Article: Climbate Change Irreversible - What to do now?

[Warborn]

Originally Posted by Malorn

It's probably a lost cause, but for those of you who don't want to be victims of bad science and hysteria...

You can start here.
http://junksciencearchive.com/Greenhouse/index.html


For the tl;dr, here's the summary. If you want to know how they arrived at these messages, read the fucking document.

Are you for real? "Junk Science Archive"? Ah, yes, the famous Junk Science Archive by renown scientist Mr. Steven J. Milloy. Oh, wait, he isn't a scientist, is he? In fact, he has no academic credentials at all. No, he's a Fox News columnist and a fucking lobbyist for industries which would be hurt by green legislation reforms. And that's to say nothing of his association with FEAF.

This is the real problem, I think. It's uneducated people who have no idea how to find credible sources. Some lobbyist who sells books pandering to people dumb enough to swallow the message he's promulgating is about as far from a person who has a worthwhile message as you can get.

[Akrasjel Lanate]

Climate changes on earth are something natural.

[Exmortius]

let's be realistic we have only monitored climate data/change for 100 years. the earth that's probably about the blink of an eye equivalent to our lifetime when you compare things. there has been all kinds of strange climate over the years such as ice ages and heat waves. then you factor in the sun and how it changes and there are quite a few variables. but data we have is not that great. and lets be honest. your local weather man can't even tell you accurately if it will rain or not tomorrow do you expect climate specialists to know if a heat wave is caused by us or the sun just putting out more heat/radiation/energy? there is big money in "going green" by selling that so there are other motivations as well. people are getting rich off selling that bs. anyway just my 2 cents.

[Warborn]

Originally Posted by Exmortius

let's be realistic we have only monitored climate data/change for 100 years.

The Earth's climate changes sometimes. I'm sure most of us have seen Ice Age the movie, so this is probably not news.

It's possible to tell the temperature many years into the past. Dendrography, the gasses trapped in glacial ice, and so on allow scientists to construct a picture of the temperature of the Earth far longer than a century ago.

The point isn't that climate change happens. It's that the climate is rapidly changing because of human activities, and if things proceed as they are the climate change will become more and more severe. The Earth will be fine, life in general will simply adapt as various species go extinct and others flourish, but our way of life is in jeopardy.

[Figment]

Originally Posted by Exmortius

let's be realistic we have only monitored climate data/change for 100 years. the earth that's probably about the blink of an eye equivalent to our lifetime when you compare things. there has been all kinds of strange climate over the years such as ice ages and heat waves. then you factor in the sun and how it changes and there are quite a few variables. but data we have is not that great. and lets be honest. your local weather man can't even tell you accurately if it will rain or not tomorrow do you expect climate specialists to know if a heat wave is caused by us or the sun just putting out more heat/radiation/energy? there is big money in "going green" by selling that so there are other motivations as well. people are getting rich off selling that bs. anyway just my 2 cents.

Earthquakes are a natural disaster, oil spills of any kind spreading all over a coastline is a human made disaster. Damage is dissimilar, but damage it is nonetheless. Look at the ozon layer hole. We caused that with fricking fridges.

We're pretty good at creating disasters, don't you think they might be on to something?



Also, why do you think climatologists are behind companies selling green power? You honestly think they have time for setting up that sort of thing? And uhm... you do realise they're usualy just getting average pay, right?

How about those Republican politicians that keep yelling it isn't true? Guess they're not getting quite a bit richer for yelling "NO, IT'S ALL LIES!"?

[Sirisian]

Originally Posted by DjEclipse

In NYC my face feels like it is getting x-rayed everyday this summer, thats with me being indoors. Unnatural for humans. Last winter in NYC it felt like how the summer should be. Again, unnatural.

I will point out you can't use season to season data for climate change predictions. The temperatures vary year to year and that's expected. That and NYC is a city which creates a heat dome. It basically causes some unnatural effects in temperature.

[ziegler]

Originally Posted by DjEclipse

I 100% concede your point. I just want to know where is the fix? Cities are growing larger, not smaller. Hotter and hotter heat dome. Microwave ovens.

The climate fight looks staged to me. During the cold war creating proxy fights, just to have everyone fighting each other was en vogue.

The fight never fixed anything, the point was just to keep all sides fighting.

Fix number one....quit making large cities. Any animal in a concentrated area will destroy that area. Locusts, cows, bears, humans...

Otherwise there wont be a fix...why?...because both sides of the arguement have agendas that are self serving and not truly in the interest of promoting humanity. Then you have China, who says we aint stopping shit, and nobody has the balls to try to kill a billion ********.

Carbon credits is a good example of this....oh..you're a polluting powerhouse...it's ok...buy a few carbon credits from the credit exchange and you're good to go....How the fuck does that fix a damn thing other than the hole in Al Gore's pocket? You dont see him living like Ed Bagley Jr, that's for damned sure.

[Sirisian]

Originally Posted by ziegler

Fix number one....quit making large cities.

You can exploit this for energy production actually. Super cities which are literally one giant city structure located around a solar updraft tower feed off the heat at the ground level through turbines and generate a ton of energy. It offsets a lot of the energy demand during peak hours for massive cities. You can build a few towers for instance around a city such as that.

I'm a big fan of planned super cities to cut down on electricity and transportation costs. We spread out way too much causing huge logistics problems. I digress, it's complicated.

[Saifoda]

Originally Posted by Sirisian

You can exploit this for energy production actually. Super cities which are literally one giant city structure located around a solar updraft tower feed off the heat at the ground level through turbines and generate a ton of energy. It offsets a lot of the energy demand during peak hours for massive cities. You can build a few towers for instance around a city such as that.

I'm a big fan of planned super cities to cut down on electricity and transportation costs. We spread out way too much causing huge logistics problems. I digress, it's complicated.

This can open up a whoooooole new topic on self reliance; why am I paying for an apple from Chile when I could grow the thing right outside my door?

[ChipMHazard]

Meh, winter is coming no matter how much or how little we pollute. In the end I highly doubt we will do anything until it's too late.

[Pillar of Armor]

Here's what it comes down to, carbon sequestered in the atmosphere since the start of the industrial revolution has increased significantly. In simple models and experiments carbon traps heat. Global average temperatures have raised a few degrees at a rate that correlates with the increase in carbon in the atmosphere. So, correlation: yes. Cause and effect: some say yes, some say no.

What do you do with this knowledge? Well, you could look at it like this example: "Well we could be poisoning our water. Do we continue our actions and take the risk or change and ensure that we don't poison ourselves." One would think you wouldn't want to take the risk, but lets say that isn't enough for you.

Here is some other intensives for changing our current energy paradigm.

Energy Security: we rely heavily on foreign oil and other fuels, most of which comes from the middle east, with oil prices controlled by OPEC. Even if we were to max out production here in the US and drill everything we have, we simply don't have enough supply. Next best option? Nuclear, hydro, solar, wind, energy efficiency standards, energy conservation.

Energy Value: Oil is getting damn expensive, and the price is only going north. Other energy options are seeing price decreases as the tech gets better. Need I say more?

Ocean Acidification: We know we are putting carbon in the atmosphere. The biggest carbon sink that pulls it back out of the atmosphere is the ocean (pretty simple chemistry). The problem with the carbon in the ocean is that it increases the acidity, which is hazardous to organisms that are important to our food supply and it damages corral reefs which are important for shore protection (harbors, shipping lanes, residential areas). Technical stuff here

[Saifoda]

Originally Posted by Pillar of Armor

Here's what it comes down to, carbon sequestered in the atmosphere since the start of the industrial revolution has increased significantly. In simple models and experiments carbon traps heat. Global average temperatures have raised a few degrees at a rate that correlates with the increase in carbon in the atmosphere. So, correlation: yes. Cause and effect: some say yes, some say no.

What do you do with this knowledge? Well, you could look at it like this example: "Well we could be poisoning our water. Do we continue our actions and take the risk or change and ensure that we don't poison ourselves." One would think you wouldn't want to take the risk, but lets say that isn't enough for you.

Here is some other intensives for changing our current energy paradigm.

Energy Security: we rely heavily on foreign oil and other fuels, most of which comes from the middle east, with oil prices controlled by OPEC. Even if we were to max out production here in the US and drill everything we have, we simply don't have enough supply. Next best option? Nuclear, hydro, solar, wind, energy efficiency standards, energy conservation.

Energy Value: Oil is getting damn expensive, and the price is only going north. Other energy options are seeing price decreases as the tech gets better. Need I say more?

Ocean Acidification: We know we are putting carbon in the atmosphere. The biggest carbon sink that pulls it back out of the atmosphere is the ocean (pretty simple chemistry). The problem with the carbon in the ocean is that it increases the acidity, which is hazardous to organisms that are important to our food supply and it damages corral reefs which are important for shore protection (harbors, shipping lanes, residential areas). Technical stuff here

It's really an opinion (and there have been plenty of experiments and studies to "prove" both sides right) as to the effects of carbon, and the REAL question of whether or not we need to change the "carbon habit" in particular. I am of the opinion that the carbon emissions in regards to global warming are not an issue, but that's not to say I can't change my mind/form a different opinion in the future.


Just one point I'd like to make about oil -- most of our oil is not actually imported from the middle east -- it is imported primarily from Canada at just under 20% of our import (which accounts for 58% of the oil -- the other 42 we pump domestically). Mexico and Saudi Arabia are the next two in line, trading places frequently. The following runners up include nations in South America and Africa. Iraq and the remainder of OPEC account for a little under 7% of our imports (which comes out to about 4% of total oil for the US). We are not involved in the petrol dollar because we just love oil. We could dump oil if we really wanted to and it was a national interest. But it is not a national interest. How do you control the world [currently]? Oil. How do you control oil? Prices and trading. How do you control prices and trading? Consumption and treaties, respectively.





Not to harp on the co2 thing again, but there's a couple glaring holes: "From some odd 1800's until 1994..." So......last 18 years anyone? I can't find this article anymore unfortunately (which is a shame, and I'm no conspiracy theorist but the original blog I found it published on was taken down with no explanation and the article no longer exists in the form it was published...) so you'll have to take me at face value (or not -- believe whatever you want to believe, doesn't matter to me really, I just enjoy the occasional engagement). Basically NASA (which historically is an organization which very much supports the notion of anthropogenic [since we're throwin that term around a lot] climate change) had either launched a satellite (I'm pretty sure this was the case) or they used a satellite already in orbit with the proper capabilities (not so sure this one is right) to measure the levels of carbon dioxide in earths atmosphere over time (something like an 18-24 month period -- the report came out in the last 6 months or so). Turns out that during that period, the level of carbon dioxide didn't increase at all -- if I recall correctly, they found that it was escaping out of the atmosphere (I could be completely wrong about that one, but I'm pretty sure it was the conclusion they came to). Again, could be wrong about that last part and maybe the ocean is simply absorbing it more as the atmosphere (supposedly) has reached its carbon saturation.


Either way, plant trees.







EDIT: On the libertarian stuff. Basically...yeah lol. I personally find libertarian philosophy to be the most moral of the political parties, and that's saying something for a political party. But watching the youtube armchair libertarians that do nothing but post their videos and bitch about how shitty everything is in regards to government and industry control while you can see that they're in a suburb or a city through the window in the background and they have IKEA furniture and other random bullshit from target and walmart and I don't see these people wearing clothing they made themselves (from cloth they wove themselves, if we really wanna be hippie about it). This is not to say all libertarians who post on youtube are like this; I've seen plenty that simply post to respond to others who just randomly bash libertarians and what not, and plenty of us do walk the walk as well -- it's just difficult to see us all the way from the city (which I can't WAIT to leave the city; people get my PTSD all wadded up in my panties -- you know, stranger danger and all that).

...Wow: /tangent.

[Figment]

Originally Posted by Saifoda

EDIT: On the libertarian stuff. Basically...yeah lol. I personally find libertarian philosophy to be the most moral of the political parties, and that's saying something for a political party. But watching the youtube armchair libertarians that do nothing but post their videos and bitch about how shitty everything is in regards to government and industry control while you can see that they're in a suburb or a city through the window in the background and they have IKEA furniture and other random bullshit from target and walmart and I don't see these people wearing clothing they made themselves (from cloth they wove themselves, if we really wanna be hippie about it). This is not to say all libertarians who post on youtube are like this; I've seen plenty that simply post to respond to others who just randomly bash libertarians and what not, and plenty of us do walk the walk as well -- it's just difficult to see us all the way from the city (which I can't WAIT to leave the city; people get my PTSD all wadded up in my panties -- you know, stranger danger and all that).

...Wow: /tangent.

Yes, I'm very disappointed if Malorn turns out not to wear his animal skins and carry his personal set of flint tools.





()

[Figment]

Dooon't think they know dutch Labour ex-prime ministers Elcyco.


You're better off posting Tony Blair.

[Saifoda]

What's a tony blair?