Talk:Politics of global warming
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Metatron (talk | contribs) at 15:13, December 29, 2007. It may differ significantly from current revision.
In response to a suggestion from TK, I think we should re-organize the global warming articles.
- Politics of global warming - advocacy on both sides of the question: how much are people causing it, and what should we do to prevent it (or adapt to it)?
- Science of global warming - how have global air temperatures risen and fallen in the past, what do scientists think caused this (especially before the modern era), and how much do "greenhouse gas" emissions like carbon dioxide add to warming?
We'll need to divide the politics part into separate articles:
- Kyoto Protocol - a treaty to "reduce" emissions or "buy" carbon credits
- Emissions trading - a "scheme" to allow "polluters" to pay a penalty in lieu of reducing emissions. (Who collects the payments, and where does the money go?)
The science is much more complicated:
- solar variation - the "solar constant" isn't constant!
- cosmic rays - affected by solar variation
- cloud formation - affected by cosmic rays
- El Nino - a natural temperature variation in the Pacific Ocean
- the so-called "Greenhouse effect" - various gas particles help keep heat from "radiating" out into space
- infrared radiation - the rays that keep french fries warm at McDonald's (similar to microwaves).
This is not a complete list, but the issue is, frankly, too complex for me! I cannot single-handedly fight against a two billion dollar industry, even if I devoted all my waking hours to it. --Ed Poor Talk 09:14, 10 August 2007 (EDT)
- Ed, your seemingly never-ending supply of creative and intelligent ideas make you an invaluable member of the CP team, if I do say so myself, and I do, speaking for myself and not you this time. ;-) --şŷŝôρ-₮KṢρёаќǃ 14:33, 10 August 2007 (EDT)
- Can I make a quick point, in reference to the first line of the article, which implies that taking action against global warming is a bad thing? Even if global warming is largely down to natural causes, there is no plausible argument for not trying to prevent it. It doesn't make sense that taking no action could be better than taking any action at all.--Metatron 10:13, 29 December 2007 (EST)