71
   

Global Warming...New Report...and it ain't happy news

 
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Sat 21 Apr, 2007 08:44 pm
Avatar ADV wrote:
What? ;p

No, really, it's true. Granted, I'm hardly claiming that global warming is -totally- due to cleaner air or anything stupid like that. But it really is an operative effect - the less particulate pollution we have in the air, the more energy makes it to ground level to get trapped in the ol' greenhouse effect.


So you are claiming the globe cooled when we put more particulates into the air? Do you have evidence of this? Any science?
0 Replies
 
Avatar ADV
 
  1  
Reply Sat 21 Apr, 2007 10:56 pm
No! Criminy. Climate's -complicated-, haven't you been paying attention? There's no "it got this way because of this" to point at.

At the same time, the effect of particulate pollution on albedo and the effect of albedo on warming is known (if devilishly hard to calculate accurately, heh.) So yes, the smoggy air had a cooling effect, one of many warming/cooling effects.

Think about it - we get a significant cooling bump whenever a volcano goes blooie and puts a huge quantity of dust into the upper atmosphere. THIS the models actually correct for - these days, such events tend to be noticed. ;p
0 Replies
 
DontTreadOnMe
 
  1  
Reply Sun 22 Apr, 2007 02:12 am
Avatar ADV wrote:
Think about it - we get a significant cooling bump whenever a volcano goes blooie and puts a huge quantity of dust into the upper atmosphere.


the same could be said for nuclear winter.

this is ridiculous. a shite environment is a shite environment. there's a word;syncronicity.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Sun 22 Apr, 2007 05:14 am
avatar has this right. Differentiating these matters IS important. It's a mental-clarity thing . Where we don't differentiate appropriately, we are bound to end up getting it wrong on causes and on solutions. An added negative is that, getting such things wrong, our abilitiy to influence others diminishes.

Recall the common conflation, more common a couple of years back, of global warming and ozone depletion, for example.
0 Replies
 
DontTreadOnMe
 
  1  
Reply Sun 22 Apr, 2007 12:33 pm
and that is why i mention synchronicity.

these things are different, but they all interact in one way or another. so it makes sense to me to see the problems in a "global" way. global as in "here's the problem. let's look at everything that could be involved. what is needed to resolve this in a satisfactory way?".

there isn't a single, magic, bullet that's going to fix everything. baby steps have been taken, but i believe that it's time to get serious. i'm not a scientist, so i have to rely on those who are to give me the skinny.

some people assert that many scientists say that alla this global warming stuff is snakeoil. but when i try to square that pov with what i hear and what i personally see. ehh, that dog won't hunt.

what's frustrating to me is how many of the folks who are of the snakeoil opinion are also some of the staunchest trumpeters of how "we need to take the long view of the war on terror. what about the future?". why is it that they don't seem to grasp the long term implications that the earth is showing real signs of illness.

analogously, the debate on oil drilling in protected lands. "hey who goes there anyway"?

maybe not many right now... but consider that +/- 70 years ago, las vegas was a railroad shack in the middle of nowhere.

80 years ago, the spot wher i'm sitting now was a citrus ranch. (we still have 2 lemon trees from that time in the backyard).

300 years ago there was no united states of america. i'd have to look it up, but i think a national geo chart that i have somewhere placed the combined population of natives and immigrants at +/- a million or so. back then, you could stop at virtually any creek or river and drink from it. probably a bad idea these days, nicht wahr ?

things change.

foxy mentions that there is a need for us to learn how to adapt to a changing climate. and since the planet does ebb and flow to a certain extent on it's own, i agree that does make sense.

but doesn't it also make for good common sense to take any inkling that the planet, our home, is showing signs of being unhealthy in a very serious way ?

since we don't have anywhere else to go, seems to me that it's worth putting down whatever "beliefs" a person has and giving the implications a real serious think.

---

btw; Avatar ADV.. no disrepect meant, hope ya didn't take offense.
0 Replies
 
Avatar ADV
 
  1  
Reply Sun 22 Apr, 2007 01:00 pm
It's very difficult to give me offense. Just ask Cyc. ;p

But seriously, exactly how does the planet "show signs of being unhealthy"? I'm not a Gaea-worshiper or anything. Certainly there is evidence of pollution. But most pollution is a local phenomenon - it relies on the actual dissemination of pollutants. If someone drops a candy bar wrapper in the Ukraine, that doesn't affect my local quality of life.

The theory of global warming is different - in fact, pretty much the reverse; emissions ONLY have an impact on a global scale, and not a local one.

That said, if you're advocating thinking through the issue, I'll just say this - what temperature SHOULD we aim for? What's the target at which we'll be happy and comfortable? (Keeping in mind, of course, that we won't all be happy or comfortable... you have a big trade-off between keeping people warm at the poles and keeping people cool near the equator.)
0 Replies
 
username
 
  1  
Reply Sun 22 Apr, 2007 02:03 pm
Pollution is NOT local. A candy wrapper dropped in the Ukraine, maybe, yes. BUT dust plumes from desertification in China, and plumes from Chinese coal-fired industry are detectable over the western US. Acid rain from midwestern plants wipes out forests in New England. Refrigerant escapes worldwide create the southern hemisphere ozone hole. Crap dumped into the oceans (fertilizer runoff, etc.) gets hundreds or thousands of miles away. The shite we dumped in the atmosphere until anti=pollution laws came in in the 60s was responsible for the slight downturn in global temp from the 40s thru the 70s (yes, parados, aersols can have a cooling effect--or a warming one, depends on what it is).

It really is all one system.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Sun 22 Apr, 2007 02:07 pm
Quote:


But seriously, exactly how does the planet "show signs of being unhealthy"? I'm not a Gaea-worshiper or anything.


Unhealthy for us, lol. The rock that we call Earth will get by just fine with or without us.

Quote:

That said, if you're advocating thinking through the issue, I'll just say this - what temperature SHOULD we aim for? What's the target at which we'll be happy and comfortable?


One which maintains the weather patterns conducive to populated life on Earth. I fear shifting weather patterns (and increasing storms) more than any other effect of GW.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
DontTreadOnMe
 
  1  
Reply Sun 22 Apr, 2007 02:53 pm
Cycloptichorn wrote:
I fear shifting weather patterns (and increasing storms) more than any other effect of GW.

Cycloptichorn


which one ? they're both scary..
0 Replies
 
Avatar ADV
 
  1  
Reply Sun 22 Apr, 2007 08:41 pm
Cheap answer, Cyc. What -is- that temperature, exactly? (I mean, are we trying to optimize for the human population here, or what?) At any rate, if we're really convinced that it's a problem, then we should KNOW what sort of temperature target we're going for, no?
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 Apr, 2007 02:09 am
I think this - Obama strong on environment - will be another reason for some here re climate change.
0 Replies
 
xingu
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 Apr, 2007 05:14 am
Quote:
Karl Rove Gets Thrown Under the Stop Global Warming Bus

Last night Thelma and Louise drove the bus off the cliff or at least into the White House Correspondents Dinner. The "highlight" of the evening had to be when we were introduced to Karl Rove. How excited were we to have our first opportunity ever to talk directly to the Bush Administration about global warming.

We asked Mr. Rove if he would consider taking a fresh look at the science of global warming. Much to our dismay, he immediately got combative. And it went downhill from there.

We reminded the senior White House advisor that the US leads the world in global warming pollution and we are doing the least about it. Anger flaring, Mr. Rove immediately regurgitated the official Administration position on global warming which is that the US spends more on researching the causes than any other country.

We felt compelled to remind him that the research is done and the results are in (www.IPCC.ch). Mr. Rove exploded with even more venom. Like a spoiled child throwing a tantrum, Mr. Rove launched into a series of illogical arguments regarding China not doing enough thus neither should we. (Since when do we follow China's lead?)

At some point during his ramblings, we became heartbroken to think that the President of the United States and his top advisers have partially built a career on global warming not being real. We have been telling college students across the country for the past two weeks that government does not change until people demand it... well, listen up folks, everyone had better get a lot louder because the message clearly is not getting through.

In his attempt to dismiss us, Mr. Rove turned to head toward his table, but as soon as he did so, Sheryl reached out to touch his arm. Karl swung around and spat, "Don't touch me." How hardened and removed from reality must a person be to refuse to be touched by Sheryl Crow? Unphased, Sheryl abruptly responded, "You can't speak to us like that, you work for us." Karl then quipped, "I don't work for you, I work for the American people." To which Sheryl promptly reminded him, "We are the American people."

At that point Mr. Rove apparently decided he had had enough. Like a groundhog fearful of his own shadow, he scurried to his table in an attempt to hibernate for another year from his responsibility to address global warming. Drama aside, you would expect as an American citizen to be able to engage in a civil discussion with a public official. Instead, Mr. Rove was dismissive, condescending, and quite frankly a bully.

Ultimately, we were left wondering what on Earth Mr. Rove was talking about when he said "the American people." If more than 60% of American voters, the Supreme Court, over 400 cities, the US National Academy of Sciences, numerous major US corporations, and others don't constitute the American people, then what does? The truth is, if this administration cared one iota about the American people, they would have addressed this problem long ago, and the sad reality is that this problem has been left to us, all of us, since the current administration has abandoned this issue entirely. In the absence of true leadership, we must guide ourselves. We can solve this, but we had better act fast.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/laurie-david-and-sheryl-crow/karl-rove-gets-thrown-und_b_46501.html
0 Replies
 
maporsche
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 Apr, 2007 07:03 am
xingu wrote:
Quote:
Karl Rove Gets Thrown Under the Stop Global Warming Bus

Last night Thelma and Louise drove the bus off the cliff or at least into the White House Correspondents Dinner. The "highlight" of the evening had to be when we were introduced to Karl Rove. How excited were we to have our first opportunity ever to talk directly to the Bush Administration about global warming.

We asked Mr. Rove if he would consider taking a fresh look at the science of global warming. Much to our dismay, he immediately got combative. And it went downhill from there.

We reminded the senior White House advisor that the US leads the world in global warming pollution and we are doing the least about it. Anger flaring, Mr. Rove immediately regurgitated the official Administration position on global warming which is that the US spends more on researching the causes than any other country.

We felt compelled to remind him that the research is done and the results are in (www.IPCC.ch). Mr. Rove exploded with even more venom. Like a spoiled child throwing a tantrum, Mr. Rove launched into a series of illogical arguments regarding China not doing enough thus neither should we. (Since when do we follow China's lead?)

At some point during his ramblings, we became heartbroken to think that the President of the United States and his top advisers have partially built a career on global warming not being real. We have been telling college students across the country for the past two weeks that government does not change until people demand it... well, listen up folks, everyone had better get a lot louder because the message clearly is not getting through.

In his attempt to dismiss us, Mr. Rove turned to head toward his table, but as soon as he did so, Sheryl reached out to touch his arm. Karl swung around and spat, "Don't touch me." How hardened and removed from reality must a person be to refuse to be touched by Sheryl Crow? Unphased, Sheryl abruptly responded, "You can't speak to us like that, you work for us." Karl then quipped, "I don't work for you, I work for the American people." To which Sheryl promptly reminded him, "We are the American people."

At that point Mr. Rove apparently decided he had had enough. Like a groundhog fearful of his own shadow, he scurried to his table in an attempt to hibernate for another year from his responsibility to address global warming. Drama aside, you would expect as an American citizen to be able to engage in a civil discussion with a public official. Instead, Mr. Rove was dismissive, condescending, and quite frankly a bully.

Ultimately, we were left wondering what on Earth Mr. Rove was talking about when he said "the American people." If more than 60% of American voters, the Supreme Court, over 400 cities, the US National Academy of Sciences, numerous major US corporations, and others don't constitute the American people, then what does? The truth is, if this administration cared one iota about the American people, they would have addressed this problem long ago, and the sad reality is that this problem has been left to us, all of us, since the current administration has abandoned this issue entirely. In the absence of true leadership, we must guide ourselves. We can solve this, but we had better act fast.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/laurie-david-and-sheryl-crow/karl-rove-gets-thrown-und_b_46501.html



This is a sad, but great story.
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 Apr, 2007 08:34 am
maporsche wrote:

This is a sad, but great story.
Whats great about it?
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 Apr, 2007 08:46 am
This is undoubtedly the answer to avoid doomsday.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,267783,00.html
0 Replies
 
maporsche
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 Apr, 2007 08:55 am
Steve 41oo wrote:
maporsche wrote:

This is a sad, but great story.
Whats great about it?


Great in a funny sort of way. I find it very humorous (particularly the last paragraph) that the administration has positioned itself in a position that that most of the country disagrees with and it's starting to crumble around them, and Rove's reponsees to Crow/David are classic.
0 Replies
 
xingu
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 Apr, 2007 09:15 am
maporsche wrote:
Steve 41oo wrote:
maporsche wrote:

This is a sad, but great story.
Whats great about it?


Great in a funny sort of way. I find it very humorous (particularly the last paragraph) that the administration has positioned itself in a position that that most of the country disagrees with and it's starting to crumble around them, and Rove's reponsees to Crow/David are classic.


It appears this country disagrees with the Bush administration on issues other than the environment as well.
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 Apr, 2007 10:16 am
What I found most interesting about the article from the Huffington Post that xingu pasted above was the complacent certainty of the author(s) of the absolute truth of their beliefs and of the supposed benefits of the costs they would presume to impose on the country. That and the equally clear certainty that they alone can speak for the American people on this issue, marks them - and not Mr Rove - as the real fanatics in this story.

So the United States " leads the world in Global Warming pollution and we are doing the least about it. From what source did they get this factoid? What exactly constitutes "doing something about it"? China will soon overtake the US in the production of greenhouse gases - as will India. What, pray tell, are they "doing about it"?? For that matter what have the signatories of the ill-conceived Kyoto treaty "done ab out it"?

Quote:
We felt compelled to remind him that the research is done and the results are in ...

Oh really!? What result?? Just what is the scientific concensus view and how well does it correlate with the doomsday forecasts of the GW cultists?
The answer, of course, is far less than the cultists would have us believe. Moreover the real, human costs of the remedies they propose are far greater than they have acknowledged.

It is a curious thing to observe how readily credulous people will emotionally attach themselves to beliefs in matters they do not themselves understand, and will go on to propose and advocate remedies that will impose truly awful costs on others, but which, through their advocacy,will briefly give them the appearance of power and wisdom .
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 Apr, 2007 10:25 am
Its a religion, plus it plays together beautifully with people that believe in big government and the control by them and government over other more ignorant and helpless people. People have to believe in something, and some people have to have a cause. Saving the earth makes them feel good, and agrees with their mindset. And guilt also plays into it.
0 Replies
 
maporsche
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 Apr, 2007 11:36 am
okie wrote:
Its a religion, plus it plays together beautifully with people that believe in big government and the control by them and government over other more ignorant and helpless people. People have to believe in something, and some people have to have a cause. Saving the earth makes them feel good, and agrees with their mindset. And guilt also plays into it.


You're right, it does sound like Christianity.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.1 seconds on 09/22/2024 at 06:27:13