or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Yet another climate change thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Yet another climate change thread - Page 4

post #121 of 145
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent



Oh great, our offspring can look forward to a diet consisting of 100% pecans!

I guess we needn't worry about global warming then!


Pecans are very nutritious, and your kids could do much worse than a nut heavy diet 8) There are lots of proteins and essential oils in pecans. Pecans are also a water intensive crop, and it looks like we will have plenty of water.

But I am sure we will never have to live on pecans 100% - there will be plenty of new farmland for old crops, and plenty of new crops for more challenging areas.

Adjusting for inflation, WWII and the cleanup afterwards cost 10s of trillions of dollars - this will be similar in scope, but spread over the next 100 years. In the end, the US will no longer be a "food superpower" (unless it absorbs Canada), but humanity will be fine.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #122 of 145
post #123 of 145
New study says we're in for some serious droughts; this link is from the Independent newspaper but it's in The Guardian and The Times today too.

We're DOOMED!!!!!!
post #124 of 145
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hassan i Sabbah

New study says we're in for some serious droughts; this link is from the Independent newspaper but it's in The Guardian and The Times today too.

We're DOOMED!!!!!!

Sorry - I just don't believe that we will have drought. These climate modeling people have a pretty piss-poor reliability record, and absolutely everything I have read tells me that the climate will be more wet.

- Rainfall has increased over the last 100 years
- the oceans will be warmer, so evaporation will be higher and that water has got to fall somewhere
- all past warm climates with separate continents were wet climates.

You can't trust most press releases on the environment. Places like Greenpeace just make doomsday crap up so that they can get more funding.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #125 of 145
What makes you think your climate people are any better than Hassan's climate people?
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
post #126 of 145
Maybe my climate people should talk to your climate people, e1618978, and come up with a compromise. For the good of humanity.
post #127 of 145
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by hardeeharhar

What makes you think your climate people are any better than Hassan's climate people?

Because looking at the past (which is what my predictions are based on) to predict the future will always be more accurate than predicting the future without looking at the past. Hassan has a much higher burden of proof, because he is predicting things that don't match anything in our past climate history (he is predicting that the opposite of our historical conditions will occur when the planet warms up)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hassan i Sabbah

Maybe my climate people should talk to your climate people, e1618978, and come up with a compromise. For the good of humanity.

The problem is that your climate people are predicting conditions which go against the entire history of the planet. Warm = wet, unless you are talking about the center of a supercontinent.

http://www.brightsurf.com/news/aug_0...s_080503_d.php
http://www.netscape.com/viewstory/20...006&frame=true

"Overall, there will be more rainfall, but also more evaporation leading to more floods and more droughts"
"Given enough time, there may be as many winners as losers."

http://gtresearchnews.gatech.edu/new...e/WWWorld.html
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #128 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by e1618978

"Given enough time, there may be as many winners as losers."

who exactly are the winners here?
post #129 of 145
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarcUK

who exactly are the winners here?

People with a better environment than they had before global warming started.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #130 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by e1618978

People with a better environment than they had before global warming started.

But the vast majority of these people already have the best climate anyway, and all you're arguing for is making your pie better than it already is at the expense of people who already have it really tough anyway. Which really means you've aligned youself with the greedy selfish ©unts.
post #131 of 145
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarcUK

But the vast majority of these people already have the best climate anyway, and all you're arguing for is making your pie better than it already is at the expense of people who already have it really tough anyway. Which really means you've aligned youself with the greedy selfish ©unts.

I don't think that you have understood anything in this thread. I am not "arguing in favor of global warming", I am arguing that

(1) It is unstopable based on the current world pollitical organisation
(2) That it will not be all bad, it will be a mixture of good and bad, particularly the part where we don't have to worry about ice ages anymore
(3) The world will be wetter, and the poles will warm more than the equator, which is good for us because it leads to more land in the mild climate zones.
(4) The "end of the world" predictions are probably exaggerated, I don't think that we need to worry about methane release from the oceans for a long time.

I am greedy and selfish also, but that is unrelated to my contributions to this thread.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #132 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by e1618978

I don't think that you have understood anything in this thread. I am not "arguing in favor of global warming", I am arguing that

(1) It is unstopable based on the current world pollitical organisation
(2) That it will not be all bad, it will be a mixture of good and bad, particularly the part where we don't have to worry about ice ages anymore
(3) The world will be wetter, and the poles will warm more than the equator, which is good for us because it leads to more land in the mild climate zones.
(4) The "end of the world" predictions are probably exaggerated, I don't think that we need to worry about methane release from the oceans for a long time.

I am greedy and selfish also, but that is unrelated to my contributions to this thread.



I to, have thought, for a VERY long time, that the situation is unstoppable. It is first and foremost a population issue. To many people, to much waste.

Where we differ, I believe, is in the need to become more efficient in the waste products we produce. Perhaps apply some self restraint on population growth.

Basically, to try to slow the current/future rates of change that appears will happen if we do nothing.

Slow the rate of growth to something that might occur over 1000 years as opposed to 200-400 years. And I believe that it is doable, VERY doable!

The potential human costs, the potential economic costs. compel me to at least try to minimize my existence, not only for myself (basically, I'm a cheapskate), but for humanity's common destiny as well.

Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #133 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by e1618978

I don't think that you have understood anything in this thread. I am not "arguing in favor of global warming", I am arguing that

(1) It is unstopable based on the current world pollitical organisation
(2) That it will not be all bad, it will be a mixture of good and bad, particularly the part where we don't have to worry about ice ages anymore
(3) The world will be wetter, and the poles will warm more than the equator, which is good for us because it leads to more land in the mild climate zones.
(4) The "end of the world" predictions are probably exaggerated, I don't think that we need to worry about methane release from the oceans for a long time.

I am greedy and selfish also, but that is unrelated to my contributions to this thread.

1) I agree - at some point you have to resign yourself to the fact, that we are humans and we are going to screw ourselves in the long term for a bite of the profits now. Is it right to accept this and do nothing, or right to accept this but try to make a stance against it even if it is pointless?

2) I agree - it wont all be bad. Maybe. But you need to justify to yourself the fact that we *might* have more land IF this prediction is correct at the expense of millions of peoples lives, who are going to die *definately* . Is land worth more than lives?

3) What do we need all this new land for? There is too much food in the world already. Food isn't the issue because if we wanted we could feed everyone who was hungry now.
Golf Courses? Race Tracks? New Cities? are these really that important?

4) I dont think anyone is predicting the end of the world - a harsh world certainly, but not the end.
post #134 of 145
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hassan i Sabbah

New study says we're in for some serious droughts; this link is from the Independent newspaper but it's in The Guardian and The Times today too.

We're DOOMED!!!!!!

Suck it up, Hassan - I was right and you were dead wrong.

Here is the latest climate model from the national center for atmospheric research - this was a huge study using nine different climate models for the periods 19801999 and 20802099, run on supercomputers at research centers in France, Japan, Russia, and the United States. There will be droughts in specific areas, but over all things get wetter.

http://www.ucar.edu/news/releases/20...terworld.shtml

"Expect a Warmer, Wetter World this Century, Computer Models Agree

For all three greenhouse-gas scenarios, the models agree that by 2080-2099:

* The number of extremely warm nights and the length of heat waves will increase significantly over nearly all land areas across the globe. During heat waves, very warm nights are often associated with fatalities because people and buildings have less chance to cool down overnight.

* Most areas above about 40 degrees north will see a significant jump in the number of days with heavy precipitation (days with more than 0.40 inches). This includes the northern tier of U.S. states, Canada, and most of Europe.

* Dry spells could lengthen significantly across the western United States, southern Europe, eastern Brazil, and several other areas. Dry spells are one of several factors in producing and intensifying droughts.

* The average growing season could increase significantly across most of North America and Eurasia."
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #135 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hassan i Sabbah

New study says we're in for some serious droughts; this link is from the Independent newspaper but it's in The Guardian and The Times today too.

We're DOOMED!!!!!!

I think you have "us" confused with "Apple."
post #136 of 145
Quote:
Sorry - I just don't believe that we will have drought. These climate modeling people have a pretty piss-poor reliability record, and absolutely everything I have read tells me that the climate will be more wet.

- Rainfall has increased over the last 100 years
- the oceans will be warmer, so evaporation will be higher and that water has got to fall somewhere
- all past warm climates with separate continents were wet climates.

You can't trust most press releases on the environment. Places like Greenpeace just make doomsday crap up so that they can get more funding.

Actually e#s, that's why all of us scientist folk are in this business. Especially us environmental scientists. It's a huge conspiracy. And I'm making tons of money.

I hope you live next to the ocean. Have fun with those hurricanes.
"Overpopulation and climate change are serious shit." Gilsch
"I was really curious how they had managed such fine granularity of alienation." addabox
Reply
"Overpopulation and climate change are serious shit." Gilsch
"I was really curious how they had managed such fine granularity of alienation." addabox
Reply
post #137 of 145
So how's that Greenland ice sheet doing?

Not so good....

http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/science...eut/index.html
eye
bee
BEE
Reply
eye
bee
BEE
Reply
post #138 of 145
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aquatic

Actually e#s, that's why all of us scientist folk are in this business. Especially us environmental scientists. It's a huge conspiracy. And I'm making tons of money.

I hope you live next to the ocean. Have fun with those hurricanes.

Did you even read my posts? I think that the oceans will rise and storms will be worse - my beef is with the "global drought" people. You are responding to the wrong person maybe? Or maybe you have a Bush-like "with us or against us" view on global warming, where I have to believe every piece of crap you say or else I am a global warming denier?

http://www.roughlydrafted.com/RD/Hom...665EE235C.html

You may not make much money, but Greenpeace has an annual $360 million budget to protect, which they do by lying and making up sensational stuff that catches the public's attention.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #139 of 145
Eric,

It isn't so simple as saying that the amount of rainfall will increase; while it is true it will, 70% of the earth's surface is water and it is possible that heating will cause draught exactly where you don't want it. During the warm ocean periods of El Nino, India experiences its droughts. Complex ocean currents couple with changing air currents to force the wetter air mass further east. In fact you can imagine a situation in which the cold air over an ocean causes selective condensation over the oceans causing the oceans to further cool relative to the land... thus drying the land to a crisp... The thing is, you can't simply say that the world will be better AND we will thus be perfectly alright. A hotter earth isn't necessarily a healthier earth or even a sustainable earth...
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
post #140 of 145
Global warming will cost 9 trillion.http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems...0/s1776304.htm
post #141 of 145
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by hardeeharhar

Eric,

It isn't so simple as saying that the amount of rainfall will increase; while it is true it will, 70% of the earth's surface is water and it is possible that heating will cause draught exactly where you don't want it. During the warm ocean periods of El Nino, India experiences its droughts. Complex ocean currents couple with changing air currents to force the wetter air mass further east. In fact you can imagine a situation in which the cold air over an ocean causes selective condensation over the oceans causing the oceans to further cool relative to the land... thus drying the land to a crisp... The thing is, you can't simply say that the world will be better AND we will thus be perfectly alright. A hotter earth isn't necessarily a healthier earth or even a sustainable earth...

If you look back a few posts, the computer models predicted certain areas of drought on land, but many more areas where rainfall and growing season increase (Canada, for example). Also, they had 9 different competing models, and as the models get more complex the results get closer together.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #142 of 145
More complexity/convergence doesn't mean correctness...
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
post #143 of 145
This is an interesting article from The New Scientist. Here are some snippets:

Quote:
Now just suppose they got their wish. Imagine that all the people on Earth - all 6.5 billion of us and counting - could be spirited away tomorrow, transported to a re-education camp in a far-off galaxy.

Quote:
"The sad truth is, once the humans get out of the picture, the outlook starts to get a lot better," says John Orrock, a conservation biologist at the National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis in Santa Barbara, California.

Quote:
Ironically, a few endangered species - those charismatic enough to have attracted serious help from conservationists - will actually fare worse with people no longer around to protect them.

Quote:
Even if CO2 emissions stop tomorrow, though, global warming will continue for another century, boosting average temperatures by a further few tenths of a degree.

Quote:
Alien visitors coming to Earth 100,000 years hence will find no obvious signs that an advanced civilisation ever lived here..."The preservation of things is really pretty amazing. We think of artefacts as being so impermanent, but in certain cases things are going to last a long time."...But these will be flimsy souvenirs, almost pathetic reminders of a civilisation that once thought itself the pinnacle of achievement.
post #144 of 145


enumbers, you could be right!

NYT article on Budgets Falling in Race to Fight Global Warming

You may need to subscribe to view (but it's a free subscription).

Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #145 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent



I to, have thought, for a VERY long time, that the situation is unstoppable. It is first and foremost a population issue. To many people, to much waste.



Yup, too many people is the major problem behind all the other environmental problems. Sure much can be done to improve things, but it gets harder and harder the more people are on this Earth.

Now if we could just convince the Pope to start handing out condoms.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Yet another climate change thread