Climate Change Already Impacting ‘All Continents’ According To New International Report

reply to post by cosmicexplorer


Who said the climate isn't changing?

I think most are just questioning the factors involved. We look back and see that this has all happened before, and are just having a hard time understanding why it has to be caused by something completely different this time. It's just too early to tell. Our Earth makes drastic changes for lots of reasons. It would be cool to think that we have people who are smart enough to "KNOW" all the answers, but at this time, I don't think we are there yet. More data required. Until then, adapt, improvise, overcome.

reply to post by beezzer



The question not in how much its gonna cost us, but are we willing to take the bet on the expense of the future generation, our children, our grandchildren.

At the end money is just a paper, just numbers, while the future generations have to bear all the consequences of our current actions. At worst, we might have to be a bit less comfortable, while at worst, the future generations might not have a place to live at.

I personally am supporter of the AGW scientific theory and agree that it is a problem. I am not going to explain myself, I have done so too many times and well, I just prefer not to start a debate on it right now.

Believing that current actions do not have any effect at all, is naive though. The world has changed more in last century than near to all previous history combined. The industrial pollution, overfishing, overhunting, deforestation, overpesticiding the fields, incredible consumption, draining up every resource possible, as long as there is a buyer, and all that for profit. Unless limits are set, these action will definitely have their consequences sooner or later.

The world does not consist only of USA or Europe, the third-world countries are developing fast, and it is a fact that this planet is not able to provide lifestandards comparable to current first-world nations, to 7 billion people.

Believing science will find a solution to everything is an incredible leap of faith. We are already reaching the borderlines of impossible. Of course developments will happen, although I doubt many major natural discoveries will be done in coming decades. There will be advancements, of course, especially in genetics, certain technologies, although the nature has set a limit to the efficiency and we are already touching the borderlines.

If you are willing to make such a bet, a bet that can affect the world of all future generations after you, do it. I truly hope though, that there are more people not willing to make the bet, and willing to make minor changes to their lifestyle for the potential benefit of their children. Even if there is a 1% chance that we might be able to affect the world positively by doing it, it is worth taking. Instead of fighting for the fictious papers, lets focus on something real and keeping it - the nature, rather than fu*king over every other species in the world in order to satisy our egos and accumulate more of the materialistic, more of the "paper". No money in the world is worth a planet, where most people can not live reasonably well.

reply to post by Cabin


Bull-poop.

(sorry for being blunt)

Climate is "dynamic".

It is always changing. I just see this as politicians and governments capitalizing on the "delta", the change, in order to assert more control over people.

ETA, I see that someone previous has already coined the term "dynamic".

Great minds. . . .

reply to post by cosmicexplorer


I don't disagree that climate changes because it has and bets guess is it will ..Nothing new there ..Its the AGW construct that most are beating themselves with . If AGW is a true phenom then it had a start .My question earlier was ,when did it start ? ....Lets put a date on it and watch how it progressed and measure the fluctuations against the cause .....peace

Cabin
reply to post by beezzer

 

The question not in how much its gonna cost us, but are we willing to take the bet on the expense of the future generation, our children, our grandchildren.

At the end money is just a paper, just numbers, while the future generations have to bear all the consequences of our current actions. At worst, we might have to be a bit less comfortable, while at worst, the future generations might not have a place to live at..Instead of fighting for the fictious papers, lets focus on something real and keeping it - the nature, rather than fu*king over every other species in the world in order to satisy our egos and accumulate more of the materialistic, more of the "paper". No money in the world is worth a planet, where most people can not live reasonably well.

I think you've stated some things as fact which are in fact debatable but I'm willing to guess that we both know what the other would say so I agree with you on there being no need to go into that and I will also ignore the appeal to emotion.

I've read and re-read your post and the argument you've made is Malthusian and that has far more to do with scarcity than it does with climate, you seem to me to be advocating a population cap. If I got that part wrong please feel free to elaborate.

Money is not just a "piece of paper", it is an abstraction of someone's education and labor. Confiscation isn't justified without a clear understanding of what is happening and how it can be fixed, or even if it can be fixed.

network dude
reply to post by cosmicexplorer

 

Who said the climate isn't changing?

I think most are just questioning the factors involved. We look back and see that this has all happened before, and are just having a hard time understanding why it has to be caused by something completely different this time. It's just too early to tell. Our Earth makes drastic changes for lots of reasons. It would be cool to think that we have people who are smart enough to "KNOW" all the answers, but at this time, I don't think we are there yet. More data required. Until then, adapt, improvise, overcome.

Well I could go through this thread and several others quoting every person who thinks climate change is bogus...but I dont care to...almost every thread in relation to climate change has a negative outlook on what science has produced. Id argue that there are a large portion of people who think that the climate is not changing at all.

Just go back and look through the thread....you can see several posts alone in here saying its bogus.

cosmicexplorer
Well I could go through this thread and several others quoting every person who thinks climate change is bogus...but I dont care to...almost every thread in relation to climate change has a negative outlook on what science has produced. Id argue that there are a large portion of people who think that the climate is not changing at all.

Just go back and look through the thread....you can see several posts alone in here saying its bogus.

You don't have to call out every poster in this thread and others. Why don't you pick just one out? If I'm one of those people you're talking about feel free to call me out.

Goteborg

cosmicexplorer
Well I could go through this thread and several others quoting every person who thinks climate change is bogus...but I dont care to...almost every thread in relation to climate change has a negative outlook on what science has produced. Id argue that there are a large portion of people who think that the climate is not changing at all.

Just go back and look through the thread....you can see several posts alone in here saying its bogus.

You don't have to call out every poster in this thread and others. Why don't you pick just one out? If I'm one of those people you're talking about feel free to call me out.

The argument I was making is that many feel of the same opinion of you...not that your opinion is wrong.....the person I was responding to said that no one was saying there isnt climate change. Although I think several in this thread think there is no climate change going on. So I hope you didn't feel it was an attack you.

But do share .....are you saying there is no climate change?

reply to post by cosmicexplorer


What people are questioning is the cause. The AGWers have been "absolutely certain" of the cause of warming, (now called climate change) where the detractors are saying there is not enough data yet to make that claim. And since we have that difference, we- the non believers, are flat earthers with our heads either in the sand or up someone's ass.

There is no grey area, you have to fully give yourself to the cause, or be labeled as I mentioned. Wear the Nike's and drink the Kool Aid.

network dude
reply to post by cosmicexplorer

 

What people are questioning is the cause. The AGWers have been "absolutely certain" of the cause of warming, (now called climate change) where the detractors are saying there is not enough data yet to make that claim. And since we have that difference, we- the non believers, are flat earthers with our heads either in the sand or up someone's ass.

There is no grey area, you have to fully give yourself to the cause, or be labeled as I mentioned. Wear the Nike's and drink the Kool Aid.

Haha i like the analogy at the end.

I agree there absolutely is no certainty at all. In fact two of my professors strongly disagreed with each other and both have doctorates in climatology or similar fields of study.

Sometimes if you look at small scale things like where they dump those chemicals in the sky to make it rain...or the smog in China.....that is man made...little man made changes. It would seem logical through observation that man can indeed change the climate....the problem is we have no clue how much or if this large scale climate change is just Earth's natural course.

I hate politicians....and politics. They turn every important argument into #.

My own personal opinion is that the oceans are the most important part of climate change. Research how water moves by temperature/salinity...etc...changing the ocean currents and how water moves would completely change climate. That is where I would start myself.

cosmicexplorer

Goteborg

cosmicexplorer
Well I could go through this thread and several others quoting every person who thinks climate change is bogus...but I dont care to...almost every thread in relation to climate change has a negative outlook on what science has produced. Id argue that there are a large portion of people who think that the climate is not changing at all.

Just go back and look through the thread....you can see several posts alone in here saying its bogus.

You don't have to call out every poster in this thread and others. Why don't you pick just one out? If I'm one of those people you're talking about feel free to call me out.

The argument I was making is that many feel of the same opinion of you...not that your opinion is wrong.....the person I was responding to said that no one was saying there isnt climate change. Although I think several in this thread think there is no climate change going on. So I hope you didn't feel it was an attack you.

But do share .....are you saying there is no climate change?

No problem, I didn't take it as a personal attack. Only a fool would deny that the climate changes, we have proof that it does change and sometimes changes dramatically. What's at issue here is a group of AGW believers claiming that they have facts when all they really have is conjecture based upon observation which isn't necessarily a bad thing but it's far from the complete product they claim to have.

cosmicexplorer

My own personal opinion is that the oceans are the most important part of climate change. Research how water moves by temperature/salinity...etc...changing the ocean currents and how water moves would completely change climate. That is where I would start myself.

I agree with you. I think the oceans have the biggest impact on "climate" where as cloud seeding or something like that is only "local weather". And I also think we need to find a cleaner source of fuel. For our children and grand children's sake. And find ways to stop leaving garbage that cannot be reclaimed around for "the other guy".

I just hate to see that agenda pushed through fear. It's common sense. It doesn't need fear, just honesty and action. (IMHO)

Let's get real - MOST of the same people who deny that WE are causing the climate to change TO THIS DEGREE (yes, the climate naturally fluctuates over the years but not to this degree) and deny that our actions are going to eventually kill our species, their own grandchildren and maybe the entire planet, are the same people who believe the story of Noah is 100% factual and that man was placed here on this earth to rule over women, the planet and the animals, and one day they'll be swept up in a wave of glory and taken away from the mess they've made to meet their heavenly father in the sky and live happily ever after.

Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, and since the 1950s, many of the observed changes are unprecedented over decades to millennia. The atmosphere and ocean have warmed, the amounts of snow and ice have diminished, sea level has risen, and the concentrations of greenhouse gases have increased.
...
The atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide have increased to levels unprecedented in at least the last 800,000 years. Carbon dioxide concentrations have increased by 40% since pre-industrial times, primarily from fossil fuel emissions and secondarily from net land use change emissions. The ocean has absorbed about 30% of the emitted anthropogenic carbon dioxide, causing ocean acidification.

Climate Change Report

Read the damn thing. Look at the data. Educate yourselves. Or stick your head into the warming earth and deny it.

reply to post by Skymon612


CBC reported this morning that the scientists speaking out are all Nobel Prize winners.

Anyone have more info on this?

Like I said on the other thread. 97% of all scientists agree that man is causing global warming. It's not a matter of propaganda or alarmists or people bringing up Al Gore. We really are causing this. There is scientific consensus.

Goteborg

cosmicexplorer

Goteborg

cosmicexplorer
Well I could go through this thread and several others quoting every person who thinks climate change is bogus...but I dont care to...almost every thread in relation to climate change has a negative outlook on what science has produced. Id argue that there are a large portion of people who think that the climate is not changing at all.

Just go back and look through the thread....you can see several posts alone in here saying its bogus.

You don't have to call out every poster in this thread and others. Why don't you pick just one out? If I'm one of those people you're talking about feel free to call me out.

The argument I was making is that many feel of the same opinion of you...not that your opinion is wrong.....the person I was responding to said that no one was saying there isnt climate change. Although I think several in this thread think there is no climate change going on. So I hope you didn't feel it was an attack you.

But do share .....are you saying there is no climate change?

No problem, I didn't take it as a personal attack. Only a fool would deny that the climate changes, we have proof that it does change and sometimes changes dramatically. What's at issue here is a group of AGW believers claiming that they have facts when all they really have is conjecture based upon observation which isn't necessarily a bad thing but it's far from the complete product they claim to have.

And that always seems to be the damn problem with everything...from guns to childcare....education....

Hence our conclusion should be....remove all politicians...!

Benevolent Heretic


Read the damn thing. Look at the data. Educate yourselves. Or stick your head into the warming earth and deny it.

Case in point.

No grey area, you either drink the flukcing Kool aid, or you have your head stuck somewhere.
The final judge has spoken. Do not question authority. Accept the facts. Ignore the detractors.

It's sad to see it come to this.

Benevolent Heretic

Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, and since the 1950s, many of the observed changes are unprecedented over decades to millennia. The atmosphere and ocean have warmed, the amounts of snow and ice have diminished, sea level has risen, and the concentrations of greenhouse gases have increased.

Climate Change Report

Read the damn thing. Look at the data. Educate yourselves. Or stick your head into the warming earth and deny it.

I downloaded it and I will read the whole thing. Interesting thing about the report, I just read the first three pages and consensus is equated to fact twice. I don't know what college you went to but where I went that would have earned me a failing grade.

Another interesting thing I noticed, conclusions reached are given a certainty rating anywhere from "not very likely" to "extremely likely" or from "Low" to High". The portion I quoted from your post is the entire reason for the report being drafted. Would anyone care to guess the certainty level the scientists assigned to their key point? Give up? Medium. That's right, they're "medium sure" that they know what they're talking about and that's with the advantage of being able to count consensus as fact. That instills confidence in their conclusions, don't it?

Anyone who doesn't believe me can click on the report and read it for yourself, you don't have to go very deep at all to see what I've mentioned. Pulling that quote out of the report and presenting it as un-assailable fact is...well...I'll be kind here and say that it was an act of misguided fervor.

But you guys do realize that it's not just this report or this agency or these scientists. It's NASA and almost every University...in fact if you went and visited and talked to every single scientist on earth almost all of them would agree with this report. The only ones disagreeing with the overall picture of this report are those funded by Big Fossil fuel companies. Think about that.

amazing
But you guys do realize that it's not just this report or this agency or these scientists. It's NASA and almost every University...in fact if you went and visited and talked to every single scientist on earth almost all of them would agree with this report. The only ones disagreeing with the overall picture of this report are those funded by Big Fossil fuel companies. Think about that.

NASA isn't disagreeing, Dr. Hansen is on behalf of NASA. That's an important distinction.

The idea that companies who sell fossil fuels might disagree with a publically funded organization who wants to heavily regulate them doesn't prove any scientific facts in fact IMO it illustrates the political nature of this process.