Ghosts, Goblins and Global Warming

[MAXIMAN]

Fred...

It's funny how we want to see things as we want to see them instead of objectively.

In 1985 I had just graduated OSU studying geology. My father...a veteran pilot for 30 years and I had stopped to change a flat. It was around mid night.

I was on back next to the truck when I saw something flying overhead. It appeared to be about 1000 feet off the deck and I asked dad what it was. As it passed over on the full moon night it was plainly triangular in shape. No plane in man's arsenal ever looked like this. The lights were unconventional according to dad and he really did not think it was a plane. I made an eery sound ...almost a silent swoosh...I'd never forget.

About 5 or 6 years later after the Gulf War I was at an Airshow when a Stealth Bomber flew over.

DEJAVU! It hit me like a ton of brick. That is exactly what I had seen years before in the night sky of northern Oklahoma. In retrospect it was obviously a test flight of that aircraft and they likely did it at night so as not to attract attention.

But until I saw that demonstration at the airshow I always questioned if it was a UFO.

If there is intelligent life visiting us from afar...why don't they reveal them selves. I don't really understand what they would have to hide. If they are far enough advanced to have travelled light years to get here then surely they can monitor us. And what would they have to fear by "coming on down!"? If they are that far advanced surely we have no weapons that could even begin to threaten them.

Strange reasoning indeed...indeed...

[prometheus578]

The "Prime Directive" forbids interferring with other civilizations.

Really... how can you accurately study Earthlings when the Earthlings know that they're being studied.

If there is intelligent life visiting us from afar...why don't they reveal them selves. I don't really understand what they would have to hide.

They have nothing to hide... it's that we have nothing to offer.

[MAXIMAN]

Re: The "Prime Directive" forbids interferring with other civilizations.

Originally posted by prometheus578
Really... how can you accurately study Earthlings when the Earthlings know that they're being studied.

They have nothing to hide... it's that we have nothing to offer.

Then why don't they go away?

Prime directive? OMG! Trekies ride Elevens?!?!

Seriously one of the early influences on my desire to study science was the character of First Science Officer Spock.

Well you know what they say. Many times science fiction becomes science fact. But many times presupposed science FACT turns out to be science fiction as is the case with anthropogenic global warming.

[MAXIMAN]

If you're feeling blue....here's a good "pick me up":

Humans using too MUCH Solar energy!

One day they say we should all convert to solar to save the planet. Next day we are using too much solar and are going to destroy the planet?

[xschop]

k-t

max, being a geologist, do you believe the k-t boundary mass extinction hypothesis?

[fredintoon]

Hi Maximan,
first, consider the world's climate as being analogous to a giant muddy river. The river's flow rate & silt percentage vary according to the forces of nature.
Now consider six billion people crapping in it. It's gotta turn a richer shade of brown, eh?

[MAXIMAN]

I never said that man had NO impact. I only said I believe he has no significant impact. The irrefutable fact that the earth has always possessed an extremely dynamic climate is a staple of fundamental earth science. This climate has warmed and cooled at a far far greater rate and range than we've seen in the past hundred years. As a matter of fact it is easily an order of magnitude greater.

When "they" started this global warming hype 30 years ago I vividly recall earth scientists saying "SO WHAT!"...the earth has been in it's current inter glacial (read warming) cycle for 25,000 years.

Of course the general public is pretty much clueless to the facts of earth's history. Thank you government schools. With the rare exception of people like Prom...and E. Liberty I doubt many know or even care to know. They just want some one else to take care of it for them and they'll listen to the loudest voice in the crowd. Sadly that voice is screaming an errant message. And sadly MANY of those presupposed "scientist" are scientist indeed...political scientists and social scientists!

The earth has undergone ...literally...thousands of reiterative cooling and warming cycles throughout the ages. This is irrevocably found true by the overwhelming body of evidence know as the transgression and regression of the seas upon the cratons. This phenomenon is readily observed and recognized by ALL earth scientist and has been accepted part of geology since the time of Lyle and Hutton.

To say that man has NO impact would be folly. But to say that man has significant impact is just as foolish. We simply do not know the impact and more and more "scientists" are coming to the stark conclusion that man's impact on planetary climate is minimal at best. I predict within 10 years the morons that have made such a big to do over anthropogenic global warming will be known as the shills of the new millenia.

What is the signifcance of mans impact? And what is the solution the "shills" are so vehemently supporting?

It is like the house afire. As the house rages in flame creating this huge source of heat a man stands across the street watching the chaos. He is smoking a cigarette. This bad for him and the fire department KNOWS IT!!! The 21st century ultra-modern fire department with all their computer technology and satellite infra-red scanning systems can see every minute source of heat. It is their job to "control" the situation. They slide up to the fire in truck screaming sirens and immediately douse the smoking man ignoring the real source of heat.

[MAXIMAN]

One more thing. If six billion people were crapping in one river that means there would be only one river on the planet?

Then 6 billion would not even exist. The supposition is absurd.

The fact is 6 billion are NOT crapping in one river. They are crapping in tens of thousands of rivers. People have been crapping in rivers since the dawn of time...as well as every other creature on this planet. What's your point? I fail to see what this has to do with global climate.

The ocean is the landfill of the planet. It always has been. All sediment, waste, and trash flow to the seas. ALl the sewage of the planet eventually winds up there. It's been this way half a billion years we can prove and likely longer considering the earth is about 4.5 byo.

Our presence or lack there of will not change this fact. It will not change the fact that the oceans are extremely resilient. Life has always thrived there as recorded in the rock in spite of this geologic fact.

And yet...even though the oceans are the nastiest place on earth...THEY SUPPORT THE MOST LIFE!...that's right...the dump ground of the planet is alive and well and always has been.

I seriously...seriously...seriously doubt ...the rise of a species fromm a mere 250,000 YBP known as homo sapien sapien will reverse the past 541 million years of earth's history.

But cha never know. Boy us "people" sure are a powerful and "godlike" lot!

[malber]

Maximan,

You say that you are an earth scientist. Do you work for an oil company?

[mro]

originnally posted by the MadMaximan Scientist
the dump ground of the planet is alive and well and always has been.

Agree with you about global warming,
but the oceans are not beyond our ability to ruin. Currently man has/is spreading organisms into different parts of the ecosystem where they have/are having a negative impact. Large areas of ocean in and around highly populated areas have become "deserts" from man made pollution. Poor management, lax law enforcement of the fishery have had a major negative impact world wide. Places like the delta here in CA have had there ecosystem literally destroyed by man which has impacted about a dozen species, some close to extinction. There’s a major river and delta in China that’s lifeless due to pollution and there are several more that are just as bad as well as more that will become that way. I fish from Alaska to Central America. Quantity and size of all fish are less just in the last 50 years.

Luckily water covers 3/5's of the planet so what ever we do takes time. But these changes have happened just in the last few hundred years, not even a eye blink on the geologic scale.


mro

[pggg]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4467420.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/5314592.stm

[prometheus578]

Of course, any boob knows that we are still coming out of the last "Ice Age". Obviously, the earth is warming. I thought this was common knowlege.

As one who chooses to live in his own little world, let me offer a slightly different, alter-reality.
Suppose instead, that the planet was not coming out of an ice age, but going back into one.
Then, the hue and cry would be that the man-made gases are blocking the sun, preventing the planet from warming.
You just can't win with some people.

Oh, and thank you, Maximan, for holding me in such high esteem... Having my name in the same sentence with E. Liberty is an honor not often bestowed.

[MAXIMAN]

Malber...What if I did? Would this disqualify me somehow. Would it somehow make earth science null and void? And what about the geologist that work for "Environmental Kook groups"

This is the mantra of the Global Warming wacks. If you don't agree with their religion...then you are disqualified on all sorts of grounds regardless of credentials. Dr. Richard Lindzen is a pre-eminent climatologist at MIT. He is totally opposed to the ideology of anthropogenic global warming. He is belittled and ridiculed by the "AL GORES" of the world not because he works in industry( he's in the academy) but because he doesn't subscribe to Gore's religion.

Dr. Timm Patterson geologist at Carleton University is a specialist in the field of paleoclimatology. He has spent decades studying the historical climate of the earth. He doesn't subscribe to the notion of man made global warming either. Why is he discredited? You tell me.

I ask you Maber...YOU answer the question. If man is causing global warming...a one degree increase today, then what caused it in the past...THOUSANDS OF TIMES and ten fold greater than we've seen today?

Was it perfectly natural for thousands of cycles over a half billion years? And now suddenly this one time it is MAN'S DOING?

[fredintoon]

"One more thing. If six billion people were crapping in one river that means there would be only one river on the planet?"

Hi Maximan,
um, er, duh, like, that was an analogy, man.
Unless you are into that oriental profundity stuff. All rivers are one river and like that.

[MAXIMAN]

Originally posted by mro

but the oceans are not beyond our ability to ruin. Currently man has/is spreading organisms into different parts of the ecosystem where they have/are having a negative impact. blah blah blah...mro

You may think I'm a mad scientist...but I am in good company my friend.

A graduate level geochemistry professor of mine said exaclty that! This guy has recieved all sorts of accolades from professional geologic organizations and many other scientific groups. He has published in XS of 80 peer reviewed papers in numerous publications.

Now this is totally OT...But I'll inform you of his opinion. He said "man is incapable of ruining the oceans..." He basically said man can not achieved in ten thousand years that which nature itself could not achieve in 1 billion.

He didn't just pull this number out of his azz. He actually had done a study and used standard chemical theory and law to calculate mans effect upon the oceans. In the very worst case scenario he said if man was dumping the most egregious materials ...with malice of forthought...intentionally ... at mind bending rates ...he still couldn't ruin the oceans.

he might be able to ruin an area...for a short time. But he could not ruin the oceans lock stock and barrle. And what ever he ruined locally would eventually return.

He was not advocating POLLUTION. To the contrary Doc AL was very very eco minded. However he DID NOT subscribe to the "science" of hysteria and hype. He was a methodic scientist and a man of reason. Not a simpleton that "connected dots".

But this again is going totally OT from global warming so I will not address this "oceans 13" topic anymore. I am not an expert in matters of oceanic ecology. Doc Al was.