Discussion: Global Warming and Other Environmental Issues

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

We're all....well I take that back, we're not ****ed our kids are ****ed.

 

[Superhobo]

Just thought I should mention this, as I feel it somehow pertains to the topic. Today, there's three feet of snow outside my house. In Texas. In Spring. Yesterday, it was sunny, moderately warm, and breezy. Day before that, it also snowed, but it didn't stick. So.

 

[chaseter]

I always love how Slim picks on Gore and fails to attack an actual, published article of science.

 

[chaseter]

Just thought I should mention this, as I feel it somehow pertains to the topic. Today, there's three feet of snow outside my house. In Texas. In Spring. Yesterday, it was sunny, moderately warm, and breezy. Day before that, it also snowed, but it didn't stick. So.

Yea it was 81 here last week, 70 something on Monday, 60 something on Tuesday and Wednesday, and now it is 28 degrees with heavy snowfall Guess what Global Warming does...creates irregular weather patterns.

Northern Texas, especially the panhandle where I live, always has f-ked up weather that changes on a dime. Has to do with the Caprock and what not.

 

[Hotwire]

I always love how Slim picks on Gore and fails to attack an actual, published article of science.

Not only that, but he is attacking Gore for basicly the same thing Bush and his buddies did to get us into Iraq, and then again during the last election. Preaching doom and gloom to try and get support for their cause.

 

[Carcharodon]

Not only that, but he is attacking Gore for basicly the same thing Bush and his buddies did to get us into Iraq, and then again during the last election. Preaching doom and gloom to try and get support for their cause.

 

[Hotwire]

Thanks, pal.

 

[teseract]

This is the 3rd year in a row where we here in Germany (which is a pretty nordic state) didn't have a proper winter. We had temperatures ranging from 5 to 10 degree celcius in fricking February. It's supposed to be the coldest month in the year here (down to -5 to -8 degree celcius normaly) and we got spring time temperature with trees sprouting leaves already!

 

[Mr Sparkle]

I disagree. Human life will cease to exist when we blow ourselves up, or a meteor hits the planet and blocks out the sun (killing plant- and animal-life alike), or the plates will shift and several supervolcanoes will erupt, covering the earth (including the sky) in ash, fire and soot. I see one of these disasters occurring far sooner than humans physically changing the environment to the point where Earth can no longer sustain human life. Just my personal beliefs, but I feel pretty good about that prediction.

really.
I would suggest you peruse photos of world environments from the last 100 years.
then correlate them to current world environments.
then resource consumption and population.

you might be surprised.

 

[daniPHANTOM]

Yesterday. High of 55. Sunshine with patches of clouds. Today. High of 20. 2 feet of snow. Odd, eh?

 

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

Humans are not significant enough to change the planet in less than 100 years.

 

[Zoken]

I agree with Bah Humbug, and reluctantly with Slim. I think the fact that the science is being rushed out as HARD FACT when there is much research to be done. In the last thirty years it has been Global Cooling, Global Warming, and now Climate Change. The calm part of me thinks that this needs to be understood better before it gets preached as gospel to the masses. Once again, many of the changes that CC-believers call for I agree with. More fuel-effecient cars, new methods of energy production and use, consumer activism.

The more emotional part of me wants to ask why these people can't make up their minds. First it was Global Cooling, then Global Warming, then Climate Change. Climate Change? Rather ambigious... how useful. It's a nice blanket statement so that when any anomolous weather happens it can be chalked up to Climate Change. Hurricane, that's Climate change. Tsunami, that's climate Change. There isn't enough wind to get my kite up, Oh, that's because of the climate change.

 

[Bill]

I agree with Bah Humbug, and reluctantly with Slim. I think the fact that the science is being rushed out as HARD FACT when there is much research to be done. In the last thirty years it has been Global Cooling, Global Warming, and now Climate Change. The calm part of me thinks that this needs to be understood better before it gets preached as gospel to the masses. Once again, many of the changes that CC-believers call for I agree with. More fuel-effecient cars, new methods of energy production and use, consumer activism.

The more emotional part of me wants to ask why these people can't make up their minds. First it was Global Cooling, then Global Warming, then Climate Change. Climate Change? Rather ambigious... how useful. It's a nice blanket statement so that when any anomolous weather happens it can be chalked up to Climate Change. Hurricane, that's Climate change. Tsunami, that's climate Change. There isn't enough wind to get my kite up, Oh, that's because of the climate change.

I'm still trying to find out what is really going on myself. I have found that there are some organizations that have no real tie to big corporations or stand to gain profit from changes in our pollution output carrying the banner for human beings to adjust their habits for Climate Change. I also think that the media, special interest groups, politicians and corporations have taken scientific findings and skewed them to fit whatever agenda they are pushing, good or bad, to their advantage. Both sides have their "pet scientists" on the payroll to "find" whatever is cohesive with what they're attempting to sell, so it makes it difficult for one of us to find out what is really going on.

What I would like to say for sure is that this is not the fault of science because this is not how science is supposed to work. There are, I'm sure, good scientists out there who are doing the research, but in this media dominated world, will they be heard if their viewpoint disagrees with whatever consensus popular media has deemed as the "truth?"

I am reading a lot of people in the field who say that there is nothing out of the ordinary going on. Still others who say the opposite. We'll have to wait and see.

 

[Hotwire]

Humans are not significant enough to change the planet in less than 100 years.

However, humans have been on this planet around 200,ooo years or more. And we have yet to establish a truely symbiotic relationship with the planet. I hate to quote a movie, but "The Matrix" got it just about right, humans are best compared to a virus. We just keep expanding and comsuming, and the more of us there are, the faster this happens. And right now it has been projected that the world will go from 6 billion to 9 billion by 2050. That's a 50% increase in just over 40 years. Using that rate of growth, in 100 years we should be around 13.5 billion. You don't think that would make a signifigant change to the planet?

 

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

However, humans have been on this planet around 200,ooo years or more. And we have yet to establish a truely symbiotic relationship with the planet. I hate to quote a movie, but "The Matrix" got it just about right, humans are best compared to a virus. We just keep expanding and comsuming, and the more of us there are, the faster this happens. And right now it has been projected that the world will go from 6 billion to 9 billion by 2050. That's a 50% increase in just over 40 years. Using that rate of growth, in 100 years we should be around 13.5 billion. You don't think that would make a signifigant change to the planet?

No....we suck.

In all seriousness my statement was in jest. Some truth and joking to it.

Do I think humans can affect this planet enough to change things? Yes, obviously we can, it's been proven that we have thinned out the O-Zone in roughly 100 years time.

Do I think that Global warming and polar ice cap melting are a direct result from humans polluting the world?

I don't know, I don't think scientists and politicians alike realize that something like that is a huge order. Not that they don't have the science or math to provide data.

But saying it is hard fact is a little....presumptuous....?

 

[Memphis Slim]

Snowstorm wallops Midwest, stranding travelers

 

[Superhobo]

Snowstorm wallops Midwest, stranding travelers

+

=

Big

 

[Hotwire]

Snowstorm wallops Midwest, stranding travelers

And somehow McAllen, TX had a high of 93 on Thursday. Weird.

 

[Bill]

The problem with constantly relating articles of snowfall in the particular areas that's he's showing is that Global Warming might cause such a phenomenon. It's called Lake-Effect snow. We get a lot here in Syracuse. We get it because Lake Ontario hasn't been freezing over as early as it should and when a front passes over the warmer water it gains strength and dumps the precipitation when it reaches landfall.

I love it when he posts these articles because he is essentially proving the other side right out of ignorance.

 

[Hotwire]

The problem with constantly relating articles of snowfall in the particular areas that's he's showing is that Global Warming might cause such a phenomenon. It's called Lake-Effect snow. We get a lot here in Syracuse. We get it because Lake Ontario hasn't been freezing over as early as it should and when a front passes over the warmer water it gains strength and dumps the precipitation when it reaches landfall.

I love it when he posts these articles because he is essentially proving the other side right out of ignorance.

And when someone calls him on his BS, he's markedly quiet.

 

[Memphis Slim]

And somehow McAllen, TX had a high of 93 on Thursday. Weird.

But at least it's Texas.

 

[Memphis Slim]

The problem with constantly relating articles of snowfall in the particular areas that's he's showing is that Global Warming might cause such a phenomenon. It's called Lake-Effect snow. We get a lot here in Syracuse. We get it because Lake Ontario hasn't been freezing over as early as it should and when a front passes over the warmer water it gains strength and dumps the precipitation when it reaches landfall.

I love it when he posts these articles because he is essentially proving the other side right out of ignorance.

You guys are so full of crap it's funny. You keep trying to find ways to switch the game so that no matter the outcome, you still win your lame argument. I've heard that crap before. Just like it's climate change now, instead of Global Warming. That way you can always be right. Why?? Because the climate always changes. From warm to cold from cold to warm. Like it's ALWAYS done for centuries!!

So now you're trying to tell me that "global Warming" is going to "freeze" me to death!!!

Man....if being "smart" means believing that crap, then I like being ignorant.

 

[Superhobo]

Man....if being "smart" means believing that crap, then I like being ignorant.

I kind of gathered.

 

[teseract]

You guys are so full of crap it's funny. You keep trying to find ways to switch the game so that no matter the outcome, you still win your lame argument. I've heard that crap before. Just like it's climate change now, instead of Global Warming. That way you can always be right. Why?? Because the climate always changes. From warm to cold from cold to warm. Like it's ALWAYS done for centuries!!

So now you're trying to tell me that "global Warming" is going to "freeze" me to death!!!

Man....if being "smart" means believing that crap, then I like being ignorant.

And yet, all the things scientists warned about are coming true. Extreme weather phenomenae wherever you look, just like they said. Oh and yes, heavy amounts of snowfall in short periods like that are an extreme weather phenomenon.

 

[Hotwire]

Let me ask you this, Slim. What if you're wrong? What if global warming, climate change, whatever you want to call it, does turn out to be real. Then what? Let's say, if after the next 50 years when the world population will be around 9 billion, we find that the "evironmental fanatics" were right, and we have caused irreparable damage to our environment. Then what? If we have followed your mentality, we've done nothing.

But, on the other hand, if we've followed the suggestions of those who believe it is real, and they end up being wrong, then what? We have a cleaner planet?

See, I've always approached this issue with the basic philosophy that one side has to be wrong. Now, weighing each side, which one would have a worse outcome if we followed them, and they ended up being wrong. I feel, following people like yourself would be the worse of the two, if proven wrong 50 to 100 years down the road.