Why all this human versus nature talk in a lot answers to Global Warming questions?
A few articles about mercury:
http://www.radiochemistry.org/periodictable/elements/80.html
http://education.jlab.org/itselemental/ele080.html
What I find interesting is that the ancient Eygptians used it to. And I recall my mom cautioning me about being careful when using an old glass thermometer which had a small amount of mercury in it. So was it Ancient man that was careless with this liquid metal or modern man?
I understand that if something isn't naturally in an environment in the first place it could be detrimental to things already living in that enviroment if something new is introduced, but isn't everything we create and use a part of nature?
Dana - We aren't the only thing adding CO2 into the atmosphere. And I'm sure you are well aware that even normal respiration releases CO2 into the atmosphere. I'm also sure you know that I'm not convinced that the increased CO2 in our atmosphere is what caused the warming trend that started after the little ice age.
And if I were had been alive during WWII and had an advisory role in even developing the Atom Bomb I would have advised against it. However, I wouldn't have scraped the whole nuclear program, since radition does have some benefits to society and I do feel we are now advanced enough to build nuclear power plants that would be safe and efficient, especially since we now know how to recycle the fuel rods.
I also know that too much of something even if it's good can be harmful. I just feel people should realize we are all part of nature and everything thing we use is a part of nature whether we change it's basic properties or not.
donfletcheryh - Good points, no one knows if we can stop the planets climate from changing. That's why I assert we should concentrate on the things we know we can do. And we need to implement a viable timeline for these changes. I feel most of the level headed people know that nothing major is going to happen either way in the next 20 years and I feel by then most people would have bought a more fuel efficient vehicle or alternative energy vehicle.
bestonnet - Sad but true. That's the problem with science and technology. Once it's discovered people can't help but use it for evil purposes. But wouldn't it have been far better if we had only developed it to start the "Cold War?" - A war in essense to keep Russia and the US from using nuclear weapons on each other. Sadly we can't dismantle our nuclear bombs due to countries like North Korea and Iran developing nuclear bombs.
(I wish you would have edited out the word 'were' when you qouted me. It's so frustrating that you can't go back and edit questions and added details after you submit them.)
Bob - I'm not refuting that humans aren't contributing to the increasing CO2 in our atmosphere. My contention has always been whether or not that's what's causing the global climate to change.
I never refuted that we experienced a warm up, since living in Minnesota it's hard to miss the fact that winters had gotten milder in the 90's and still started later in the beginning of 00's.
My only concern is on how much we really know about our environment.
The only point I will concede is finding viable ways to reduce CO2 emissions so we can rule it out as the cause of the climate changes we are witnessing. I realize it can't be ruled out until we find ways to stop emiting CO2.
Now if that day ever occurs (1) or even before that day occurs (2) and either 1.) Global Warming continues or 2.) We see a dramatic downturn of the global average temperature. Will you concede that human activity didn't cause this little warming trend?
C_Martel - Thanks for the informative answer about mercury and it's uses. The thing is I kinda asked two questions in the body of my question. And most people that answered, answered that question.
Bob - That's why I'm giving the concession that we should work on ways to lower our CO2 emissions. Since in a way it will kill two birds with one stone.
One we will lower our dependence on oil and two we can come to a more solid understanding of what caused the warming trend.
Since the only other way we will definitly know CO2 isn't the culbrit is if it continues to increase and we have a long cooling trend and I'm not ready for that yet, since I still live in Minnesota. (Sorry I couldn't help but throw a little humor into our serious discussion.)