... is fucking serious.

this will invariably be a rather long post; but i don't care, it's important.

and if you don't think so, you're contributing to the problem in more ways than you can imagine.

ignorance is a horrendous thing.

so - some facts about venus.

it's important to know.

and if you read on, you'll understand why.

venus
- second planet from the sun
- often called earth's "sister planet" - similar size and composition
- atmosphere consists mostly of carbon dioxide and nitrogen
- enormously rich CO2 atmosphere results in a strong greenhouse effect that causes surface temperature to reach extremes of 500°c
- were it not for this greenhouse effect, the surface of venus would be similar to earth
- far too hot to support life

whereas the earth is a virtual "heaven" - venus is our "hell".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus

so... yes, the greenhouse effect is present on other planets.

in fact a bit of it is necessary in order for our own to be inhabitable.

it's natural.

but in excess, as we see, it renders planets completely uninhabitable.

and this is where it gets nasty -

human activity is increasing the natural greenhouse effect of our own planet.

carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases are on the rise due to the burning of fossil fuels, land clearing and agriculture, and other human activities.

undeniable fact:

The scientific opinion on climate change, as expressed in the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Third Assessment Report in 2001 and explicitly endorsed by the national science academies of the G8 nations April 2005, is that the average global temperature has risen 0.6 ± 0.2 °C since the late 19th century, and that it is likely that "most of the warming observed over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming

if you think this isn't serious, you've deluded yourself.

get your head out of the fucking CO2 clouds, so to speak.

we may not see any real effects in our lifetime - 0.6 of a degree? who gives a crap, right?

wrong.

you should give a crap.

we're self-destructing.

unless we do something, our planet will eventually be exactly the same as venus.

all in the name of what? our convenience? profit?

a legacy of 4.7 billion years, and we're destroying it.

i'm petrified of this.

and if more people were, i think we'd actually be able to do something about it.

http://www.greenpeace.ca/e/resource/green/index.php

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TUiP6dqPynE

think about all this the next time you self-absorbed cretins cry about not having a date for the prom or about the fact that you've gained twenty fuckin pounds since leaving home for university.

and do something that just might actually matter.

you are not as important as you may think you are.

you are a piece of shit.

and so am i.

and i hate us for believing otherwise - our ignorance is, before our very eyes, resulting in the destruction of ourselves and the world around us.

Prediction : Some ignoramus will post about Mars' icecaps melting. This will bring about a sound arsekicking as it will be pointed out to them that:

A: The icecaps sublimate, not melt.
B: The positive feedback caused by the release of GHG from the ice accelerates the local temperatures above what can be expected given the solar constant and albedo.

BTW, I've gained 38lbs since going back into education , and uni isn't even till next year.

Wha?

I actually give a shit about my future and the future generations beyond that.
There are countless documentaries and news reports on different parts of the globe currently where the greenhouse effect is contributing NOW.
One example was where an inuit type people on the northern tip of Canada where huge lakes use to freeze over and they would go fishing for food by digging holes in the frozen lake but the lakes doesnt freeze over any more. A way of life is gone and a source of food is gone. Some people may say, good riddence because they wont be killing any seals anymore but thats not the point. The point is that in the space of 20-30 years, whole lakes that would be normally frozen over are not freezing at all during the winter months.
That is a huge change in such a short period of time. The change is happening alot quicker than people realise and the time is now to do something about it. Im still disgusted that America didnt sign the Kyoto treaty..

the unforunate thing is that most people just don't give a shit.

they see a "minuscule" increase in temperature and think "so what?"

and i'm not even american... but i'm ashamed by mere association that the american government has thus far neither ratified nor withdrawn from the protocol.

fuckin makes me sick.

I think their excuse was that they have enough trees in south America to recycle the air or some shit thus thats their contribution. I am also apauled at some state laws allowing clunkers on the road with inferior dirty piss water petrol (gas) If they were in Europe they would be arrested for even thinking the car road worthy and sure, our gas is as much as 4 times higher than U.S. prices but its far better quality. Im glad some of those lax laws are planning to be tightened up recently.
Britain, even though part of the Kyoto treaty, is the only member not to have met its target emissions, so Blair, you better catch up. And please do shut up about the idea of a nuclear power plant. Yes it may save on some emissions but the chemical waste, where is going to go? Seep into our earth? into our oceans? Please just invest more in renewable energy would you, the Greens are giving out that the introduction of nuclear power would side line oh so important renewable projects..

some people don't feel the effects of global warming.

maybe australia is affected by it more, but lets just say the weather here for the last 10+ years has been fucking odd.

most people in north america will tell you that the weather here has been fucking odd.

it's impossible to deny, because it absolutely has been!

and yet -

what's the canadian government doing about this particular problem?

and america -

http://www.detnews.com/2005/autosins...B01-141349.htm

it's disgusting.

its nice that Gore looks at this as a moral issue.
were used to the hypocrites in office who bought there way in, trying to put themselves in our beds at night over marriage sex and personal things.

there supposed to oversee that funds are used for sake of national/global matters like even setting an example. and in this admin, none of the funds go towards the enviroment. these guys are trying to get in our bedrooms and set up the American life for us. Meanwhile they dont even governize here, there busy creating freedom and democrazy elsewhere.

Nature will continue to get rougher more unpredictable and violent and thats what were asking for. its no accident the hurricane season was the way it was and that it will be again.

even just in this U.S. admin, since the eye has been on totalitarianism, the only way to bring us together is when some of our homes get taken away and we have to start again. when the security of the future is overlapped by the welfare of the present. the hope is further in the awakening.

Kyoto was not enough & will not be enough. Kyoto also provided companies and governments with ample 'wiggle' room to dick off real regulations.

Which does not really excuse Bush from not signing it...but I really do not think that it would have made a significant difference for the future of the planet.

I do not understand why people are so furious about Congress not enacting stricter fuel-economy regulations, when we are going to have to stop using fossil fuels in the future PERIOD. There is great new technology available. I do not understand why more people are not endorsing the use of fuel cells and the like--while there are the hybrids and whatnot available and also cleaner, alternative fuels, the hydrogen fuel cell is undeniably the best solution for halting global warming.

And I know that there are 'powers that be' influencing such things. But I think that a REALLY fucking hard push for something entirely different to fuel our vehicles and our need for energy is in order.

Furthermore, something needs to be done about China. Much of China's manufacturing is run by coal, which is not helping, especially given how much China burns. Air pollutants have been found in North America from Chinese manufacturing. It is a global issue, not just one of the 'Western' world. Everyone needs to get together and do something...because if they do not, everyone is going down on the same ship.

The weather in Minnesota has been nuts. It still is. Minnesota is particularly vulnerable to climate change, because there are really different, distinct environments in the state--prairie, deciduous forests, and coniferous forests. I do not think that climate change has affected all areas in the same way or to the same degree. There are a lot of people who do not feel and/or see the impact of global warming as much as people in Minnesota can and have.

I'm not sure if anyone has read it or not, but National Geographic ran a really fantastic article about climate change in September of 2004 (I think?). It's a really compelling article with opinions from people all over the world, and a lot of info. about how scientists are coming to the conclusion that the Earth is warming faster than ever.

did anyone see the documentary on bbc last night with David Attenborough?

So many people are taking ages to actually start doing anything about it - it's like take your damn time!

as far as i'm concerned, in failing to ratify the outlined protocol of this treaty, the american government is sending out the message that this isn't a pressing issue.

which it is.

and i don't agree that this treaty won't make a significant difference for the future.

because, if nothing else, at least it's a step in the right fucking direction.

it's something, ya know?

i mean, what exactly would "be enough"? and would that be realistic as far as present day action goes?

yes, there will be a time when we'll be forced to stop using fossil fuels.

however, excessive burning of fossil fuels is a major contributer to the global warming problem.

i agree, we should be exploring other options for powering our vehicles.

but again - change on this sort of scale can not happen immediately.

strict fuel-economy regulations can.

i agree.

but when you're at the top, you've gotta expect criticism.

how can we expect the rest of the world to take steps to fix this problem when america - the "super power", the wealthiest country in the world - doesn't even seem to give a shit?

pretty fuckin pathetic if you ask me.

0.6 ± 0.2 °C is a lot. i think it's a 6°C increase globally that is widely accepted as being enough to wipe out a good majority of life on the planet. a temperature rise won't make the uk a tropical country and southern europe into desert - this is not a localised phenomenon if more places in the world become barren due to exccessive temperature then those places will lose plant life which adds to the greenhouse effect. the rise needed to achieve this loss in certain parts of the world/certain species of plants is tiny - we then have a snowball effect.

and just look at africa. do you think millions of people just appeared in places that could not sustain life, or do you think millions of people had lived for thousands of years in these places which once sustained life?

and then there is the UN water report, which was buried within a report on the planets capacity to accommodate us and the economic benefits of operating in an environmentally friendly way (it's sad they have to word it that way - "i don't give a crap if we're all going to die if i can make money. what? i can make more money and be environmentally friendly?"). we're using more water than it is possible to replenish i.e. we're unable to reprocess it into a useable form at the rate we consume it at. we're also storing so much water in industrial processes that at this rate we will run out of it at some point. granted, that's a very long time yet, but in the meanwhile for every little bit of deficit we trade to the environment, some of the environment disappears. in the meanwhile world population grows and consumption increases. even if we're able to process the same percentage of water per head back into the environment as population increases the percentage of 'replenished' water out there decreases at an increasing rate.

as human environmental impact is now on a global scale, and because we're increasing in population, even if we decrease our impact on the environment per head we probably still will be increasing our impact overall. we really do need some drastic things to happen. when india and china really take off we may be in some serious shit (roughly 1/3 of the worlds population combined).

this is definately a "hope for the best, expect the worst" situation

but i hope everyone who realizes the importance of this issue does their best to get it across to everyone. i'm going to do my best, that's for sure.

it's all gonna be okay though.

The oceans are also a major source of greenhouse gases, as are trees. Trees and other vegetation take in carbon dioxide and give off other gases such as methane, a major greenhouse gas, and a host of other compounds, many of which are also greenhouse gases. Decaying vegetation also gives off methane gas. Studies of smog in the Los Angeles basin indicate that over 90% of the smog is generated by the vegetation in the area. To aid in perpetuating the hoax, however, environmentalists, aided by major news media outlets, censored and suppressed this study.

Studies have shown that greenhouse gases produced by human activity accounts for around 1 percent of the gases in the atmosphere. The total elimination of human generated greenhouse gases would have a negligible effect on Earth’s global mean atmospheric temperatures. The elimination of all U.S. gasoline powered vehicles would reduce worldwide “greenhouse” emissions by less than 0.2%.” What would be the effect on global mean temperatures? None. Doubling of manmade greenhouse emissions above current levels would increase the global mean temperature by one degree Centigrade, which is within the normal range of temperature swings.

It is the fluctuations of the Earth’s orbit around the sun, volcanic eruptions, the emission of gases by oceans and trees, all natural occurrences, that cause rises and declines in global mean temperatures, i.e., “global warming” and “global cooling,” not human activity.

http://www.chronwatch.com/content/co....asp?aid=12594

Unfortunetly, that is a point of view that would require more-or-less every single eniviromental scientist on the entire planet to have some how forgotten high-school science as soon as they get thier BSc.

I've yet to see an introductory text that doesn't already mention all of those factors. Shit, I've got level 1 texts from the mid 90's that mention fluctuations in the SC and natural emissions as a major factor in GMST ,so it's not as if it's somehow escaped the attention of some of the most relevantly educated people on the entire planet.

Whoever wrote that website needs to pick up a decent a-level/high school text. They will find that these things are already being researched. The findings may not be perfect, but it's better than an implied libelling of thousands of hard working scientists as incompentant or corrupt.