Global warming causes trouble in Siberia

We should find a way to power the earth using all those greenhouse gases that are trapped in the atmosphere. Make climate change a good thing!

 

If we ever figure out artificial photosynthesis, we could do that.

 

Man, a bunch of y'all take this shit real personal, dontcha?

Cheer up. Tomorrow will be worse.

 

We just enjoy being touch with reality. You should check it out, we have facts and evidence here. It's far superior to the alternatives. It's also easier to defend because we can back it up and not have to prance around lies and misinformation.

If the doubters were right, they would have proven it by now. Especially since whoever found actual evidence that climate change isn't caused by humans or isn't happening would likely get all the money they could ever want from oil companies.

 

Imagine people taking the future of the planet their children are supposed to live on "personal."

But seriously, you'd have more fun in threads like this by learning about the topic and having something interesting to say. It's worth trying. For next time, obviously.

 

But it's so much easier to be selfish and only consider yourself. We'll be dead in a few decades, so it doesn't matter what happens after that, especially to your own children and their children. They should have been born earlier when we had it good, so really it's their own fault.

 

Yeah, and it's not like global warming is creating acute crisis anywhere.

 

True, it isn't affecting anyone at all.

 

given the "Operation SnowBall" antics, I think the jury is in for "Paid", "Really"...oh, and no offense taken. We had a "moment of all-country face-palm" on that one.

Clear evidence abounds by some posters here of the adage that "ignorance is bliss" can easily morph into "ignorance is dangerous."

Something MacLeod said above really resonated with me. If it is true that Humanity is only one factor in Global Warming, Climate Change, Planetary Realignment, whathaveyou,
why on Earth would we NOT do what we could to mitigate and adjust what we do, how we do it, and why we do what we do to our environment. A version of that serenity prayer, "...change what (we) can.."

There are any number of Companies/Corporations/Multi-Nationals who are already reaping the benefits of and/or becoming aware of consumers that will be loyal purchasers of more "Green" or "Environmentally Friendly" or Sustainable" products and services. Profit still being Queen, there is much profit to be made making changes in manufactoring, distributing and delivering these more friendly products and services.

Pretending (or more horifically, believeing) there is no past, present and future impact on our orb, and it is just cyclical and it will go away and it is just a blip and it is Obama's fault will only delay and detract from actions and solutions we need now.

There were those in other threads who poo-pooed us ever getting to the "world as it is in Star Trek" as a society.

They may be correct.

 

I've never understood the resistance so many have to the notion of climate change, most people are either willfully ignorant or actually ignorant as to what that term means.

The big one is confusing weather with climate. Weather goes up and down in fits and struggles and other than some vague idea of what to expect in certain areas of the world it's hard to really know how it works. Yes, your local weatherman dropped the ball on predicting this weekend's snow storm, but that's because weather is a balance and if one thing changes it throws the whole thing out of whack. But, still, in a general sense the weatherman can get in range. Maybe you get a dusting rather than those several inches. Maybe it's 40 outside instead of 35. As far as weather is concerned these are fairly acceptable margins of error.

Climate isn't scaled in terms of days, weeks or even months. It's not even scaled in terms of years. Rather it's looked at in terms of decades, scores, and centuries. In terms of looking at ice core samples it's looked at in terms of millennia.

And when you look at it like that it's easy to see a trend. (I.E. Al Gore's scissor lift graph.)

Think of your bank account and look at it between pay checks. You started off this period with x-amount of dollars and by the end of the period you have x-y dollars. Do you say, "Well, I'm not making money!" Or do you broaden your look at the checkbook and see that once every week or two you get an infusion of cash? And when you broaden it out you see that even though you enter these periods of spending money you're still overly trending upward. (Assuming your expenses aren't greater than income.)

Climate and weather are the same way. Weather goes up and down and is fickle. Climate shows a trend over a long period of time.

Now, is the climate's change man-made or just the Earth's cycle? Since we have ice at the polar caps we're still technically in an ice-age, though coming out of one or in the "quieter" period of one. That's hard to say but it's also hard to ignore the presence of green-house gases in ice core samples and the presence and quantity of those gases basically track with the industrial revolution when we started pumping this crap in the air.

But let us ignore all of that. Let us say that this climate change is not being caused by humans and it's just a natural process. Afterall, those ice-core samples only go back a few centuries and this planet has been here for vastly longer than that. You get a glass of water out of the ocean, there's no fish in it, does that mean there's no fish in the ocean?

So, allowing that...

So what?

What's the harm in making changes anyway and going with greener options. Even if it's not having a meaningful impact on the global climate impacts on the local climate are certainly happening when it comes to the burning of fossil fuels in urban areas. We've seen hazes and fogs of automobile exhausts hovering over and in cities, we know air-quality is impacted in a variety of ways depending on how weather conditions are allowing pollution to move away from cities. It can be seen and observed on the sides of buildings and on greenery in cities that car exhaust collects there and covers everything in grime.

Maybe it's not impacting the environment on a global scale but isn't at least locally making things a bit harder to live in? It's certainly not healthy to breathe in car exhaust and covering buildings and trees in exhaust and soot isn't looking good.

So would it really be *that* bad if we endeavored to make a change just so that things smell and look nice? Not saying we have to make changes overnight but certainly if we look more into alternative fuels, making more fuel-efficient engines, or finding other ways to power cars we'd be better off on a local scale.

If we look to other ways of generating power for our cities other than fossil fuels, things would still be cleaner and we wouldn't be dependent on scarce resources that we can only get my blowing up and damaging huge areas of the Earth's surface with mines and explosives.

Maybe it won't change the overall climate of the planet but, shit, wouldn't it still in some respects be better for you, personally, than it is now? Would it really be *bad* if you walked down the street not breathing in the exhaust from dozens of cars?

Fine, changing our behavior won't have an impact on the planet. But it will have an impact on our local communities.

 

We all need to stop passing gas.

 

Anyone who studied math or geography since the time Eratosthenes (died 195 BCE) knew it wasn't flat.

Those totally ignorant of science? Yes. But we probably shouldn't be listening to them about science.

 

"An argument from ignorance occurs when either a proposition is assumed to be true because it has not yet been proved false or a proposition is assumed to be false because it has not yet been proved true. This has the effect of shifting the burden of proof to the person criticizing the proposition, but is not valid reasoning."

 

The stupid in this thread really burns. It burns so much.

Kudos to Emilia, BigJake, Chilli, and Awesome Possum for taking the time to debunk the garbage on parade.

 

Post any peer reviewed evidence that climate change isn't real and isn't being caused mainly by human activity. So far all I see is a lot of talk and nothing to back it up.

I dare you.

 

There's a fair amount of this out there, actually, so it's not a high bar to clear (and doesn't prove anything, anyway.)

 

I'd like to see any that would cause us to have to reevaluate the mountains of evidence that supports climate change. At this point it's like disproving evolution. A lot of people doubt it, but anyone to says it is either an idiot or repeating an idiot.

 

What about those who don't deny climate change, but accept that things simply change (man made or not)?

I think that if our current society existed 10,000 years ago, we'd have panicked over the European glaciers melting. The spot I'm sitting right now, typing this, was covered with hundreds of meters of ice. I agree that change was extremely bad.

I don't see the connection between "climate change" and "death upon us all" that some people seem to see.


Or those who don't think that it's all just man made?

 

If everyone who feels certain that climate change will harm their grandchildren would stop using electricity and motorized transportation we might actually make some progress.

---------------