Anthropogenic climate change and the denial of science.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
26-05-2015, 06:54 PM
RE: Anthropogenic climate change and the denial of science.
(26-05-2015 04:53 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  
(03-05-2015 06:11 PM)The Drake Wrote:  Sooooo...it's about climate correction ? We've been messing it up since the dawn of the industrial age, and ignoring the effects. I personally don't think it's a good idea to force it back. Yes the science is sound...but it is untested (on a global scale). And honestly if shit goes wrong I'd rather not be the one to say "oops".

Not climate correction. It's the mitigation of the human effect on climates through the removal of what we emitted into the atmosphere (or as much as we can).

There is no "back" to force it into. Climates vary with or without human influence. These are "solutions" in the sense that they remove the anthropogenic influence or try to minimize its effect.

I don't trust us...Our track record isn't the greatest. I'd rather not test it on the only planet we have. Good science...but let's save it for a really bad day. I think we're better off, backing off.

The second mouse gets the cheese.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-05-2015, 06:56 PM
Anthropogenic climate change and the denial of science.
(26-05-2015 06:54 PM)The Drake Wrote:  
(26-05-2015 04:53 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Not climate correction. It's the mitigation of the human effect on climates through the removal of what we emitted into the atmosphere (or as much as we can).

There is no "back" to force it into. Climates vary with or without human influence. These are "solutions" in the sense that they remove the anthropogenic influence or try to minimize its effect.

I don't trust us...Our track record isn't the greatest. I'd rather not test it on the only planet we have. Good science...but let's save it for a really bad day. I think we're better off, backing off.

Okay. That's your vote. And as a Geoscientist who studies this, I'd say it's worth a shot.

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-05-2015, 07:09 PM
RE: Anthropogenic climate change and the denial of science.
(26-05-2015 06:56 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  
(26-05-2015 06:54 PM)The Drake Wrote:  I don't trust us...Our track record isn't the greatest. I'd rather not test it on the only planet we have. Good science...but let's save it for a really bad day. I think we're better off, backing off.

Okay. That's your vote. And as a Geoscientist who studies this, I'd say it's worth a shot.

As a layperson I respect your opinion and recognize your authority in this matter. However, I still think it's best if we let nature take its course and do what we can to lessen the human impact as opposed to reversing it.

The second mouse gets the cheese.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-05-2015, 07:16 PM
Anthropogenic climate change and the denial of science.
(26-05-2015 07:09 PM)The Drake Wrote:  
(26-05-2015 06:56 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Okay. That's your vote. And as a Geoscientist who studies this, I'd say it's worth a shot.

As a layperson I respect your opinion and recognize your authority in this matter. However, I still think it's best if we let nature take its course and do what we can to lessen the human impact as opposed to reversing it.

I can see why you side that way. I did too up until maybe a few years ago as I started looking into it more and more.

What we would be doing, is using nature to regulate the human impact on nature. It's not as synthetic (in at least some cases) as it sounds.

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheBeardedDude's post
26-05-2015, 07:20 PM
RE: Anthropogenic climate change and the denial of science.
(26-05-2015 07:09 PM)The Drake Wrote:  
(26-05-2015 06:56 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Okay. That's your vote. And as a Geoscientist who studies this, I'd say it's worth a shot.

As a layperson I respect your opinion and recognize your authority in this matter. However, I still think it's best if we let nature take its course and do what we can to lessen the human impact as opposed to reversing it.

The 1st problem I have with forcibly changing the climate is that we'd be doing it for our benefit. Not a bad idea if you consider the whole planet, but who does that ?

The second mouse gets the cheese.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-05-2015, 07:26 PM
Anthropogenic climate change and the denial of science.
(26-05-2015 07:20 PM)The Drake Wrote:  
(26-05-2015 07:09 PM)The Drake Wrote:  As a layperson I respect your opinion and recognize your authority in this matter. However, I still think it's best if we let nature take its course and do what we can to lessen the human impact as opposed to reversing it.

The 1st problem I have with forcibly changing the climate is that we'd be doing it for our benefit. Not a bad idea if you consider the whole planet, but who does that ?

Once again, it's not about "changing the climate for our benefit". It's about removing some of the anthropogenic influence from the equation.

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheBeardedDude's post
26-05-2015, 07:40 PM
RE: Anthropogenic climate change and the denial of science.
(26-05-2015 07:16 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  
(26-05-2015 07:09 PM)The Drake Wrote:  As a layperson I respect your opinion and recognize your authority in this matter. However, I still think it's best if we let nature take its course and do what we can to lessen the human impact as opposed to reversing it.

I can see why you side that way. I did too up until maybe a few years ago as I started looking into it more and more.

What we would be doing, is using nature to regulate the human impact on nature. It's not as synthetic (in at least some cases) as it sounds.

And it sounds real good. It works...on paper...in simulations...but if we F up, this is the only Earth we have. We've changed the climate by our very existence, through action and inaction, but it was always passive. We now have the knowledge to change it in an active way, but can we truly predict the effects on a global scale ? Would we be prepared to deal with the consequences ?

The second mouse gets the cheese.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-05-2015, 07:43 PM
Anthropogenic climate change and the denial of science.
(26-05-2015 07:40 PM)The Drake Wrote:  
(26-05-2015 07:16 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  I can see why you side that way. I did too up until maybe a few years ago as I started looking into it more and more.

What we would be doing, is using nature to regulate the human impact on nature. It's not as synthetic (in at least some cases) as it sounds.

And it sounds real good. It works...on paper...in simulations...but if we F up, this is the only Earth we have. We've changed the climate by our very existence, through action and inaction, but it was always passive. We now have the knowledge to change it in an active way, but can we truly predict the effects on a global scale ? Would we be prepared to deal with the consequences ?

You're blowing the scale of these experiments out of proportion I think while assuming that they'd have massive runaway feedbacks.

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-05-2015, 12:18 AM
RE: Anthropogenic climate change and the denial of science.
(26-05-2015 07:40 PM)The Drake Wrote:  
(26-05-2015 07:16 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  I can see why you side that way. I did too up until maybe a few years ago as I started looking into it more and more.

What we would be doing, is using nature to regulate the human impact on nature. It's not as synthetic (in at least some cases) as it sounds.

And it sounds real good. It works...on paper...in simulations...but if we F up, this is the only Earth we have. We've changed the climate by our very existence, through action and inaction, but it was always passive. We now have the knowledge to change it in an active way, but can we truly predict the effects on a global scale ? Would we be prepared to deal with the consequences ?

We are *currently* Fing up in the most epic fail way possible. Beardy is proposing mitigation.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like morondog's post
31-05-2015, 05:42 PM
RE: Anthropogenic climate change and the denial of science.
(27-05-2015 12:18 AM)morondog Wrote:  
(26-05-2015 07:40 PM)The Drake Wrote:  And it sounds real good. It works...on paper...in simulations...but if we F up, this is the only Earth we have. We've changed the climate by our very existence, through action and inaction, but it was always passive. We now have the knowledge to change it in an active way, but can we truly predict the effects on a global scale ? Would we be prepared to deal with the consequences ?

We are *currently* Fing up in the most epic fail way possible. Beardy is proposing mitigation.

I know. And I laud him for it. But I think our effort is better served by lessening our impact and adaptation. I'd rather not hear someone say "OOPS...I was just trying to fix it !!! Sorry, my bad !"

The second mouse gets the cheese.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: