Posted: May 23, 2008, 9:04 AM CST
dragondog4 wrote:I'll debate this with you bourbon.
Who understood Carbon Dioxide 650,000 yrs ago. Its only been 2000 yrs since christ was supposedly walking around. And we're still struggling to prove or disprove this. And according to some postings on this site anything before this time was mythology.
Yes Science has enough signs to say its fact that the Magnetic cycle of the earth has switched rotations. And many believe that it is these magnetic switches in rotation that have caused these extremes in climate.
My point is that Carbon Dioxide has previously been at today's level in the Earth's atmosphere and the world survived, just as we survive today.
Yes, there is a Magnetic Cycle with Magnetic Pole reversals. Scientists also know that there is a weakening of the magnetic field before each reversal. The Earth's magnetic field is currently weakening, which could be a signal of an impending reversal. This would still occur regardless of the amount of CO2 we pump into the atmosphere.
dragondog4 wrote:But that doesn't explain the hole in the Ozone. The ozone hole is man made. And Science can measure its growth and retraction. We know from history especially the industrial revolution of the 1800s that saw pollution sky rocket in and around the major cities of the world. We (The then population) experienced the consequences of that pollution. As new deseases exploded on to the scene. Death rates were high and life expectancy low.
Here you are linking chemical pollution to ozone depletion, and rightly so. The main ozone depleting chemicals are CFC's or Chlorofluorocarbons. Other ozone depleting chemicals include HCFC's Hydrochlorofluorocarbons, Halons, Methyl Bromide, Carbon Tetrachloride, and Methyl Chloroform. Carbon Dioxide is NOT an ozone depleting chemical.
dragondog4 wrote:Then (Don't ask me when, where or who) the cities started cleaning themselves up. Factories started to mind there waste. Found alternative methods to dispose and or treat their waste. AS this happened the rivers and air improved. Life expectancy improved. In recent history locally. Christchurch banned certain forms of Household heating. It's Atmospheric pollution improved because of that stance. That was during the 1960s or 1970s.
Again, you are talking about chemical pollution. There are thousands of nasty chemicals produced and used by industry. A lot of these chemical pollutants do affect the health and well being of people globally. I don't dispute this, but these chemicals are not being blamed for global warming. It is the Carbon Dioxide which is being blamed.
Every person on the planet exhales Carbon Dioxide, as does every other living animal. It only becomes toxic in high doses, much higher than the current environmental levels. There is no adverse health effects from the current levels of Carbon Dioxide.
dragondog4 wrote:New Zealand is starting to see water issues. Why not have cars that create water as a waste by product.
The cars you are referring to are driven by Hydrogen. They do not
create any water. Initially, water has to be split to produce Hydrogen and then by burning the Hydrogen in the car, you return it to the state of water. There is no net water gain.
Still, having cleaner cars on the road would have to be a good thing.