Global warming: Truth or Ficition

[Dare]

Originally posted by Dyani
What about the other parts of the world that will become uninhabitable?

They say global warming is already cause problems for native peoples up in Alaska - melting permafrost has caused serious erosion to the point where two native towns actually have to relocate off their ancestral land because it's no longer safe to live there.

Even if it isn't global warming's fault, 'tis still a shame.


And now...considering how much of the Alaskan pipeline is built on permafrost...I imagine the permafrost melting beneath it (possibly causing breaks and whatnot) isn't a good thing. They'll have to go back and restructure it I guess.
Money money money...

[Tiikeri]

Originally posted by Dyani
Wouldn't have this problem if me and STL had sorted out something to do with humanity a long time ago ... <3 STL

The only thing wrong with humanity is people like you and STL...

[Dare]

Originally posted by Tiikeri
The only thing wrong with humanity is people like you and STL...

That was uncalled for.

[Darkslash]

You have to admit our climate is changing;

If you'd been reading what I've posted, you'd see that is indeed what I believe.

In fact, though you would consider me "ignorant" and "stupid," I wonder if it is not those who have completely shut off in their minds the possibility that these "studies" of such vague phenomena may actually be in partial or whole error in their conclusion who are the more stupid. At least admit that we don't know the cause for sure; at least admit that we have had a virtual nanosecond in the history of time in which to observe the climate; at least admit that an unexpected change in the cyclical temperature fluctuations of our planet should not lead ourselves first to blame.

And I don't think you fully understood my question, or at least I wasn't clear in my intended point:

"Would the earth gain or lose more total land, assuming this report is correct?"

That is a pragmatic, sensible, and cautious approach to this issue: there are things we as a human population can undertake as precautions against the changing climate. After all, since the warming, according to the report, cannot be stopped, and since we have roughly 100 years to adjust, why not start considering the implications, the worst-case scenarios, etc., rather than going on a vendetta against human progress?

My point was, since so much coastline will be flooded, we can move north or south into newly hospitable climates. Yes, the entire Sahara will be an oven, yes, entire ecosystems will die, yes, land will go under water -- at this point, according to the report, it's pretty much tough luck. I don't give a darn about a freakin' monkey -- according to the evolutionary theory, if it wants to survive it should learn to move north too. The earth will survive, we humans will survive -- as long as we know in advance what we're going to do.

We start by attempting to calculate the amounts of land, conservative and liberal estimates, that will be flooded and/or rendered uninhabitable and calculate the amount of new land we will live in, and see if it comes out as a net positive.

Like the report stated, there really is no silver bullet for climate change -- multifaceted adaptation to this changing world, the hallmark of human existence, will get us through -- no amount of blame-placing will do that.

[Stormfury]

Originally posted by Tiikeri
The only thing wrong with humanity is people like you and STL...

Exactly, what was the purpose of that statement?

[Dyani]

Originally posted by Darkslash
[B]"Would the earth gain or lose more total land, assuming this report is correct?"

why not start considering the implications, the worst-case scenarios, etc., rather than going on a vendetta against human progress?

My point was, since so much coastline will be flooded, we can move north or south into newly hospitable climates. Yes, the entire Sahara will be an oven, yes, entire ecosystems will die, yes, land will go under water -- at this point, according to the report, it's pretty much tough luck. I don't give a darn about a freakin' monkey -- according to the evolutionary theory, if it wants to survive it should learn to move north too. The earth will survive, we humans will survive -- as long as we know in advance what we're going to do.[B]

My whole arguement of *the climate is changing* was only aimed at those who have their heads deep enough in the sand to not know/believe these things are happening. And if you read my post correctly, I said that I wasn't blaming humans and that you wouldn't hear me say so.

I wasn't going on a vendetta against human progress. It probably hasn't helped the situation but thats beyond the point. We are, for the majority, a selfish species. We have the ability to think and plan ahead yet we really only care about ourselves when it comes to the future. The only reason why Global Warming has become such an issue is because it threatens us. The only way humanity can really step forward is to consider the whole world. Everything in it is in the palm of our hands. If we are God over the world, wheres the benevolence and omnipotentcy? We could do everything in our power to stop this but we don't, or very little. Your post just shows this, *I don't give a darn about a freakin' monkey*. Would you care that lions would probably die out too?

Also, if we are gonna move into the warmed tunda, this is where the OZone is considered thinner so we'll die of radiation. What about those hundreds of millions of people on the equator who cannot afford to move? Are you going to help them move? From the way you're talking, you only seem to care about people near you/America.

This whole *according to the evolutionary theory, if it (the monkey)wants to survive it should learn to move north too* is so full of BS I want to be sick. Ok, start with the facts. A monkey does not know/understand about the warming earth and probably only cares about humping the nearest female. Global Warming is going to take a while, therefore the coastline will encroach on the land slowly. Monkeys understand little about moving from their territory unless something catastophic occurs (whether local or global) and by then, it could well be too late.

America was too late with dealing with Green issues as with a lot of things. Bush ignored it to the last minute and even now he's only doing small things. :woeisme:

With the "Would the earth gain or lose more total land, assuming this report is correct?" debate, I would have thought we would have lost more land. How would we gain more land without creating it ourselves?

[Pnt]

If I can add my two cents about the conduct in this thread, I think we all need to remember to keep a respectful attitude, or leave.

Originally posted by Dyani
America was too late with dealing with Green issues as with a lot of things. Bush ignored it to the last minute and even now he's only doing small things. :woeisme:

This is not an American problem, this is a world problem. This situation wasn't caused by George Bush; the man has been in office for six-seven years. Global warming existed long before Bush, and it will exist long after. Every single human being on the face of this earth is to blame for global warming*, including you and me. Passing the blame off to Bush is a means through which people can pass off their own responsibility; he's becoming a whipping boy. Truth be told, there's not much Bush could have done; he can only enforce laws that Congress passes. This is exactly why I think Global warming has been politicized. It isn't science, it is down-with-capitalism-and-Bush scare tactics. Propaganda. I want to see a report with actual raw data because I'm tired of being told what scientists have decided, I want to decide for myself. Politics and science don't mix well at all, and when politicians use science as a means to get their political view across, we all suffer the consequences.

*Again, this is assuming mankind is the major factor in this. I personally think that global warming as it is currently presented isn't a scientific hypothesis, but political propaganda and rhetoric. Even with this new report, they've shown nothing scientific to the general public to back up their claim, or the organizations that have reported on it have failed to mention even one bit of data.

[Tiikeri]

Originally posted by Wicked
That was uncalled for.

Maybe so, but it's true.

Originally posted by S0nique
Exactly, what was the purpose of that statement?

Just voicing my opinon.

Originally posted by SimbaTheLion
You really make me laugh sometimes ... Don't break the rules.

I'll break the rules if I want to. Oh, and I'd like to see you laugh when I turn up outside your house, I still have your address you know

[Dyani]

Originally posted by Tiikeri
I'll break the rules if I want to. Oh, and I'd like to see you laugh when I turn up outside your house, I still have your address you know

Tiikeri calm down, theres no need to threaten STL. Its a pathetic thing to do and also should the police get hold of it, could lead to legal action.
Also, yes sure you're allowed to break the rules. Just don't be surprised should you be banned.

Originally posted by Pnt
If I can add my two cents about the conduct in this thread, I think we all need to remember to keep a respectful attitude, or leave.


This is not an American problem, this is a world problem. This situation wasn't caused by George Bush; the man has been in office for six-seven years. Global warming existed long before Bush, and it will exist long after. Every single human being on the face of this earth is to blame for global warming*, including you and me. Passing the blame off to Bush is a means through which people can pass off their own responsibility; he's becoming a whipping boy.

Sorry if I sounded disrepectful unless that was aimed at Tiikeri ... ?

Ok. Global Warming is not an American problem, true. However, while the rest of the Western World has been at least trying to act to slow Global Warming, Bush has not done anything. Only recently has he been emphasising the idea that Global Warming is a threat. Before he wasn't really paying the issue the attention is deserved. Thats what I was meaning. Sir David Attenborough even says he is an environmental villian in that aspect.
But I do agree that Bush is becoming a scapegoat. He has made mistakes in the past that not everyone agreed with, but people are moaning about him more than nessisary.

[Stormfury]

Originally posted by Tiikeri
Just voicing my opinon.

I'll break the rules if I want to. Oh, and I'd like to see you laugh when I turn up outside your house, I still have your address you know

And it was perpetrated for what reason? Don't answer that question, it's rhetorical.

Rule-breaking is allowed 3 times or less*. Depending on a moderator's discretion.

So... what's going on my friend?

[Darkslash]

If we are God over the world, wheres the benevolence and omnipotency?

We aren't God over the world, aren't omnipotent -- we are as fragile, at the foundation, as any other organism on this planet.

Frankly, I stick to my statement. I really do not care if I need to kill and eat a lion to survive in a global catastrophe. I absolutely believe that humans are our first priority when and if something needs to happen, some sort of mass movement, we'd better focus our resources on ensuring people's survival. "Barbaric" would adequately describe concern for, and resources spent to transport/rehabilitate wild animals. If evolutionary theory is correct, they'll move or evolve on their own, it's simple. They're not helpless.

On to another point: Who said the poor had to afford the move? In a crisis, and with a plan thought out ahead of time, we can take care of our neediest. Kyoto Protocols and emissions regulations will not prevent their countries from ultimately flooding and will not prevent the deaths of millions -- but a plan for survival will.

I'll attempt to clarify, for a second time, my conjecture about the "net positive" -- could it be possible that the amount of land rendered uninhabitable by rising seas and temperatures be counterbalanced by the land made newly temperate and habitable?

[Stormfury]

Weather-wise and near-term future of GW will insight some interesting conditions. But let me back it up and see something on the grand scale of things.

Global warming is somewhat nonpartisan to weather-related changes. Now we're having a low or a high-end El Ni?o event (See: ENSO Diagnostic Data and TAO-array). Global warming would have little relevance to this in some ways (Collins et al. 2005, Climate Dynamics, 24, 89-104. 19), but they're very much linked anyway. Said pattern El Ni?o event suggests : warmer-than-average temperatures over western and central Canada, and over the northern United States, wetter-than-average conditions over portions of the U.S. Gulf Coast and Florida, and drier-than-average conditions in the Ohio Valley and in portions of the Pacific Northwest.

Global warming -- and its acceleration will cause a super-heated planet? Or "Hell planet." Which would become uninhabitable. Apart from the norm, weather-changing is a GW acceleration scenario.

[Only-now]

The point of my last post was that in the data that scientists use..and the models they make..they leave out the natural cause of those emissions....so they basically leave the CO2 levels at the point they are, and then shift all the blame to humanity without attaching the correct amount of natural CO2 to the natural sources. Not to mention, it was also mentioned that these natural emissions can fluctuate, and rise or fall...so that leads to increases in CO2 in the atmosphere...if you read it, it is basically like a cycle..once more.

I also agree with Pnt on the issues that this is not an American problem...it is a world problem. There are many industrial nations..some without any environmental laws. Global warming has been happening for years...even before any of the newer environmental pacts or programs were in effect...and during that time the whole WORLD was doing what they are still doing now...so it isn't just our fault (if it is man's at all). I also agree that it would be cool to see a report that wasn't just the conclusions of scientists. I believe in this day and age it would be much more accurate if we could just have the results and make our own decisions. Much of the time scientists can't be trusted with what they SAY is right or wrong.

Oh..and luckily for us, if StL and others do come up with a plan for humanity...we won't be forced to obey it. (as it would lead to man's downfall)

~Kiva

[Sadiki]

Originally posted by Only-now

I also agree with Pnt on the issues that this is not an American problem...it is a world problem.

Yeah it's not America's problem yet it took long time from USA to recognize the problem. China and USA are still create the most of the "green house gases" in the world and still they haven't even signed up on Kiotos contract which was made in UN to protect world from fast polution. So in another words USA and China are not willing to get the amount of polution degressed, but maybe after realising the problem they will.

And it's deffinedly the whole world's problem. People should deffinedly think about using public transportation as much as they can and use avoid cars and especially vehicles that use a lot of gas when they don't really need them. I know in US a lot of places own car is only way to get to places, but it doesn't have to be that way. We can't make the damage we caused already undone but we can try to slower the process as much as we can.

[Pnt]

Originally posted by SimbaTheMighty
Yeah it's not America's problem yet it took long time from USA to recognize the problem. China and USA are still create the most of the "green house gases" in the world and still they haven't even signed up on Kiotos contract which was made in UN to protect world from fast polution. So in another words USA and China are not willing to get the amount of polution degressed, but maybe after realising the problem they will.

Just because we didn't sign the Kyoto agreement doesn't mean we don't care about the environment. To my knowledge, we weren't ready to enter a binding treaty because it could damage our country's economy in the long run. Some may think that the world's well being is more important than our country's economy, but if we stop to think about it, if the US economy tanks, the rest of the world isn't far behind. That's not an arrogant statement, quite a bit of the world is reliant upon the US dollar, US exports such as agriculture, or various US companies. With failing economies, no one's going to care about the environment, they're going to care about getting food into their children's stomachs, so the global warming issue is put aside. I firmly believe that this issue can only be tackled if the world's economy stays strong, as more money flowing means more money that goes to research for future issues. In the end, our research and technology for resolving this problem or helping us live with it will be what saves us, not the realistically small amount of pollution we reduce under a treaty.

Our country actually has many laws in place that limit pollution, many more than currently developing countries such as China and India. Many of our companies are also choosing to reduce their output due to public opinion and concern for the local community's property value. We're also among those at the front of finding new and cleaner technologies as well.

I saw a commercial once that summed up the problem quite well. This girl noticed fish dying in a local stream because of a huge chemical plant giving off pollution. Children started getting ill from the chemicals as well. She led a local community's efforts to get the plant shut down, and support grew like crazy. Eventually the plant was closed. Unfortunately, the plant employed almost everyone in the town. Now unemployment in the town was out of control. They couldn't afford to treat their kids or feed their families. They started drinking out of the polluted water when their water services were turned off. In the end, the solution was far worse than the problem. While I can't remember the original message of the commercial, it's final statement was correct, saving the world isn't easy.

[Sadiki]

well I was reading that on wikipedia so weather it's true or not we still can't get around China and USA being the ones who let out the most of those gases that effect on our enviorment. what comes to the research of finding ways to lower the amount of polution, I bet US does research on it as much as other countries do, but I think instead of working as invidual companies trying to make money out of what they figure out, they should work together.

And I'm not trying to make it seem like US and China are the ones to blame for that or that the fault is mostly theirs. Just thinking that sinse it's everyone's problem people should forget about money for a while and make try to find a way to save our planet, because even some people say that it's not an issue or that it's a natural cycle. The fact still is that Ozone layer is getting thiner letting more and more ultraviolet rays on earth and also warming up the planet. i don't see how people can deny that. Also the increasing amount of Carbon dioxide is adding up the temperature in this world.

[Stormfury]

Senate Enivronment and Public Works (EPW) Committee hearing with Senator Clinton and Al Gore (5:37).
http://youtube.com/watch?v=3jxTw4ADfIA

Pigouvian-Carbon tax:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_tax
[SIZE=small]^ Looking for this in its entirety; anyway...[/SIZE]


http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wir...3014590&page=1

IPCC Working Group II - Fourth Assessment Report, Friday, 6 April, 2007.

[Utora]

I don't believe in Global Warming. I think Earth is simply going through her cycles.


Scientists can see the poles of the Earth by studying magma flow after it hardens. The flows move with the magnetization of the Earth's poles.

They are starting to find the poles are changing, which happens every so many thousands of years. The electro field around the Earth starts to weaken as these poles shift.

That field is a part of the atmospheres regulation of the temperature here on Earth.
So, it's going to get a bit hot as the poles change again. The North and the South poles will change completely..but this is carried on over many many years, and I doubt any of us will see it in our lifetime.


Earth goes through volcanoes, hurricanes, tornadoes, meteors and comets, wildfires, floods, storms, ice storms, earthquakes, mudslides, ..etc etc.

I'm sure man has changed the world's cycles a bit throughout our existence; but overall...we probably aren't causing "Global Warming" in my opinion. Earth is running her course I believe....


---

I could gather the studies I've researched for anyone that wants exact information..I kinda just drew from what I remembered from my findings in the past two years on this topic.

[Dyani]

http://www.break.com/index/tough-to-argue.html
The guy puts forward a good arguement, worth 9 minutes watching

[Zoltan]

Just to relax everyone, the Kyoto agreement is a nice thing, but wouldn't be enough to stop the warming.
So crying about why the USA government didn't sign it is pointless. Out of business. Whcich is sad, but that's how recent world works until somebody decides to change and successfully reaches the goal.

It seems that Earth has cycles of warming up and cooling down. But thinking that our hands are clean in this mess is cowardice, not daring to take responsibility for our acts. Whereas there's this natural cycle, our CO2 pollution is far not natural. So we have a nice lion's share in it. It's everybody's fault: everybody's who don't dare to take controll out of the hands of these world-destroyers.
Anyeay I read about a new idea how to decrease warming. And it would be pretty cheap relatively. For some million dollars sulphur could be spread in the atmosphere. This would be similar to great volcanic cataclysms, which cool down the Earth beneath. It could stop the warming, but we could only gain some plus time to preserve Earth's climates from a final turning point, and to prepare for a drastical change in our economies and CO2 release. Because if we can't maintain the sulphur shield anymore, and there's still no change in our additional CO2 release, the whole warming effect would fall on the Earth in one great wave, which would be pretty catastophical.

So what to do? We need a drastic change of view globally. Let's hang everybody who doesn't follow.