Origin of the universe?

[kvn8907]

lol 

[Sedodes]

The subject is "Origin of the Universe" not "Debate The Very Nature and Fundamental Thoeries of Existence of the Universe and All Matter and Energy by way of Discussing Space, Distance, Dimensions, and Length in Varying Views of Dimensional Space in Terms of Theoretical Geometries or Those Applied in Special Circumstances."

The discussion of space itself possibly being ecliptic or hyperbolic instead of Euclidean ("parallel lines" NECESSARILY having to be arched toward or away from each-other instead of equidistant [by our perspective] at all points, but still being equidistant at all points due to "curvature" of space itself) won't really help to determine the Origin of the Universe IMHO.

[Eth]

  Oh.  Fuck.   

[GeomanNL]

I just have to add this interesting link to the list:

http://www-eps.harvard.edu/people/faculty/hoffman/snowball_paper.html

It's about some freaky climatic changes in the early history of the earth.
Something to take note of: the sun was cooler in the past.

[GeomanNL]

Maybe I should explain why I posted this link... it's because of the beauty of the thought: imagine a world where the sun is dimmer than ours, where the day temperature is only a little above freezing. Imagine that the skies are blue... which is exactly the problem because the heat escapes quickly. Freezing nights, which create violent snow storms, very long glaciers, and an ocean covered by many meters thick layers of ice. In other words, a mixture of Mars and Europa (the moon).
Imagine periodic violent volcanic eruptions, which spew tons of ashes and greenhous gasses into the atmosphere. A dead soil, chemically in balance with the atmosphere because there is hardly any erosion, means that they are not absorbed back. They stay there, and over eons become a fuzzy haze which covers the globe.
The heat is trapped, the ice melts, and a long hot summer begins... one which will last for thousands and thousands of years...

Okay, that's just my imagination

[Sedodes]

Put your imagination to WORK and get a job, hippie.

If you were an enlightened REPUBLICAN you'd know that, outside of the normal spring/summer/fall/winter seasons, it's impossible for there to be any climate change at all.  Nor can there be any environmental impact which would cause it.

[kvn8907]

Why's that?

[GeomanNL]

I think that's because he is sarcastic about US-Republican opposition against greenhouse-gas emissions reductions, because they say that there is not going to be such a climate change, but they are certain that such measures would result in an economical disaster

http://www.irregulartimes.com/onclimatechange.html
 I quote:
Regarded as a whole, the Republican position on global climate change seems like nothing more than a retreat into a pre-scientific mode of intolerant persecution of ideas that dare to stray from the orthodoxy of the system in power. The arguments used to deny global climate change are embarrassingly similar to the arguments used to deny biological evolution or to insist that the Earth really is flat.

Holy... this is ... well, read for yourself: it's about the US representative to the UN (someone called Bolton).
http://www.independent-media.tv/item.cfm?fmedia_id=11749&fcategory_desc=Under%20Reported

[kvn8907]

Hey, it IS possible that the Earth might be going through a normal warming cycle, greenhouse gasses or not.

[GeomanNL]

Yeah sure, dream on
There's more carbon in the atmosphere than in a very long time, and it is increasing quite rapidly. That cannot be denied, and will have consequences.
I think that "someone" is going to lose a little, while others may gain a little

This is also interesting (contains a graph):
http://www.junkscience.com/MSU_Temps/historical_CO2.htm

And this:
http://www.cotf.edu/ete/modules/climate/GCremote3.html

And this:
http://www.john-daly.com/bull120.htm


I think that especially the future levels look quite worrying.

[Sedodes]

I'm not an advocate of environment destruction or anything, but I _do_ try to remain objective.

1)  Yes, there are high levels of CO₂ in the atmosphere.  However, it has been shown that at other points in Earth's history the concentration have been much higher.

2)  There is no conclusive evidence that our climates are significantly different due to the fact that more CO₂ is present.

Humans began organized agriculture some 10,000 years ago.  The % of carbon dioxide contributed by humans to the atmosphere since the industrial revolution compared to the many thousands of years of farming preceeding it is negligible.  Personally, I believe that we're just beginning a "heat age" (as the Earth has in the past) in a similar vein as we undergo a periodic "ice age."  However, I do recognize the fact that because of human CO₂ contributions this "heat age" will probably be longer and stronger than those previously experienced, having untold ramifications.  But something will survive... even if it's not us.

[Eth]

  I submit that, rather than derailing this thread again with another controversial subject, we start a new one.  I was planning to start a Global Warming thread anyway, so this is a good time to do it.  <SWOOOOSH!>