An inconvienent Truth and Global warming

[Howell]

The whole point of discussing the issue outside of mudslinging politics and mental masturbation is how does this information change the way I live my life.

In order to examine the issue and come to a final understanding we must answer some basic questions:

What is happening? Is the earth warming, cooling or something else?
Why?
What can we do about it?

Let's see if we can keep it civil and free from hyperbole. I present this article to start.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/mai...18.xml&sSheet=/news/2004/07/18/ixnewstop.html

 

[Stereodude]

Yes the earth is warming, but mankind isn't to blame. Global warming has turned into a religion to the left.

 

[Handruin]

Dr Solanki does not know what is causing the Sun to burn brighter now or how long this cycle would last.

He says that the increased solar brightness over the past 20 years has not been enough to cause the observed climate changes but believes that the impact of more intense sunshine on the ozone layer and on cloud cover could be affecting the climate more than the sunlight itself.

I'm reading two different pieces of information on this subject in regards to the sun being brighter, yet, I've also been reading about global dimming more and more, and more. The signs related to the dimming appear to be pollution, but how is this interacting with global warming and more intense sunshine as quoted above?

 

[Pradeep]

The problem with the CO2 levels is that even if we stop generating excess amounts now, it will take decades for temps to stabilise. And the Earth itself does go through Ice Ages from time to time.

Sea level rise is my biggest worry.

 

[Clocker]

No matter what is done in the USA to stop 'global warming' , the folks in China and India and the rest of Asia just don't care about pollution or our atmosphere at all. In a few years they will blow past the USA as the worlds biggest polluters (by far) so it just won't matter what we do here anyway.

 

[Stereodude]

Google Mars Warming. Scientists have been reporting that Mars has been warming for years also. It's certainly preposterous to thing that the same thing (the Sun) could be responsible for both.

The latest story:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/02/070228-mars-warming.html

 

[Stereodude]

No matter what is done in the USA to stop 'global warming' , the folks in China and India and the rest of Asia just don't care about pollution or our atmosphere at all. In a few years they will blow past the USA as the worlds biggest polluters (by far) so it just won't matter what we do here anyway.

That's why they're exempt from the Kyoto accords... Because they're still developing... It makes perfect sense right?

The whole global warming & blame the US idea has been cooked up the by liberals and their socialist buddies in Europe to punish the US for being the most successful country and in the world.

 

[Pradeep]

Well I think what makes the USA look particularly bad is that we are responsible for the largest amount of CO2 emissions, per capita. Way more than the "developing" China and India etc.

http://maps.grida.no/go/graphic/national_carbon_dioxide_co2_emissions_per_capita

 

[Tannin]

You guys disgust me. How much f*king proof do you need? There has been no reasonable grounds for doubting the science for quite a few years now, and you aren't even troubling to look at the damn evidence?

FFS, you don't even need to read the science anymore, you can tell what's going on just by walking around. I'm sitting here with the stench of burning eucalypt strong in my nostrils - this time it's King Island, which is hundreds of kilometres away and yet I can smell it without even having to step outside.

I've lost count of the number of huge fires this summer, and every year is worse than the one before. Our city lake hasn't been empty for 80 years, but it's empty now. The other two lakes in the district are empty as well, and that too is unheard of. We have had an endless series of record temperatures, record low rainfalls in winter, record storm activity in summer, and you are still even wondering if there is a question?

I can smell the destruction that you people have wrought. Yes, you - 25 percent of the entire world's greenhouse gases, from one damn country. We all have a part to play, and we are all at fault to some degree, but the United States is by far the worst offender.

Sorry, but I really don't know what else to say given this level of pig-headed, willful selfish ignorance. This isn't a damn political issue, this is nothing to do with left and right, this is you and your countrymen destroying my world.

The time for asking questions is over. Long over. If you can't see the facts in front of your face, then there is no point in discussing the matter. People as willfully ignorant as this don't deserve to live on this planet.

 

[Stereodude]

You guys disgust me. How much f*king proof do you need? There has been no reasonable grounds for doubting the science for quite a few years now, and you aren't even troubling to look at the damn evidence?

FFS, you don't even need to read the science anymore, you can tell what's going on just by walking around. I'm sitting here with the stench of burning eucalypt strong in my nostrils - this time it's King Island, which is hundreds of kilometres away and yet I can smell it without even having to step outside.

I've lost count of the number of huge fires this summer, and every year is worse than the one before. Our city lake hasn't been empty for 80 years, but it's empty now. The other two lakes in the district are empty as well, and that too is unheard of. We have had an endless series of record temperatures, record low rainfalls in winter, record storm activity in summer, and you are still even wondering if there is a question?

I can smell the destruction that you people have wrought. Yes, you - 25 percent of the entire world's greenhouse gases, from one damn country. We all have a part to play, and we are all at fault to some degree, but the United States is by far the worst offender.

Sorry, but I really don't know what else to say given this level of pig-headed, willful selfish ignorance. This isn't a damn political issue, this is nothing to do with left and right, this is you and your countrymen destroying my world.

The time for asking questions is over. Long over. If you can't see the facts in front of your face, then there is no point in discussing the matter. People as willfully ignorant as this don't deserve to live on this planet.

Boo hoo... Do you want a tissue to wipe your tears away with?

I'm talking about facts and you're talking about emotions... We can't discuss facts when you want to approach this from an emotional level. I don't give a rat's ass if how you feel. Your anecdotal evidence means nothing. If you want me to consider it, then you must accept record cold temperatures, and record snowfall in the US as proof that it isn't happening.

The simple fact is there is 0, ie: not one bit, proof that global warming is caused by man, or the EVIL USA. If you'd like I can begin listing things that large groups of people previously claimed that have since turned out false... Consensus isn't science...

Lets see:
- Flat Earth (false)
- Sun revolving around the earth (false)
- Impossible to break the sound barrier (false)
- Atom was the smallest thing (false)
- Global cooling (apparently false)
- Matter couldn't be converted to enery (false)
- There were 4 elements [Air · Fire · Water · Earth] (false)
- We would never need more than 640k of memory (false)

I can go on and on, and on and on...

If you think everyone riding horses and having manure and the smell of manure everywhere, and all the related disease, filth, and sickness was a better way to live, you can lead by example instead of trying to wag your finger at me and getting self righteous.

 

[Stereodude]

Well I think what makes the USA look particularly bad is that we are responsible for the largest amount of CO2 emissions, per capita. Way more than the "developing" China and India etc.

http://maps.grida.no/go/graphic/national_carbon_dioxide_co2_emissions_per_capita

We'd better kill all the livestock then. http://news.independent.co.uk/environment/article2062484.ece

"Livestock are responsible for 18 per cent of the greenhouse gases that cause global warming, more than cars, planes and all other forms of transport put together."

 

[ddrueding]

Or better yet, trap their gaseous emissions and use it as well....

 

[Stereodude]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/li...ogy.html?in_article_id=440049&in_page_id=1965

 

[Mercutio]

Factually, there is undoubtedly global warming from some source.
Factually, there are undesirable consequences for global warming.
Factually, there are human industrial activities - whether from logging, farming or generating power with petrochemical processes, that can be shown to have strongly negative environmental consequences.

There is a strong correlation between global warming and large scale human industrial activity. No, a strong correlation is not the same thing as absolute fact.

Regardless of causation, we as a civilization need to be looking at what we can do to minimize the negative consequences of global warming and of industrialization in general.

All of those things are rational statements.

... Unless you're one of the fuckheads who thinks God gave man dominion over the earth to use as he sees fit and when Jebus comes Real Soon Now that you'll ascend bodily to heaven. In which case, uh, what Tannin said.

 

[ddrueding]

I like that idea Merc, god should fix global warming...he started it

 

[CougTek]

You guys disgust me.

[...]

People as willfully ignorant as this don't deserve to live on this planet.

Ditto. The new scape goat of the irresponsible, ignorant polluting class is the sun now. Mysteriously becoming brighter right when mankind starts booming its industrial waste. How convenient. Good thing our star syncs its schedule with our oil companies.

I just can't believe there are folks thick enough to buy this.

 

[sechs]

Stereodude officially missed the point of this thread. Please open a new one if you wish to flog him.

What can you do about it? Amazingly easy stuff like drive less and use energy efficient appliances.

I do my part to encourage global dimming by spending most of my carbon on flying.

 

[fb]

Maybe someone should give these scientists a tip about the AEI's initiative?

http://environment.guardian.co.uk/climatechange/story/0,,2004397,00.html

 

[Mercutio]

As computer people, we don't have much room to talk about environmentalism, regardless. Manufacturing electronics is way high up on the list of horrible things you can do to the planet, and given the lifespan and the disposable mentality of companies that make the products, we (everyone who comes to this site) are all particularly guilty.

 

[Stereodude]

Maybe someone should give these scientists a tip about the AEI's initiative?

http://environment.guardian.co.uk/climatechange/story/0,,2004397,00.html

And so the corollary to this is that all scientists who disagree with global warming must be on the take right? I think not...

 

[Stereodude]

Stereodude officially missed the point of this thread. Please open a new one if you wish to flog him.

What can you do about it? Amazingly easy stuff like drive less and use energy efficient appliances.

I didn't miss the point of the thread. I can't answer the question, "How do we stop it?" when the premise assumes facts not in evidence. We can't stop what we didn't start.

 

[Stereodude]

I just can't believe there are folks thick enough to buy this.

I mean it's not like there's any evidence that the earth has warmed and cooled in the past without our help or anything.

 

[Howell]

There is a strong correlation between global warming and large scale human industrial activity. No, a strong correlation is not the same thing as absolute fact.

Regardless of causation, we as a civilization need to be looking at what we can do to minimize the negative consequences of global warming and of industrialization in general.

You are right, correlation is no where close to causation. The increase in solar activity since the 1700s also was not caused by industrialization or human activity.

We need to be good stewards of where we live. This includes knowing what we can and can not affect. Individually, we have immediate control over how much electricity and water we waste. Turn the lights off when you leave the room, Turn off the water while you are brushing your teeth. Collect rain water to water your plants.

Research into the causes of environmental damage is good in that it helps us focus our efforts where they can be most effective.

 

[Howell]

Maybe someone should give these scientists a tip about the AEI's initiative?

http://environment.guardian.co.uk/climatechange/story/0,,2004397,00.html

What a shoddy piece of reporting. No parts of the IPCC IV report have been published yet. The only thing that has been published so far is the Working Group 1 - Summary for Policy Makers (SPM). This is a political document. We'd like to think that scientists are completely rational and non-political; but no one is.

http://www.lavoisier.com.au/papers/articles/landsea.html

For that matter scientists aren't even as rational as we would like:
So perhaps there is more to the beauty premium than simple discrimination: beautiful people could well be genuinely more productive. But Professor Hamermesh devised a clever way to demonstrate that whatever lies behind our preference, our choices are based on skin-deep evidence. He showed that when candidates stood for election on more than one occasion, their chances of success rose simply when they used a more flattering photograph.

The electorate was surely the most rational in the world: the membership of the American Economic Association.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/8b790f12-bfe7-11db-995a-000b5df10621.html

 

[P5-133XL]

I didn't miss the point of the thread. I can't answer the question, "How do we stop it?" when the premise assumes facts not in evidence. We can't stop what we didn't start.

A very false statement. I stop stuff, that I didn't start, every day. Two children start argueing; the parents stop it, even though they didn't start it or have anything to do with it.

The premis, that we should only try to change that which we do is totally bogus. There are ethical and moral considerations that may obligate reasonable actions for a person, even without personal responsibility.

If you see or predict suffering, and can stop or diminish it, then shouldn't you, even if you are not the cause? All it takes for evil to win, is for good people to take no action.

Even beyond good and evil. What about totally natural disasters. Should not people in the direct path of a natural disaster such as tornadoes, hurricanes, volcanoes, floods be warned? Is it not reasonable, that a good person should warn others about the impending natural disaster? What about preventing a potential avalanche rather than people get harmed when it lets loose? Or should you, as someone not responsible for the natural disaster just let it happen: Consequences to others be dammed?

For me, the issue of personal responsibility is irrelevant. I don't care if we caused the problem. The real questions are does the problem exist, or will exist in the future, and what can we do to minimize the harm?

 

[Pradeep]

In the end, whilst we might survive the current problem, it's only going to be worse for our kids.

To me, this is indeed a case of "think of the children".

 

[Pradeep]

Of course, I say that whilst my home county has declared a state of emergency due to blowing/drifting snow causing whiteout conditions. So I would be risking a ticket if I left work to go home. One of the guys on the current shift couldn't make it in, so I guess a double shift is on the cards.

 

[Stereodude]

A very false statement. I stop stuff, that I didn't start, every day. Two children start argueing; the parents stop it, even though they didn't start it or have anything to do with it.

The premis, that we should only try to change that which we do is totally bogus. There are ethical and moral considerations that may obligate reasonable actions for a person, even without personal responsibility.

If you see or predict suffering, and can stop or diminish it, then shouldn't you, even if you are not the cause? All it takes for evil to win, is for good people to take no action.

Even beyond good and evil. What about totally natural disasters. Should not people in the direct path of a natural disaster such as tornadoes, hurricanes, volcanoes, floods be warned? Is it not reasonable, that a good person should warn others about the impending natural disaster? What about preventing a potential avalanche rather than people get harmed when it lets loose? Or should you, as someone not responsible for the natural disaster just let it happen: Consequences to others be dammed?

For me, the issue of personal responsibility is irrelevant. I don't care if we caused the problem. The real questions are does the problem exist, or will exist in the future, and what can we do to minimize the harm?

You missed my point... If we (mankind) aren't causing global warming, and lets say it is caused by the sun. What makes you think we are powerful enough to stop global warming? If the sun is causing global warming how is cutting back on electricity and fossil fuel usage going to stop it? Wouldn't we need to actually address the source of the problem?

Also, why does it go without saying that all the side effects of global warming are bad? The earth was hotter than it is now in the 1200-1300's. For example England was known for its wine then, famine and disease were nowhere to be found...

 

[Mercutio]

Stereodude, Holland and the whole state of Florida would like to have a word with you.

 

[Handruin]

You missed my point... If we (mankind) aren't causing global warming, and lets say it is caused by the sun. What makes you think we are powerful enough to stop global warming? If the sun is causing global warming how is cutting back on electricity and fossil fuel usage going to stop it? Wouldn't we need to actually address the source of the problem?

Also, why does it go without saying that all the side effects of global warming are bad? The earth was hotter than it is now in the 1200-1300's. For example England was known for its wine then, famine and disease were nowhere to be found...

That's like saying a person with hereditary emphysema shouldn't bother to stop smoking. There are a lot of ways you could look at it. I still think it's fairly clear that over-abundant CO2 can still cause us problems.

If it is the sun, we could work to build a solar deflector. It may seem like a long shot, but if we could deflect a good percentage of the sun, maybe it might bring us back to normal levels. But who's to say we should mess with such an issue? Addressing the energy usage should be something we consider even if there was no looming global warming.

 

[ddrueding]

Addressing the energy usage should be something we consider even if there was no looming global warming.

I think this is the bigger point. Relying on things we can't make ourselves is a risk we shouldn't be taking. Global warming won't threaten the USA significantly for at least another 50-100 years, our dependence on foreign oil will make us vulnerable long before that.

 

[Pradeep]

I can smell the destruction that you people have wrought. Yes, you - 25 percent of the entire world's greenhouse gases, from one damn country. We all have a part to play, and we are all at fault to some degree, but the United States is by far the worst offender.

I dunno Tony, Australia is the second largest polluter of CO2 per capita after the USA, and exports 30% of the world's coal. So if the USA is public enemy number 1, then is Aus the 2nd?

 

[fb]

What a shoddy piece of reporting. No parts of the IPCC IV report have been published yet.

I think they express themselves in this way because the general direction of the report is already known. And they do use expressions like "its latest report will provide" and "It is expected to stress", which I interpret like a reference to the future...

Anyway, it's not like we'd have to revert back to a medieval lifestyle to reduce our CO2 emissions. So I really don't understand this resistance.

 

[sechs]

As computer people, we don't have much room to talk about environmentalism, regardless.

Come to California. We pay a fee upfront to recycle our electronics.

 

[sechs]

You missed my point... If we (mankind) aren't causing global warming, and lets say it is caused by the sun. What makes you think we are powerful enough to stop global warming?

What makes you think that we aren't?

If the sun is causing global warming how is cutting back on electricity and fossil fuel usage going to stop it? Wouldn't we need to actually address the source of the problem?

No. If a valley has problem with flooding, do we need to stop the rain?

Let me spell it out for you:
Is there global warming? YES
Is it bad for people? YES
Is there something that we can do to mitigate or stop it? YES
Does the source matter? NO

 

[timwhit]

Here is a good article for Stereodude. ;-)

 

[Sol]

[quote-sech]Is there global warming? YES
Is it bad for people? YES
Is there something that we can do to mitigate or stop it? YES
Does the source matter? NO[/quote]

I'm not sure I agree 100% with you on number 3. We have identified things which may help mitigate/stop/reverse global warming but I don't think there is any conclusive proof that they will... We should certainly try, especially since many of the things identified will likely be helpful regardless of their affect on global warming (or lack thereof) but I think at this point we still need to avoid making the assumption that we have all of the answers.
I don't know if there really is any way to scientifically study the issue and come up with conclusive solutions without actually attempting them, there may be just too many factors to consider. I definitely agree, however, that denying responsibility and resigning ourselves to being powerless to change things is a terrible idea.

 

[sechs]

Honestly, this is potentially so big and so bad, it's a hell of a lot better to do something rather than nothing.

 

[Bozo]

My memory is a little foggy on this but: A few years ago the auto manufacturers (?) developed a catalitic converter of sorts that scrubed CO2 from the air. It could have been mounted in front of the radiator of cars and cleaned the air while the car was moving. The idea was presented to Calif. but they rejected the technology.
I forget all the details, but it sounds like this would be a good start.

Bozo :joker:

 

[Sol]

It seems like something like that would produce a fair amount of carbon as output. Would that just get dumped on the road or would you need to clean out your cars carbon tray every few days/weeks... If you actually could catalyse a reaction to get the C out of CO2 it'd be great but I have a feeling that it would take a fair bit of energy and energy use in a car means lots of CO2 output...