Do planes have any effect on climate?

Nix said:
I love the fact that the media let that one slip by quietly. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

It was on the news, however it may have only been the local news, can't remember exactly when I saw it, but yeah, amazingly it just sneaks through the cracks.
 
Tute said:
I can tell you with almost complete certainty that planes make absolutely zero difference to the climate, just as is the case with cars, ships, and other CO2 emitting machines.
Click to expand...

Tute said:
The fact that there is no proper, conlusive, unbiased proof that AGW is indeed, real.
Click to expand...

Newsflash... there's no proper, conclusive, unbiased proof the AGW isn't real either, so the claim that you are "almost completely certain" is laughable. You just owned yourself with your own argument.
 
joeyjojo said:
Global warming IS happening (fact). Whether global warming is entirely man-made or just mostly is the real question.
Click to expand...

Or at all man made?

I don't buy it. The earth is a constantly changing, living entity. The climate has been changing for millennia, we have been on this planet for a pathetically small time in comparison. We are just a tiny blip in the timeline, I just don't buy that we are responsible for climate change, at the absolute worst we may have sped the process up, but I'm not even convinced of that.
 
Tute said:
The fact that there is no proper, conlusive, unbiased proof that AGW is indeed, real.

The fact that it's being used as an excuse to raise taxes - rather than to combat the so called "threat" properly.

It's like speeding and road safety. If it was really a problem and the government cared about preventing it, they'd do something decisive and proper to attempt to curb it properly. But they don't want that, as it would mean a lot of revenue lost - so we just get blanket camera coverage that does nothing to sort out the problem itself. Just like "climate change" - it's been dreamt up with revenue generation in mind.
Click to expand...


roflcopter!

Climate change is a natural process which has happened ever since the planet first formed, it's been happening for billions of years.

EDIT: Also you couldn't use these 4 days of no planes as proof either way as there is a massive cloud of ash over all of europe!

Love ocuk armchair scientists. Funny times.

EDIT2: What does it matter who "started climate change" the simple fact is that cheap oil is running out and we need to find new fuels and improve efficiency in all aspects of our lives. What happens to the average joe when petrol reaches £5-£10 a litre in 20-40 years when all the cheap oil has gone. We need to plough money into renewables, nuclear fission if we can get it to work and hydrogen power.
 
Last edited:
In september the 11th when all planes were grounded across the usa,some bright scientist went oiut and measured the temperature,it was 1-2 degrees warmer because of the lack of jet plumes from all the planes,this resulted in global cooling because of the pollution,this is where the sun fails to break through the cloud,in the longterm is does major damage by messing up the weather climate in certain parts of the world,they are blaming the famine in 1984/85(band aid) on pollution from all around the world as the people in africa never got the monsoon(rainy season) because of global cooling which causes the crops to die etc.....i seen a program on the TV about it sometime back.....the bottom line is pollution from planes is very bad for our planet.
 
Last edited:
I wonder what would happen to the economy and weather if we only allowed planes to fly over land between sunset and sunrise, they can't just go around flying planes and messing with our skies 24/7, there needs to be a balance, you only have to look at the image i posted on the last page to see what a horrible haze they create, im sure it has a negative affect on the temperature and sunlight we receive.
 
OK, all our "man-made" CO2 is just dug up in the form of oil/coal, which is just the remains of dinosaurs from millions of years ago. We can't actually make more CO2 by burning coal + oil than there was when creatures with far bigger feets than us were strolling across the face of the earth and there was no oil or coal buried underground.

Plus, how far down do you think we can extract that black gold, and how much more is further down, currently out of reach?

I give 2 fingers to global warming. Once we burn all the oil dry, and dig up the last of the coal that we can reach, nothing's going to happen, we won't all drop dead. Daniel Merriweather :rolleyes: Even if we do heat up, human's will cope with a climate change for the warmer, maybe some random species that no one's heard of/can pronounce will go extinct, oh boo hoo. :p
 
The_Sophisticate said:
OK, all our "man-made" CO2 is just dug up in the form of oil/coal, which is just the remains of dinosaurs from millions of years ago. We can't actually make more CO2 by burning coal + oil than there was when creatures with far bigger feets than us were strolling across the face of the earth and there was no oil or coal buried underground.

Plus, how far down do you think we can extract that black gold, and how much more is further down, currently out of reach?

I give 2 fingers to global warming. Once we burn all the oil dry, and dig up the last of the coal that we can reach, nothing's going to happen, we won't all drop dead. Daniel Merriweather :rolleyes: Even if we do heat up, human's will cope with a climate change for the warmer, maybe some random species that no one's heard of/can pronounce will go extinct, oh boo hoo. :p
Click to expand...

It's amazing how close you came to grasping it then completely failed. Congratulations for that, I don't see that everyday.

I'll break it down for you shall I?

All that CO2 came from all the flora and fauna before us, correct but - and it's a big one - that CO2 was sequestered and stored away; it was not 'active' within the current system. Since the 'anthropocene' began, we have effectively released - or made active - all this CO2 that took an epoch to be stored naturally. No, it hasn't magically appeared from no-where but it has suddenly been reintroduced to the climatic system en-masse. Thousands and thousands of tons of the stuff, dug up from where it wasn't causing any harm and let loose to do its thing.

Now, for you to sit there and stick up your two fingers at global warming makes you one of two things:

1. An idiot.
2. Selfish.

Which is it? A 'sophisticate' you most certainly are not.
 
Amp34 said:
We're not all armchair scientists! Some of us have actually done fieldwork!:p

Although I very much doubt poster 2 has...
Click to expand...

:D

In all seriousness, I bet there are actually only 1 or 2 people on the whole of this board who can actually say they understand the science and make a decent conclusion from it. Another small group are probably scientifically trained and can therefore appreciate the science involved, digest the information given and make a rough conclusion from it.

It's the tabloid readers (or even worse, broadsheet) that make me giggle. Regurgitating what you have read elsewhere (no matter the source) with no critical thought isn't anywhere near scientific. And it's kinda scary that the media has allowed the armchair scientists phenomenon, and just like football supporters (armchair managers anyone? :D), they are a fickle bunch. Willing to turn on a theory if something isn't quite right or it becomes hip.

It it also the ultimate in internet arguments. I think I participated for less than a day in the AGW thread in SC and decided to take my leave :D
 
DreXeL said:
Or at all man made?

I don't buy it. The earth is a constantly changing, living entity. The climate has been changing for millennia, we have been on this planet for a pathetically small time in comparison. We are just a tiny blip in the timeline, I just don't buy that we are responsible for climate change, at the absolute worst we may have sped the process up, but I'm not even convinced of that.
Click to expand...

Indeed, the Earth does change over time - the atmosphere changes in relative proportions of gases, the mean surface temperature goes up and down. But the natural changes in the Earth's conditions are extremely slow. And here we humans are 100 years after the industrial revolution (as you say, exceedingly fast on a geological timescale) seeing a 30% increase in CO2 concentration (graph).

To say that there is no human impact where civilization relies heavily on highly CO2 producing methods is ridiculous!
 
HeadlessChicken said:
:D

In all seriousness, I bet there are actually only 1 or 2 people on the whole of this board who can actually say they understand the science and make a decent conclusion from it. Another small group are probably scientifically trained and can therefore appreciate the science involved, digest the information given and make a rough conclusion from it.

It's the tabloid readers (or even worse, broadsheet) that make me giggle. Regurgitating what you have read elsewhere (no matter the source) with no critical thought isn't anywhere near scientific. And it's kinda scary that the media has allowed the armchair scientists phenomenon, and just like football supporters (armchair managers anyone? :D), they are a fickle bunch. Willing to turn on a theory if something isn't quite right or it becomes hip.

It it also the ultimate in internet arguments. I think I participated for less than a day in the AGW thread in SC and decided to take my leave :D
Click to expand...

I agree entirely, unfortunately climate change has become way to political and "mainstream", meaning everyone has an opinion. That's not bad in itself, however it is bad when they don't admit their opinion is based on no scientific work. Unfortunately these people are usually the loudest advocates for and against it...

I can think of around 4 posters on this forum that I know of that have a reasonable understanding of climate change and the science behind it, one, I'd suggest is me, due to having done a variety of uni modules on the subject (past and current climate change, proxies etc) and been taught by people who actually study it academically and write a variety of papers on the subject, however I still sit on the fence because I don't believe I know enough to give a strong opinion either way...

Yet there are people that seem to have done nothing but read The Sun and the Mail who believe they know for certain? Hmmm... Maybe they should write a paper on the subject as they are obviously cleverer than our current crop of scientists...:p Funnily enough none of the 4 I mentioned earlier are staunch either way..
 
Nix said:
Snip
Click to expand...

I just don't give a hoot about global warming. I use energy saving bulbs for the saving on energy bills etc, and other energy saving alternatives, but it's all fiscally motivated.

Anyone think of the deforestation going on in the rainforests, where an area the size of brazil is cutdown every day or some other wild statistic. :rolleyes:

My point is since this is a capitalist world, all the fossil fuels will be burned eventually, there's no stopping the oil companies. Once they're all gone, personally I'm all for going nuclear.
 
I'm sorry, but this whole 'armchair scientist' thing really ****** me off. So, nobody is allowed an opinion unless they have studied in depth everything there is to know on the subject? And anybody else who dares to express an opinion is a Sun/Daily Mail reading 'armchair scientist'? Please :rolleyes:

FWIW my opinion (and it is just that, an opinion, I don't claim anything I say on the subject to be fact), is based on what I have read/watched in various places, none of which include tabloid rags.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom