PDA

View Full Version : I don't know if this goes here or not, but...



_Kristen_
12-07-2006, 06:51 PM
Can you guys help me out with my BIO homework?? If not, it's ok...

# What impact might CO2 emissions have on overall global warming?
# Is there evidence of a strong connection between CO2 emissions and global warming?
# What impact have chlorofluorocarbons (CFC) emissions had on global warming?
# How is the structure of the ozone related to global warming?
# Would the earth be warming as quickly if we had not invented and used internal combustion engines for our transportation?
# How can we model future changes in the global climate with the scientific models available?
# What can global climate models tell us about life on earth for future generations?
# How much scientific weight should we place on the results of these models?

Lodat225
12-07-2006, 06:57 PM
Internet Resources

* Ask Dr. Schund - What is the Greenhouse Effect?
[http://vvv.com/adsint/freehand/uncleal/green.html]
A short paper on the Greenhouse Effect.

* Biosphere Research
[http://www.vt.edu:10021/artsci/geology/mclean/Dinosaur_Volcano_Extinction/index.html]
Dinosaur volcano-greenhouse extinction theory by Dewey M. McLean.

* Climate change, greenhouse effect
[http://167.8.29.7/weather/wclilink.htm]
and How the Greenhouse Effect works
[http://167.8.29.7/weather/wgrnhse.htm]
Two articles on the Greenhouse Effect from USA Today.

* Climate Change: State of Knowledge
[http://www.usgcrp.gov/usgcrp/CCSOKNOW.html]
A very nice Website on global warming and the Greenhouse Effect.

* Climate Models: How Reliable are Their Predictions?
[http://gcrio.ciesin.org/CONSEQUENCES/fall95/mod.html]
An essay by Eric J. Barron on the current state of climate models and questions of model reliability.

* Grappling with Greenhouse
[http://www.erin.gov.au/air/climate/greenhouse/NGAC/ngac_con.html]
Understanding the science of climate change.

* Human Population and Global Warming
[http://members.aol.com/trajcom/private/popco2.htm]
This essay looks at the relationship between global warming and human population growth.

* Status of the "Global Warming" Hypothesis
[http://www.on.doe.ca/comm/speech_wp5.html]
Text for lecture by Dr. Gordon McBean, Assistant Deputy Minister, Atmospheric Environment Service, to the World Meterological Organization 12th Congress, Geneva, June 16, 1995.

* Student Conference on Global Warming
[http://www.covis.nwu.edu/TeacherPointer/teachers/Gp24984.html]
A Web page created by Doug Gordin.

1;


By continuing to increase the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere we are getting closer to global warming accelerating.

2;

Although they are often interlinked in the mass media, the connection between global warming and ozone depletion is not strong.

3;

Chlorofluorocarbons have caused the greatest amount of. ozone depletion.

4;

The sun's radiation gets in through the ozone hole, and that's why it's warming up down here. The hole is made up by all the CO2 in the atmosphere.

5;

Maybe, but a lot of the CO2 in the atmosphere is not only the engines, it would slow it down, but not stop it.

7;


The sunís radiation will ruin the ozone layer , also the greenhouse gases and CO2, and thus more heat will come down to Earth so the future generations are screwed... lucky for us that wont happen now.

8;


Well, this might help slow down global warming, so Iíd say ALOT.

Can't help you with 6. but maybe we could try to stop all the CO2 from going to the atmosphere?

there you go.

Bazza
12-07-2006, 07:11 PM
For ozone depletion look up the Chapman Equations. Essentially CFCs are greenhouse gases, so can affect global warming.
Some good bacground reading.
http://www.umich.edu/~gs265/society/greenhouse.htm

For global warming have a look at positive and negative feedback mechanisms to see what could happen.

I had to do a recent essay on the evidence for global warming, and overall I concluded that there is little, apart from the correlation between carbon dioxide emissions and global temperature increase in the past 150years (there should be some decent graphs on the net).

_Kristen_
12-07-2006, 07:20 PM
Thanks! :) Both of you.

Bazza
12-07-2006, 07:21 PM
Ok, here's something I've lifted out of some lecture notes:


Cl atoms remove O3 and O in the catalytic chlorine cycle

Cl + O3 -> O2 + ClO
ClO + O -> Cl + O2
Cl + O3 + O -> Cl + 2O2

Each chlorine atom can destroy about 105 O3 molecules.

_Kristen_
12-07-2006, 07:23 PM
Oh, thanks! That helped. :D

Lodat225
12-07-2006, 07:26 PM
Oh, thanks! That helped. :D

Blah, i helped more.

Bazza
12-07-2006, 07:26 PM
Um, I wouldn't trust what Lodat has put, it's a load of bullshit, don't think he know's what he's talking about.

Mainly this point that he's screwed up on:

The sun's radiation gets in through the ozone hole, and that's why it's warming up down here. The hole is made up by all the CO2 in the atmosphere.


The greenhouse effect is caused by solar radiation being able to pass through the Earth's atmosphere, heating up the Earth. The Earth inturn radiates back infrared radiation. Whilst the majority of this escapes into space, some is reflected back by the greenhouse gases. The more greenhouse gases present, the more infrared radiation that doesn't escape, causing the Earth to heat up more and more.

Lodat225
12-07-2006, 07:37 PM
I just made those all up, i don't know if they're right or wrong, and not all of it is bullshit.

Bazza
12-07-2006, 07:38 PM
I just made those all up, i don't know if they're right or wrong, and not all of it is bullshit.

oxy-MORON

...........

0r4ng3
12-07-2006, 07:44 PM
That's a contradiction, not an oxymoron.

Bazza
12-07-2006, 07:47 PM
An oxymoron is a contradiction in terms.

I'm a scientist, not an English Linguist, so I don't know if there's any difference?

Lodat225
12-07-2006, 08:18 PM
An oxymoron is a contradiction in terms.

I'm a scientist, not an English Linguist, so I don't know if there's any difference?

Scientist? And you couldn't answer ONE of her questions... atleast i answered them.

Endymion
12-07-2006, 09:47 PM
Can you guys help me out with my BIO homework?? If not, it's ok...

# What impact might CO2 emissions have on overall global warming?
# Is there evidence of a strong connection between CO2 emissions and global warming?
# What impact have chlorofluorocarbons (CFC) emissions had on global warming?
# How is the structure of the ozone related to global warming?
# Would the earth be warming as quickly if we had not invented and used internal combustion engines for our transportation?
# How can we model future changes in the global climate with the scientific models available?
# What can global climate models tell us about life on earth for future generations?
# How much scientific weight should we place on the results of these models?

first off: that's not biology, let alone science.

Llamas
12-07-2006, 09:52 PM
An oxymoron is a contradiction in terms.

I'm a scientist, not an English Linguist, so I don't know if there's any difference?

An oxymoron is when two terms appear to be complete contradictions, but actually make sense. "Monopoly", "fine mess"... that kind of thing. They are contradicting words that make sense.


first off: that's not biology, let alone science.

It's definitely not biology... but how is it not science? It's definitely a very vague and surface type of science, but it is science. We have a biology major here that's called biology, society, and environment. It's basically that kind of stuff... you can't really do anything with a degree in that, but it is science.

And I think you meant "that's not science, let alone biology". :)

Bazza
12-08-2006, 02:29 AM
Scientist? And you couldn't answer ONE of her questions... atleast i answered them.

Um, you try being arsed to do someone elses work.


Llamas: thanks for the clarification


And yeah I'd agree it's not really Biology, possibly more physics, when concerning radiation and greenhouse effect. I had a module last year called environmental physics which covered a lot of this stuff.

JoY
12-08-2006, 03:20 AM
first off: that's not biology, let alone science.

i luv u.<3

_Kristen_
12-08-2006, 05:22 AM
first off: that's not biology, let alone science.

i know i'm in 9th grade Bio... but we're doing that project because "of the weather today"

Endymion
12-08-2006, 12:10 PM
possibly more physics

you are now on my very short list of "punch these people in the face upon first sight"

Endymion
12-08-2006, 01:16 PM
But if this is not biology, nor science, nor physics, what is it then?

ecology. and no, it's not a real science. next you'll claim that "political science" is actually a science.

Llamas
12-08-2006, 01:23 PM
come on endy. I was an ecology, evolution, and behavior major. If you want to tell me I wasn't studying a real science, I'd gladly prove you wrong. My upper level ecology course was basically calculus and chemistry mashed together and then related to how things live.

Oh, and that shit she talked about is NOT ecology.

Llamas
12-08-2006, 01:25 PM
I? Far be it from me. But I thought ecology was all about hugging trees & throwing overripe tomatoes on nuclear plants, not sc-sc-scientifically discussing the effect of CO2 on the atmosphere. Physics (don't smash my head, please, I still need it) must be brought somewhere, I am certain. I am fairly sure a certain part of physics can deal with it, providing sc-sc-scientific evidence.

OH GOD OH GOD OH GOD. Yours was far worse than Endy's. You are the stereotyper. I can't tell you how many times I fucking got so fed up with "What are you studying?" "Ecology" "Oh, so you hug trees and want to save the rain forest?" FUCK NO. asiiowernjsdifjasilfsjdf.

But no, ecology has very little to do with the atmosphere. The only time the atmosphere matters to ecology is when it places its effects on various ecosystems.

Endymion
12-08-2006, 01:25 PM
i'd submit to that.

XYlophonetreeZ
12-08-2006, 01:31 PM
It's environmental science. NOT ecology (which is most definitely a real science). The stuff she's learning is real science too, even though the particular questions she's being asked to answer are incredibly shitty.

_Kristen_
12-08-2006, 01:37 PM
It's environmental science. NOT ecology (which is most definitely a real science). The stuff she's learning is real science too, even though the particular questions she's being asked to answer are incredibly shitty.

i know! my teachers so gay. he goes on the whole period about how we are all going to die...

Llamas
12-08-2006, 01:37 PM
XYZ = awinnerisyou! Definitely EnvSci, which pretty much incorporates several different types of science on a surface level. And the questions she was asked are much more philosophical than scientific, sadly. That kind of crap definitely doesn't belong in a biology course, though.

Sorry, Duskygrin, I didn't mean to get all flipout on you. I realized that you did say "far be it from me", so it's not like you were assuming and saying you were right. I think that I just got soooooo sick of people saying things like that, that I overreacted. My mistake. Still, you should NEVER believe what you see from politicians to be the truth!!

And for those of you who don't know/are interested, ecology is the study of the interactions of organisms with eachother and the environment. It seems easy in writing... but god... so much calculus I want to tear my face off. :(

EDIT: Kitten, that thing about how you're all gonna die is probably the most accurate thing of all this that your teacher has said. THAT is actually ecology, though. Not necessarily true, but ecology (among a lot of other things, I think?) proves that 2012 is the year the world will end. Based on ecology, it seems like a flawless projection... I haven't read anybody else's views on it... but that's not a crazy assumption. It's damn close to proven fact.

_Kristen_
12-08-2006, 01:40 PM
kitten? lol :p

oh really? that's scary...

XYlophonetreeZ
12-08-2006, 01:41 PM
I'd say more, but I've gotta go study for my ecology exam (no joke!).

Llamas
12-08-2006, 02:02 PM
kitten? lol :p

oh really? that's scary...

sorry, there's another poster whose name is kitten. I don't differentiate, I guess.


I'd say more, but I've gotta go study for my ecology exam (no joke!).

haha, nice! gl!

Endymion
12-08-2006, 03:39 PM
It's environmental science. NOT ecology

that's a big "my bad" from me. sorry bri.

the whole pseudo-scientific study of global warming just bugs the shit out of me. the atmosphere, weather, global temp, etc etc etc is such a huge, complex, and chaotic system that none of our models come even remotely close to being able to predict anything accurately.

XYlophonetreeZ
12-08-2006, 03:47 PM
Yeah, that's true. And I started writing that before you submitted to what llamas said, so I wasn't trying to rub it in or anything.

Bazza
12-08-2006, 04:11 PM
you are now on my very short list of "punch these people in the face upon first sight"

Why? Because I have an opinion on something?

Paint_It_Black
12-08-2006, 04:12 PM
I studied environmental science for a year in college. I definitely wouldn't call it real science. I dropped out right before the end because I was bored out of my mind and hadn't done the huge lame project I was supposed to do, but for the hell of it I took the practice final exam before I left.

Turns out I scored higher than anyone else in the class. If I had just taken the final exam, even without the lame huge project, I would have passed with one of the highest grades in the class. Oops. But still, who gives a shit, it's environmental science.