Subject: »Climate Change and Global Warming

So you´re ok with the fact that in few decades there is no more [t]rain forest?
(edited)

The famous train forest! :)

i understand you too, but...

we don't know about the future.

so we have two opportunity:
1, nothing to do, because we can't. just see, how our earth destoy. and we spoil the situation
2, try to do, that may be. and hope. :)))

nobody don't know it, that the process can be stopped. but we must try! :)


i hope you understand my english. :)
(edited)

indeed , the rainforest will be gone within 25 years... That's very sad news and it's impossible that that won't have an impact on climate or on living conditions....

Besides that it's very sad that the rainforests will get lost, does it harm us in any way?

lots

According to your theory it won't harm us, but there are a lot of people, also scientists e.g., who say it will be very bad for us... I know there are a couple neglecting the problem, like shown on the Youtube films.

Yeah we know allready that the say it's bad.. but why?

rain forest = lung of earth

more rain forest, fewer Co2
fewer rain forest, more desert

:(

this not right way, to slow the global-warming.

Easy man...
I didn't post some videos to denie pollution, lost of rainforests, or whatever.
They even don't denie global warming.

But let's make it clear: my opinion is that global warming exists, but is not caused by human acticities.
We must spend bilions and bilions $ not to stop global warming. We have to stop pollution, preserve raw material, and to adapt us to climate changes. Fight climate changes is completely useles. (imho)

you are very confident, but i don't know why? :) nobody see the future!! and nobody knows for sure, what are the reasons. (i think the human activity and the nature too)

i agree, with you, the global warming is fact.

we must to do everything to stoped this process, or maybe slows down.

I am looking forward to more warm climate, Czech Republic is too cold...warmer climate would be cool.

Ok, but... just to be more precise...
I don't think global warming is a fact. It's an opinion. It's also my opinion, but it's not a fact.

I dare to show you one more time this video:
Global Warming: False Data
Becouse we often think what tv show to us is a fact, but often is only propaganda.

Ok, I think I sayd enough now :)
Peace man!

My theory? I haven't said anything about 'my theory' (besides the fact whether I have my own theory or not). "There are a lot of people, also scientists, who say it will be very bad to us" doesn't mean a thing. First of all: people can say whatever they want. Secondly that scientists are included as 'as well' doesn't make your argument any stronger. Thirdly scientists can say whatever they want. I reckon myself as a scientist and can contradict myself intentionally. And lastly: what do tests, measurements, etc., tell us and how should we interpret this?

"There are a lot of people, also scientists, who say it will be very bad to us" only shows what we already know, it's the fact that a lot of people are saying this, but nobody knows who, apparently "scientists" are included. That fact is that biophilia is ruling the world, money comes at a lower place. The fact that we're genetically coded to love nature and anything what looks like nature prevents us from thinking rationalistic in these matters. We all agree that global warming is bad and that it'll be bad when the rainforests will be gone because we're afraid of losing nature while we love nature. This has nothing to do with the real effects and personally I believe there's no-one on this entire planet who really knows whether losing the rainforest or global warming would be bad.

"rain forest = lung of earth

more rain forest, fewer Co2
fewer rain forest, more desert"

This is absolutely BS. If we would cut all the rainforest on the world and replace it with huge fields solely filled with grass much more CO2 would be absorbed. Rainforests are not the lungs of the earth. The Netherlands (here we have grass practically everywhere) absorbs as much CO2 as a rainforest which would be multiple times bigger.

I do not reject the idea of global warming, I'm trying to stay objective as much as possible. Nowadays we see a lot of warning graphs which show how the global temperature has increased over de last x-decades, but none of them explains how these graphs are made. Personally I believe that currently we're technically not advanced enough to measure the average global temperature at all.

Would you measure and record the temperature in for example Tokio you'll find a huge and worrying (which in fact is worrying for the people living over there) increase of temperature, but the main reason for that is that in this huge city with its huge buildings there's no way for heat to escape.

Earlier this year it was estimated that there was a chance of over 50% that all ice in the north pole would melt this year. I haven't heard anything about it anymore so I don't know whether it really happened or not, but did anyone of us notice anything of an molten or nearly molten pole this summer? Did anyone, btw, know that the temperature on the south pole is falling and that the ice volume is increasing? Did anyone know an increase of temperature on the south pole would lead to more snowfall and would reduce the increase of sea level due to global warming with one third?
(edited)

Something else probably also not unimportant is the temperature of ice. Under normal conditions ice has it's biggest volume at around -5 degrees C. If you cool a massive volume of sea ice (e.g. the north pole) from -1 to -4 you would get a rising sea level. I don't know if this might be of any significance (probably not), but what I'm trying to illustrate is that global warming isn't as simple as a lot of people belief. It's not like an increase of consumption will lead to an increase of CO2 in the atmosphere which will lead to global warming, melting ice poles, and a risen sea level.