The real climate change catastrophe

[Smoke]

I find it astounding that anyone still doubts that climate change is happening, and even more astounding that they come out of the woodwork to gloat and cheer every time some unqualified hack publishes another unscientific piece of trash claiming the rest of us have been had.

Right-wingers hate environmentalism in any form. Either they hate anything that might interfere in any way with free markets, or they think Jesus is coming back so soon that it's pointless to worry about the environment -- or both.

 

[Joe_Stocks]

Since Climategate broke a couple of weeks ago none of the major networks have covered it in their broadcasts (NBC, CBS, ABC), unless they have covered it in the last day or so.

It makes sense that NBC won't give their viewers the news regarding Climategate, GE owns NBC and is set to get billions from the federal government for renewable energy projects.

Man-made global warming (ManBearPig) was never about the science in the first place.

 

[darkendless]

I take that as a no. Do you assume it to be true then?

They are correct,

Go look at the bleached coral in the great barrier reef in Australia, 1/3 is now all dead.

 

[Troublemane]

Has anyone mentioned the link between Al Gore and Kenneth Lay yet? And how the same scams Enron was using is the basis for the whole Carbon Cap-and-Trade system?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPbpmOk9Qjc&feature=fvw

 

[Troublemane]

Further amplification of that debate.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cpEcPFSEIwQ&feature=related

 

[kai]

For god's sake, kai, the daily mail? You HAVE to be kidding me.

No! thats highbrow! for me , I am a Sun Man, and anyway i got it free on a special offer


so look i am new to this , i havnt taken much notice i have had other things on my mind, so this guys (Ian Pilmer ) article are you saying its rubbish and why?

 

[sandy whitelinger]

I suppose I rely on the media reporting it correctly to me, if that's what you mean.
I also rely on common sense, we know CO2 is increasing in the atmosphere, we know CO2 gets dissolved in sea water, and we know that dissolved CO2 forms carbonic acid. 1 + 2 + 3 = dead coral.

So, you are basing this on the hope that media is responsible and limited knowledge.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

I find it astounding that anyone still doubts that climate change is happening, and even more astounding that they come out of the woodwork to gloat and cheer every time some unqualified hack publishes another unscientific piece of trash claiming the rest of us have been had.

This statement is fraught with ignorance. First of all climate change always happens. The question as to whether it is unavoidable or controllable or related to anything being championed is certainly questionable.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

I assume they came to their conclusions by the scientific method of hypothesis, repeatable experimentation, and publishing by peer-review. This is how I trust any other scientific research, like how a new drug works, or the best wing shape of airplanes, etc.?

So you assume this.

I absolutely do not understand this viewpoint. Just because our actions may not cause an immediate, disasterous outcome, does not give us free-reign to treat our planet like crap. It also does not mean that our actions are not harming our environment in other more subtle ways.

Really, is it prudent to wait until your house is on fire to buy smoke alarms?

How much will the money you saved be worth, if you destroy your planet in the process?

This statement is irrelevant to my post. Perhaps you need to go back and review it.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

Right-wingers hate environmentalism in any form. Either they hate anything that might interfere in any way with free markets, or they think Jesus is coming back so soon that it's pointless to worry about the environment -- or both.

That is a crass generalization. This right-winger is against political environmentsl positions and solutions that are not based on proven insight.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

They are correct,

Go look at the bleached coral in the great barrier reef in Australia, 1/3 is now all dead.

And you have seen this first hand and have certain knowlege of how it happened?

 

[Troublemane]

Heres a serious question for all those who call skeptics "climate change deniers" (as if they were 'holocaust deniers' or something)....IF climate change is occurring (which it is, I simply dont know how we can be sure we know which way its going), and IF the majority of it is MAN-MADE (which im not sure how you determine, but lets say we can)....HOW can you say for sure that the "CAP and TRADE" system is going to do anything to fix the problem?

How can you be sure CO2 is whats causing it? I mean, if CO2 is the cause, then maybe we should just exterminate anything that breathes? Or would that be going to far?

I mean because if the answer is simply "we have got to do something, and this is something"..no thats not a good enough answer. I mean, what are the consequences if its wrong? We dive even deeper into a depression? And it doesnt even help the environment? That would really, really suck! :angel2:

 

[darkendless]

And you have seen this first hand and have certain knowlege of how it happened?

I have but what difference does it make if i havn't seen it? Is this a big conspiracy of the Australian Government to enforce climate change scare tactics. Please, this is NOTAmerica.... lol

It was a tourism problem not a climate change one. Nothing stood to be gained by lying about bleaching of the coral reef because it is costing everyone more money to keep alive to business.

The coral died because of changing water conditions which is due to warmer temperatrures in the reef system.

 

[Thief]

I don't have the numbers at hand....
But are we not pouring tons of carbon into the atmosphere, at far greater capacity than the Earth has ever seen before?

You could think of the Earth as a container, with a food supply and air.
If one organism should gain the advantage, the food supply will dwindle and the air supply goes with it.

Like a bottle of grape juice...fermenting into wine.
The container will play out it's resources, and the fermentation will stop.
Use up the fuel...produce too much co2, and it all stops.

 

[kai]

I don't have the numbers at hand....
But are we not pouring tons of carbon into the atmosphere, at far greater capacity than the Earth has ever seen before?



You could think of the Earth as a container, with a food supply and air.
If one organism should gain the advantage, the food supply will dwindle and the air supply goes with it.

Like a bottle of grape juice...fermenting into wine.
The container will play out it's resources, and the fermentation will stop.
Use up the fuel...produce too much co2, and it all stops.

Carbon dioxide is released to the atmosphere by a variety of natural sources, and over 95% of total CO2 emissions would occur even if humans were not present on Earth.

Carbon dioxide in Earth's atmosphere - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[kai]

They are correct,

Go look at the bleached coral in the great barrier reef in Australia, 1/3 is now all dead.

The Australian Conservation Foundation says the reef, which stretches 2,000km along the east coast, is "dying a death of a thousand cuts".

The Federation wants an immediate ban on trawling and all exploration for shale oil mining.

Director Don Henry also called for control of what he described as massive pollution from sugar and cattle industries along the coast.

BBC News | Asia-Pacific | Great Barrier Reef 'dying'

 

[kai]

How about methane emissions any one know anything about the problems caused by increased methane emissions? (serious contributors only please)

 

[Adso]

To be frank, I think these emails to be incredibly damaging to global warming, and to science in general. I haven't heard about any tampered data, or falsified results, but it's looking like there was squashing of dissenting view-points through the peer-review process. You tamper with peer-review and you screw up science's check and balance. Even if the emails turn out only to be about personal animosity, rather than a professional blocking, what the general public will remember is "Global warming is a hoax and you can't trust science."

I will be interested in finding out exactly what the emails say, and what research, if any, is made void. Afterall, if all they were doing was blocking certain research from being published, then publishing that research should right the wrong. There is still a large volume of research supporting human-aided global warming, and it is only nullified if the results were skewed.

Climate change data dumped - Times Online

Apparently they don't have the raw data anymore as it was thrown out. I read elsewhere that it was due to them moving the research to another building and they didn't have the room, which to me sounds an awful lot like BS; if you're a scientific team, I would imagine the most important items to hold on to would be the raw data.

What they do have is apparently the value-added and homogenized data.

 

[Gunfingers]

Carbon dioxide is released to the atmosphere by a variety of natural sources, and over 95% of total CO2 emissions would occur even if humans were not present on Earth.

Carbon dioxide in Earth's atmosphere - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Think of it like homeostasis. Your body naturally produces 98.6 degrees of heat. Increase that by five percent and you're looking at possible brain damage or death. The same is true of the atmosphere's CO2 content.

 

[Falvlun]

Climate change data dumped - Times Online

Apparently they don't have the raw data anymore as it was thrown out. I read elsewhere that it was due to them moving the research to another building and they didn't have the room, which to me sounds an awful lot like BS; if you're a scientific team, I would imagine the most important items to hold on to would be the raw data.

What they do have is apparently the value-added and homogenized data.

Not good.

However, the data was thrown away in the 1980's. I think that was before global warming was such a hot button political issue. It's not like it was thrown out last year-- Oops, our bad, now you can't see it.

It also states that the data was obtained from weather stations around the world. Would not these weather stations still have the data? It would just need to be compiled again.

EDIT:
I work in a quality control chemistry lab. I'm pretty sure we only keep our original data-- chromatographs, etc-- for only two years. And then it gets pitched, too.