1. Advertising
    y u no do it?

    Advertising (learn more)

    Advertise virtually anything here, with CPM banner ads, CPM email ads and CPC contextual links. You can target relevant areas of the site and show ads based on geographical location of the user if you wish.

    Starts at just $1 per CPM or $0.10 per CPC.

What should America do about action on climate change?

Discussion in 'Politics & Religion' started by Bushranger, Dec 6, 2012.

  1. Obamanation

    Obamanation Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    8,016
    Likes Received:
    237
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    180
    #21
    If one can subscribe to the idea that a butterfly flapping it's wings can eventually lead to a hurricane, the idea that human production of warming gases can lead to global warming seems like much less of a leap.

    As you mentioned, climate change is not only happening, it is inevitable. The question of how much effect we have on it seems completely without scientific concensus.

    You and I are both emitting green house gasses as we sit here and breathe (and fart). I wonder, if we eliminated every artificial source of manmade greenhouse gasses and determined the only way to slow down the pace of climate change was to bring the earth's population down from 7 billion to less than 500million, would Al Gore be advocate genocide and forced sterilization as a necessary means to save the planet?
     
    Obamanation, Dec 10, 2012 IP
  2. Bushranger

    Bushranger Notable Member

    Messages:
    2,841
    Likes Received:
    257
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    200
    #22
    @Corwin - forget climate change as we hear about it for a moment - are you saying that the increasing number of new man-made factories being built pumping out plumes and plumes of stuff none of us could breathe up close is fine and that nothing should be done to curb the growing trend?

    Do you see an ever increasing potential for poisoning ourselves, at all?
     
    Bushranger, Dec 10, 2012 IP
  3. Corwin

    Corwin Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,438
    Likes Received:
    107
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    195
    #23
    I'm saying that if an increasing number of factories pumping out gases into the atmosphere has any significant effect on the environment, then it should be easy to run experiments to prove the effect. If you pump "plumes of stuff none of us could breathe", is it even remotely possible that we can pump out enough to affect humans? Or can the planet absorb/process enough to render it inert or harmless?

    Friendly reminder to everyone: humans breathe in oxygen (O2) and exhale carbon dioxide (CO2). Plants breathe in CO2 and breathe out O2. This is part of a closed system that keeps O2 and CO2 in balance.

    There is also a gaseous barrier between the planet's atmosphere and the ocean. The ocean contains O2 and CO2. Gases pass between that barrier.

    Now, the Earth is an adaptive system. Pump too much C02 or O2 into the atmosphere and the ocean will compensate by absorbing the appropriate gas.

    The question, then is at what point can humans pump too much CO2 into the atmosphere at such a rate that these compensating mechanisms can't keep up. Now, I don't believe in any "conscious Earth" crap, but I firmly believe in the ability of complex systems to reach an equilibrium. Is it possible that humans can upset the balance to such an extreme that the Earth compensates with extreme weather that kills off the humans responsible for the imbalance? I've seen closed systems do scary things.

    It really can be the height of hubris to believe that humans can affect the planet. Worst we can do is inconvenience ourselves.

    At the end of the day, we cannot "hurt" the Earth. This planet has existed for billions of years and has survived ice ages, heat waves, reversals in the magnetic poles, global movements of tectonic plates, and more. A super eruption from just one volcano can spew more dust into the atmosphere than has ever been spewed in the history of man and place all humans on the extinction list within six months.

    If we screw up, worst that could happen is the Earth just shrugs us off, like it did the dinosaurs, and starts with something else.
     
    Last edited: Dec 11, 2012
    Corwin, Dec 11, 2012 IP
  4. earlpearl

    earlpearl Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,584
    Likes Received:
    150
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    155
    #24
    Corwin: Its my understanding that the scientific claims around human impact on global warming is about 30 years old. I'd have to think with all that history and science there is a good bit of original research and then follow up research. One of the more interesting pieces of research, at least from a science and publicity basis was this research wherein the well-known global warming denier, Professor Richard Muller said “As scientists, it is our duty to let the evidence change our minds,”

    Muller was a loud scientific denier who then did his own research and acknowledged the science of human caused global warming. Quite a reversal.

    What I find stunning though, is how you just spent time on Long Island helping your family recover from flooding caused by Hurricane Sandy, that caused damage at a level never before seen there. There is strong evidence that over the last 100 years water levels of the Atlantic along the mideast to Northern shores have risen about 1 foot. That comes from the warming of the Polar regions. Its well documented. The science ties it to man made causes. Certain scientists have claimed that a foot or more of the sea blast that hit the coastal areas was a direct function of the rising sea levels. And that extra foot dramatically increased damage.

    Its still damn crappy in the areas that were hit. You've seen it more recently than did I and you evidently saw some of the worst areas. I was up there but didn't get to the worst hit areas.

    The wide spread pictures of destruction up in the NY metropolitan region are startling: http://rt.com/usa/news/frankenstorm-sandy-live-updates-451/ and the breadth of the damages focused in NJ and NY are simply incredible.

    I'm just surprised that after you come into direct contact with this issue you push out this attitude that simply ignores the current state of events and the damages it can cause.

    There are other impacts that affect the earth's environment as there have been for the ages, but the stark changes over more recent times have been tied to the growth of industrialization by a lot of science over a lot of years now.

    I don't know....when you go into an area that has simply been devastated, its hard for me to brush off the connections to thirty years of science.
     
    earlpearl, Dec 11, 2012 IP
  5. Corwin

    Corwin Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,438
    Likes Received:
    107
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    195
    #25
    Just because a lot of people believe it doesn't make it so. And sorry, but your statements really are only your opinion without a solid reference of original research.

    And what passes for climate change "research" today is just people repeating what other people have written. I have to see the data - even Einstein had to show his work.

    Science is unmoved by opinion, emotions, or consensus. Back when I was helping design automotive airbags one of the early modules malfunctioned during test. Now, I could yell, cry, and scream at that module about how important airbags are for saving lives, keeping children safe, protecting parents, or tried to lay a guilt trip on it. None of that would have made that airbag work - only our science did.
     
    Corwin, Dec 11, 2012 IP
  6. earlpearl

    earlpearl Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,584
    Likes Received:
    150
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    155
    #26
    Corwin:

    When Muller published information before in which he doubted man made climate changes his findings and publications were highly touted by the political side of the debate that argues against man trying to reverse that trend.

    Now you are saying his new data doesn't have merit. Which one is it? Are you saying the only merit he had was as a climate change denier and having changed his mind via research his new data, research, efforts, and findings are worthless?

    If so that makes no sense.
     
    earlpearl, Dec 12, 2012 IP
  7. robjones

    robjones Notable Member

    Messages:
    4,256
    Likes Received:
    405
    Best Answers:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    290
    #27
    Primary cause of global warming is guys on the other side of the water that constantly posit their ideas of what Americans need to do.
    Someday technology may enable us to email them a life.
     
    robjones, Dec 13, 2012 IP
  8. Corwin

    Corwin Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,438
    Likes Received:
    107
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    195
    #28
    Muller? New data? I don't see a reference to original research in what you wrote, instead I see you making the same lame argument I've been telling you repeatedly is unconvincing, while asking me to take your word for it.
     
    Corwin, Dec 13, 2012 IP
  9. Bushranger

    Bushranger Notable Member

    Messages:
    2,841
    Likes Received:
    257
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    200
    #29
    Hmmm, there's your problem robjones... global warming is caused by your propensity to use too much energy. Has nothing to do with the man over the sea. Now do you feel a little cleverer? a little smarter? you fountain of knowledge you... You'll be an expert soon enough.
     
    Bushranger, Dec 13, 2012 IP
  10. robjones

    robjones Notable Member

    Messages:
    4,256
    Likes Received:
    405
    Best Answers:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    290
    #30
    Naah, no reason for me to duplicate your effort. Must be awesome to live in a country so perfect you can dedicate all your posts to correcting our errors. :p
     
    Last edited: Dec 13, 2012
    robjones, Dec 13, 2012 IP
  11. Bushranger

    Bushranger Notable Member

    Messages:
    2,841
    Likes Received:
    257
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    200
    #31
    Well that's a different site. Seeing this one's American we predominantly discuss American ideologies. No point talking about fixing America's problems at wahabi.com. And you know, those yanks just loooove being told what to do and all. :)
     
    Bushranger, Dec 13, 2012 IP
  12. Obamanation

    Obamanation Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    8,016
    Likes Received:
    237
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    180
    #32
    Ignoring for a moment the groundless claim that energy usage is a primary cause of climate change, I do get a chuckle out of the idea Americans "use too much energy". Energy consumption has traditionally been a coefficient of economic activity. More economic activity, more energy consumption.

    When you say we "use too much" what you are really saying is on a per capita basis, the US has more economic activity than practically every other country on the planet, an obvious fact. I can guarantee you, if you divide our energy consumption by our GDP, Australia is a much bigger polluter than the US.

    Another, more legitimate way of measuring a nation's emissions would be to measure total emissions divided by quantity of people living above the poverty level. It is completely unfair to count half the population of China that practically lives without electricity.
     
    Obamanation, Dec 14, 2012 IP
  13. aira

    aira Active Member

    Messages:
    1,176
    Likes Received:
    7
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    78
    #33
    Some government organizations can actually inform the citizens what is actually happening in our nature, the calamities and disasters we are experiencing has something to do with climate change.
     
    aira, Jan 1, 2013 IP
  14. Corwin

    Corwin Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,438
    Likes Received:
    107
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    195
    #34
    Why should I take YOUR word for it?
     
    Corwin, Jan 1, 2013 IP
  15. traxport121

    traxport121 Active Member

    Messages:
    1,201
    Likes Received:
    8
    Best Answers:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    63
    #35
    I have heard some rumours about a US project called HARP. Is there any truth in what they say USA is impacting upon the climate of the world?
     
    traxport121, Jan 5, 2013 IP
  16. Corwin

    Corwin Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,438
    Likes Received:
    107
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    195
    #36
    HARP is an extremely-low frequency transmission system for communicating with U.S. submarines moving very deep underwater.
     
    Corwin, Jan 6, 2013 IP