Global Warming & Human impact on the planet.

Archived discussion from Toril-2.
ssar
Sojourner
Posts: 1446
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Newcastle, NSW, Australia
Contact:

Global Warming & Human impact on the planet.

Postby ssar » Sat Sep 03, 2005 7:00 am

Noticed many folks posting about this in a New Orleans thread, and as usual there seems to be a significant amount of really ignorant people and attitudes, even still these days! :roll:

The increased significant detrimental effects of human activity, industrialization, resource depletion, environmental & ecological imbalance and destruction cannot be ignored, denied, simply shrugged off or explained as a part of the natural evolutionary process of the planet.

Sure there are cyclic weather trends (incl. modern-termed observations like El Nino/Nina and the Greenhouse Effect), global temperature variations evident over thousands/hundreds of thousands/millions of years in the history of this planet.

But that doesn't mean it's ok for us to accelerate the worsening.

The point is, the human race and especially those in power around the world (both in government and the private sector) could (and SHOULD) be heavily researching and applying modern technologies to preserving the planet, it's resources, and all life on it.

Eshacin & Salen posted some very useful links which detail reliable information on the subject.

Quoting "The Skeptical Environmentalist" book as ""probably the most important book on the environment ever written." - The Daily Telegraph, 8/27/2001" and other similar appraisal by "The Economist" not only shows how dumb and jaded you are on such issues, but refers to such corrupt, greed-driven, short-term narrow-minded and stupid views that this and similar publications almost ought to be banned.

So: Recycle what you can, use large water tanks where possible, etc etc, and make your voice heard by those in power (members of parliament/senators/multinational CEOS etc) to wake up and start taking proactive and effective action to extend life on earth as we know it.
That's one of the major things I want my taxes spent on - not f*cking guns, huge politician salaries/superannuations and cops busting people for carrying 1 joint.


On the other hand...

If the ship is going down, we may as well go down in "a bang", so to speak.
So use resources mightily, drive bigger cars hard & fast, everyone get guns, swords and take out whoever, steal what you can and spend up.
Sure sounds good!
BEER
teflor the ranger
Sojourner
Posts: 3923
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Waterdeep

Re: Global Warming & Human impact on the planet.

Postby teflor the ranger » Sat Sep 03, 2005 2:09 pm

ssar wrote:But that doesn't mean it's ok for us to accelerate the worsening.


Prove greenhouse gases are the cause and ignorant enviros might actually have a case.

Oh wait. They can't.

Btw, Ssar, I was the one who originally suggested the Skeptical Environmentalist. It was someone else's ignorance to critcize it without having read it which you quoted above.
Teflor does. Teflor does not.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Postby kiryan » Sat Sep 03, 2005 4:11 pm

things I've read lately.

1. thickness of the ozone layer has stabilized

2. the increase in power and frequency of hurricanes/tropical storms has more to do with a natural shift in deep ocean currents that happens every 60 years or something than global warming which may or may not have an affect.

When the contintents have reconstituted pangea and you've seen an ice age come and go then you can talk about how man has changed the natural order of things. until then your just looking at part of a cycle that you have no idea how long it is and trying to guess what that cycle is and how man is affecting it. personally I think we should put more stock in the opinions of those who are studying the past via core samples.

IMO, the earth is a robust and relatively closed system. I don't think we have begun to understand the natural processes that exist that will compensate for different things.

I don't think its actually possible for us to "kill" mother earth, although she may not be able to support human life at times during her cycle/compensation for unnatural events and we can definitely affect the cycle. We don't need to save the earth, we need to halt the earth's cycle in a manner that allows us to survive indefinitely.
Salen
Sojourner
Posts: 771
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2001 5:01 am

Postby Salen » Sat Sep 03, 2005 8:10 pm

don't get me wrong, I don't think global warming is bad for the planet.

>energy = > biomass (until you get to Mercury level of >energy)

It was a lot warmer waaaaay back when. The Earth had more diversity and amount of biomass. It's human ego that makes anyone think we can F up stuff so bad that the planet can't fix itself over a epoch.

I'm just saying that Global Warming is bad for people. If projections are right, really bad for people near tidal waters or boarderline deserts.
emote Rescuepractice
teflor the ranger
Sojourner
Posts: 3923
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Waterdeep

Postby teflor the ranger » Sat Sep 03, 2005 11:19 pm

One thing is for certain, the rising mean global temperature will bring about hard-to-predict change.

Best thing we can do is to improve data-collection, interpretation, and prediction for the near future.
Teflor does. Teflor does not.
avak
Sojourner
Posts: 672
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 6:01 am

Postby avak » Mon Sep 05, 2005 4:25 pm

Thanks for that post ssar. I'd second all of it.

I find it amazing and truly frightening how stubbornly uninformed some people insist on being. Teflor, while your arguments are absolutely insane, at least they are grounded in -some- logical thought. What really shocks me are arguments like, "we've only been recording weather for 100 years!" That reminds me of when the whole global warming debate came up and a state Legislator gave public testimony on the matter...to paraphrase, "I just can't see how people are getting so worked up about this, I mean come on, out here it can be 110 degrees in the summer and 50 below in the winter! That's a difference of 160 degrees and these wackos are getting all rabid over an average change of 1 or 2 degrees a decade!"

So yeah, 154 countries have ratified the Kyoto Protocol, the central premise of which is that CO2 is the primary culprit of global warming.

As for permafrost thawing, I just so happen to have some knowledge of that. I did two years of fieldwork in northern Canada studying it, have spent 1000's of hours reading primary lit on the subject, and have published papers in peer-reviewed journals. In addition to that, I wrote my undergrad thesis on the volatility of the thermo haline circulation system in the north atlantic, ala the day after tomorrow.

The main point is that global "warming" is a bit of a misnomer. Not all parts of the globe will necessairly get warmer. So, yes, you could point to places where ice reserves are getting bigger and permafrost is getting thicker. That's precisely not the point though, but it gives plenty of ammo to those that wish to muddy the waters on the subject.

And one last thing, no, there is no way to accurately show a correlation between Katrina and human-influenced climate change. I think you could however, show correlation between Bush's IQ and needless suffering in the Gulf. (sarcasm!!!)
Llaaldara
Sojourner
Posts: 998
Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Dobluth Kyor

Postby Llaaldara » Tue Sep 06, 2005 11:04 pm

I thought all globes warmed with human impact?

Return to “General Discussion Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests