Climate Change
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
07-09-2010, 07:26 AM
 
RE: Climate Change
Well here is my take on Global Climate Change (better that GW IMHO).

Would the Climate change regardless of man? Yes. Fact!

Does man affect the pace and/or direction/type of Climate Change? Yes. Fact!

Do the vast majority of things being asked of people as far as helping reduce Climate Change makes sense in a context outside of Climate change i.e pollution reduction, reduced reliance on oil, energy savings etc...? Yes Fact!

Do I need idiots like Al Gore preaching to me about the end of times if I don't reduce my freaking carbon Footprint? NO! Fact!

Should we be focusing a whole bunch more on the inevitability Climate Change no matter what we do in the next 50/100 years? Damn straight we should be. See my first point. Fact!

Do certain groups pro/con, rep/dem, whatever skew science to help promote their view on things? Yes, unfortunately. Fact!

Does this make it near immpossible to know much of anything about Global Climate Change for sure? Yes Fact!

So should we just do these things for the other very good reasons, and start thinking more creatively about what to do WHEN the Climate changes? Absofrickinlutely! FACT!
Quote this message in a reply
07-09-2010, 07:43 AM
 
RE: Climate Change
(07-09-2010 07:26 AM)Dregs Wrote:  ...
Do certain groups pro/con, rep/dem, whatever skew science to help promote their view on things? Yes, unfortunately. Fact!

Does this make it near immpossible to know much of anything about Global Climate Change for sure? Yes Fact!

So should we just do these things for the other very good reasons, and start thinking more creatively about what to do WHEN the Climate changes? Absofrickinlutely! FACT!

There are folks on both sides who skew the science to support their position ... no argument. Of course, such folks are not scientists!!

The use of the phrase "for sure" renders the comment about the impossibility of knowing something about global climate change "for sure" a fact, but it's an irrelevant fact. In science, nothing is known to be true absolutely!

It's not impossible to do something to mitigate global climate change without bankrupting our society ... reducing CO2 emissions is not economically infeasible. The "global climate change skeptics" have painted a picture that there are only two mutually exclusive possibilities: either do nothing (business as usual) or suffer a complete economic collapse through efforts to mitigate global climate change. This is a grotesque misstatement of the situation, and it bothers me a lot that so many people have bought this misrepresentation as "fact"!
Quote this message in a reply
07-09-2010, 02:30 PM
 
RE: Climate Change
I often feel that if it means the collapse of human civilization (if it continues unabated for a for a long period of time) is bit more of a price to pay than a short term economic slump. Besides, if a global consensus can be reached to take action, could we not just temporarily put aside money and for once do something for the greater good?

Well, I guess if we could, the human race wouldn't be screwed.
Quote this message in a reply
15-09-2010, 12:03 AM
 
RE: Climate Change
The EU has also proposed to increase the reduction to 30% by 2020 if other major emitting countries in the developed and developing countries agree to do their part under a global climate agreement to come. This agreement should come into force in early 2013, when the commitment period of the first Kyoto Protocol expired.
Quote this message in a reply
15-09-2010, 12:23 PM
 
RE: Climate Change
(15-09-2010 12:03 AM)kimsmarkin Wrote:  The EU has also proposed to increase the reduction to 30% by 2020 if other major emitting countries in the developed and developing countries agree to do their part under a global climate agreement to come. This agreement should come into force in early 2013, when the commitment period of the first Kyoto Protocol expired.

It won't mean much if the US, China, and India don't come to the table. China and India assert that it is there right to industrialize and modernize their economies with access to cheap fossil fuels, like the western world does. According to them, denying them free use of fossil fuels would be unfair and hypocritical.

The US needs to ratify any protocol in Congress. The US never ratified Kyoto. The multi-billion dollar oil lobbyists will buy off any reasonable conservatives, and the religious nuts who believe only God will determine the end of man will obviously oppose the measure. Then we are left with conservative Democrats, who will be too scared to make any drastic moves that might defeat them in an election. Then there are the real liberals, but they never organize properly and they are too few to matter.
Quote this message in a reply
15-09-2010, 08:28 PM
RE: Climate Change
There was a pretty interesting editorial in Newsweek this week about the Earth/ climate change/ etc. Here is the link
http://www.newsweek.com/2010/09/12/georg...to-it.html
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-09-2010, 01:05 AM
RE: Climate Change
(15-09-2010 08:28 PM)catdance62 Wrote:  There was a pretty interesting editorial in Newsweek this week about the Earth/ climate change/ etc. Here is the link
http://www.newsweek.com/2010/09/12/georg...to-it.html

The world will survive global warming, pollution and everything else that people do to it, but will the ecosystems that support the human race survive that stuff? That is the question. There have been seven major extinctions in geological history. Are we going to be the eighth?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-09-2010, 01:14 AM
 
RE: Climate Change
Whatever happens in the next thousand years is but a blink on the geological time scale, but it means a hell of a lot to us and the species with which we share this planet. The Earth will indeed survive, but it might well look very different and we might not be here. This editorial seems to imply that doing nothing is pretty much o.k. - but it won't be very o.k. to those of us who are living here, now. At the very least, there likely will be huge adjustments to make in response to the warming that is locked in right now - at a time when cheap energy from oil is going away.
Quote this message in a reply
17-09-2010, 08:39 AM
RE: Climate Change
I´m sorry my first post/reply on this forum is a quote but I think George Carlin said it best:

The planet has been through a lot worse than us. Been through all kinds of things worse than us. Been through earthquakes, volcanoes, plate tectonics, continental drift, solar flares, sun spots, magnetic storms, the magnetic reversal of the poles…hundreds of thousands of years of bombardment by comets and asteroids and meteors, worldwide floods, tidal waves, worldwide fires, erosion, cosmic rays, recurring ice ages…And we think some plastic bags, and some aluminum cans are going to make a difference? The planet…the planet…the planet isn't going anywhere. WE ARE!

I want to rip off your superstitions and make passionate sense to you
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-09-2010, 12:27 PM
 
RE: Climate Change
I've seen that bit and I think it is really funny...

However, I will admit I am selfish and arrogant. I care about the survival of the human gene pool. That is my responsibility as a Darwinian organism. So I will "meddle" with nature if it means the continuous survival of the human race.

We also need to rephrase the debate from "Saving the Planet" which truly is as Carlin puts it, and rephrase it to "Save the Human Race." It might carry more weight then.

Also, a lot of Carlin said was comedic exaggeration.
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: