Earth day

Discussion in 'Opinions, Beliefs, & Points of View' started by shades, Mar 29, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. shades

    shades Staff Alumni

    I think I saw a couple of posts on this before it happened, which was Saturday night, U.S. time. Many major cities around the world turned off all the lights in an effort to continue public awareness of conservation and clean energy, etc...

    Did anybody actually experience a blackout in their city? Do you think that a one hour blackout will increase public awareness?

    Also, since this was started in Australia, does anybody know if any one person or group was responsible for starting what I feel is a very important effort?
  2. Summer.Rain

    Summer.Rain Well-Known Member

    Ukraine didnt took part in this Earth thing
    but because Ukraine exporting most of its energy to Europe
    i did noticed sort of a "jump" in the energy input, oh well, maybe it was just me...
  3. Hae-Gi

    Hae-Gi Banned Member

    As I said last year...

    The blackouts you mentioned probably were caused by the above reason.
  4. shades

    shades Staff Alumni

    Hae Gi: I agree that it's probably too late, but the blackouts were done intentionally to bring awareness to people who don't know about it. Also I just want to know if anyone was in a city that did it and what it was like. It did not happen exactly where I live. Also, the problem became much worse starting in the early 1900's right after the industrial age began. So it doesn't have anything to do with a change in the activity of the sun. The documentary "An Inconvenient Truth" shows data, colllected by scientists from the ice at the poles, that carbon emissions began to increase at that time. Approximately 99.9% of scientists involved in this study say that it was WE...humans that started the 'greenhouse gas' effect.
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 29, 2009
  5. Hae-Gi

    Hae-Gi Banned Member

    Yes, of course they started to increase, but not enough to be of any significant difference. I'm not sure if it's true that the problem became "much worse" when the industrial age began, but if it did it's just a coincidence.

    By the way, Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth" is full of falsehood. Utter junk "documentary". What a waste that he got the Nobel prize.

    Also, far from 99.9% of scientists that are into this believe humans are behind it. Maybe in that study, but otherwise, it's just the media that tilts it so that it seems that way. Many scientists are in doubt about this, and many know the truth.

    And a final addition... you may want to talk about an unnatural increase of the greenhouse effect instead of the greenhouse effect, if you will keep believing in it... without the greenhouse effect the Earth would look like Mars.
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 29, 2009
  6. shades

    shades Staff Alumni

    Do you think that the earth, which is about 4 billion years old, just coincidentally started to have higher carbon emissions in the 100 years of the industrial age?...and that the caps are melting now is just a coincidence?
    The odds of that happening, lets see....about 4 billion to 1!

    The media are reporting what the scientists are telling them...the scientists are not finding higher carbon emissions in the ice because the media told them it was there.
  7. Hae-Gi

    Hae-Gi Banned Member

    If that's what the media does, how come that, for instance, even Swedish Svt, generally one of the most trustworthy news outlets, due to being public service, replied to a famous Swedish reporter that then worked for them - when she asked if they shouldn't invite sceptical scientists into the discussion or ones that don't believe in that humanity has caused what now is happening - that no such scientists exist? Even public service Svt. She was aware of such scientists but they ignored her plead for objectivity. The media is always just crap. Or almost always, anyway. -_-; Not aware of any news outlet, so far, that isn't crap in the end.
  8. Zurkhardo

    Zurkhardo Well-Known Member

    You don't think pumping billions of tons of carbon dioxide, among other pollutants, is not having an adverse affect on the enviornment? Nor is removing the trees that, from an ecological standpoint, are essentially this planet's lungs? I'm hardpressed to believe that humanity has had absolutely no adverse affect on this planet's enviornment; even if it is part of a historical cycle, we're are certainly accelerating it far beyond the normal rate.

    As for pinning this on media hype, I've read numerous academic and journalistic sources that substatiate a growing, man-made crisis. This is hardly all the result of just media sources attempting to bolster ratings as such.

    The fact is, even if Global Warming were fabricated (and 96% of climatologists believe it to be true), it'd still be just as crucial that we don't continue to degrade our enviornment and plunder what is left of it. Surely Earth cannot sustain such unnatural additions (or removals).
  9. wheresmysheep

    wheresmysheep Staff Alumni

    well dublin didnt partake. and i didnt do it either.
  10. Axiom

    Axiom Account Closed

    Earth what :biggrin:

    Didn't hear about it this year and so I forgot :)
  11. jameslyons

    jameslyons Well-Known Member

    Here's how global warming works:

    1. The majority of the Sun's energy is reflected off of Earth's magnetic field and upper atmosphere -- like the Ozone layer.

    2. The frequency of the Sun's energy is too fast to be captured by pollutants in the air as it descends toward the surface of earth. Still about 70% of energy never makes it to the ground.

    3. Carbon Dioxide is a molecular bond that can absorb heat.

    4. When the Sun's energy hits something and begins to heat it up, the item reradiates the heat to acclimate to its environmental temperature.

    5. The reradiated heat rises and is a much slower frequency than the Sun's original radiation. And that reradiated energy is captured by the CO2 in the atmosphere.

    6. As an aside, The color black has a very low albedo rating while the color white has a very high albedo rating. The higher an albedo rating is the more energy you reflect. So as the ice caps melt, the earth will be absorbing more heat. Thus exponentially increasing the effects of global warming. Particularly in conjecture with our thirst for wood.

    To answer your question Mike, I didn't notice a difference in my town. Earth day wasn't publicized as well as it could have been. I only saw a blurb on BBC world news. Then forgot about it as the day progressed.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.