• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Billions and Billions of sources, where does it all go? We need to ACT!

Renae

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
48,389
Reaction score
18,084
Location
San Antonio Texas
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
Everyday across the Globe Billions of little emitters are turned on. Some of very tiny, others so huge their impact is seen for miles. They are inside, and out. They are in cars, planes, houses, SCHOOLS, hospitals, businesses... everywhere there are humans, you find them. Emitting and Emitting. Billions of them. No one talks about where it all goes. We just act like it's all normal.

And you know what, the obvious answer is with us everyday. When it's day time, it's hot, when it's night time it's not. So why can't we SEE it, even though it's WHY we SEE??

Yes, I'm talking about Lights. All kinds of lights. If it creates light, it creates heat. Period. (Yes, I'm aware it's POSSIBLE to create cold light...). Billions upon billions of little heat sources the world over and where does that heat go? It just "dissipated" into the air? You don't think that every bit of warmth doesn't matter? And speaking of warm, what about all the cars, planes, ships, trains... hell everything man does, creates HEAT! And where does it all go eh?

Yeah, people don't want to face reality, that their heat... their HEAT! Think about it, every person on the planet adds to the Global Heat Index! We are all to blame for the increased heat of the Earth, we're changing the Climate with all of our Heat Sources!

Act now! Turn off all your lights, unscrew your lightbulbs. Don't be selfish, think about the impact your heat will have on future children! Every scientist in the world knows that the production of Light creates Heat. How can you argue with the SCIENCE OF IT???
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
74,101
Reaction score
32,310
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Conservatives favor smaller government, therefore they favor NO government.

Conservatives want total anarchy. A complete absence of government. Lawlessness.

This brings violence as factions fight for power. Children will die as a result of these conflicts.

Therefore, conservatives want to kill children.
 

bowerbird

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 22, 2009
Messages
1,431
Reaction score
563
Location
australia
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
Everyday across the Globe Billions of little emitters are turned on. Some of very tiny, others so huge their impact is seen for miles. They are inside, and out. They are in cars, planes, houses, SCHOOLS, hospitals, businesses... everywhere there are humans, you find them. Emitting and Emitting. Billions of them. No one talks about where it all goes. We just act like it's all normal.

And you know what, the obvious answer is with us everyday. When it's day time, it's hot, when it's night time it's not. So why can't we SEE it, even though it's WHY we SEE??

Yes, I'm talking about Lights. All kinds of lights. If it creates light, it creates heat. Period. (Yes, I'm aware it's POSSIBLE to create cold light...). Billions upon billions of little heat sources the world over and where does that heat go? It just "dissipated" into the air? You don't think that every bit of warmth doesn't matter? And speaking of warm, what about all the cars, planes, ships, trains... hell everything man does, creates HEAT! And where does it all go eh?

Yeah, people don't want to face reality, that their heat... their HEAT! Think about it, every person on the planet adds to the Global Heat Index! We are all to blame for the increased heat of the Earth, we're changing the Climate with all of our Heat Sources!

Act now! Turn off all your lights, unscrew your lightbulbs. Don't be selfish, think about the impact your heat will have on future children! Every scientist in the world knows that the production of Light creates Heat. How can you argue with the SCIENCE OF IT???
Got a link to show that it is the heat from light bulbs that are the problem? (Says she betting Mr V will post a link about replacing incandescent bulbs with fluorescent bulbs)
 

Wiseone

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 26, 2009
Messages
12,177
Reaction score
7,550
Location
Ft. Campbell, KY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Why do so many people, especially the most vocal people, see everything in such binary terms. Like Mr. V here who sees the Global Warming debate not as based on a science not even fully understood or established by individuals who spend their entire lives studying climatology, which a range of varying view points on whats happening and even more solutions for each of those view points.

No instead there's only two arguements:
1) That nothing is happening and everything is fine. His argument.
2) That man is literally killing the earth and unless we return to an existence of cavemen we will fry the Earth out of existence.

Perhaps if someone says "Hey I think mankind is having an effect on the environment on a global scale." He isn't advocating the destruction of the last 10,000 years of human technological process. Perhaps he may be saying "I think at the current rate of increase for factors X, Y, Z that in 50 years the Gulf Stream may change its nature thus affecting climate in Europe and the Eastern United States."

Or perhaps he's thinking "At the current rate of change of X, Y, Z in 50 years a certain type of fish will be extinct which will have a major impact of global food production and thus food prices." Something like that, even if you think its wrong, is not unheard of in the history of the Earth, species have gone extinct due to environmental changes throughout time.

And let me say again what I think is the most important point about a Global Warming or Global Climate change debate. There is literally not a single person on his planet can understands everything about Global Warming or climate change, its a fairly new science and an extremely complex one. Everything you me and everyone else here understands about this issue comes from what someone else says, and since I doubt most of us read any kind of scientific journal or university publications, I know I don't, we are probably reading what someone said someone else said about the issue.

The information is so second hand and so complex, and given that science never totally agrees with itself when it comes to new fields or ideas is no surprise that there is no universal opinion amongst the scientific community about climate change.

Its no different than the debate within that community over the nature of Gamma ray bursts, black holes, the nature of the interior of particles like protons. The whole point of the scientific process and academic culture is to have theories, information, and conclusions compete with each other and suffer through the harshest scrutiny to ensure they are as accurate as possible.

The problem comes with issues like Climate change become politicized by people who have no understanding of the issue themselves and simply are going by what other tell them and taking it as absolute fact. Thats when politicians who want to pander to either Mr. V or his exact opposite, and end up doing something stupid and probably backed by half-science.
 

bowerbird

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 22, 2009
Messages
1,431
Reaction score
563
Location
australia
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
Why do so many people, especially the most vocal people, see everything in such binary terms. Like Mr. V here who sees the Global Warming debate not as based on a science not even fully understood or established by individuals who spend their entire lives studying climatology, which a range of varying view points on whats happening and even more solutions for each of those view points.

No instead there's only two arguements:
1) That nothing is happening and everything is fine. His argument.
2) That man is literally killing the earth and unless we return to an existence of cavemen we will fry the Earth out of existence.

Perhaps if someone says "Hey I think mankind is having an effect on the environment on a global scale." He isn't advocating the destruction of the last 10,000 years of human technological process. Perhaps he may be saying "I think at the current rate of increase for factors X, Y, Z that in 50 years the Gulf Stream may change its nature thus affecting climate in Europe and the Eastern United States."

Or perhaps he's thinking "At the current rate of change of X, Y, Z in 50 years a certain type of fish will be extinct which will have a major impact of global food production and thus food prices." Something like that, even if you think its wrong, is not unheard of in the history of the Earth, species have gone extinct due to environmental changes throughout time.

And let me say again what I think is the most important point about a Global Warming or Global Climate change debate. There is literally not a single person on his planet can understands everything about Global Warming or climate change, its a fairly new science and an extremely complex one. Everything you me and everyone else here understands about this issue comes from what someone else says, and since I doubt most of us read any kind of scientific journal or university publications, I know I don't, we are probably reading what someone said someone else said about the issue.

The information is so second hand and so complex, and given that science never totally agrees with itself when it comes to new fields or ideas is no surprise that there is no universal opinion amongst the scientific community about climate change.

Its no different than the debate within that community over the nature of Gamma ray bursts, black holes, the nature of the interior of particles like protons. The whole point of the scientific process and academic culture is to have theories, information, and conclusions compete with each other and suffer through the harshest scrutiny to ensure they are as accurate as possible.

The problem comes with issues like Climate change become politicized by people who have no understanding of the issue themselves and simply are going by what other tell them and taking it as absolute fact. That's when politicians who want to pander to either Mr. V or his exact opposite, and end up doing something stupid and probably backed by half-science.
I agree that is it !@#@! complex but then so is pathophysiology and there are lots of people who understand that - not all of the answers of course but enough to fuddle by on.

In actuality it is about core concepts. and stringing ideas onto them to make concept maps - that is how we really understand a complex issue

I am not a climatologist but I DO know how to read research papers - for the most part - and I understand enough physics and chemistry to keep up with the more complex explanations and develop my own concept map. Now every time I read a new research paper that information gets added to the main concept map, and yes I DO read original research.

I also read a LOT of denialist dreck - possibly more even than the research. How I can tell them apart is that the denialist dreck is usually very poorly referenced and full of strawmen arguements
 

Renae

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
48,389
Reaction score
18,084
Location
San Antonio Texas
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
Why do so many people, especially the most vocal people, see everything in such binary terms. Like Mr. V here who sees the Global Warming debate not as based on a science not even fully understood or established by individuals who spend their entire lives studying climatology, which a range of varying view points on whats happening and even more solutions for each of those view points.

No instead there's only two arguements:
1) That nothing is happening and everything is fine. His argument.
2) That man is literally killing the earth and unless we return to an existence of cavemen we will fry the Earth out of existence.

Perhaps if someone says "Hey I think mankind is having an effect on the environment on a global scale." He isn't advocating the destruction of the last 10,000 years of human technological process. Perhaps he may be saying "I think at the current rate of increase for factors X, Y, Z that in 50 years the Gulf Stream may change its nature thus affecting climate in Europe and the Eastern United States."

Or perhaps he's thinking "At the current rate of change of X, Y, Z in 50 years a certain type of fish will be extinct which will have a major impact of global food production and thus food prices." Something like that, even if you think its wrong, is not unheard of in the history of the Earth, species have gone extinct due to environmental changes throughout time.

And let me say again what I think is the most important point about a Global Warming or Global Climate change debate. There is literally not a single person on his planet can understands everything about Global Warming or climate change, its a fairly new science and an extremely complex one. Everything you me and everyone else here understands about this issue comes from what someone else says, and since I doubt most of us read any kind of scientific journal or university publications, I know I don't, we are probably reading what someone said someone else said about the issue.

The information is so second hand and so complex, and given that science never totally agrees with itself when it comes to new fields or ideas is no surprise that there is no universal opinion amongst the scientific community about climate change.

Its no different than the debate within that community over the nature of Gamma ray bursts, black holes, the nature of the interior of particles like protons. The whole point of the scientific process and academic culture is to have theories, information, and conclusions compete with each other and suffer through the harshest scrutiny to ensure they are as accurate as possible.

The problem comes with issues like Climate change become politicized by people who have no understanding of the issue themselves and simply are going by what other tell them and taking it as absolute fact. Thats when politicians who want to pander to either Mr. V or his exact opposite, and end up doing something stupid and probably backed by half-science.
People whose livelihood depends on AGW Research?

Of all the people here, I have the most real-life meteorological experience, training and knowledge. To claim I lack an understanding of the science, shows that it's really not about the science but the conclusion.
 

Cold Highway

Dispenser of Negativity
DP Veteran
Joined
May 30, 2007
Messages
9,596
Reaction score
2,739
Location
Newburgh, New York and World 8: Dark Land
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Conservatives favor smaller government,
Actually no they dont
Conservatives want total anarchy.
No they dont. They cant even tell the difference between an actual Anarchist and a pissant spoiled wannabe kid who dresses in all black.

Therefore, conservatives want to kill children.
The left voted for the cluster**** wars as well.
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
74,101
Reaction score
32,310
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Actually no they dont


No they dont. They cant even tell the difference between an actual Anarchist and a pissant spoiled wannabe kid who dresses in all black.



The left voted for the cluster**** wars as well.
Yes, this is pretty much the point I was driving at. Although I meant more traditional conservatives, not neocons who are pretty authoritarian.

Conservatives don't want anarchy or dead children and liberals don't think we should ban all electricity. People need to stop being ridiculous.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom