Why Climate Change is Worse Than We Thought

a reply to: YarlanZey

Perhaps we should take a good hard look out our lifestyles as a global community, where we live, where the resources are and how we can use what we have whilst having a minimal impact. I know that all the farmland and buildings that have replaced the forests does not help and tree roots help water drain and prevents flooding. Too having lots of people living in high risk areas of flood, earthquake and drought is just storing up economic problems as well as social/health when large populations become refugees of such disasters.

If we do something like that there will be complaints that we're becoming Socialists and destroying Democracy. We can't have that, can we?

originally posted by: darkbake
a reply to: network dude

I think debating what to do about climate change is a much better idea than debating whether or not it exists! If Republicans don't like carbon taxes or other liberal policies, they have the right to debate that. I might even agree with them on some issues.

I can agree with that. Hell, even if I don't believe man has a part in it, you could appeal to my love of nature to persuade me to help with something like pushing for alternative fuels, or planting trees.

When all this fist got heated, I was on the side of "it's happening, but it's natural". I haven't changed much over the years, and I am a bit befuddled at why it even matters who (if anyone) is to blame.

IF it was us who caused ALL of this, then we started pretty much from the day we invented fire. And it snowballed from there. I don't think we can make enough changes to make the Earth think we aren't really here. So our choice is to adapt.

IF we only had a small part in it, and there is something we can change to magically fix what we screwed up, then super. But, it looks like we aren't anywhere near understanding if that's true, and light years away form coming up with a way to fix it.

We seriously need to do a better job at forward thinking. Nuclear waste being one of the biggest problems nobody seems to talk about anymore. Trying to make sure that the people who live in this planet 200 years from now can enjoy the same beautiful things we can.

But I suppose it make some people feel better knowing it's someone's fault.

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: darkbake
a reply to: network dude

I think debating what to do about climate change is a much better idea than debating whether or not it exists! If Republicans don't like carbon taxes or other liberal policies, they have the right to debate that. I might even agree with them on some issues.

I can agree with that. Hell, even if I don't believe man has a part in it, you could appeal to my love of nature to persuade me to help with something like pushing for alternative fuels, or planting trees.

When all this fist got heated, I was on the side of "it's happening, but it's natural". I haven't changed much over the years, and I am a bit befuddled at why it even matters who (if anyone) is to blame.

IF it was us who caused ALL of this, then we started pretty much from the day we invented fire. And it snowballed from there. I don't think we can make enough changes to make the Earth think we aren't really here. So our choice is to adapt.

Given the increasing population and increasing use of technology this means that the contribution to the problem in the last few decades is greater then the last few thousand years. This means we are responsible and the possibility exists to reverse it.

Remember the Ozone hole. We stopped using CFC and the hole started to repair itself.

IF we only had a small part in it, and there is something we can change to magically fix what we screwed up, then super. But, it looks like we aren't anywhere near understanding if that's true, and light years away form coming up with a way to fix it.

The only lack of understanding is how to get politicians to acknowledge the science. This is the crazy thing. The deniers scream and shout that science is in the pocket of big gov. But if that was true then big gov would be doing what the science suggest they very clearly are not.
Time for folks to wake up : carbon credits and offsetting etc is merely a political way to avoid the problem with smoke and mirrors. Gov "a" reduces its footprint due to a field of trees in gov "b"'s back garden because Gov "a" planted them.....yeah right!!!

We seriously need to do a better job at forward thinking. Nuclear waste being one of the biggest problems nobody seems to talk about anymore. Trying to make sure that the people who live in this planet 200 years from now can enjoy the same beautiful things we can.

But I suppose it make some people feel better knowing it's someone's fault.

There is never any forward thinking. It's all about the political cycle of 4-5 years.

Blame? Now you are getting close. It is my opinion that a lot of denial is due to the need to not be part of the problem, which is very easy if there is no problem.........

Our children and grandchildren will inherit the consequences of our actions.

originally posted by: Danke
a reply to: lostbook

Google news alone has at least 10 AGW/Climate change alarmist articles EVERY single day.

No no no...there is no agenda here...

This same "legendary" climate scientist has been making similar claims since the 1980's.

And he's been right.

I really should get into climate science though. It is the one scientific field where you don't need to actually prove what you are talking about, and can be wrong over and over and over again in your predictions, yet still be considered a "legend".

Go ahead, you give it a try.

Hansen had a pretty famous paper in Nature around 1980. Pretty much all of the prediction came true, and the basic physics now is still as it was understood then. Of course we know much more but it shows that in the end you can't get around physics.

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: darkbake
a reply to: network dude

I think debating what to do about climate change is a much better idea than debating whether or not it exists! If Republicans don't like carbon taxes or other liberal policies, they have the right to debate that. I might even agree with them on some issues.

I can agree with that. Hell, even if I don't believe man has a part in it, you could appeal to my love of nature to persuade me to help with something like pushing for alternative fuels, or planting trees.

When all this fist got heated, I was on the side of "it's happening, but it's natural". I haven't changed much over the years, and I am a bit befuddled at why it even matters who (if anyone) is to blame.

Because you're acquiescing to the interests of the liars and people who actively are causing the problem. It does matter. Planting trees won't do squat. (eventually they die and their carbon is re-released). Stopping mining and burning coal will, but that gets in the way of many powerful people's paychecks.