Delete

I'm sorry, the first time I writ this it didn't show up in "My Posts". So I redid it. Here's a Link , it will take you to the other Global Warming. You can cross refrence them.

This is really not something that's possible with the modding options in the game.

And maybe there is no global warming in the game because you have the technology to control and prevent it

I mean, if you can terraform then you have no problem with globaL WARMING, RIGHT?

Hi!

IMO those fusion power plants of 25'th era Humanity don't run on oil or coal.

BR, Iztok

I assume you are refering to global warming as a threat to your planets eco system and that it is caused by activity of the planets dwellers?

Till that is proven on this planet why even mod it?

Despite what Gore may says temperature rise leads to a rise in CO2, not the otherway around. That is a proven fact revealed by ice core testing.

His film makes for good science fiction though, please note how many times he says "IF"

Spyrer, you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. Ice core testing proves that CO2 levels correspond to rises in the Earth's temperature. This doesn't prove that rising temperature causes CO2 rises at all, it could just as easily be the other way around.

Talk to pretty much any climate physicist. CO2 causes the Earth's temperature to increase. This is just as well, because without the pre-industrial levels of CO2, the Earth would be one big ice cube. Adding more CO2 increases the effect, I don't see why people have such problems with that, apart from the fact that things would be a lot more convenient were it not the case.

Well tough luck. The universe doesn't have to conform to what we consider convenient.

For your reading pleasure I present

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

some highlights of the piece are

Between 1940 and 1970, global temperatures went down slightly, even though carbon dioxide levels went up.

If greenhouse gases were causing the climate warming then scientists would expect the troposphere to be warming faster than the surface, but observations do not bear this out. Satellite temperature measurements show that tropospheric temperatures are increasing with "rates similar to those of the surface temperature,"

please feel free to read and learn.

as for I don't see why people have such problems with that, apart from the fact that things would be a lot more convenient were it not the case.

The problem is that the data on the past is not certain, and the date that is coming in from modern techs like satelite radar mapping, photos, and qualified researchers are ignored by the cry of global warming or the messenger is accused of being funded by "big oil."

as for "Talk to pretty much any climate physicist" please view


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

for their views.

Of course, most of the population might be distracted by 'hot topics' in the pop-control broadcasts, like the fact that Aliens are trying to kill them and eat them, after using Mass Drivers to take out the factories first ...

So...Why couldn't someone make a global warming mod? I don't do mods so I don't know. And I still think this Spyrer guy is retarded or something.

Sorry. No affence, but have you seen all the shows about global warming. Its gotta be true.

Yup, if you can manipulate global climate on that level global warming would be easy to eliminate.

As to global warming on this planet, I hesitate to even get involved, but will point out that much like evolution, global warming (and climate change as a whole) is a field of science that receives special treatment from some quarters because the conclusions are unpopular. It's always remarkable to me how when science tells people something they want to hear or provides them with a new convenience it's great, but when it tells them something they don't want to hear there's a global scientific conspiracy to suppress the "truth," which is invariably that "everything's fine and I can keep living just like I am now."

For the record I do not deny that the earth is getting warmer, but if it is part of the planets natural varience, solar activity or as the result of our activity is up for debate.

but for some of the events reported like sea level rise or all the glaciers melting that simply is not happening. And I will add to that "yet"

Things like the Kyoto Protocol where nations like Africa,India or China are not included are doomed to fail. If it does not include everyone why debate it?

Moving away from fossile fuels will happen with or without the global warming debate for no other reason then money or time. It saves us money and fossile fuels will run out.

Computer forcast models can be "tweaked" to say whatever your bias is.
Look at your typical weather forcast, how accurate is it 7 days from now?
People are making major plans that effect your world based on computer models.

and for the record I have seen most of the shows on global warming and note how many times they are carefull to say "if","can","estimated" or "models show"

I hope so. ImhO, it should have happened at least fifty years ago, but was obstructed by those who profit from continued use of fossil fuels. In the U.S., we should have had efficient public transportation (PT) to at least rival the PT systems in Europe at least fifty years ago, as well. The Diesel engines used in most heavy transport were invented in what?, 1860?

The sheer stupendous amount of moola pouring in from gas sales alone makes it likely nothing will be changed. When the oil billionaires' children die because of global warming, then there might be a slight chance it maybe will get changed ... but I wouldn't hold my breath. Toyota and G.M. trotted out designs for hydrogen-powered vehicles a year or two ago; the design for them is old as the hills too. In fact, back in the early '70's there was a rumor of an engine design that could "burn water" ... the rumor quickly disappeared, under the weight of tons of other more-important news items, like ... uh I forget. All electricity in the U.S. could be produced by alternate methods within a year or two, especially using large fields of solar-powered production technology ... but there "just isn't enough money" ...

Time to "Embrace the Horror", friend. Try and put THAT into GCII!

Spryer, thank you for reporting your beliefs. You must be aware I assume that they conflict with those of a supermajority fo the scientific communtiy, like probably over 95%?

The warming most definitely is thought to be in large part anthropogenic, although I suppose there is room for a tiny bit of doubt about this, but not much. As for you disbelief that glaciers are melting, well now you are just sticking your head in the sand. Glaciers everywhere aroudn the world are rapidly decreasing in size. I have even seen this with my own eyes, having been hiking in Rocky Mountain National Park three times in the past 15 years. There is zero debate about that as far as I can tell (I have subscribed to Nature, Scientific American, and Discover for about 15 years, I also listen to the CBC radio broadcast Quirks & Quarks each week and the BBC radio broadcast Material World weekly).

As for China and India, being unwilling to join agreements, well there isn't much incentive for them to when the inudstrial nations cannot even agree (Becephalus looks at Australia and the US). Moreover whatever happened to cleaning up after your own mess? A child who refused to clean up his mess using the argument that in future years his baby brother would begin making a messes and thus should have to help with the current one probably wouldn't get very far with his mother.

I love how social conservatives are all about family and responsibility blah blah blah, but only in regards to other people's behavior. The typical US conservative never seems to want to have to make meaningful changes to their own lives, or live up to the consequences of their actions. 90% of their political slate seems to be, I want to stay with my wealthy comfortable life regardless of the conquences. I would love if in 10 years we just shut off the baby-boomers social security and were like, oh I thought you didn't care about that program? Your voting preferences sure showed you didn't?

If stopping global warming required us to blow some small nation up, insetad of drive smaller cars and use less energy, that shit would have been blow up back in the Clinton years, maybe even the first Bush would have gotten it. Americans are so much more willing to have wars than economic sacrifices, since the goverment is carefult o amke sure the wars don't involve economic sacrifices.

You are right that scientists tend to blow the possible negative consequences out of proportion (mainly to make their grant proposals look more important I think), and the news blows it even further out of proportion, because mainstream news in the US and many other places has zero to do with news and 100% to do with selling advertising and hence entertainment.

But the insinuation of some "controversy" about global wamring in the scienctific community is rediculous. There are only a handful of serious scientists involved in the field in dissent, out of thousands. And most of those as far as I can tell have some fairly close times with the energy industry.

Anyway, being from Minesota global warming sounds good to me , but I doubt it will be good for most people, since many live on the coasts or in dry areas that rely on glacial meltwater.

Well now you have me started.

Just so you know, at this point, the idea that global warming is not real is beyond a pleasent fantasy. It's scientific fact at this point. They were predicting it in the seventies. And look now, thirty years later we are just now beginning to face the consequences, and projections of the future are not pleasent.
What I hate the most about it is that 1). Little is being done about it, and 2). It will be my generation that will have to deal with the consequences of the actions of those that came before us. I assure you, if nothing is done, the people currently in power will go down in history as one of the most irresponsible groups of people to ever walk the face of this planet. Not to say there aren't those out there who are working to stop this, but the people who have the power to do so are innevitably failing their duty to use it for the greater good. Foolish, in my opinion.
And if I seem just a little angry by this, well that would be a bit of an understatement. The fact that the people who are supposed to be keeping this world safe are doing little as the water rises around the feet is a bit distressing to me. It shows there is little care for anything further than personnal gain in politics. I am dissapointed that people who are supposed to be intelligent and competant are acting like chickens with their heads cut off. It's like the Cold War, where the fate of the entire human race and most life on the planet was being played around with like a toy between two overpowerful groups of paranoid people with no forsight or love for their children. Granted, the situation is not as dire as it was then, the predictions are grim none the less, and I will see those first hand if nothing is done. I hope people can come to their senses in time.

The part that truly annoys me is that I have no power to do anything, not even vote for who represents me. It is enough to make one scream at times.

Well I am done with that, my position, if a little extreme, clearly made. Wow... That was quite a rampage now that I read over it... But I mean every word of it.

But as to the subject of the thread, I really don't think that this would be a problem in that day and age...

My take is this, it doesn't matter whether or not you believe global warming is happening, and it doesn't matter whether or not we are causing it. The initiatives, propelled by the theory of global warming, to lower emmissions and generally clean up the planet, is still a good thing. Aren't you tired of polluted air, water, and land? If Al Gore's movie scares us and the next generation into being more environmentally aware, I'm all for it. It's time to clean up the pig sty we've been living in.

OK. really powerful people (rich,wealthy(republicans) only care about the publics opinion and keeping the public happy (and mislead) so the majority of the people have no clue whats really happening which is the terrorization of themselves by thier own government.Don't believe anything political that the news shows tell you (that includes global warming for some reason) because the news channals are pretty much only concerned with getting better ratings, and they do that by telling people what they want to hear, not whats really going on.

OK. now that I'm done yelling...  

Global warming is surely happening, and naturally, people don't want to believe it.
But you can't just say "NO IT ISN'T", you have to do something about it. unfortunatly, lazy people (not you) choose the "no it isn't" path and thats where the arguments start and where the facts start getting twisted.

Hey, Zman2100, if I could mod that well, I would try to put that in (unfortunatly, I can't   ), because it would be pretty interesting to see in the game.

Unfortunatly most people would be against it because it isn't practical (er...it would just get in the way). sorry.  

Non-truths are so conveinient.   haha...

the CO levels where almost twice as high during the age of the dinosaur as today

so tell me all of you people who are saying that man is the course of global warming because of our CO output why was it that much higher then

you mean instead of burning fuel in your car but at some factory in someone elses town

that would be electrical

or burning alcohol made of corn or whatever so now the emitions are corn instead of oil

More volcanic action in dino ages. Combustion creates CO. The problem is not that we are damaging the climate since like you point out the dinos lived in it when it had more CO the problem is changing the climate to the point where it damages us. There is also the danger of losing mass amounts of coast line. The dinos lived on pangea(sp?) one giant continent, personally I am far enough inland I am not worried about massive floods or increase in tropic storms but the change of weather patterns and increase of global temperatures might piss off my grandkids when they all have to deal with it and I am long dead. People will survive no question about it, but in the next few hundred years the earth will probably change drastically due to global warming that we are accelerating, although any type of combustion adds to the greenhouse effect. Some CO gets into the atmosphere on its own, no big deal, but at our current rate I expect my grandkids to watch all the coastal areas I know well to drop off into the ocean. I predict more rain less coastline and hotter temps all around. 120 degrees above the equator in spring and you will never see snow south of Canada.

Emission restriction is also applied to factories although I would argue its not really applied much at all where I live. Also electric cars/energy is only as "clean" as the source of the electricity. Really I think it makes sense to just improve on our old power plants, which is something that gets stuck in congress constantly, or gets passed then squashed before the money ever gets spent (on the intended purpose anyway). Cleaner coal plants, nuclear power plants (they don't blow up as often and supposedly we can make them without all that toxic waste we have piled up everywhere now). Hydrogen cars is the way to go imo. Just fill your car up with water and go. Corn is the thing a lot of people promote right now and its really about getting off foreign oil sources and it is cleaner burning, BUT it wears out older engines and the price of corn and high fructose corn syrup (read the ingredients on just about anything you eat) will sky rocket for a while I would guess. Hydrogen, solar, wind, all that sounds good to me. You can always convert it to electricity if you want an electric car. Then there is cold fusion, fission, tesla coils, and all other sorts of crazy clean unlimited energy theories out there too. The trick is that a lot of this stuff (like solar panels) get promoted heavily wayyyy before they are viable and by the time they have evolved enough to work well no one wants to hear about it.

they have come up with a way that nuke plants no longer even have to think about blowing up

they have also come up with a way to do away with the toxic waste. and that is called recycle the waste product. (carter outlawed the recycling of nuclear waste with a presidential order and non of the presidents sense have countered that order)

you can reuse that nuke stuff for 20 years and when that 20 years is over all you have is a handful of inert dirt.

that research team only had one more goal and that was to make sure it cannot be used as weapons. (bill Clinton shut these guys down to save welfare. so we don't have those perfectly safe nuke plants or the welfare that Clinton was trying to save.

Yeah seems political BS is pretty much the problem with everything.

Actually, after nuclear waste is recycled or whatever, it turns into a material that can be used to make nuclear warheads, but is otherwise harmless. So thats where the political problems start.

Nuke plants use Uranium (I think), and I don't think uranium is renewable, so won't we run out eventually and have high prices with that just like gas is now?

Actually, there are more and more studies coming out to show that global warming is due to increased solar activity. There is an article in this month's Discover (I think it was Discover) magazine about the studies conducted by Danish researchers about the sun being the primary culprit in today's global warming, not man. There is also a show that was made that was shown over in the UK about it, you can find it on Google Video, search for "The Great Global Warming Swindle". The fact is, the single biggest contributor to the greenhouse effect is water vapor. Dr. Mann the biggest proponent of global warming due to CO2 is trying to get water vapor taken off the list of greenhouse gases. This is because man is not a significant contributor to water vapor in the atmosphere. Additionally, man is responsible for 3% of all CO2 emissions on a yearly basis. So call me skeptical when people claim that we are solely responsible for global warming. I actually encourage people to look at all sides of the issue, and not just the CO2 crowd. After looking at both sides, draw your own conclusions. Sorry for the lack of paragraphs, my "enter" key isn't working.