[__ Science __ ] Science question

[Enlightenedtruth]

So the two aren't really comparable at all.

I do agree to a point; but the heat from the suns rays do strike the earth 24/7 as the earth does rotate, and winds do blow hot air as well. I'm just really curious if the scientist are correct with the pollution aspect, my understanding is the pollution isn't going away and is actually increasing.

 

[Milk-Drops]

I do agree to a point; but the heat from the suns rays do strike the earth 24/7 as the earth does rotate, and winds do blow hot air as well. I'm just really curious if the scientist are correct with the pollution aspect, my understanding is the pollution isn't going away and is actually inincreasing.

Yes, the sun is hitting the Earth 24/7, but due to how the Earth rotates the loss of heat will be greater in areas that are not facing direct sun light.

Pollution is dependant on the source of our energy needs.

 

[BeyondET]

I really don't agree with all this talk. I think planet earth can take care of itself.

Planet earth will take care of itself though the earth doesn't care about people living on it. Will cause havoc where it needs to.

 

[Uncle J]

the heat from the suns rays do strike the earth 24/7

Not uniformly across the planet or across time.

I'm just really curious if the scientist are correct with the pollution aspect, my understanding is the pollution isn't going away and is actually increasing.

If you're referring to greenhouse gasses, yes they are increasing.

 

[GodsGrace]

Planet earth will take care of itself though the earth doesn't care about people living on it. Will cause havoc where it needs to.

But I think earth has always been in a state of flux. Ice age, dust bowl, deserts expanding, flooding. We use earth, but I don't think we're the problem, like some people do.

 

[JT4444]

But I think earth has always been in a state of flux. Ice age, dust bowl, deserts expanding, flooding. We use earth, but I don't think we're the problem, like some people do.

It took thousands of years for the world's population to reach 1 billion. Now we're adding 1 billion people every decade. We are definitely hurting the planet. I can only hope that the Second Coming is not far off.

 

[jasonc]

We get rain from the Sahara.
The sand rain covers everything.
Thankfully, it's rare.

That travels ,not the sand like that to Florida and parts of the south east and causes respiratory issues and storms .

I had asthma problems because of that

 

[Tenchi]

I've been reading about global warming and climate change for years now. But there is something I do not understand; and I have yet to find any scientist who will even acknowledge my question. If carbon emissions and pollution are merely holding in the heat of the sun; then why isn't the temperature consistent all over the earth?

There are myriad variables making local weather and far, far more that produce the Earth's climate. This is why its such nonsense for climate alarmists to claim the one variable of atmospheric C02 as the primary culprit of any warming of the planet that might be going on. Baloney. History (not going back only fifty or a hundred years, but hundreds and thousands of years) reveals a world with a climate that, generally, cools and warms in long, slow cycles (of centuries, in some cases). The models climate alarmists are basing their panic on are woefully inadequate to their purpose and have been demonstrated to be so repeatedly by experts in the field of climatology. This is why the climate alarm slogan has altered, shifting from "global warming!" to "climate change!" so that, cold or hot, any change in the climate can be held up and massaged into proof that the always-changing climate of the planet is an "existential threat."

Climate alarmism is, at bottom, a not-so-cloaked bid by global elites to bring nations, en masse, under the aegis of international regulatory bodies like the WHO, the UN, the IMF, the IPCC, etc.. Under the direction of the WEF, one can already see the WHO preparing to declare "climate change" a "health emergency" and, through a new, multi-national agreement conferring on the WHO special, unelected, powers to suspend the normal operations of any signatory nation, intends to force billions of people into its soft totalitarian (aka climate alarmist) regime.

Anyway, if you wish to see, to really see, beyond the brainless, rhetorically-slippery, panic-stoking, trust-our-experts propaganda of the western MSM, check out the following two links, or watch Dr. Jordan Peterson's interviews with Dr. Richard Lindzen (a dynamical meteorologist holding multiple degrees from Harvard and, for a decade, professor of atmospheric science at MIT), or Dr. Judith Curry (former professor Emerita and Chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at Georgia Institute of Technology), or Dr. Steve Koonin.

Brownstone Institute ⋆ Brownstone Institute

Brownstone Institute - New ideas in economics, social policy, and public health - defending freedom, promoting human rights, and open dialog

brownstone.org

Climate Discussion Nexus

CDN is a group of concerned Canadians who believe more information about climate science and policy debates will lead to better decisions.

climatediscussionnexus.com

You might also find Dr. James Lindsay's "New Discourses" on YouTube concerning the Marxist meaning of "sustainability" and "degrowth."

 

[Barbarian]

and I have yet to find any scientist who will even acknowledge my question. If carbon emissions and pollution are merely holding in the heat of the sun; then why isn't the temperature consistent all over the earth?

For one thing, only part of the Earth gets direct sunlight at any particular time. This is why we have winters and summers. When the northern hemisphere tilts toward the sun, we have warm summer. When it tilts away, it cools and we have winter. The poles never get direct sunlight and so they stay cold. Winds, clouds, and proximity to large bodies of water affect temperature as well. Water has a higher specific heat than rock, so the ocean warms nearby land in winter and cools it in summer. Land in the center of a continent will have greater variations in temperature.

But keep in mind, the Arctic ice is floating in the ocean, which means it melting won't increase sea levels (it's like melting ice in a glass of water). Conversely, the ice that's on land, such as in Antarctica and Greenland, is increasing sea levels as it melts.

Precisely. Floating ice doesn't affect water levels at all when it melts. This is why the melting of the Arctic ocean pack ice won't raise sea levels. Melting of continental glaciers, and ice shelves in Antarctica will cause sea levels to rise.

 

[Barbarian]

Anyway, if you wish to see, to really see, beyond the brainless, rhetorically-slippery, panic-stoking, trust-our-experts propaganda of the western MSM

If you were a bit less hysterical, you might be more believable. We're not all going to die. But life is going to be harder for a lot of people (and better for a few people, as in Northern Africa).

 

[Tenchi]

If you were a bit less hysterical, you might be more believable.

Ah, ad hominem: Never a sign that wise or useful statements are about to follow.

 

[GodsGrace]

It took thousands of years for the world's population to reach 1 billion. Now we're adding 1 billion people every decade. We are definitely hurting the planet. I can only hope that the Second Coming is not far off.

That's interesting because it seems to me that Europe is not even replacing the current population because everyone is having only one child or no children.

Ditto for the US.

Could you post any statistics?

 

[JT4444]

That's interesting because it seems to me that Europe is not even replacing the current population because everyone is having only one child or no children.

Ditto for the US.

Could you post any statistics?

World Population by Year - Worldometer

Population growth through history from 5000 BC to the current year (2024) for the entire population of the world

www.worldometers.info

 

[GodsGrace]

World Population by Year - Worldometer

Population growth through history from 5000 BC to the current year (2024) for the entire population of the world

www.worldometers.info

Thanks JT.

It looks like the average change is about 1.5% to 2% per year.

Doesn't seem like a lot to me.
What was forecasted many years ago had many worried, including me.

I don't really understand what problems that kind of growth can bring.
We used to worry about feeding the world.

So now what happens?
Some small farmers are being shut down because they're too close to a town, for instance.
Food has become very expensive and I don't understand why. Doesn't seem to be any real reason.
Sometimes I think the higher ups just want us to be hungry.

Hate to sound like a conspiracy theorist, but I don't know what to believe.

BTW, Happy New Year!

 

[Barbarian]

Ah, ad hominem: Never a sign that wise or useful statements are about to follow.

Such as "brainless, rhetorically-slippery, panic-stoking, trust-our-experts propaganda."

My point, exactly. Try to do better.

 

[Barbarian]

We used to worry about feeding the world.

So now what happens?

There is the Ukraine problem. The world depends on them to a large degree. So prices for wheat rise.

But the slowing of population is a consequence of prosperity in many developing nations. Increased living standards generally reduces family size.

 

[Barbarian]

That's interesting because it seems to me that Europe is not even replacing the current population because everyone is having only one child or no children.

Ditto for the US.

If the U.S. didn't have immigration, we would be losing population. However, immigration is enough to slightly increase U.S. population so far.

 

[JT4444]

Thanks JT.

It looks like the average change is about 1.5% to 2% per year.

Doesn't seem like a lot to me.
What was forecasted many years ago had many worried, including me.

I don't really understand what problems that kind of growth can bring.
We used to worry about feeding the world.

So now what happens?
Some small farmers are being shut down because they're too close to a town, for instance.
Food has become very expensive and I don't understand why. Doesn't seem to be any real reason.
Sometimes I think the higher ups just want us to be hungry.

Hate to sound like a conspiracy theorist, but I don't know what to believe.

BTW, Happy New Year!

I only said that the world's population was going up by about a billion per decade. The population of the world was 7.1 billion in 2011, but it went up to 8.1 by 2023. It was 6.1 billion in 1999. So, the population has recently been going up by about a billion every 12 years.

Obviously, this is going to increase competition for resources. We're figuring out new ways to deal with the problems of limited resources. I'm not saying it's all gloom and doom, but we've seen how something like war in Ukraine can affect food prices.

 

[Tenchi]

Such as "brainless, rhetorically-slippery, panic-stoking, trust-our-experts propaganda."

My point, exactly. Try to do better.

Apparently, you don't know what "ad hominem" means...

And you might want to inform yourself about the tu quoque fallacy which you employed in the quotation above.

It seems you should take your own advice and "Do better."

 

[GodsGrace]

There is the Ukraine problem. The world depends on them to a large degree. So prices for wheat rise.

But the slowing of population is a consequence of prosperity in many developing nations. Increased living standards generally reduces family size.

Right.
But my feeling is that the world population increasing is NOT a problem.
I think the opposite, I think the decreasing of the world population is a problem.
I used to know a lot about this but have forgotten most of it.
Anyway, what do YOU think?