What are your thoughts on global warming?

[mgmine]

Hello
Well weather you beleave we/humans are the cause
(although I think we are rapping/destroying this world)
The fact is it is happening and we.are.not doing enough to even slow it down let alone stop it. I don't we can stop it, I feel the world will take of it self and do a clean start again.
Ruben

?
What would a clean start look like? If we didn't have global warming the earth would still be covered in ice and uninhabited. If we didn't have fossil fuels we would still be in the dark ages. There could not have bee an industrial revolution without coal and oil. Stop using it today and see what the world would be like in a week. The opinions that people have are based on whet they read. This goes for the scientists as well as the layman. As I said before they are using computer models. To be correct you have to have correct information. If all you can think about is fossil fuels then that is all you will study. Expand your thinking "out of the box" and maybe something that wasn't considered before will turn up. It's easy to blame mankind on causing the problem because we can be controlled. It's not so easy to blame good ole mother nature.

 

[mgmine]

I agree, but that brings back to what I said earlier, that if we take that route and ignore who is affected by that action, I fear that extreme governments will be elected and work against the goal of reducing CO2 output.

I would vote for more money to be spent on research towards better technology but to first earn that money we need to profit from traditional avenues.

.

Instead of trying to change the weather do research into living with it. Why doom and gloom instead of celebrating warmer weather. If the weather turns cold again like it did in the 1970's there will be a lot more fossil flues being burned, much shorter growing seasons, much more of everything that goes with cold weather.

 

[MitchM]

Instead of trying to change the weather do research into living with it. Why doom and gloom instead of celebrating warmer weather. If the weather turns cold again like it did in the 1970's there will be a lot more fossil flues being burned, much shorter growing seasons, much more of everything that goes with cold weather.

I also agree with more funding for how to live within our climate change situation.
Unfortunately, I think that climate change will cause large areas of the earth to become uninhabitable, while other areas open up to new human settlement and farming regions.
That change will cause quite a bit of disruption to the existing populations and will bring unpredictable (for now), and most likely, negative consequences.
The change in the ocean's temperature and CO2 levels, plus our harvesting of now threatened species are happening a rate that evolution can't keep up with.
Evolution will catch up to us humans, and not in a good way.

.

 

[mgmine]

I also agree with more funding for how to live within our climate change situation.
Unfortunately, I think that climate change will cause large areas of the earth to become uninhabitable, while other areas open up to new human settlement and farming regions.
That change will cause quite a bit of disruption to the existing populations and will bring unpredictable (for now), and most likely, negative consequences.
The change in the ocean's temperature and CO2 levels, plus our harvesting of now threatened species are happening a rate that evolution can't keep up with.
Evolution will catch up to us humans, and not in a good way.

.

Yes I hear that too but again I ask what real harm will it do? So the ocean levels rise all that means is that the shore lines move back. That in turn means that cities will have to be rebuilt and that in itself is not a bad thing. People may have to move elsewhere they have done that since the beginning of life. Crops that require cooler temperatures will be grown elsewhere. Those that require warmer weather will be grown elsewhere. Science will develop new forms of corn and wheat ones that can grow stronger and quicker. That will enable the growing population to have more food. Man can't change nature he can only adapt to it. Start the planning now instead of trying to change nature. We build stronger buildings because of earthquakes that haven't happened yet. We build houses on tall piers for storm surges that haven't happened yet. We prepare for a lot of things that may never happen. We don't spend time and resources trying to prevent earthquakes or hurricanes or tidal waves or volcano's or..or..or..

 

[mgmine]

Is this true or not? I don't know which is why I am skeptical. I checked out the NASA web site and all I found was a lot of trying to explain things that started with "scientists can't be sure but think"... this is the problem that when ever a new finding doesn't match the general accepted facts the reason usually starts out like this. I also checked out the climatologist Dr. Judith Curry mentioned and she in fact is a real person. I always do this to verify that the information being presented is fact and not made up names or statistics. So read this and think about it.

http://www.thegwpf.com/record-drop-in-global-temperatures-as-el-nino-warming-ends/

Here is the other side of the argument and how it's explained away

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/jpl/study-sheds-new-insights-into-global-warming-trends

 

[MitchM]

Yes I hear that too but again I ask what real harm will it do? So the ocean levels rise all that means is that the shore lines move back. That in turn means that cities will have to be rebuilt and that in itself is not a bad thing. People may have to move elsewhere they have done that since the beginning of life. Crops that require cooler temperatures will be grown elsewhere. Those that require warmer weather will be grown elsewhere. Science will develop new forms of corn and wheat ones that can grow stronger and quicker. That will enable the growing population to have more food. Man can't change nature he can only adapt to it. Start the planning now instead of trying to change nature. We build stronger buildings because of earthquakes that haven't happened yet. We build houses on tall piers for storm surges that haven't happened yet. We prepare for a lot of things that may never happen. We don't spend time and resources trying to prevent earthquakes or hurricanes or tidal waves or volcano's or..or..or..

As we deplete the world's oceans of food for ourselves, we will need to turn more towards land based foods which will require more intensive agricultural and livestock production - both net contributors to CO2 levels. As different geographical areas of agriculture open up, those areas will need to have a certain quantity of organic matter in the soil, but I'm not familiar enough with those figures yet so I can't speak on that.

I view salt water reefs as an indicator species, much like land based amphibians. These animals are not establishing themselves in newer areas. Change is happening too fast.
Without the large diversity of the smaller animals, larger species will not survive either so being at the top of the food chain, we will be the last ones to die out, but we will still die out without the supporting infrastructure that allows us to survive.

.

 

[morewater]

Since most trucks and locomotives are powered by diesel fuel which has an overall smaller footprint than gasoline and certainly coal, I would opt for rail and truck delivery.
Just because a method does not pollute the air but can greatly pollute soil and water does not make it better for the environment.
If any positive action is to be taken to combat climate change/global warming, then distribution of all fossil fuel needs to be frozen at present levels and then reduced as cleaner forms of energy become available. Expanding the distribution system is, without a doubt, a step in the wrong direction and counterproductive to addressing this global environmental threat.

Lac Megantic

 

[Riftlake]

Farting cows in California causing the planet to heat up: http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/storie...ME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2016-11-29-01-43-12

 

[Meyer Jordan]

I would vote for more money to be spent on research towards better technology but to first earn that money we need to profit from traditional avenues.

To me, that approach is just kicking the can down the road. Action needs to be taken 'yesterday' not sometime in the distant future. There is not going to be any easy way to do what needs be done.

 

[MitchM]

To me, that approach is just kicking the can down the road. Action needs to be taken 'yesterday' not sometime in the distant future. There is not going to be any easy way to do what needs be done.

I agree with you, but I'm taking into account human nature as I see it.
Someone once said that humans will do the right thing, after we have tried all other methods.
Maybe it was Mark Twain.

.

 

[Meyer Jordan]

I agree with you, but I'm taking into account human nature as I see it.
Someone once said that humans will do the right thing, after we have tried all other methods.
Maybe it was Mark Twain.

.

It was Mark Twain, but I believe that he was a little more specific....that America will do the right thing after it has tried all other methods. We are the world's premier 'can kickers'.

 

[MitchM]

Even if we could get the USA to cease CO2 emissions by 100% tomorrow, that would only take away 30% of total world emissions.
China is currently running into a wall of cost issues with their solar panel production.
http://seekingalpha.com/article/4026774-crisis-american-solar-manufacturing-fall-first-solar

This issue of climate change is constantly running into the issue of money and it's pretty difficult for our western economies to dictate to less fortunate countries that they won't be able to participate in our ongoing displays of wealth.

.

 

[Meyer Jordan]

Even if we could get the USA to cease CO2 emissions by 100% tomorrow, that would only take away 30% of total world emissions.
China is currently running into a wall of cost issues with their solar panel production.
http://seekingalpha.com/article/4026774-crisis-american-solar-manufacturing-fall-first-solar

This issue of climate change is constantly running into the issue of money and it's pretty difficult for our western economies to dictate to less fortunate countries that they won't be able to participate in our ongoing displays of wealth.

.

This is all covered in the Paris agreement.
http://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2015/12/a-readers-guide-to-the-paris-agreement/420345/

 

[MitchM]

As with any climate change agreement, countries seem to feel they can drop out as conditions dictate. Remember Kyoto?
China has dropped their emissions output, but I think it's more because of a drop in their manufacturing activity. They're no longer building their ghost cities and I use copper prices as a general construction indicator. Copper prices are way down.
Yes, China is building a lot of wind power, but a lot of it is going unused because they don't have the distribution infrastructure or demand anymore to have a use for it.
There are a lot of "make work" projects in China and their citizens are constantly demanding higher wages.

Just to show how much the Chinese actually buy into global warming and rising sea levels, they are financing a new sea level city in Malaysia.
Actions speak louder than words.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/featu...ar-singapore-scares-the-hell-out-of-everybody

.

 

[Meyer Jordan]

Just to show how much the Chinese actually buy into global warming and rising sea levels, they are financing a new sea level city in Malaysia.
Actions speak louder than words.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/featu...ar-singapore-scares-the-hell-out-of-everybody

This is not about rising sea levels but selling real estate to people that ignore the world around them. This is just 'business as usual'. What do the developers care if the sea levels rise? They plan on having sold enough units before that happens. They will not be the losers.