If pollution were to vanish... 11 replies

  • 1
  • 2

Please wait...

SuperSmeg

Renegade Cybertronian

50 XP

22nd September 2005

0 Uploads

10,694 Posts

0 Threads

#1 7 years ago

...in an instant, at the snap of one's fingers, would that really benefit the planet, or set it on a quick path to destruction?

Yes, the planet is choking because of how much we take it for granted, but in a way, it has adapted over time.

But what if pollution were to instantly, and suddenly disappear? What would the overall effect be?




Crazy Wolf VIP Member

Snipes With Artillery

277,420 XP

22nd March 2005

0 Uploads

27,192 Posts

0 Threads

#2 7 years ago

We'd probably go "Sweet! So this'll happen again, right? Let's keep on truckin'!"

"Pollution" must be defined, I think. Also, less pretty sunsets. And probably colder weather, considering what we call pollution. It'd likely be worth it. Streams that don't have industrial runoff, meth-free drinking water, air that won't give you cancer? Yeah, sounds pretty good to me.




Antilles VIP Member

The Imaginative

114,272 XP

17th July 2006

0 Uploads

9,726 Posts

1 Threads

#3 7 years ago

As Wolf says, it really depends on what your define as Pollution.

Some of the pollutants in the atmosphere actually helps to keep our planets temperature at a constant. If we were to loose ALL of the pollutants in the atmosphere Earth's Temperature would actually drop substantially in Annual Average, by something like 5 degrees Celsius I believe it was. (that would be bad)


Garruscopy.png



SeinfeldisKindaOk

5.56 smoke Haji every day

55 XP

18th July 2008

0 Uploads

8,397 Posts

0 Threads

#4 7 years ago
SuperSmeg;5586291 Yes, the planet is choking because of how much we take it for granted, but in a way, it has adapted over time.

How has the planet adapted over time? I mean... pollution has had an effect on the planet that has caused changes in things like the climate but wouldn't the planet adapting to pollution mean that it would have resisted those effects? Also, are you saying the planet is a living organism like the Gaia theory or whatever it's called?

Pollution is a negative word to me. Getting rid of a negative would be positive in my eyes.




SuperSmeg

Renegade Cybertronian

50 XP

22nd September 2005

0 Uploads

10,694 Posts

0 Threads

#5 7 years ago

Professor Dr. Scientist;5586318How has the planet adapted over time? [/QUOTE]

Professor Dr. Scientist;5586318I mean... pollution has had an effect on the planet that has caused changes in things like the climate but wouldn't the planet adapting to pollution mean that it would have resisted those effects? [/QUOTE]

Well, look at it this way. Us choking the planet, hasn't resulted in drastic changes which would have ultimately made us extinct.

[QUOTE=Professor Dr. Scientist;5586318]Also, are you saying the planet is a living organism like the Gaia theory or whatever it's called?

No, because that would be stupid.

[QUOTE=Professor Dr. Scientist;5586318]Pollution is a negative word to me. Getting rid of a negative would be positive in my eyes.

Yes it would be positive, but what this topic is about, is the sudden dissappearance of polution all at once, instead of gradually over time. Changes have happened for the planet over time that we as a species have populated it. What I am getting at is, what would happen to Earth if it would suddenly be without any polution at all, all at once, and in an instant?




Schofield VIP Member

om :A

319,554 XP

24th October 2007

1 Uploads

30,539 Posts

0 Threads

#6 7 years ago

If pollution were to just disappear a lot of people would be out of a job. =p




Guest

I didn't make it!

0 XP

 
#7 7 years ago

SuperSmeg;5586291...in an instant, at the snap of one's fingers, would that really benefit the planet, or set it on a quick path to destruction?

Yes, the planet is choking because of how much we take it for granted, but in a way, it has adapted over time.

But what if pollution were to instantly, and suddenly disappear? What would the overall effect be?

I am not a scientist, i am not a biologist, i am not Al Gore (thank god) and i am certainly not 100% sure i am correct.

But i honestly think the whole pollution problem is kinda bullshit... Earth has seen warmer periods, times where the average degree was like 40-60 degrees, at the poles. Above 120-140 around the equator (not sure if that is the right word, the imaginary circle which is the hottest part of the earth around the middle...).

We had worse times on Earth, and every time, EVERY TIME. Earth entered an ice age after that. It happened what, over a hundred times before? All the pre-ice ages were warm, some even hot. It been way worse. And of course, i am not stupid i DO think pollution warms up the Earth, but i think it is not even 1% as bad as Al Gore makes us want to believe.

And so what? If shit happens, we have around 200-300 more years before Earth goes too wild to live on. There are already plans to start Pollutioning Mars. Since that would make Mars warmer, and have a atmosphere around the planet. Making Oxygen stay inside the atmosphere just like with Earth. That would take about 50-75 years to do, then plant millions of trees, which use the CO2 from the pollution to make oxygen. And after another 50-75 years the planet would have a breathable atmosphere.

Note, there were plans for this and they started preparing this for real back in 2004... They started to discover the best places to start around 2007. They already had human scouting and they want the first CO2 generators there around 2015.

So, yeah, i can't bother thinking about the pollution that much:P It is either bullshit or we are preparing for disaster already.

''why bother changing our habbits, if we can keep doing what we are so good at at another planet''




Crazy Wolf VIP Member

Snipes With Artillery

277,420 XP

22nd March 2005

0 Uploads

27,192 Posts

0 Threads

#8 7 years ago

So, the scientific community supports the global warming theory, and points to greenhouse gases which have an observable effect, and previous ice ages have been catastrophic to the majority of the species that experienced them, but you just feel like it's bullshit, so we shouldn't worry?




SuperSmeg

Renegade Cybertronian

50 XP

22nd September 2005

0 Uploads

10,694 Posts

0 Threads

#9 7 years ago

Achiehunter;5586969I am not a scientist, i am not a biologist, i am not Al Gore (thank god) and i am certainly not 100% sure i am correct.

But i honestly think the whole pollution problem is kinda bullshit... Earth has seen warmer periods, times where the average degree was like 40-60 degrees, at the poles. Above 120-140 around the equator (not sure if that is the right word, the imaginary circle which is the hottest part of the earth around the middle...).

We had worse times on Earth, and every time, EVERY TIME. Earth entered an ice age after that. It happened what, over a hundred times before? All the pre-ice ages were warm, some even hot. It been way worse. And of course, i am not stupid i DO think pollution warms up the Earth, but i think it is not even 1% as bad as Al Gore makes us want to believe.

And so what? If shit happens, we have around 200-300 more years before Earth goes too wild to live on. There are already plans to start Pollutioning Mars. Since that would make Mars warmer, and have a atmosphere around the planet. Making Oxygen stay inside the atmosphere just like with Earth. That would take about 50-75 years to do, then plant millions of trees, which use the CO2 from the pollution to make oxygen. And after another 50-75 years the planet would have a breathable atmosphere.

Note, there were plans for this and they started preparing this for real back in 2004... They started to discover the best places to start around 2007. They already had human scouting and they want the first CO2 generators there around 2015.

So, yeah, i can't bother thinking about the pollution that much:P It is either bullshit or we are preparing for disaster already.

''why bother changing our habbits, if we can keep doing what we are so good at at another planet''

:facepalm:




Nittany Tiger Forum Mod

*Shrug*

289,107 XP

15th September 2004

0 Uploads

27,136 Posts

0 Threads

#10 7 years ago

According to the most recent IPCC reports, the Earth may be warming partially due to natural causes (I think), but anthropogenic greenhouse emissions are also strengthening the warming trend. Anthropogenic enhancement of the global CO2 budget is not a lie as well as its effect on the global energy budget. Furthermore, CO2's response to radiation of all wavelengths has been studied buy scientists partially or fully independent of climate change studies. If you want results, I can provide them.

I'm tired of people that are brainwashed into thinking that the obvious is a lie. Climate prediction is a tricky science, but we are definitely seeing an explainable correlation between global mean temperature trends and global mean CO2 concentration.

On topic, I would love to see CO2 levels instantly return to their pre-industrial levels.




  • 1
  • 2