Cigerette smking add to global warming??

[chal7ds]

Bascule answers questions with references, but his own answers to my questions I think kind of mirror where his own knowledge lies...

 

in one big, black, hole of nothingness..lol

[YT2095]

well before we get into a Flame war (fire causes global warming too). lets not forget Sheep and Cattle farmers, animal flatulence is a quite a large and measurable contributor towards global warming, CO2 is just ONE of them, ever considered CH3 (Methane)?

 

now that we`re on a Lighter note (but non the less significant), lets stick to topic and less about social skills in reply

[chal7ds]

social skills are tied in with argument because they directly influence whether a SOLUTION is found or not. So yes, it is viable to critique the argument skills of another if those lacking skills are blocking a point of interest, or access to REAL information.

 

There are no boundaries here people. Let's discuss what's WRONG with what civilization is doing, not name a topic of debate only to bring up another one without going into detail about how the first problem contributes to the pollution of air. I know ppl are sensitive, because no one wants to feel insecure during an argument, but if that's the case, then we aren't having a real discussion..we're just shooting the s#$t about various topics with no real desire to find solutions.

 

I WANT SOLUTIONS. I want to know what's WRONG with what civilization is doing, don't you?

[YT2095]

well as concisely as Possible NO, cig smoke has no measurable impact of ANY significance upon the global environs with respect to warming.

 

thread closed.

[chal7ds]

and your rationale and/or proof for this argument please?

[bascule]

Bascule answers questions with references' date=' but his own answers to my questions I think kind of mirror where his own knowledge lies...

 

in one big, black, hole of nothingness..lol[/quote']

 

I've worked in climate science for 5 years now, and I know how much the global warming issue has been grossly mischaracterized by the media and by environmental activist organizations. Clearly you are one of the people who have been taken in by these groups, especially with statements like:

 

I WANT SOLUTIONS. I want to know what's WRONG with what civilization is doing, don't you?

 

As I've said repeatedly, we don't even know if global warming is a "problem" or not. As it stands we are merely augmenting the natural trend.

 

If you really feel global warming is a problem, can you tell us why? Do you think the polar ice caps are going to melt (I've already gone over why this isn't doesn't appear to be the case, but when it comes to global warming, the jury is still out on pretty much everything). What other doomsday scenarios do you forsee brought about by global warming? Because while these get a lot of attention by the press, most of them are either unsubstantiated, mischaracterized, or highly unlikely.

 

If you feel like I'm not giving you the answers you want, I suggest you e-mail a PhD climate scientist. There are two very noteworthy blogs on climate science, RealClimate and Climate Science.

[YT2095]

and your rationale and/or proof for this argument please?

I`de have hoped that had you have read this thread in it`s entirety it would have become abundantly clear by now that this was the case, and therefore somewhat Self evident.

 

obviously Not it would seem

[chal7ds]

"Clearly you are one of the people who have been taken in by these groups"

 

I have not been 'taken in' by any group. I pose (individually) it may be a problem, unlike you, who seems to think that since an issue is currently "unknown", that we have no reason to take responsibility for OURSELVES to pry farther and figure out for OURSELVES if it is a problem or not, instead of waiting for scientists to figure it out for us. Just because you might be inexperienced or don't know the ramifications of a possible problem, doesn't mean you can't still pose metaphysical arguments concerning it.

 

I think it might be a problem because I've read about how factories and chemical plants have had major accident spilling, which causes major pollution in creeks, rivers, land, etc.. This concerns me, because we have to dig deeper and question the source of these industries and their ultimate goal on society.

If the secretions of these industries have done this type of destruction in this area of pollution, i have to question whether they might be polluting the air as well. I am also prepared, if given the right information, to seek out my own methods of measurement or conclusions..but obviously, i would need help from other people before i could do that.

 

I guess the answers I want are out of the scope of this forum, so I will try to contact the climate scientists as you've mentioned. Thank you.

[YT2095]

you know, I bet you`re the sort to stand in a burning building and complain that someone was having a cigarette too, or moan if someone had a kids water pistol and got you "wet" while you`re in the swimming pool

 

the fact is, is that cig smoke is such a TINY TINY amount of gas when compared to that of other less noticable (ignorable) things that to make an issue of it is foolishness by comparison.

as I said before, how many cigs would it take to operate your computer for even a second???

 

NOW tell me that cigs are the problem!

the owness of proof is upon YOU to show that they are, not for US to show that they`re NOT (although we HAVE done that for you, more than adequately).

[chal7ds]

"The United States's Centers for Disease Control and Prevention describes tobacco use as "the single most important preventable risk to human health in developed countries and an important cause of premature death worldwide".1

 

An indirect public health problem posed by cigarettes is that of accidental fires, usually linked with consumption of alcohol. Numerous cigarette designs have been proposed, some by tobacco companies themselves, which would extinguish a cigarette left unattended for more than a minute or two, thereby reducing the risk of fire. However the tobacco companies have historically resisted this idea, on the grounds that the nuisance involved in having to relight a cigarette left untouched for too long would reduce their sales. In fact, untreated tobacco formed into a cigarette will extinguish itself relatively quickly if left alone, and as a result cigarette tobacco is treated chemically to allow it to smolder indefinitely.

 

The main health risks in tobacco smoking pertain to diseases of the cardiovascular system, in particular smoking being a major risk factor for a myocardial infarction (heart attack), diseases of the respiratory tract such as Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) and emphysema, and cancer, particularly lung cancer and cancers of the larynx and tongue. Prior to World War I, lung cancer was considered to be a rare disease, which most physicians would never see during their career. With the postwar rise in popularity of cigarette smoking, however, came a virtual epidemic of lung cancer.

 

A person's increased risk of contracting disease is directly proportional to the length of time that a person continues to smoke as well as the amount smoked. However, if someone stops smoking, then these chances steadily although gradually decrease as the damage to their body is repaired.

 

Diseases linked to smoking tobacco cigarettes include:

 

lung cancer and other cancers

stroke

peripheral vascular disease

birth defects of pregnant smokers' offspring

Buerger's disease (thromboangiitis obliterans)

impotence

chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, emphysema and chronic bronchitis in particular "

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

This information was taken from a recent article on health and smoking.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

 

As you can see, the reading and research I've done on the topic points to more human health problems as opposed to air pollution, but you seem to miss the point of why a forum is created. It is a public area for OPEN discussion, argument, questions, and ideas. By postulating a question about cigerettes and their relationship to air pollution, I am opening a topic about a subject in which I could not find information otherwise, so when i get answers that depend on other answers from the participators in the thread, of course I'm not going to be satisfied, especially if it's shown that it causes diseases, it obviously, even if somewhat 'insignificant', probably affects the air as well. It might not be noticeable now, but who knows, in a century or two..we could be in some dangerous territory. And of course computers are more dangerous to our society than cigerettes, but I already KNOW that..I'm asking a question and wanting an answer or at least brainstorming about a possible problem that might exist that I don't know too much about. Get it?

 

Since you've also assumed what type of person I might be, I think I will return the favor and 'assume' what type of person you are:

 

I bet you're the type of person to not question anything metaphysically, and you're probably the type of person who sits there and smokes a pack of cigerettes around people who don't like smoke totally unaware and apathetic of it's effects on the health of yourself and society. You're probably also the person who talks s@#t in a forum about someone you don't know, but then runs away to mommy when actually faced by the people in real life who you assume and slander on in a forum.

 

Of course, this is only a 'bet'..as you've placed one on me.

Thank you and good day.

[YT2095]

ROFLOL, for a start that post has Nothing factual about Global warming, it`s actualy VERY off topic.

 

yes indeed I AM a smoker, and no I DON`T smoke around other non smokers without asking if it`s OK 1`st, I don`t entartain the metaphysical as a realism, the "Mommy" trick would be certainly be a feat in itself, as I said I don`t entertain the metaphysical, and yes I`m pretty darn good at weighing up off topicness and Troll flamers itching for an argument.

 

what you fail to realise is that I (and probably one or 2 others would have thought alot more of your idea if you`de mentioned the Factories and processing that went into cig production!)

 

you came here with an Idea you thought had scientific merit.

It doesn`t.

You don`t like it.

 

TOUGH!

[Lance]

I'm asking a question and wanting an answer or at least brainstorming about a possible problem that might exist that I don't know too much about. Get it?

Your answer was given and you chose to argue about it. That's not discussing, it's trolling. If you're going to argue about it you could at least point out a few facts in support of your seemingly pointless rebuttal. Without evidence your accusations have no weight.

[YT2095]

that`s nothing, did you read this:

have you been reading this thread? We've already established that the effects of cigerettes on global warming is nil.

 

and then compare that to the original post/topic, and yet it STILL carries on! I closed this thread once, I`de like to know WHY it was ever re-opened?

[jessica03]

what a bunch of sensitive little bitches.

 

just what i'd expect from a bunch of linear thinkers.

[bascule]

This is something I've had to deal with a lot, because I have a lot of environmentalist friends who are deeply concerned about global warming due to horror stories they've been fed by the media or environmental activist organizations. And I cannot tell you how frustrating it is for scientists on both side of the debate when the media mischaracterize their papers, positions, and statements, especially when this is done with a political slant.

 

I try to tell them "Don't worry about it, relax and wait until science has a difinitive answer for you" but to many this is unacceptable and they wish to meddle with the sources of anthropogenic climate forcings before we can really understand what effect that may have on the climate system. Case in point was this little post:

 

I pose (individually) it may be a problem, unlike you, who seems to think that since an issue is currently "unknown", that we have no reason to take responsibility for OURSELVES to pry farther and figure out for OURSELVES if it is a problem or not, instead of waiting for scientists to figure it out for us.

 

As I hope the exchange I posted earlier illustrated, this is an extremely complex issue which the layperson has absolutely no chance of comprehending, as has been illustrated time and time again by various media reports on global warming.