Global Warming | Fact or Fiction?

[Alceste]

Mass extinction is very well understood? Not sure I buy that one. And who said anything about inaction, well besides the Rev. The climate will change, no doubt about that. Global food and water shortages, all ready experiencing that. The only thing likely to change is who the shortages impact. The actions that need to take place are planning for a warmer Earth. Where will crops grow? Where will people live? These are the questions to ask. Trying to actually change the weather patterns will never work.

Who is trying to "change the weather patterns"? Everybody who cares about climate change is trying to reduce CO2 emissions, because CO2 concentrations have been understood for decades, by every credible expert to have a warming effect on the climate.

IOW, we are not trying to intentionally manipulate the weather. We are trying to reduce the rate at which we unintentionally manipulate the weather.

So, I still don't see droves of cultures rushing to take up democracy.

OK. Let me help you with that.

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

IOW, we are not trying to intentionally manipulate the weather. We are trying to reduce the rate at which we unintentionally manipulate the weather.

Alright, I'll give you that. But unless we take over the world and physically force developing nations to go green this is a pipe dream. Facts is facts. Better to plan on what we are going to do after the change than sitting around wishing the world would come to its senses.

OK. Let me help you with that.

Nice pics, lets just say the two of us interpret these events in different ways.

 

[painted wolf]

I tend to go with a combination of Revoltingest and Alceste's ideas...

We have the technology to reduce our consumption of natural resources without sacrificing our standard of living.

Even without climate change this has to be seen as a good thing.

I agree that getting everyone on-board is going to be difficult if not neigh-impossible. There is always one jerk in the group. Such as China deciding to hold the Ozone layer hostage....
China Threatens Massive Venting of Super Greenhouse Gases in Attempt to Extort Billions as UNFCCC Meeting Approaches - MarketWatch

wa:do

 

[Alceste]

Alright, I'll give you that. But unless we take over the world and physically force developing nations to go green this is a pipe dream. Facts is facts. Better to plan on what we are going to do after the change than sitting around wishing the world would come to its senses.



Nice pics, lets just say the two of us interpret these events in different ways.

Hard to interpret the fall of the USSR, the Berlin Wall, Tienanmen Square, the Green Revolution in Iran and the Arab Spring in any way that doesn't include the proliferation of democratic ideals, I would think, but I'm curious.

I still think waiting for somebody else to act before we act ourselves is childish. Since the action required of ordinary people to defend themselves and their families from the worst impacts of climate change dovetail so nicely with actions required to reduce or own personal carbon footprint, there is no reason for normal people to concern themselves with what China is plotting. Just get your vegetable patch dug and put in your rain barrels.

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

Hard to interpret the fall of the USSR, the Berlin Wall, Tienanmen Square, the Green Revolution in Iran and the Arab Spring in any way that doesn't include the proliferation of democratic ideals, I would think, but I'm curious.

Rejection of Tyranny doesn't necessarily equate a proliferation of democracy. Sure we hear a lot of people chanting democracy but do we see much of it? I haven't.

I still think waiting for somebody else to act before we act ourselves is childish. Since the action required of ordinary people to defend themselves and their families from the worst impacts of climate change dovetail so nicely with actions required to reduce or own personal carbon footprint, there is no reason for normal people to concern themselves with what China is plotting. Just get your vegetable patch dug and put in your rain barrels.

Never said we shouldn't act or even lead by example. Plenty of people are doing exactly what you suggest. My point is we need to acknowledge that it will not be enough and plan accordingly. Even if every person in the western world went green tomorrow it would not slow down global warming.

 

[idea]

We've had ice-ages etc. etc. in the past - the sun controls a lot of the temperature too:
Solar activity & climate: is the sun causing global warming?

CO2 is not so horrible, plants need CO2 to live, the greatest CO2 producer in the world is the decaying plants in the rain forest. I don't like breathing smogie air, but I think things like carbon tax do more to harm humanity than to help it.

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

Well, it looks like we fall into two categories, with one notable exception of course, those who think humanity is partly to blame and those who think humanity is mostly to blame. So, a question for everyone. What human effect causes the greatest impact on Global Warming? Fossil Fuels? Increased Population? De-Forrestation? Lets look for a Root Cause in this.

 

[painted wolf]

Well, it looks like we fall into two categories, with one notable exception of course, those who think humanity is partly to blame and those who think humanity is mostly to blame. So, a question for everyone. What human effect causes the greatest impact on Global Warming? Fossil Fuels? Increased Population? De-Forrestation? Lets look for a Root Cause in this.

All of the above... seriously this is a synergistic problem, there isn't a single cause. Each problem feeds the others.

Increased populations increase the amount of fossil fuels consumed and the amount of deforestation... meanwhile consumption of fossil fuels and deforestation allows for a larger population.

This is a typical ecological feed back loop.

wa:do

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

All of the above... seriously this is a synergistic problem, there isn't a single cause. Each problem feeds the others.

Increased populations increase the amount of fossil fuels consumed and the amount of deforestation... meanwhile consumption of fossil fuels and deforestation allows for a larger population.

This is a typical ecological feed back loop.

wa:do

Granted, could Humanity be the root cause? Maybe technology which allows for humanity to over populate?

 

[Reverend Rick]

Yep, but what they don't agree on or refuse to say is how much cause. It gets really fuzzy at that point and I think they simply don't know. I lean towards less rather than more and that the impact is to speed up a natural event rather than creating the event itself.

That is it in a nut shell. Scientists are just guessing. It kills them not to have all the answers. When someone points this out, their automatically anti-science.

Just because I say, "Hey, smart guy, you don't have all the answers. Quit acting like you do" does not mean I am anti science, I just don't worship science.

I love alternative energy and becoming more efficient. I plant trees and worship mother earth.

I LOVE BEING GREEN

 

[painted wolf]

Granted, could Humanity be the root cause? Maybe technology which allows for humanity to over populate?

There is no "root cause" in a synergistic system.

A good example of a simple synergistic ecological problem are these poor things

There was a lot of debate as to the cause... one group said it was pollution, one said humans had nothing to do with it and it was a parasitic nematode.

They were both wrong... it was the combination of the two. Populations of frogs with the parasitic nematode as tadpoles grow up normally in non-polluted waters... frogs without parasitic nematodes grow up just fine in polluted waters. The pollution weakens the frogs and allows the nematodes to interfere with development of limbs as they grow.

There isn't a ROOT cause because it's a synergistic system. It's functions fine with one or the other issue at play, but when they are combined the problem is sudden and severe.

We are not the root cause of global climate change, we are an exacerbating factor. The difference is we have the capacity to find exactly what and how we are doing it and alter our behavior.
The real trick is having the will to do so. Given human psychology and history, I have my doubts.

wa:do

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

There isn't a ROOT cause because it's a synergistic system. It's functions fine with one or the other issue at play, but when they are combined the problem is sudden and severe.

So the combination of the two wouldn't be considered the root cause of that particular effect?

 

[painted wolf]

A root cause implies a single cause that can be eliminated.

Global climate change is far more than just two factors.

wa:do

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

A root cause implies a single cause that can be eliminated.

Global climate change is far more than just two factors.

wa:do

Ah. Makes sense to me. Love reading your posts, I always feel like I learned something. Well, except when its all math equations, then my head just hurts.

 

[painted wolf]

Ah. Makes sense to me. Love reading your posts, I always feel like I learned something. Well, except when its all math equations, then my head just hurts.

LoL mine too, If I didn't love biology so much I'd have stuck with art to avoid it!

And thanks so much for the compliment!

wa:do

 

[Panda]

We are not the root cause of global climate change, we are an exacerbating factor. The difference is we have the capacity to find exactly what and how we are doing it and alter our behavior.
The real trick is having the will to do so. Given human psychology and history, I have my doubts.

wa:do

I agree entirely with this PW especially the part on bold. It also seems to be the conclusion the majority of scientists have taken.

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

I agree entirely with this PW especially the part on bold. It also seems to be the conclusion the majority of scientists have taken.

I also agree. I think the only real questions are what is the degree of exacerbation we have on the event and what effect any efforts towards slowing the event might have. Me personally, I don't thing humanities effect is more than 50% of the cause. As for our efforts, without global buy in I would say nothing we do will slow the warming trend we are now in. That's why I think we should plan for the worst, which is a much warmer planet and some changes in region ecologies. Humanity is going to have to rethink where it lives and where its food sources come from.

 

[painted wolf]

I also agree. I think the only real questions are what is the degree of exacerbation we have on the event and what effect any efforts towards slowing the event might have. Me personally, I don't thing humanities effect is more than 50% of the cause. As for our efforts, without global buy in I would say nothing we do will slow the warming trend we are now in. That's why I think we should plan for the worst, which is a much warmer planet and some changes in region ecologies.

The worst case scenario is pretty extreme. Permian level issues.

Humanity is going to have to rethink where it lives and where its food sources come from.

We should already be doing that.
In many parts of the world like Australia, they already are. Australia has been facing major ecological breakdown problems like salinization of water and soil and mega-drought.

wa:do

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

The worst case scenario is pretty extreme. Permian level issues.

Permian level? Really? Wouldn't take a super-volcano eruption or a astroid hit to get that extreme?

 

[Flankerl]

Would be nice if people would use the term "climate change" more often. Even though its always rather stupid because climate is never something static and always changes.

But then of course your books dont sell so much.