The climate change thread

[child of Thor]

Kind of related to climate, well more the enviroment i guess?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/real_story/4493728.stm

now that makes me mad - cross even. I hope the investigation comes up with a clear culprit and they are suitably fined for this pretty rubbish situation

Still its typical 'sweep it under the carpet' attitude that many companies use to save money. I also hope Indonesia makes a big fuss about it, and other developing countries check out this kind of thing too. Not only do we scew them by taking their resources, we then send back the toxic refuse after we've used those resources! feel the outrage

[child of Thor]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4511556.stm

all they need is a Steven Segal type to help them in their quest for justice

[The Mad Viking]

Re: Re: R a

Originally posted by child of Thor


well for my part, i'm purely ametuer - i have no formal training on the subject. I just share a concern for the lack of concern over the issue as expressed by many of our governments.

My phiolosphy on climate change is quite simple. We have one planet to try to live on, so maybe we should take the more cautious approach in our actions that 'might' have a negative effect on the world around us.

Is the extra billions that a billionaire may gain worth the future of the planet? I just dont think so. At the end of the day this is all our planet - activities of the mega rich that 'may' damage that legacy isn't the progressive way forward their accountants are telling us is so imho.

Also the impact of post industrialisation and the apparent speeding up of the degredation of our habitat might be more than coincidence? can we afford to take the chance thats its not? Greed vs the future - i'll take the future thanks.

stuff like that. And thanks for the link - i'm glad a few people are interested in the topic

There is a viewpoint, which is very naive, IMO, that this is about the earth vs billionaire's greed.

To me, this about about clean water, electricity, and hospitals for the millions of humans who don't have this.

I'm also all for conservation. It just makes sense. But I despise the liars who make false pronouncements of impending doom in the next 25 years, when the fact is, they have absolutely no clue.

And those who believe it is their divine duty to decide for the people, and censor all the evidence which casts doubts on their precious hypothesis, in the self-righteous conviction that the what is at stake is too important to permit doubt.

[child of Thor]

Re: Re: Re: R a

Originally posted by The Mad Viking


There is a viewpoint, which is very naive, IMO, that this is about the earth vs billionaire's greed.

it could be - it just often times seems this way?

To me, this about about clean water, electricity, and hospitals for the millions of humans who don't have this.

I'm also all for conservation. It just makes sense. But I despise the liars who make false pronouncements of impending doom in the next 25 years, when the fact is, they have absolutely no clue.

And those who believe it is their divine duty to decide for the people, and censor all the evidence which casts doubts on their precious hypothesis, in the self-righteous conviction that the what is at stake is too important to permit doubt.

Fair points, but it cuts both ways with the censorship of evidence. I would suspect that if you are incredibly rich it just makes it much easier to censor evidence, and you'd be more inclined to do so if your wealth depended on it?

As a humble lowly scientist on a medium wage i just cant see what you'd have to gain be joining the 'worried' group(which seems to be gaining the most overall exceptance).

Don't underestimate the greed of the few mega-rich that more or less rule our world.

a few more links here on enviro stuff:

Orca's now the most polluted of artic animals -

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4520104.stm

And one from the recent global talks in Montreal -

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4519702.stm

I just cant see that the overall global concern being expressed can be all for nothing, and if it isnt then were heading fast into disaster area's for much of the world

[Arrian]

to Eli, Az, and Che.

Wow, Arrian, the Jews and the Commie.

I consider myself more environmentally minded the the average Joe (perhaps that's not so hard). I handle environmental claims for a major insurance company, so I see a lot of dirty ****. It's not on the level of climate change, of course - a leaking underground storage tank here, a landfill there, some dumping of industrial waste over there, etc. I see how it ends up impacting communities' drinking water supplies down the road, and I see how expensive and difficult it is to clean up - rather than preventing it in the first place.

I believe we should be doing more to take care of, and to study, our environment. Not because I get the warm fuzzies for the furry critters (though I often do, being a dog lover - they're furry), but because I think it's important to the survival and growth of the human species, of which I am a part. Crapping all over our environment is short-sighted and stupid. Ultimately, WE are the top of the food chain, and the goal is to STAY THERE. This automatically means humans > other living things. Other living things, of course, can be crucial to our future. Then again, it is important to remember that thousands (millions?) of species of life on this planet have died out in the past, and more will in the future... and we're here.

Anyway, it seems to me that the earth is a massive system that we've only been seriously studying (from a climatic standpoint) for a proverbial blink of an eye. So I don't think we've got it all figured out just yet. That does NOT mean "change nothing, stick our heads in the sand and it'll all be fine." But I think a serious, measured approach is better than the alarmist "Day After Tomorrow" crap (my goodness, what an awful movie!).

-Arrian

[child of Thor]

Do something is definately better than do nothing for sure

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4532344.stm

apart from a cold snap a month back it has been warm this winter so far in the uk?

[Solly]

It's been around average - we usually get our coldest snaps in January and February once the seas around us have cooled down enough.

[The Mad Viking]

Actually, doing something to a system you don't understand is almost always WORSE than doing nothing.

Our history of "doing something" to help environmental systems has been a road to hell, paved with good intentions.

Over and over again, our interventions have made things worse.

Mr. Viner, in the bbc article, does not understand the simplest elements of logic. Correlation does not show cause.

The simple fact is that the earth has experienced far greater temperature variances in the past than it is now.

It is folly to believe that 150 years of data will give you understanding of systems that have been operating for, say, 300 million years. That is viewing a non-random sample, on the extreme edge of the dataset, that represent .0000005 of the total dataset.

The system is far more complex than the climate activists would have you believe, and the unknowns totally overwhelm the knowns.

Even a simple system and a simple issue like forest management and fire prevention blows up completely when humans think they have too much effect, and need to control things.

In several areas of the US, concerns about forest fires spurred action. "Do something is better than do nothing, for sure," one may expect people to have said. For decades, forest fire prevention protected the forests by rapid response and highly effect fire-fighting. It was very successful. Environmentalists, naturalists, sportsmen, property owners - everyone was happy.

Then a strange thing happened. It became impossible to stop the fires. Some recognition of the problem was made by some people in the early 70's and a program to allow natural (lightning) fires to burn, with limits was introduced in Yellowstone Park. But in 1988, precipitation fell early, generating a wetter spring followed by a drier summer. Fires raged out of control. Despite herculean efforts - 25,000 fire fighters, $120 millions dollars expended, the park lost nearly 800,000 acres, over a third of its forest.

Why? Because years of aggressive fire supression had allowed the fire fuel load in the underbrush to grow to horrendous levels. Small, densely packed trees that would normally have been killed off by periodic fires which did not kill larger primary trees had not been allowed to occur. And the result was nothing less than cataclysmic.

https://<a href="http://www.nps.gov/...ture/fire/</a>

The correlation of human action and global climate response simply has not been shown, despite the bleatings of the faith-based activists.

Resource management makes sense on many levels. Reducing consumption levels of fossil fuels is a good thing. Preventing clear cut of natural forests is probably more important. I feel that the climate change activists have hi-jacked the debate on resource management and this will ultimately be found to be detrimental.

[Arrian]

Actually, doing something to a system you don't understand is almost always WORSE than doing nothing.

True.

However, one could say that cutting down on industrial pollution would not actually constitute "doing something" but rather moving back towards "doing nothing." Given that large-scale industrial activity has not been, over the course of thousands of years, the norm.

Working on lowering emissions is, as far as I can see, a no-brainer. No need to be hysterical about it, but it is something that ought to be consistently pushed. And, as we in the 1st world develop the technology for more efficient & environmentally sound widget-making, we will eventually be able to sell it to industrializing nations (who are, at this point, undergoing the old-style dirty industrial revolution... China in particular).

Aside from worries about climate change, there is the simple factor of wanting clean air & water. Personally, I'd rather not have MTBE in my drinking water...

-Arrian

[Dis]

speaking of climate change. The leaves have finally fallen from my trees. It's real late this year. Talk about global warming!!! It would be nice to have some sort of winter.

[Arrian]

Bastard. It's been in the teens and 20s most of this week here, plus 10-15mph wind. Today is warm (40ish?).

-Arrian

[Odin]

Originally posted by The Mad Viking

The simple fact is that the earth has experienced far greater temperature variances in the past than it is now.

It is folly to believe that 150 years of data will give you understanding of systems that have been operating for, say, 300 million years. That is viewing a non-random sample, on the extreme edge of the dataset, that represent .0000005 of the total dataset.

That doesn't eliminate the fact that global average temperatures are linked to CO2 levels. Also, the climate 300 million years ago has no relevence to today's climactic regime, which has only been in it's present state for about 10,000 years. And we have a hell of a lot more than 150 years of data thanks to tree rings, lake and ocean sediments, and glacier cores. The fact that the Little Ice Age ended relatively abruptly at the same time the West was industrializing most rapidly (late 1800's) just can't be a coincidence. Temperature-wise we are approaching global average temperatures not seen since the Altithermal (the warmest time of the current interglacial, about 6000 years ago), abruptly bucking the cooling trend since the Altithermal.

[Richelieu]

Had 24cm of snow here during the night. It increased my driving to work time from 45min to 75min and my driving back home time to 55min. The usual.

[Odin]

It has been snowing here off an on for two days.

[Richelieu]

I don't mind snow that much. What i hate is the humidity down here. I'd much rather have -30c back home in northern Quebec than -10c over here.