Climate change could mean the extinction of our species

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trish

We know what you're ideology INCLINES you toward, but it's not thinking.
Did you know, my illiterate friend, that last spring wind provided 40% of Spain's power. I should think that would keep the GOP's tea sufficiently iced; were we capable of repeating Spain's success.

The key words in your post are INCLINED and SKEPTIC. They are both chosen to deceive the reader into believing you put more thought into the issue than you have. INCLINED makes us think that you carefully weighed the evidence on both sides of the issue__ perhaps putting all the evidence for on one side of the see-saw and all the evidence against on the other side and then because the balance was so delicate, placing a marble on the incline to see which way it would roll. What belies the word usage is the conclusion: climate science is a steaming plate of shit. Well gee, if it’s one steaming plate of shit why be skeptical? Skeptical connotes a measure of restraint__a withholding of judgement. It admits the possibility that the truth may lie in either direction. To claim in the same post that climate science is “one big plate of steaming bullshit” and then claim you’re a climate science “skeptic” is a ludicrous abuse of language. It’s like saying, “I thought about eating that big steaming pile of shit but in the end I was inclined not to.” Really?? We’re suppose to believe such a judgment involved a moment of “thought.” Obviously your mind was made up from the start, influenced as it is by right wing swill. You were never a climate science skeptic and your inclinations are determined by the gradients of political punditry.

Then asking what happen to Ah Gore. Sheeesh! Whatever happened to Smokey the Bear? They’re both mere spokesmen. Gore isn’t a scientist and Smokey isn’t forest ranger. Why such attention to surface details??


http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v...geo1327.html#/

and

http://www.nature.com/news/three-qua...an-made-1.9538

---

Well Trish...you can continue your one woman show with all your charts, graphs, scare tactics, and doom and gloom, but as usual, you're on the wrong side of the issue...BECAUSE NOBODY GIVES A FUCK. !! You're like the one remaining protestor down at OWS who's still beatin' the druum as the cops haul him away. The gig is up, you had a good run, a few guys made lots of money, the polar bears are having a good time again, and you may even get a show on Current out of all your hysteria, and maybe a couple hundred folks will turn in to be bored to tears, and .........maybe someday when we're not 15 trillion in debt, unemployment is a manageable 4%, we're drilling for oil in the Gulf, and building pipelines for natural gas, maybe we'll take another look and tune you in again ....just for a few laughs to hear you still lecturing is on cap and trade...(snore)
So long climate change...we hardly knew ya.

Quote:

---

just for a few laughs to hear you still lecturing is on cap and trade

---

Find any post...ANY POST...where I said one thing or another about cap and trade. I dare you. You can't. You're a loser, you just make things up. You throw whatever shit that comes to your tiny brain whether it applies or not. You're all over the fucking map and saying nothing. Why don't you try to make a point, loser?

http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v...geo1327.html#/

and

http://www.nature.com/news/three-qua...an-made-1.9538

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LibertyHarkness

have you been dead yet ? :)

---

Well, not personally. How 'bout you, Morticia? I am running a tad late for Halloween though.:hide-1:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by onmyknees

So long climate change...we hardly knew ya.

---

If you deny that science has proven that human activity is changing the climate and generating advanced global warming, is there anything about the other half of the thread, such as the 'extinction of our species' that you are concerned about?

For example, are you indifferent to deforestation in the Amazon basin -if it means obliterating the habitat of the first nations who live there - is that just the way the cookie crumbles? Does the modernisation of Africa and as a consequence the extinction of thousands of species of birds and insects, and also Gorillas bother you at all, is this just the impact of market forces?

I am not suggesting you should lie awake at night frightened that the world will end up looking like a giant shopping mall, but there are so many beautiful things to see, and places to go which make life on earth a pleasurable experience, isn't there an argument for us setting limits on where industry can go to preserve the best of what we have?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trish

LOL:smhWe may just all have to live in a venusian desert. Then water will be even a greater problem.

---

what a load of bull
"venusian desert":dead:

Quote:

---

what a load of bull
"venusian desert"

---

Tell that to Texas, currently undergoing a drought like they've never seen before. That conservative State of the rugged individualism has taken to metering private wells that draw water from the common aquifer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trish

....., that last spring wind provided 40% of Spain's power.

---

I don't think it did, not on avg. anyway (to be fair to you though...you didn't really say that) ...I thought that figure was a bit high so I looked it up. It seems during some particularly strong gales in 2009 , wind power provided 40% of Spain's energy for a couple of hours. It did even better this year at 59 % (a new record) Nov.6 for almost a day. On average though, Spain now derives about 16% of it's energy from windmills...which is still pretty impressive. While looking this up I ran across another interesting stat : the U.S. is the second largest user of windmills (China is #1...Spain is #4)...


Trish, if you had to recommend one nature magazine over all others (in terms of stories/science/photo's)...which would it be? Thank You.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trish

Tell that to Texas, currently undergoing a drought like they've never seen before. That conservative State of the rugged individualism has taken to metering private wells that draw water from the common aquifer.

---

big deal the world is always going though droughts and floods that has nothing to do with carbon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by russtafa

big deal the world is always going though droughts and floods that has nothing to do with carbon

---

russtafa why are you so cynical? Even if you don't think carbon emissions over nearly 200 years, climate change, global warming or the wrath of God are to blame, you know yourself that livelihoods have been lost in northern Queensland over more than 200 years because of periodic droughts -do you think those farmers and herders just shrugged their shoulders and said, lets move south, I can drive a taxi? The issue is resource management, whatever the cause of local/global climate patterns: how we maintain the land so that it doesn't dry out and die out; how we protect precious water resources, and how we have alternatives for ventures that don't fail. Over the next 5 years on current rates of production, food prices are set to rise dramatically -China now needs so much Pork, for example, it is importing it from the UK, which means the dear old Pork Pie makers in Meltron Mowbray are competing for the raw product, and finding the cost in the last year has gone up by nearly 30% -sugar, wheat are following this trend. Its a devilish mixture of market forces and nature. And whether you care or not, at some point in the future, you will pay.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fred41

I don't think it did, not on avg. anyway (to be fair to you though...you didn't really say that) ...I thought that figure was a bit high so I looked it up. It seems during some particularly strong gales in 2009 , wind power provided 40% of Spain's energy for a couple of hours. It did even better this year at 59 % (a new record) Nov.6 for almost a day. On average though, Spain now derives about 16% of it's energy from windmills...which is still pretty impressive. While looking this up I ran across another interesting stat : the U.S. is the second largest user of windmills (China is #1...Spain is #4)...


Trish, if you had to recommend one nature magazine over all others (in terms of stories/science/photo's)...which would it be? Thank You.

---

No, not an average: I cited a recent and notable to peak to counter an empty hyperbole.

http://www.gizmag.com/wind-power-spain/11215/

But as you say the average 16% is nothing to sneeze at. When it comes to specifics I’m not big on telling people what to do or how to meet civilization’s energy needs. I have no opinion on cap and trade (which started in the U.S. as a GOP proposal and now seems to be favored by DEMS and is pooh-poohed by the GOP...go figure). Hazards accompany any and all methods of producing power on the gigawatt scale. Climate change is the hazard of using coal and oil (and yes Russtafa, it’s happening. Whereas no single event can be said to be caused by greenhouse forced climatic heat imbalance the increased frequency of such events is evidence for it). The hazards of natural gas include explod[]ing neighborhoods and ground water polution via fracking. The hazards of nuclear are increase cancer deaths within plumes of periodically released gasses, not to mention the big unsolved problem of how to dispose of nuclear waste. The troubles of hydroelectric include the dangers dam[] failure, flooding and the diversion of water supplies. Wind power is a hazard to migrating bird populations (which are already declining precipitiously). Many complain of the noise and the view. The production of semi-conductors used in Solar panels uses toxic chemicals. Battery disposal is a huge problem.

When [living] plants switch[ed] to solar power eons ago they nearly forced themselves out of existence by filling the atmosphere with gas that’s noxious to photosynthesizing plants, namely oxygen. (Today it’s human civilization that covers the face of the planet and we’re filling the atmosphere carbon dioxide and chopping down giant swaths of forests that would sequester it for us for free. ) The moral is (and russtafa should agree with this) the scale of energy production required to sustain a worldwide civilization of nearly seven billion people will inevi[t]ably change the ecology of the planet. We need to proceed with caution if we do not want to effect our quality of life adversely.

Now to the question “if you had to recommend one nature magazine over all others (in terms of stories/science/photo's)...which would it be? Thank You.”

I’m too swamped to read nature magazines anymore for their stories and photos though I do still have a few that get delivered to my mailbox.

Until Stephen Jay Gould died I subscribed to Natural History and read his column with pleasure. The magazine does still have great pictures, stories and explains a lot of science. I think I would recommend this one first even though it’s been awhile since I’ve perused an issue.

I currently get Scientific American, Physics Today, Nature and Notices of the American Mathematical Society delivered to my mailbox. Of these I can only recommend Scientific American for the laymen.

I also regularly visit

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/

http://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/

[BTW Fred, I don't mean to aim this whole diatribe at you, but rather took your post as a springboard to address some of the ideas posted by others as well.]