone you should meet, Big D!

Ouch.

Originally Posted by DOMS

Stop global warming before Greenland thaws out...again.

They were talking about this on Bill Maher.... very interesting.

Originally Posted by zombul

I'm really glad to see an original subject pop up that hasn't been discussed before!

Global Warming is the world's newest religion.

Originally Posted by NeilPearson

Lots of places. The writing is on the wall. The technology is getting there. The world needs to double it's amount of energy available in the next 20 years to keep up with growth. That is simply not achievable with fossil fuels. Nuclear is very unpopular... this means there is going to be a lot of money available for alternate energy. Solar cells are getting smaller and more efficient every year. Carbon nanotubes are starting to appear in solar cells which boosts their efficiency greatly. At that does not even mention hydrogen fuel cells.

So here is the trend... Solar is getting cheaper, more efficient and more widely available (not to mention more socially acceptable)

Fossil Fuels are getting more expensive, the quality is going down as the 'good' reserves are being used up first. They are also getting less available as we burn them and as wars make it more troublesome and expensive to extract it.

Couple that with exponentially shorter development times as technology progresses and it is going to happen. It has to... not because we want to save the environment or be responsible but because there is money to be made in alternate energy.

Take a look at this trend:

http://www.earth-policy.org/Indicato...tor12_data.htm

It's not a linear trend. Fossil fuel growth doesn't have this same kind of a curve.

Technology growth is an exponential curve made up from a series of S curves. A technology starts out slow and gradually builds then as it is begins to work and become profitable, it goes through an exponential growth period. As the limits of that technology are reached the curve slows down and you get an S shaped curve. But the amazing thing is that as that technology starts to slow down, a newer technology always emerges with a new S curve that starts to take off as the old one flattens. If you average these S curves together, you will notice that the overall trend is exponential and the new technology increases what the old one can do by several orders of magnitude.

We have seen the effects of this technology expansion on computation already. We started out with manual computations. They were slow... pencil and paper type of transactions. This lasted thousands of years. Electromechanical technology (punch cards) increased our computational power. These got faster and faster on an S curve but eventually topped out where relays took over and gave a new fresh S curve... which was replaced by S curves offered by vacuum tubes, then transistors, and eventually integrated circuits. Now as the physical limits of transistors are starting to be seem, new technologies in nanotech and quantum computing are starting to emerge promising to carry on the exponential scale

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:PPTMooresLawai.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acceler...rating_Returns

This is not just in computing. This trend can be seen in ALL forms of technology... it is just the most obvious in computing since that technology is the furthest along in its exponential curve. Many of the curves that look kind of linear are really exponential, they just look like the start of the curve we saw in early computing. It is exponential, though... and that will be much more obvious in the next 20-50 years.

The same kind of curve is now obvious in wireless computing.

And in 20 years, it will be obvious in energy production too. We are simply at a shifting point between fossil and clean energy production.

The shift in any growth pattern has ALWAYS been industry driven with profit as the primary incentive. I have no recollection of any altruistic contributions to progress in any area of the human development ... it's always been all about the Benjamins. The most powerful people on this planet today are the heads of the oil industry. IF the Bush family dynasty was founded in cosmetics and I asked you about either one of the Georges you'd be all "Bush who?" ... you'd have no idea who I was talking abut. It's only because his family's dynasty was planted in the dusty ground of an oil field that they rose to power and political affluence. It would be a pretty safe bet to make that BushCo and the rest of the monsters that own that human food chain right now do not want to see any theoretical exponential shift away from fossil fuels come along and knock a dent in their profit/power structure.

Ain't gonna happen without a serious paradigm shift. This shift will not happen with the current political system in place ... the game is rigged. A green policy is what we need to own a cleaner planet, but that green policy would mean that gas in America would be the same as it is in other places around the planet. $5 a gallon ... any votes for $5 a gallon? Anyone?

Originally Posted by DOMS

Where's the "Has yet to be determined" option?

DOMS, I remember your view on this from the last thread.

But voting no? I mean do you really believe we have ZERO effect?
I don't think humans "caused" global warming. It is a natural process.

But we did add at least a little to it, IMO.

Originally Posted by BoneCrusher

The shift in any growth pattern has ALWAYS been industry driven with profit as the primary incentive. I have no recollection of any altruistic contributions to progress in any area of the human development ... it's always been all about the Benjamins. The most powerful people on this planet today are the heads of the oil industry. IF the Bush family dynasty was founded in cosmetics and I asked you about either one of the Georges you'd be all "Bush who?" ... you'd have no idead who I was talking abut. It's only because his family's dynasty was planted in the dusty ground of an oil field that they rose to power and political affluence. It would be a pretty safe bet to make that BushCo and the rest of the monsters that own that human food chain right now do not want to see any theoretical exponential shift away from fossil fuels come along and knock a dent their profit/power structure.

Ain't gonna happen without a serious paradigm shift. This shift will not happen with the current political system in place ... the game is rigged. A green policy is what we need to own a cleaner planet, but that green policy would mean that gas in America would be the same as it is in other places around the planet. $5 a gallon ... any votes for $5 a gallon? Anyone?

The paradigm shift is a technological, economic one... it has nothing to do with politics. Politics can slow down progress but only to a point. They can't and won't block the enabling technologies. As nanotech and computer processing continue progress, it is going to happen. We already are seeing hybrids come out and they are extremely successful... so much so, there are more and more models every year. This does not benefit the Bush's, they can't block it from happening.

In 20 years, when a company is offering a backyard solar system that fits on a 3 x 3 foot panel and is capable of running your entire house (including electricity for a plug in rechargable car) for less than $1000... No oil company will be able to compete... especially when fossil fuel burning is at $5 (or more a gallon)

Rising oil prices is exactly what is going to help speed up the death of the oil companies. They know there days are numbered. They will branch out into other technologies to try and compete with the new solar start ups... either that or they will just try and make as much as they can in the next 10 years, retire rich and let the companies fold.

It doesn't matter if they don't want to see a shift away from fossil fuels. You can't stop the technology especially in a global system...

It's just like biotech and stem cell research now. The religious right can try and block it but they can't. They might slow down development in the US but they can't get rid of the need for it. Where there is a need, there is someone in the world that will develop stuff to fill that need. China, Japan, Europe... they aren't going to stop stem cell research or alternate fuel research. When they are all living with clean, cheap energy and vastly extended life spans, the US government and oil companies won't be able to keep the technology out.

It is no coincidence the fall of communism all over the world happened right around the time the internet because popular and mass global communications became faster and readily available. The governments fought it as long as they could but technology and the spread of information ultimately won out and continues to do so. No government or group of people is strong enough to hold back the global spread of technology... ain't going to happen.

Originally Posted by BoneCrusher

The shift in any growth pattern has ALWAYS been industry driven with profit as the primary incentive. I have no recollection of any altruistic contributions to progress in any area of the human development ... it's always been all about the Benjamins.

I couldn't agree more with this. But there is no monopoly that can't be crushed if there is a much better, cheaper, cleaner technology to replace it.

It is those Benjamins that is going to drive alternate fuel and solar... not any government incentives or initiatives.

BushCo might have slowed it down and prevented it from becoming mainstream 20 years ago... but the technology is much better now and much cheaper and is getting better all the time. You can only hold it back so long before it is obvious the alternatives are much better.

Anyone who claims humans have an influence on the atmosphere equal to zero units of whatever we're measuring is a fool.

Originally Posted by NeilPearson

The paradigm shift is a technological, economic one... it has nothing to do with politics. Politics can slow down progress but only to a point. They can't and won't block the enabling technologies. As nanotech and computer processing continue progress, it is going to happen. We already are seeing hybrids come out and they are extremely successful... so much so, there are more and more models every year. This does not benefit the Bush's, they can't block it from happening.

In 20 years, when a company is offering a backyard solar system that fits on a 3 x 3 foot panel and is capable of running your entire house (including electricity for a plug in rechargable car) for less than $1000... No oil company will be able to compete... especially when fossil fuel burning is at $5 (or more a gallon)

Rising oil prices is exactly what is going to help speed up the death of the oil companies. They know there days are numbered. They will branch out into other technologies to try and compete with the new solar start ups... either that or they will just try and make as much as they can in the next 10 years, retire rich and let the companies fold.

It doesn't matter if they don't want to see a shift away from fossil fuels. You can't stop the technology especially in a global system...

It's just like biotech and stem cell research now. The religious right can try and block it but they can't. They might slow down development in the US but they can't get rid of the need for it. Where there is a need, there is someone in the world that will develop stuff to fill that need. China, Japan, Europe... they aren't going to stop stem cell research or alternate fuel research. When they are all living with clean, cheap energy and vastly extended life spans, the US government and oil companies won't be able to keep the technology out.

It is no coincidence the fall of communism all over the world happened right around the time the internet because popular and mass global communications became faster and readily available. The governments fought it as long as they could but technology and the spread of information ultimately won out and continues to do so. No government or group of people is strong enough to hold back the global spread of technology... ain't going to happen.

Great stuff, but you sound a little to much the techno dreamer and not enough the social realist here. I use the following part of your post as food for thought.

The paradigm shift is a technological, economic one... it has nothing to do with politics. Politics can slow down progress but only to a point. They can't and won't block the enabling technologies. As nanotech and computer processing continue progress, it is going to happen. We already are seeing hybrids come out and they are extremely successful... so much so, there are more and more models every year. This does not benefit the Bush's, they can't block it from happening.

In the 70's Carter built a tax credit into the system that allowed people to install solar water heaters for free. The credit was such that between the tax relief and the energy savings the home owner was completely reimbursed for the cost of the system within 14 to 24 months. Ronnie and George killed it. They also ended the investment into solar and alternative energy research. It's still dead compared to the research done in the computer industry. The advancements in alternative energy research are way out of sync with those made in collateral areas like robotics, space flight, and something as useless as the television.

Politics effectively killed this research 25 years ago ... and we still are not really making the advances we should be given the available resources at hand. Politics driven by money = world dominance.

I'm not projecting any kind of hypothesis here, just recounting history. Technology has been altered, bought out and shelved, or completely deleted for the sake of the financial gain of more powerfull competitive industries. I'm not making this up as I go along ... this is just part of our history as a culture. I see as you do the direction we will eventually go in with our ever expanding technologically driven alternative fuel research. I'm just not convinced the powers that be will roll over and play dead as this technology kills their cash cow.

When the financial gains are strong enough to fund a complete replacement of the infrastructure currently used to process dead dinosaurs into gasoline then ... and only then ... will we see this shift to alternative fuels.

This hybrid car theory is a perfect example. When you amortize the costs of the hybrid car against the savings gained over traditional fuel powered vehicles a loss per miles driven shows up. The hybrid cars on the market today cost an average of $6000 more per car than comparable cars with conventional gas engines. This means that the amount of money you save, or don’t save, by buying a hybrid is very much dependent on gasoline prices and also depends upon how long you intend to keep the vehicle. Factor in that the tax incentive for buying these cars ended in 2006 and the costs go up per mile driven.

Just like with any new technology, you will pay for the privilege of being a pioneer. You shouldn't. Why is our money we pay out in taxes not used for AFS research? It is our money placed in the hands of the federal government to steward our advancement as a country, pay the bills of running government, and care for those in need within our own society. When someone with an altruistic intention gets an initiative up it only lasts a short while then dies, or is capped to a finality that prevents real growth.

We have seen that Arabs do not control gas prices ... politics and big business do. Our gas prices at the pump went up high enough that we will still pay the man, but not high enough to pay the bill at the academic level for stronger AFS research. Is this leveling of prices at the pump some kind of social happenstance? Some sort of random event?

Originally Posted by Pianomahnn

Anyone who claims humans have an influence on the atmosphere equal to zero units of whatever we're measuring is a fool.

Ahhem ... uh DOMS? I believe he is talking to you ...

I thought an Inconvienent Truth was well done.


I'm still not sure how anyone has disproved some of the numbers in the movie, like the 928 peer review studies.