Global warming

ndbiker

In the 1970's we were all going to die of starvation because of the ice age we were causing because of pollution. If that didn't do it the population boom was going to cause us to not to be able to produce enough food to feed all the people on the planet by the late 1970's. Along with killer bees, various viruses, and perhaps a stray asteriod it's amazing we're still around. So far none have transpired. The media loves disaster scenarios and people love to dream them up. Scientists can get funding to study them so it feeds on itself. We have a tough time predicting tomorrows weather, what makes us think we can even begin to predict our affect on the climate? Reducing pollution, conservation,working to shift to renewable energy sources, reducing our dependence on others for our energy needs are laudable goals for their own sake. I don't need to be scared into making changes.

limerickman

The science tells us that if the present rate of greenhouse gas emmissions is maintained, the earths mean temperature will rise by 3 - 4 degrees celsius.
That rise is a fact - and it is incontrovertible.

What pattern any subsequent weather pattern changes are inflicted, as a result of that increase, are largely academic.
What should be concentrating minds is maintaining (or ideally reducing)
current/future temperature increases.
The only way to do this is for the world to cut greenhouse gas emmissions - now.

__________________
.."But finally the last thing I’ll say to the people who don’t believe in cycling, the cynics and the sceptics. I'm sorry for you. I’m sorry that you can’t dream big. [I]I'm sorry you don't believe in miracles. You should believe in these athletes, and you should believe in these people. I'll be a fan of the Tour de France for as long as I live. And there are no secrets" - this is a hard sporting event and hard work wins it - Armstrong 2005 TDF
morelike hypocrisy.

ndbiker

I realize that many scientist are saying just what you indicate. Many also say(although less quoted) that while there has been nominal increase in temperature over the past hundred years the expected future increase should be much milder than the 3-4 degrees C which you have quoted. Since much of this is theory based on computer models, the observed increases have been anywhere from .3 degrees to 1 degree in the past hundred years depending on the source, I am still of the opinion that far easier to induce mass hysteria than to prove that we are heading for some impending catastrophe. Since we love a good catastrophe it is milked for all it's worth. If you want to reduce CO2 emissions just mandate that all gasoline and diesel fuels smell like rotting carcasses when burned. Then folks will have a real motivation to reduce auto emissions.

limerickman

2,500 scientists have put their name to a report issued in Paris this week by UNESCO, which states that temperatures will rise by 3-4 degrees Celsius.

Since Kyoto we have had challenges by scientists - funded by companies such as Exxon - claiming that the evidence of global warming through greenhouse emmissions was bogus.
Their claims that there was no increase in global termperatures or that greenhouse emmissions are causing environmental problems has now been quashed.
That part of the debate is over. Finito.




Incorrect.




Auto emmissions are only part of the problem.
Emmissions from all fossil fuels (gas/oil/coal/hydrocarbons) constitute greenhouse gases.
As they're burned, they release carbon in to the atmosphere - and therein lies the problem.
Reduce all emmissions is the key.

Ideally, we need to develop a strategy to obtain energy without resorting to fossil fuel sources.

__________________
.."But finally the last thing I’ll say to the people who don’t believe in cycling, the cynics and the sceptics. I'm sorry for you. I’m sorry that you can’t dream big. [I]I'm sorry you don't believe in miracles. You should believe in these athletes, and you should believe in these people. I'll be a fan of the Tour de France for as long as I live. And there are no secrets" - this is a hard sporting event and hard work wins it - Armstrong 2005 TDF
morelike hypocrisy.

Flyer's.Finale!

Over population is yet another unspeakable issue re; CO2 emmissions.

In the USA we have SUVs driving up to Star Buck for coffee drinks.

And we are constructing 14 brand new Air Force Bases in Iraq as we contemplate invading Iran from Iraq.

$10 trillion in oil reserves in Iraq alone--at current wholesale prices is why the USA will NEVER leave the middle east.

CO2 emmissions, blood for oil, SUVs and bully tactics are the game---marketing, politics, denial and counter-stories sell the mission to a global marketplace.

The Double Zero

Surely no one can dispute that global warming is a reality,
Down in Aus we are experiencing the worst drought in history, there has not been any rain of significance for at least 5 years and the official drought situation is over 10 years.
In my town we are on stage 4 water restrictions, water usage for things such as washing cars, watering lawn, hosing gardens etc is banned.
There are bushfires going beserk there has been one burning since Christmas that has burned out millions of hectares.
Farmers are losing their farms as they cant grow anything to make money, it is bad sh*t

__________________
Nothin's faster than the Double Zero.

limerickman

DZ - there are some people who do still deny which is baffling given the evidence before us.



I heard a guy being interviewed on local radio here about the Barrier Reef in Aus.
This scientist has been studying the Reef for the past 15 years and has said that the coral (on the Reef) is literally dying because sea temperatures have risen year on year in that part of the world.

__________________
.."But finally the last thing I’ll say to the people who don’t believe in cycling, the cynics and the sceptics. I'm sorry for you. I’m sorry that you can’t dream big. [I]I'm sorry you don't believe in miracles. You should believe in these athletes, and you should believe in these people. I'll be a fan of the Tour de France for as long as I live. And there are no secrets" - this is a hard sporting event and hard work wins it - Armstrong 2005 TDF
morelike hypocrisy.

EoinC

DR was correct - Global warming will not kill Planet Earth - but it'll make it a mite uncomfy for those species who are affected directly, or indirectly, by small climate changes. Some may be worse off (eg humans) and some may be better off (eg non-coastal dwelling ants).
Many of these effects may be hard to quantify - eg Antarctica is a breeding ground for oceanic life. A small change in temperature there has a large effect upon the pace of the local ecosystem (no more penguin pies, fella's). This, in turn, means less availabe food for marine species that feed upon polar marine species. Following the trail, the tuna schools that head South to bulk up may find that McFish's Great Southern 24hr Fast Food Restaurant is closed for business.
OK, so tuna becomes rare and the price goes up. Now the biped tuna-eaters turn their hungry gaze on some other species. Now some species that has not been directly affected by rising sea temperatures has gone from 2nd-rate on the trawler target chart to 1st-rate. Etc, etc.
Humans may think that they are very adaptable (and they are, relatively), but they also like to be comfortable. They can live at under -40º Celsius (but they like to have heating) and they can live at over 40º Celsius (but they like to have airconditioning).
Over the last 150 years, we have not only achieved the release of enormous quantities of greenhouse gases, but we have also managed to significantly deforest large areas of the planet's land masses. Whilst man-made effects may not be the only causes of the current climatic movement, they must at least be a contributing factor.
I can see that I, as a person living in the 20th and 21st Centuries, have had, through my daily life, a larger net impact on the environment than my equivalent would have 150 years ago. I'm guessing that this would apply to a significant proportion of those of us who, through our lifestyles, have access to read and discuss such things.
If you spend any time outside your backyard, you will know that not all of the people of the World enjoy the levels of comfort that we do. If we continue to bask in this comfort without taking some responsibility for its byproducts, our children may find themselves being squeezed out of such comfort.
Strangely, I don't require a scientist to tell me that chopping down a forest, or burning fossil fuels has an effect on the environment - I managed to work that one out all by myself.

Lanc_arm_strong

-It is Australia's worst draught in record NOT history.

-Its definatly not the worst bushfires ever recored.

-Farmers have always been losing there farms, in Aus, here, and everywhere else, for a very long time. A lot due to economics, some due to bad buisness management, some due to bad luck. But a lot of buisnesses go bad. So, should the Aus Automotive industry blame Climate Change for its loss of buisness recently? Or is climate change responsible for Aus mining boom?

Climate change may or may not be happening, no scientist actually knows, so how the F*** do some dumb bike riders like us know! My guess is that faced with such uncertainty we are better to address global warming as if it is happening, as its better to be safe then sorry.

But please, no misrepresented faux facts in threads!

EoinC

If we're dealing with semantics, climate change IS happening. Climate change has always happened, as long as there has been a climate to change. I haven't seen any scientific debate on that. The debate is on whether any current change is affected to a small or large degree by human behaviours.
And yes, if no-one can prove empirically one way or the other, erring on the side of caution strikes me as being a sensible and realisable path to follow, particularly when (depending upon how it is managed) it can have several benefits outside of those related to climatic influence.

The Double Zero

Im not here to argue how to save the world, Im looking out the window and saying how things are down here.
This is the worst drought in Australia's recorded history,
Never mentioned that this was the worst bushfire in our history, but its bloody bad, Government has stated that our fire season has started 2 months earlier than normal.
Farmers have been suffering due to significant lack of rain = no crop growth. No business tricks required for that one.

__________________
Nothin's faster than the Double Zero.

Lanc_arm_strong

Drought: But you must understand that the present drought in Australia is not much worse then many in Australias record. Lack of water is caused by a lot of things. One is bad luck, rain justr might not fall in the right places. But population growth coupled with a lack of investment in water supply is actually the main reason. And some parts of Australia, mainly in the north, have experienced GAINS in rainfall!

Farmers: Some parts of Australias farming industry used to be ridiculous, protection, subsidies as well as government handouts during tough times to help inefficient farmers to get through their bad partches in the past. But luckly this attidude has dwindled, so farmers are losing their farms because the Government is not giving them handouts during droughts as it used to! So you see, it is just economics thats behind it!

Bushfires: Less loging of mainland forrests in recent years= Less fire breaks=Worse fires (Also could it be that there are just more lunitics deliberatly lighting fires?)

As an aside its so stupid the way no one really adddress how bad fires are for green house gases?? It seems to me that the easiest, cheapest and quickest way to reduce GHG is to just put fires out quicker?? Perhaps there is more to it, what do you all think?

EoinC

Might be difficult if you don't have any water?

Bro Deal

But the core of the green movement is made up of ex- or would-be hippies who believe in fairy tales of economic simplification, like we should all grow organic vegetables and wear clothes made of hemp. When you bring up the obvious solution to the energy problem, which is nuclear power, they freak out.

Kyoto is a fantasy. It's never going to happen in the U.S. Our standard of living is intrinsicly linked to our energy consumption, and there is no way people will voluntarily reduce their standard of living. If you want carbon emissions reduced then you had better have a viable way to substitute for not only the energy that you give up by burning less hydrocarbons but also for the energy growth that is inevitable in the future. Currently nuclear power is the only option.

ndbiker also pointed out a continuing problem with the greens and that is the presence of whackos and chicken littles like Dr. Paul Ehrlich. Ehrlich and his wife have been promoting themselves with tales of doomsday since the late 60s. They went from certain starvation causing the deaths of hundreds of millions to a pollution triggered ice age to nuclear winter. Once global warming came into the public's consciousness they were right at the forefront. Ehrlich was once quoted as saying that the consequences of global warming should be exaggerated so the public would become alarmed enough to do something. Bozos like Ehrlich have done untold harm to the acceptance of global warming.

__________________
"You are like the wind and I like the lion. You form the tempest. The sand stings my eyes and the ground is parched. I roar in defiance but you do not hear. But between us there is a difference. I, like the lion, must remain in my place. While you like the wind will never know yours." -- Mulay Hamid El Raisuli, Lord of the Riff, Sultan to the Berbers, Last of the Barbary Pirates