Let's talk global warming...

[Orfy]

It doesn't matter what mankind does. The Earth will do what the earth has done for millions of years with out us.

It will cool and heat and cool and heat. We will not change it.

 

[EdWort]

AlGore refuses to even debate this topic with his critics. It's all a sham, just like 30 years ago with the coming ice age scare.

I'm all for conserving non-renewable resources, but I hate environmentalist wackos that work to take away private property because of a toad, bird, or salamander, and then put ridiculous stringent controls on business & private citizens that end up costing untold amounts in taxes and economic issues.

Most of the BS AlGore wants you do do is BS and won't change how much the sun warms the earth in our current cycle. Don't forget he won't change his lifestyle, he'll just buy carbon credits from his own company to assuage his "guilt" for jetting around the world wasting gobs of energy to fuel his ego.

 

[Nyxator]

Yep, global warming deniers are just another part of an anti-intellectual movement.

It's obviously easier for some people to believe in a vast global warming conspiracy than it is to believe educated people coming to a rational consensus in their field of expertise.

As I've said before, C02 is a greenhouse gas. It holds heat and it can easily be experimentally proven. It is one of the gasses that enables life on this planet to exist because it holds heat, so it should seem obvious that having an absolutely unprecidented amount of C02 in our atmosphere would be a cause for concern.

Even if there was no global warming occuring, I want to breathe clean air. I don't want to live in a polluted city with smelly, nasty air. The nice thing is that by building, say, more nuclear power plants and vastly reducing the fossil fuel plants, we get cleaner air, and incidently, we might help reduce global warming.

I'm all for conserving non-renewable resources, but I hate environmentalist wackos that work to take away private property because of a toad, bird, or salamander, and then put ridiculous stringent controls on business & private citizens that end up costing untold amounts in taxes and economic issues.

I think that claim may need some backing. First, no one thinks that's a good solution to environmental problems. Your previous posts also seem to indicate to me that you may be disregarding economically sound solutions out of hand because you don't think global warming is happening.

One obvious solution is nuclear power. It's cheaper, makes tons of power, no one loses money in taxation, regulation, etc.

 

[user 574]

Wow. Weathermen are never wrong. This changes my thougts on everything.

This weatherperson agrees that earth is getting hotter. (NWS!)

[ame="http://www.metacafe.com/watch/466218/naked_weather_lady_part1/"]http://www.metacafe.com/watch/466218/naked_weather_lady_part1/[/ame]

 

[Cheesefood]

Cheese, haven't you missed the sarcasm smiley?

I live in Chicago. Randomly pick a weather scenario and there's a good chance it'll happen that day. I've seen snow in June and put on shorts in February. Still, they're almost never correct. Unless you're living in Hawaii where the forecast is "Sunny, 80º with light morning and afternoon showers" or England with "Cloudy", the chance of being an accurate weatherman is about the same as being an American League pitcher and having a high batting average.

So when a meteorologist (a word shockingly similar in nature to astrologist) tells me his thoughts on global warming, my first thought is this: You can't predict noon warming.

Dude, I know I'm sh!tting on your career here. No offense.

They have billions worth of sattelite, radar and doplar and the best I can get is "30% Chance of Rain", when we're in the middle of a 20 day drought. So yeah, I trust Al Gore over a dude from the Weather Channel. People actually return Al Gore's phone calls.

 

[EdWort]

Even if there was no global warming occuring, I want to breathe clean air. I don't want to live in a polluted city with smelly, nasty air. The nice thing is that by building, say, more nuclear power plants and vastly reducing the fossil fuel plants, we get cleaner air, and incidently, we might help reduce global warming.

One obvious solution is nuclear power. It's cheaper, makes tons of power, no one loses money in taxation, regulation, etc.

I'm all for nuclear power and I wish we would build a couple more refineries too, but why haven't we bothered to build them?

As far as the earth warming goes, I am not a denier, I am a doubter.

Our most reliable sources of temperature data show no global warming trend.Satellite readings of temperatures in the lower troposphere (an area scientists predict would immediately reflect any global warming) show no warming since readings began 23 years ago. These readings are accurate to within 0.01ºC, and are consistent with data from weather balloons. Only land-based temperature stations show a warming trend, and these stations do not cover the entire globe, are often contaminated by heat generated by nearby urban development, and are subject to human error.

 

[CodeRage]

Al Gore didnt have a snow balls chance in an above avarage temperature winter at winning a spelling bee so he set his sights on the Nobel Peace Prize.

tongue in cheek of course..

 

[zbeeblebrox]

i have a basic theory that the earths orbit is not a perfect elipse and there fore we somtimes drift closer to the sun. also what about the woble of the sun, i mean we know planets are around other stars becuase they woble, so wouldnt this put the sun closer to the earth at certian points. other then that i just think the climate is somthing far beyond what we can understand in the long run.

oh and also as far as i know coal power is cheaper then nuclear power. be it because of regulations, construction, disposal of waste.
check out this wiki

 

[Nyxator]

I'm all for nuclear power and I wish we would build a couple more refineries too, but why haven't we bothered to build them?

As far as the earth warming goes, I am not a denier, I am a doubter.

Our most reliable sources of temperature data show no global warming trend.Satellite readings of temperatures in the lower troposphere (an area scientists predict would immediately reflect any global warming) show no warming since readings began 23 years ago. These readings are accurate to within 0.01ºC, and are consistent with data from weather balloons. Only land-based temperature stations show a warming trend, and these stations do not cover the entire globe, are often contaminated by heat generated by nearby urban development, and are subject to human error.

If you're talking about the NOAA satellites, they did note a heating trend, albeit a smaller one than the more extreme climate change models predicted. In fact if you go their website, a recent study found a closer connection between their readings and ground readings than previously thought.

Either way, I'm fine with skepticism. I think I took too much out of your initial post that seemed to paint you as more of an ideologue than I think you are.

As for the nuclear power plants, it's against the law to build more of 'em at this point, but I think that will change soon.

 

[cheezydemon]

Unless someone wants to make a valid argument that Al gore is either: "the cause of global warming", or "a renewable energy source", can we shut the F up about Al Gore? I don't give a damn about him or his personal life. And last I checked he aint running for office!!! (forgive the vernacular, it just seemed more effective)
http://link.brightcove.com/services/link/bcpid1184423697/bctid1184380025
There. Somebody please tell me that the people at the discovery channel have no idea what they are doing, otherwise I think we have reason to be worried.

 

[Short Drive]

Unless someone wants to make a valid argument that Al gore is either: "the cause of global warming", or "a renewable energy source", can we shut the F up about Al Gore? I don't give a damn about him or his personal life. And last I checked he aint running for office!!!

But he is the face and voice of the movement.

Is buying carbon credits like indulgences in the middle ages? You can sin all you want if you pay enough. You only had to toe the line if you were poor. It was wrong then and it is now. I don't care how much money you have. If I got to toe the line then so do you. F*** Al Gore and his holier than thou Hollywood gang. Nothing they say or do will in my opinion affect climate change. They are all a bunch of f-en hypocrites. Ask Sheryl Crow how long she used one square of toilet paper. And does she eat pizza with her hands?

Damn I got started. I hate when that happens.

Oh well. RDWHAHB Thanks, I think I will.

 

[TxBrew]

I watched a show not about global warming but it was only a part of the show on what could end life for humans.

The scientists they had said there is no debate over global warming and no debate on if humans are causing it. They stated only a few rogue scientists are disagreeing with consensus.

One went further and used holocaust deniers as example. Everyone knows the Holocaust happened but yet some people really deny it did. They compared people who disagree about global warming to holocaust deniers. That it's fact now but people still want to deny it.

I haven't done enough research to make up my mind but found that curious. I know tomorrow it's going to be 90 though.

 

[Ó Flannagáin]

How long have we been accurately measuring the earth's temperature? Not that long, I don't see how we can use such a small amount of data to say something is true. Theories are great and I believe global warming could be real, but come one, we have no idea how hot it was 500 years ago ... 1000 years ago ... 2500 years ago. There are just as many theories about the earths natural cycles of hot and cold periods as there are about global warming.

I hate pollution, I hate dirty air. I hate seeing the French Broad river look like **** when you can clearly see a picture from the early 30's that has crystal water. I want to clean our environment, I want people to ride bikes more, I want solar power, but calling others ignorant for doubting is plain EAC BS.

 

[EdWort]

The scientists they had said there is no debate over global warming and no debate on if humans are causing it. They stated only a few rogue scientists are disagreeing with consensus.

That's my whole point. The nut cases say there's no debate because they refuse to debate it, yet they have no real scientific proof either. Just a consensus. Science is not based on consensus, but provable facts.

I hear the word "majority" all the time, but lets see the list of these scientists who make up this consensus and I would like to see them debate their critics.

As before, the same stuff happened 30 years ago with so called "cooling" period.

 

[TxBrew]

What about ice core samples? Don't those show temperatures dating back thousands of years or just CO2 levels.

 

[Vermicous]

The frequency of oxygen isotopes is directly affected by temperature. By examining the isotope deposits in ice core samples, the average temperature can be accurately gauged for the last 500,000 years.

 

[olllllo]

That's an odd juxtaposition Tx. Hesse avatar talking about Holocaust deniers.

 

[TxBrew]

The frequency of oxygen isotopes is directly affected by temperature. By examining the isotope deposits in ice core samples, the average temperature can be accurately gauged for the last 500,000 years.

Is there a chart that shows the trends from the core samples?

 

[Vermicous]

This has a rough chart

http://www.daviesand.com/Choices/Precautionary_Planning/New_Data/index.html

Here is the noaa site if you really want the nitty-gritty

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/icecore/antarctica/vostok/vostok_data.html

 

[TxBrew]

That's an odd juxtaposition Tx. Hesse avatar talking about Holocaust deniers.

Hesse was a Holocaust denier?

 

[Crazytwoknobs]

Shipping is a bigger factor than production of the beer itself methinks. Also, purification of the water used for cleaning/brewing probably has a large effect.


The production of meat is the #1 cause of global warming, but nobody seems to be spouting propaganda about veganism.....

What it comes down to is really:


What will you tell your kids if warming actually causes problems? What would you tell them if it didnt?


If you don't do anything, all you can say is "I didn't believe it". If you do something, you can say "it was a fad, oh well, hahaha".

 

[mrkristofo]

The biggest problem I have with this subject is how it is usually called. "Global warming" makes everybody think it's going to be warmer everywhere, and then people say "there's now freezing temps in Florida"... Well see, the more accurate term is "Climate change", because in some instances, the affect it will have on the temperature will be unpredictable.

From all that I have read (and I am by no means a meteorologist...only 3 upper div Meteo classes), it should be called "Global Weirdening" for exactly the reasons you said. I live adjacent to the snowiest mountains in the lower 48. It's mid november, and guess what? Barely any snow. Guess what else? Similar pattern last year. But guess what else? Florida is freezing. Florida can have its oranges and geriatrics, jut give me back my damn pow pow.

 

[olllllo]

Hesse was a Holocaust denier?

Juxtaposition in that that he is a contemporary of that era and I'm used to him talking about beer or banning spam.

His writing was, in fact, banned or denied if you will.

 

[Dude]

Ohhh....man. No kidding, I come back from a week long climatology conference to this? Are you guys trying to kill me?

First--I invite you over here for a global warming discussion.

I've seen some pretty ridiculous stabs in the dark in this thread. I have to question a few:

Wow...the founder of the weather channel.....

Does that make Oral Roberts God's personal advisor because he started the religeous channel?

It is OK to hate Al Gore, but to deny global warming because you don't like Al Gore is about the most politically minded thing that I have ever heard.

Glacier National park has 5 or 6 glaciers left...there were 50-60 of them in the forties.

The ice that has melted at the caps will not "grow" back unless there is an ice age. The ocean and land that are now exposed after thousands of years are darker than the snow and therefore absorb more heat from the sun, melting more snow and so on and so forth.

Did you fail to notice the drought in Atlanta?

Some people need to flip it over to the discovery channel once in a while. Oh wait! Al gore or some other weather channel hating democrat probably runs the discovery channel, right?

You are stabbing blindly at elements that have no relevance to global warming. Atlanta drought? What does that have to do with global warming? The world never had a drought before? If you are going to spout off random indices of supposed global warming, please, post some facts. I have a meteo background so I'm not going to accept just anything. Let's make this a discussion with some truth.

Ehh... right.

The Sun has a hot cycle of 11 years. The end of the last cycle was in 2002, that means that 2002 would have been the year where the average temperature on Earth would have been the highest since 1993. Funny how we're now in the lower part of the cycle and how the NASA (you know those guys with all the money and the best scientests on Earth, they went to the Moon and Mars...) said that this year is the worst in terms of the thickness of the Arctic Ice caps. But of course, just cause you bring a few (dozen) men to the Moon and back, you don't know sh** about using satellite imagery to calculate the volume of an ice cap. I mean, it's such hard science compared to building a full-bodied suit that can resist -280F (on the Moon) and ceramic tiles that can withstand near 3000F temperatures on reentry of the atmosphere... They know how to do all the different kinds of physics, but they can't do simple math to calculate the volume of an ice cap...

Ummmm... Who says the solar cycle is related at all? That theory doesn't add up.

You are right Mr. Weatherman, I don't believe you. Not just because when I hear the word liberal, I tend to tune out whatever is being said. But because numerous points are factually incorrect. Unless this was stated in the 1950's, I don't see how anyone with any sort of scientific background can believe these statements.

Help me here. What is incorrect?

I'm so damn sick of fear mongering scare tactics: global warming, war on Terror etc..... The Jury is still out, and will be for a long time. There is no dissent that average temps are going up, however, there is no credible proof (nor may there aver be), that we have a lot to do with it.

Basic social science: A population in fear is easier to control.

Besides, aren't we all having this discussion as we sip on a albeit tasty, but alas proven poison?

Ahhhhh. Some common sense.

NASA admits error in gobal warming data only after someone else found it and pointed it out.

http://news.mongabay.com/2007/0817-nasa_snafu.html

Here in Atlanta the data is based on flawed data collected at ATL airport.

As an example when the official reporting center at ATL report temps as high as
42* F. I am less than 20 miles away and am regularly scraping frost off my winsheld unless I'm sadly mistaken water freezes at 32*F or less.

The largest temp difference was 44*F and I had frost 20 miles away. And this is not California we don't have micro climates down here.


Maybe gobal warming is happening, maybe it isn't. Maybe we are causing it, maybe we aren't. But how can anyone with a oz. of common sense think the govt can make things better. They can't even deliver disaster relief to huricane victims in a timely manner or secure the borders and that's their main freakin jobs.

Rant over

Ahhhhhh.....some more common sense. However, you CAN have frost at a warmer temp than 32°. Just for future reference.

Here on earth life is carbon based if you control carbon, you control life itself, a bureaucrats dream come true.

And it has been proven already, temperature drives carbon dioxide levels, not vice versa. Think about that. Al Gore was wrong, sorry.

I live in Chicago. Randomly pick a weather scenario and there's a good chance it'll happen that day. I've seen snow in June and put on shorts in February. Still, they're almost never correct. Unless you're living in Hawaii where the forecast is "Sunny, 80º with light morning and afternoon showers" or England with "Cloudy", the chance of being an accurate weatherman is about the same as being an American League pitcher and having a high batting average.

So when a meteorologist (a word shockingly similar in nature to astrologist) tells me his thoughts on global warming, my first thought is this: You can't predict noon warming.

Dude, I know I'm sh!tting on your career here. No offense.

They have billions worth of sattelite, radar and doplar and the best I can get is "30% Chance of Rain", when we're in the middle of a 20 day drought. So yeah, I trust Al Gore over a dude from the Weather Channel. People actually return Al Gore's phone calls.

First, no offense taken. I've been wrong many times.

Please don't generalize meteorologists though. Just because the National Weather Service chooses to dilute their forecast accuracy by giving percentages, doesn't mean every meteorologist does. The Air Force has a strict time-based forecast that gives very little leeway on accuracy. Either you are right, or you are amending to be right. It is a complicated process, but I'll tell you--over the past 16 years I've worked with some amazing weather forecasters. I've also worked with some really bad ones too. I think however, that you'd be amazed at how accurate we can get. Of course the AF doesn't hedge like the NWS does.

Just found this:

http://shop.newbelgium.com/sustainability.php

Finally, on topic!!!!!!

I was actually going to post this as well. IIRC, when we toured the NB brewery, they said they were operating at close to 98% "green". They even have a water purification plant of their own. It was all pretty amazing.

 

[Ó Flannagáin]

The frequency of oxygen isotopes is directly affected by temperature. By examining the isotope deposits in ice core samples, the average temperature can be accurately gauged for the last 500,000 years.

I'm sorry, but I take that with a grain of salt. I don't think any science is "to the degree" accurate about what the weather was on a daily basis 500,000 years ago. Even if they think they are, there's no way to prove it. IT WAS HALF A MILLION YEARS AGO! And, we are debating over a few degrees here anyway, not the average for a 5000 years or so period.

 

[cheezydemon]

"Global Warning" on the history channel last night was the most comprehensive thing I have seen on global warming. I suggest you catch it if it comes on again.

Global warmings and Ice ages have happened before, and they all coincided with co2 and methane levels(and other greenhouse gasses). Heat creates co2? to an extent perhaps. Heat is releasing the co2 and methane in the permafrost it is melting, adding to the vicious cycle.

China has 500 new coal burning power plants either in the works or on the slate for the very near future.
They are expected to overtake the USA in pollution and co2 emissions by 2010. All of the third world countries are scrambling to follow suit which will create even more demand for energy and even more pollution.

And excuse me DUDE, droughts and elevated storms are effects that can be related to global warming.

We have had 2 fairly serious droughts here in the last 3 years and never had one before. So yes, while nothing is proven, I see these droughts that are popping up more and more frequently as signs of changes to come. I'm happy you had fun at the conference, but I am entitled to my opinion, and for all that you know, I am right....dude.

 

[cheezydemon]

http://www.history.com/shows.do?action=detail&episodeId=251203

This was really eye opening. The temp changes that they predict by core samples are confirmed by bones(or the lack of them after a point) of animals that lived at the time, confirming that huge climate chang occured at that time, rendering them extinct.

 

[Aiko]

We have had 2 fairly serious droughts here in the last 3 years and never had one before. So yes, while nothing is proven, I see these droughts that are popping up more and more frequently as signs of changes to come. I'm happy you had fun at the conference, but I am entitled to my opinion, and for all that you know, I am right....dude.

You use the word "never" very loosely. How do you know you "never" had a drought there 1,000 years ago or 10,000 years ago. Where are your temp and hydro records from those times? Official record keeping of weather data didnt start until the late 1800's so that means we have 100+ years of "real" data? How can you base your assumptions on the global climate change on limited data sets. I know you will says ice cores or whatever, but how accurate are those? They just realized that Co2 follows temp not the other way. I agree we are in a warming trend, but to say "WE" are the cause is an outlandish statement, the earth will continue to go through these cycles well after Man is gone. And the people who continue to say there is a "unanimous consensus" from the scientists, they are wrong. Many involved with the IPCC disagreed and some even quite because of many of the so called facts were not factual, only theory.

 

[cheezydemon]

http://www.history.com/shows.do?acti...isodeId=251203

This show was on the history channel last night. Very eye opening. Core samples from ice and land show that global warmings and ice ages happen, always in a direct relation to green house gases( co2, methane etc.). The fact is, the USA, soon to be overtaken by china, dumps huge quantities of co2 and other pollution into the atmosphere. The huge forests that were the natural scrubbers of co2 are being cut down and destroyed throwing what was a balance into a vicious cycle of melting perma frost and escalated drought and severe storm activity.
Humans are driving this warming.

 

[cheezydemon]

Yep, Global Warming, the next religion, designed by AlGore to tax your money, change how you live, and control your life.

I get it that you hate Al Gore. Cool. But he isn't running for office, what is he getting from your taxes?

 

[cheezydemon]

I just said that global warmings and ice ages have happened before. It is foolish to ignore clues that we are given that another one may be looming.
So take it a little more literally, "We"(ie the people LIVING here now) have never had one. OK?

 

[Whiskey]

Well here's my opinion...

First of all I will state that I do believe that the Earth is warming. I also believe that man has made in an impact on the effects of this warming period. I also believe that regardless of what version of global warming you subscribe to, we should be conscious of how we treat our planet, its resources and the wildlife that inhabit this planet.

Let me get the Al Gore issue out of the way now. I think Gore is a modern day carpet bagger, he is taking a sensitive issue and making a profit off of it. It is a fact that Mr. Gore pays carbon credits though a company he partly owns and chairs, Generation Investment Management. It is also a fact that he was vice president for 8 freaking years and never made a peep about Global Warming when he was in a position to actually do something productive. I will however commend Mr Gore for bringing to light the fact that we do need to be cognisant of how we treat our planet. Of course I think it is sad it took sensationalism to bring that obvious fact to light. I just think the movement could have used a better figure head. As far as him not running, how much you want to bet he drops his name in the hat sometime soon, wouldn't that be convenient? I'll start respecting the man when he starts touring the states in a solar powered car or by horse drawn carriage instead of bouncing around in his private jet and living in his mansion.

I believe in the theory that we are in a natural warming cycle. The last Ice age was only a few days ago in the life cycle of this planet. Sure they can take ice sample and get an idea of what the temperature were 500,000 years ago, but is not 100% accurate, to say it is is ridiculous. The only way scientists could know what temperatures are would be to get hot in building a time machine.

However, even if this is a natural warming cycle, I would bet that mankind may be doing damage to how the climate reacts to these changes, we may be helping the change along and may be hindering the planet being able to "bounce back".

I do not subscribe to the "sky is falling" theory. However if it gets people to pollute less and stop deforestation, I'm all for it. I do agree we are making a negative impact, deforestation, urban sprawl (this is especially true in the US) rampant pollution of water sources, reckless hunting and fishing practices, over population, etc.

My biggest pet peeve is how all of the Global Warming fanatics are spouting it as fact, it also pisses me off that they have the audacity to suggest you can "buy" your way into saving the planet, if the Carbon Credit scheme isn't the best money making scam of the last 200 years I'd be shocked. That's like letting people hunting endangered species because they paid a "endangered species credit", then saying it's okay because the money goes to saving another species, completely moronic. Also the fact they refuse to officially debate the issue has me worried.

Anyways I'm all for education in being more environment friendly, I'm all for finding alternate energy sources, I'm all for subscribing to the fact that we have to do something to stop deforestation, pollution and urban sprawl. But to say we are the sole cause for global warming is a stretch to say the least.

 

[cheezydemon]

I was on both of these threads before they were combined. This post is to alert you that I have not been posting 3 posts in a row....lol, not that anyone cares.

Education is Key. Anyone who is convinced that they know what is happening in ablsolutely certain terms, or who is convinced that they should feel one way or the other because of Al Gore or any kind of political affiliation, are really doing themselves and their planet a dis-service. We need to find out as much info as we can, and from there make an informed decision.

Anyone else who wants to mention AG.....(hmmmm) by that I don't mean the source of your ingredients, please start an Al Gore thread, since he has no measurable effect on the planets change, or lack of change.

 

[rohanski]

This "global warming" issue is my pet peeve. A while back this subject came up on another thread and all I was asking anyone to do was read. I didn't get preachy I was just asking them to read. I was pretty much railed by a few insinuating that I was ignorant and they even offered help explaining it. I can also read.

Believe it or not this issue has been around since the early 80's and the Chicken Little’s are at the same place they were at 25 years ago accept now it has become an emotional issue vacant of properly assessed data meaning they are throwing out data that doesn't prove their theories. When "global warming" first came around it didn't have a name yet but scientists were perusing a theory that Co2 was causing an increase temperature. The evidence presented in the main stream now leaves out critical data because it would send up red flags and expose what is really going on.

What it boils down to is it ain't going away until the politicians get a really big tax. Face it. And it all relies on people being too damn lazy to just read.

 

[Kevin Dean]

Methane is a more serious threat to global temps than carbon dioxide is. We'd see a noticable drop in methane production if we all just drove the entire bovine population extinct, but man we love our beef.

Global Warming (notice the capitals) is propaganda and fear-mongering even if it's true. I, however, doubt that it is. The Earth is pretty clearly undergoing a warming trend but we simply haven't had the capacity to accurately measure global climate long enough to make more than educated guesses. Humans have existed for a cosmic "blink of the eye" and have had the mental capacity to observe and understand the universe for much less time. I'm not a creationist at all and I find some of the arguements they use to be funny, but can someone SCIENTIFICALLY PROVE that God didn't create fossils 6,000 years ago that had isotopes that would be consistent with million year old fossils?

The point is "No matter what science we throw at an issue today, the results of scientific analysis depend on the science being right" and frankly I'm not sure I have that much faith in it.

While people (mainly the media, but laymen too) argue about the science of global warming, I'll dispute the other side: the human impact.

It's often cited that the increase in temps will harm food production world-wide causing people to starve. At first glance, this makes sense until you actually look at a projected climate map. In the Midwest US, for instance, food production is expected to drop about 50%. IT'S GOT NOWHERE TO GO BUT DOWN. It's one of the most fertile, densely farmed areas for food.

Other places, however, like Russia and Canada will actually see an INCREASE in arable land due to the reduction of permafrost and the increase to "termprate" that was once frigid.

The problem is that the world super-powers, like the US, will be distrupted not that the "world" or humanity will die. When we discuss "global" change you've got to factor in the African land in poor, desolate villages that will now sustain food crops AS WELL AS the Dustbowl 2.0.

The great thing about humans is we adapt pretty well. The bad thing is that most people are intolerant of change and they like to gripe.

 

[njnear76]

Now is the best time to move on to environmentally safe and plentiful fuel alternatives. They do exist, but it will take research and engineering to take advantage of them.

It doesn't matter whether or not global warming exists or whether or not it is man made. If it is occurring, the human race will find a way to cope. We are good like that.

That being said, we owe it to ourselves, future generations, and the other animals on this planet to not trash the only home we have. That means getting off non-polluting and limited fuel sources immediately, and researching bio-fuels, nuclear energy (short term solution), etc... We also need to cleanup the messes we made (nuclear waste, PCB, oil spills, pesticides, etc...) and learn from our past mistakes.

As a species we should know better. It shouldn't come to any surprise that our general disregard for our fellow man and our planet is coming back to haunt us in the forms of a tainted food supply, and devastating natural disasters.

Granted you can't avoid everything, but the only reason why Katrina was so bad was because the wetlands, which formed a natural hurricane barrier were destroyed to make room for more industry and McMansions.

 

[zbeeblebrox]

That being said, we owe it to ourselves, future generations, and the other animals on this planet to not trash the only home we have. That means getting off non-polluting and limited fuel sources immediately, and researching bio-fuels, nuclear energy (short term solution), etc... We also need to cleanup the messes we made (nuclear waste, PCB, oil spills, pesticides, etc...) and learn from our past mistakes.

As a species we should know better. It shouldn't come to any surprise that our general disregard for our fellow man and our planet is coming back to haunt us in the forms of a tainted food supply, and devastating natural disasters.

Granted you can't avoid everything, but the only reason why Katrina was so bad was because the wetlands, which formed a natural hurricane barrier were destroyed to make room for more industry and McMansions.

I would like to see what you mean by tainted food supply? I have not heard anything of this. and aren't natural disasters always devastating. hence the disaster part.

but i digress. bio fuels are a good idea but i think it would require quite a lot of research and genetical engineering to get a plant that can produce enough fuel for everyone without taking up all of our farmland, because i would like to be able to eat in the future.

As for cleaning up i believe that the United States does this quite well already. We have everything regulated so that we can avoid spilling oil or having a nuclear melt down(which has never happened in America). not to mention the good natured people of this country that are willing to be inconvenienced and taxed for these issues.

Same thing goes for deforestation at least in America check this out

 

[cheezydemon]

The only problem is that ice ages and global warmings in the past have not stopped at a few degrees. The cycle speeds itself up.

 

[cheezydemon]

Manufacturing produces far more co2 than breweries.

 

[njnear76]

I would like to see what you mean by tainted food supply? I have not heard anything of this. and aren't natural disasters always devastating. hence the disaster part.

I was talking about pollution of our water system, mercury in our fish, chemicals in our cows, cancer causing pesticides in our fruits and vegetables, etc... The USA has gotten a lot better about cleaning up our messes, but we also need to encourage other nations to do the same. Pollution in China for example will effect us too.

As far as natural disasters goes... There are some places we shouldn't live: flood zones, places susceptible to wild fires, marshes that could provide hurricane protection, etc... Forest fires, hurricanes, and floods will occur, but perhaps if we are wise about where we build and what we do, the impact to our society could be less. There is a lot of land in this country. There's no point in building on a fault line.

It's a bit off topic, but my point is that we can't piss in the well that sustains us and expect to thrive.