Topics that'll never be on TV sci-fi because half of the internet would go nuts....

[Antiboyscout]

Human and non-human relations

Alien or animal?

[bronnt]

You are talking out of your ass. There is a consensus that rising levels of CO2 is causing global warming, there is a consensus in how much our current output will cause the temperature to rise, and there is a consensus that it will cause massive ecological harm, notably it will make most of the middle east two hot for human habitation even in many of the better case scenarios.

I knew this was going to be the sticking point. It happens when science gets politicized, and it suddenly becomes heresy to re-examine studies in attempt to increase knowledge.

There have been a slew of recent studies challenging whether C02 is the primary greenhouse gas driving global warming. Some of those are rubbish, sure, driven by ideology and not science.

But there's still a slew of honest dissent. C02 is a heavy gas, tending to hug near the Earth's surface, and it does not reach the Earth's outer atmosphere to absorb radiation. Additionally, C02 has no effect on ocean temperatures, which comprises two-thirds of the world's surface, because atmospheric radiation doesn't penetrate into the surface of water (well, not beyond a few literal microns), while solar radiation penetrations tens of meters deep. The extra heat that's transferred into the top few molecules of the ocean's surface tends to cause evaporation, which is actually a cooling effect.

Another part of this problem is the idea that correlation equals causation. Over the past 150 years, the CO2 in the atmosphere has increased, and global temperature has increased. But there's not a smoking gun pointing to C02 as the main culprit, when it's likely that solar output is also constituting a part of that warming trend (the Earth has generally been on a warming tend since the Little Ice Age). There's actually no strongly stated mechanism for which increased C02 raises global temperatures-the molecules absorb heat in a limited bandwidth, but heat transfer in the atmosphere, especially the lower atmosphere where C02 lives, is driven by convection, so a C02 molecule is going to bump into other molecules and the heat ends up displaced.

I'll admit that there's a lot more of the science that's beyond me. I do understand enough to confirm that there's still actual, informed debate happening on the topic, which is difficult in many circles because it's become so politically charged.

[jadenova]

Human and non-human relations

Alien or animal?

Let's go for both. Non-humanoid alien and animal.

[Draco Dracul]

But there's still a slew of honest dissent. C02 is a heavy gas, tending to hug near the Earth's surface, and it does not reach the Earth's outer atmosphere to absorb radiation. Additionally, C02 has no effect on ocean temperatures, which comprises two-thirds of the world's surface, because atmospheric radiation doesn't penetrate into the surface of water (well, not beyond a few literal microns), while solar radiation penetrations tens of meters deep. The extra heat that's transferred into the top few molecules of the ocean's surface tends to cause evaporation, which is actually a cooling effect.

One, it doesn't need to be in the upper atmosphere to trap radiation. Plenty of radiation gets to the Earth's surface, that's why the earth isn't a frozen ball of ice and we can see.

Two, CO2 doesn't have to directly make water warmer for it to heat the oceans. If you have more heat in the lower atmosphere, some of that heat is going to go into the oceans simply because they are next to each other. Some of it will evaporate, most of it won't. Also the extra evoporation will action cause secondary warming effects because Water Vapor is a greenhouse gas.

You are talking out of your ass. There is a consensus that rising levels of CO2 is causing global warming, there is a consensus in how much our current output will cause the temperature to rise, and there is a consensus that it will cause massive ecological harm, notably it will make most of the middle east two hot for human habitation even in many of the better case scenarios.

Another part of this problem is the idea that correlation equals causation. Over the past 150 years, the CO2 in the atmosphere has increased, and global temperature has increased. But there's not a smoking gun pointing to C02 as the main culprit, when it's likely that solar output is also constituting a part of that warming trend (the Earth has generally been on a warming tend since the Little Ice Age). There's actually no strongly stated mechanism for which increased C02 raises global temperatures-the molecules absorb heat in a limited bandwidth, but heat transfer in the atmosphere, especially the lower atmosphere where C02 lives, is driven by convection, so a C02 molecule is going to bump into other molecules and the heat ends up displaced.

I'll admit that there's a lot more of the science that's beyond me. I do understand enough to confirm that there's still actual, informed debate happening on the topic, which is difficult in many circles because it's become so politically charged.

Correlation doesn't equal causation, but it does suggested it. In the past 150 years we've had CO2 levels increase at rates greater than in the past 1 million years and temperatures increase at a faster rate than at any point in the 1 million years. Absent an factor that could account for both like say summer for ice cream sales and drowning it's safe to assume they are related unless extraordinary evidence points elsewhere.

It increases temperature because more total heat is being absorbed. Unless convection is sending the CO2 molecules into space the "cooling" process you speak of will do nothing of the sort, it will simply move the heat around the lower atmosphere. Energy cannot be created or destroyed, the earth is habitable because it both radiates heat out into space and receives energy from the sun, by absorbing more of that energy it means less is being radiated out, but the same amount is coming in meaning it gets warmer.

The green house effect was proven in 1859, the first effects of global warming where noted in 1876, in 1896 it was calculated that with the current carbon production the earth would warm over the course of several thousand years. This is a science that is older than anyone alive today, the onus is on the deniers to come up with an alternative that both explains what is happening now and makes valid predictions.

[Antiboyscout]

Human and non-human relations

Alien or animal?

Let's go for both. Non-humanoid alien and animal.

Intelligent or feral?

[jadenova]

Human and non-human relations

Alien or animal?

Let's go for both. Non-humanoid alien and animal.

Intelligent or feral?

Once again let's go with both.

[MissKittyFantastico]

Human and non-human relations

Alien or animal?

Let's go for both. Non-humanoid alien and animal.

Intelligent or feral?

Once again let's go with both.

African or European swallow?

[Antiboyscout]

Human and non-human relations

Alien or animal?

Let's go for both. Non-humanoid alien and animal.

Intelligent or feral?

Once again let's go with both.

Intelligent and feral, what is this Tarzan?

[Robovski]

So an alien wolf-boy?