Stupid question, is the inevitable climate change catastrophe true?

[GagHalfrunt]

I live in Los Angeles, California so should I plan on moving to somewhere with a higher altitude or is this study inaccurate? :\

Please stay right where you are. The rest of humanity is doing this for the sole purpose of drowning the LA basin. If all you people move its been for nothing.

 

[Brainonska511]

That's a nice illustration of the process. But where are the politician's that fund all this research and review? You know, the one's that are paying for the work and expect the outcome they paid for and desire? I don't see them in that illustration. You don't believe that politics isn't present in the process, do you? Everything I eat, drink, breath, drive, sleep on, wear, sit on and watch has politics involved in it to one degree or another. Surely the peer review process does too.

Politicians appropriate money for research, but they are not responsible for specific research grants. The former is a "value" decision on the merits of certain areas of research from the public perspective. The latter is more of a merit based system, where money is distributed based on whether the proposed methods are scientifically sound, look to answer interesting questions, and whether the person writing the grant will actually be able to accomplish what they claim to want to test.

 

[Paratus]

Yeah, I can't find anybody willing to buy me a pony so I know how it feels.

Really? Maybe you haven't looked hard enough. Because while the republicans don't want to pay for facts to help make decisions about the climate they do want to give tax breaks to help buy race horses. Maybe you could get in on that deal?


http://dailysignal.com/2014/12/15/c...e-tax-breaks-including-one-race-horse-owners/

 

[88keys]

Man made climate change is happening, however I do suspect that scientists might be collectively exaggerating their claims (as they seem to have a nasty habit of doing that). It could be that is just human nature as we all exaggerate to some degree or that maybe it's because they know that we won't listen and so they need to drive the sense of urgency a little further. Who knows?

To be honest, I'm past the point of caring either way. It is very clear to me that the vast majority of people on this planet are doing nothing about it and have no viable plans to change it. This is mainly because none of us are willing to make the needed sacrifices to alter this course. The bottom line is that we've pretty much reached the limits of human population on this planet and the rest of the world is catching up to us in terms of quality of life and the resources simply don't exist at this time to support that. Every solution leads to a much bigger problem. We now need to plant massive fields of crops which of course leads to massive parasite infestations so you'll need to rely on pesticides which also happens to kill bees which we need to pollinate the crops. People complain about factory farming and their business practices but do you really think that 1950's agricultural practices will support 2010s demands?

The real problem that nobody wants to talk about is that there are too many fucking people and we need to get a hell of alot smarter in a short period of time if we want to solve these problems.

 

[Mai72]

Man made climate change is happening, however I do suspect that scientists might be collectively exaggerating their claims (as they seem to have a nasty habit of doing that). It could be that is just human nature as we all exaggerate to some degree or that maybe it's because they know that we won't listen and so they need to drive the sense of urgency a little further. Who knows?

To be honest, I'm past the point of caring either way. It is very clear to me that the vast majority of people on this planet are doing nothing about it and have no viable plans to change it. This is mainly because none of us are willing to make the needed sacrifices to alter this course. The bottom line is that we've pretty much reached the limits of human population on this planet and the rest of the world is catching up to us in terms of quality of life and the resources simply don't exist at this time to support that. Every solution leads to a much bigger problem. We now need to plant massive fields of crops which of course leads to massive parasite infestations so you'll need to rely on pesticides which also happens to kill bees which we need to pollinate the crops. People complain about factory farming and their business practices but do you really think that 1950's agricultural practices will support 2010s demands?

The real problem that nobody wants to talk about is that there are too many fucking people and we need to get a hell of alot smarter in a short period of time if we want to solve these problems.

TBH, by the time real climate change starts to rear its ugly head we will all be dead. Not much is going to happen in the next 50 years. Now, in 200 years? 300-500 years? Yes, I think a lot is going to change. The Eastern seaboard is going to look much different. I live on an island in NJ and I doubt it's going to be here in a few hundred years. I'm going to be long dead by then.

I think this is the number one reason why most people are reluctant to change their habits. Most feel that climate change isn't going to affect them. It's a bad way of thinking.

 

[TheGardener]

The oceans will only rise 1M in my lifetime? DAMN! I bought property 300 ft above sea level thinking I'd have ocean front property in 10 years. I've been mislead.

 

[Newell Steamer]

“Our children will enjoy in their homes electrical energy too cheap to meter..."
-- 1954, Lewis L. Strauss, Chairman of the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission.

Still bitterly clinging to that 1950's nuclear dream of 'electricity to cheap to meter?'

Uno

What do scientists know about economics and profit speaking industries? Nada.

But, I guess their lacking grasp of capitalism applies to science as well.

It's a shame I can't pull off your level of hackery and still feel I am right; since I am grounded in reality.

 

[Paratus]

Man made climate change is happening, however I do suspect that scientists might be collectively exaggerating their claims (as they seem to have a nasty habit of doing that). It could be that is just human nature as we all exaggerate to some degree or that maybe it's because they know that we won't listen and so they need to drive the sense of urgency a little further. Who knows?

To be honest, I'm past the point of caring either way. It is very clear to me that the vast majority of people on this planet are doing nothing about it and have no viable plans to change it. This is mainly because none of us are willing to make the needed sacrifices to alter this course. The bottom line is that we've pretty much reached the limits of human population on this planet and the rest of the world is catching up to us in terms of quality of life and the resources simply don't exist at this time to support that. Every solution leads to a much bigger problem. We now need to plant massive fields of crops which of course leads to massive parasite infestations so you'll need to rely on pesticides which also happens to kill bees which we need to pollinate the crops. People complain about factory farming and their business practices but do you really think that 1950's agricultural practices will support 2010s demands?

The real problem that nobody wants to talk about is that there are too many fucking people and we need to get a hell of alot smarter in a short period of time if we want to solve these problems.

The solution to too many people is starring you in the face. 1st world countries have marginally declining birth rates below replacement . 3rd world countries have birth rates well above replacement. Work on eliminating poverty and global birth rates will fall.

That normally means increasing the amount of KWh per person per year. Instead of pretending like its the 1850's and using coal why not use nuclear, wind, solar and natural gas.

Even China is starting to reduce coal use.


At the end we have a smaller global population using less resources that are more environmentally friendly and that's entirely first world. If you were a business would you like to have a market of 1.5billion first world and 8.5 billion third world customers or 7billion 1st world customers?

 

[zinfamous]

That's a nice illustration of the process. But where are the politician's that fund all this research and review? You know, the one's that are paying for the work and expect the outcome they paid for and desire? I don't see them in that illustration. You don't believe that politics isn't present in the process, do you? Everything I eat, drink, breath, drive, sleep on, wear, sit on and watch has politics involved in it to one degree or another. Surely the peer review process does too.

you are clearly barking up the wrong tree....it's so embarrassing how ignorant you are regarding this process.

"politicians" I suppose in your mind, means NIH funding? In this process, that is all they have to do with it. Grant is approved, money is available, the end. Research and the review process has nothing to do with any interest group or any politician when it comes to academic and basic research. None. Those Funds are available to the Researcher until they expire; the University where they conduct their research takes a huge overhead cut from each grant to pay for support staff, facilities, general departmental expenses. It is how universities run. There isn't a single politician or lobbyist or anyone outside of the research field that is ever involved in the majority of basic science.

If, however, you are talking about the handful of papers that come from GE and BP and the Oil lobby: yes, that is often sent in a direct line down from the board with the mandate: "Make x argument work!", the "data" is then returned from their "crack team in the lab," is then sent to the lobbyists and ends up on the desk of their respective Congress Critters. These very few papers are generally only published with journals that do not require peer review, and the reason for this is obvious even to stupid people.

 

[ImpulsE69]

The reason people have a hard time caring about global warming is $$. Assuming humans are affecting global climate, it works pretty much like anything else. One person or a 100 are not going to make a dent. Politicians like to call attention to it, but their buddies in the corporations are the biggest offenders, and you see little happening to change that.

BTW, I have no children and don't plan on having them. I've done my part. What have the rest of you planet killers done?

 

[Muse]

It's interesting that saving the earth always seems to cost me a lot of money for very little end result. That's all I'll say on this subject. Climate change has become so hyper-politicized that I don't trust either side.

So, you have a choice.

1. You can believe that man-caused/aggravated global warming is hastening catastrophic changes in our planet and do your part to try to mitigate the problem by taking reasonable actions on a personal level...

2. Or you can take the attitude that nothing we do makes much difference one way or the other and just do any damned thing you please.

Your choice. "You're either part of the solution or you're part of the pollution."

A key word in the thread title is "inevitable," ill chosen. "There is absolutely no inevitability as long as there is a willingness to contemplate what is happening." -- Marshall McCluhan's The Medium is the Massage

 

[K7SN]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4r-A2wL2yMI
http://www.newscientist.com/article...=SOC&utm_campaign=hoot&cmpid=SOC#.VaCeIrXjLIU

I just read this report by NewScientist that no matter what people do, sea levels will rise 16ft......and taking drastic action would only prevent an additional 65ft....

This is really starting to scare me.

I live in Los Angeles, California so should I plan on moving to somewhere with a higher altitude or is this study inaccurate? :\

And where would you move?

The point is for all the predictions of impending "gloom and doom" but only a complete understanding of the math of Chaos as it pertains to weather and climate yields the vain hope that someday we will accurately predict future catastrophic change.

The simplest way to understand Chaos Theory is this example is several smaller balloons inside a larger balloon that floating in the air or on the ocean. The range (size and shape) or limits or larger containment balloon change with external and internal chaotic actions. The position of the smaller balloons constantly change within the larger balloon. The maximum extent of the larger balloon defines a chaotic threshold beyond which there occurs a paradigmatic switch to a new playing field (A different containing balloon) .That could be a catastrophic change or it could be just change which has occurred numerous times in the past.

The only thing we can say for certain is that change within our current system (The smaller balloons) is occurring. Greenland is melting, Ice shelves of the coast of Antarctica are breaking off and heading north, Glaciers are disappearing and instead of being drawn toward an ice age we moving away again. Change means some places will do better and some places will do worse. .

Since we can only accurately predict weather for a couple weeks, maybe a couple months if we devote extreme mega computing resources; to predict next year much less the next century is ludicrous.

So half of Bangladesh may slip under the ocean and the other half dry up but so much is non-predictable (warm the Pacific Ocean and flood California and turn Nevada into a lacustrine wonderland or dry up California and write off the southwest as uninhabitable are both possibilities. So assuming you live another 100 years, where are you going to move? On time will tell.

When Antarctica settled on the south pole and separated from the last of the other continents, we got ocean currents circling Antarctica which altered almost all major ocean currents however when Krakatoa erupted and Europe Froze , the ocean currents bring warmer equatorial Atlantic ocean waters north stopped coming.

One reason we can't predict is because we because we can quantify all the factors. We barely understand why Mesoamerica dried up a millennium ago but the Maya didn't like it. After 911 we stopped fly planes for a few days and a measurable change in the earths temperature occurred. We have substituted the crap that comes out of a fossil fuel (especially coal) plant for a ever decreasing ozone level but in part they do the same thing. Chaos theory balances all internal changes and if we could identify all the pieces,, we could predict, those that attempt to predict currently aren't predicting, they a publishing. Each example above gives us another piece of the puzzle but we have a bucket full of unconsidered puzzle pieces.

Change is going to occur, hopefully in this same chaotic system that man has evolved over the last two millions years with ice ages and droughts, the ocean rising a lowering several hundred feet and major volcanic activity. This article says "The Sky is falling" because it may rise another five meters long after all of us are moldering in our graves or our ashes are scattered to the four corners of the earth. Balderdash!

Climate change of some sort will happen as it has since the beginning of this earth But significant change usually happens in geologic time and baring another mega asteroid hit or black hole it will change at a rate if your lucky won't effect you and if not, move to North Dakota or Canada.

 

[Paratus]

...Chaos Stuff....

This is a fundamental misunderstanding of climate change science.

To understand whether the Earth is warming or cooling and why only requires understanding the Earths energy balance:

Once you've measured the terms you can tell the Earth is warming due to greenhouse gases. The magnitude of the energy imbalance means the Earth must warm until energy in equals energy out.

If I wanted to know the exact temperature at sometime at someplace in the future I would need to solve your "chaos" math. But if instead I want to know trends and averages that's no problem.

For example I couldn't easily tell you the temperature at every point in a glass of ice water left in the sun for 10 minutes due to the chaotic nature of the mixing melting ice and warmer water. But I can easily tell you in 3 hours the ice will be melted and the water will equal to the ambient temperature.

If you want to know more about climate change science I suggest following this link:
American Chemical Society Climate Change Toolbox
The menu at the bottom can take you to many in depth articles.

 

[SolMiester]

climate is always changing, and I dont believe a word these climate scientists say!, they are all busy justifying their salaries.
At any rate, nothing, INCLUDING carbon tax is going to reverse the change IMO

 

[ImpulsE69]

It's probably just the aliens.

 

[Paratus]

climate is always changing, and I dont believe a word these climate scientists say!, they are all busy justifying their salaries.
At any rate, nothing, INCLUDING carbon tax is going to reverse the change IMO

Oh the climates changing? How do you know? Those climate scientists you don't trust? Nothing we do will change it?

How's that CPU cooler you got for your rig? I bet you trust it to do it's job. Yet you don't trust the same type of energy balance calculations that were used to design it to inform us about Earths climate?

Very strange position you have. :hmm:

 

[88keys]

On the bright side, people who live in temperate climates (i.e. where the vast majority of the first world typically dwells). Will be the least effected by climate change while those third worlders will be the ones who reap the worst consequences as they fend for themselves against, droughts, famine, massive floods, super storms, and a variety of other nasty things that kill people who don't have anything to do but fuck and crank out babies like a goddamn factory.





.....sigh. I'm an awful excuse for a human being.

 

[SolMiester]

Oh the climates changing? How do you know? Those climate scientists you don't trust? Nothing we do will change it?

How's that CPU cooler you got for your rig? I bet you trust it to do it's job. Yet you don't trust the same type of energy balance calculations that were used to design it to inform us about Earths climate?

Very strange position you have. :hmm:

LOL......

 

[Paratus]

LOL......

LOL indeed.

 

[BAMAVOO]

AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH Stop the CO2. We don't need more plants. AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

 

[IHateMyJob2004]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4r-A2wL2yMI
http://www.newscientist.com/article...=SOC&utm_campaign=hoot&cmpid=SOC#.VaCeIrXjLIU

I just read this report by NewScientist that no matter what people do, sea levels will rise 16ft......and taking drastic action would only prevent an additional 65ft....

This is really starting to scare me.

I live in Los Angeles, California so should I plan on moving to somewhere with a higher altitude or is this study inaccurate? :\

We knew this 15 years ago.

 

[ImpulsE69]

Really, if they want people to take them seriously though, they need to make up their minds.

Global Warmnig to be postponed in 15 years by mini ice age:

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-N...n-just-15-years-scientists-say/2751436649025/

Solar scientists, armed with the best data yet regarding the activities of the sun, say the Earth is headed for a "mini ice age" in just 15 years -- something that hasn't happened for three centuries.

 

[Paratus]

Really, if they want people to take them seriously though, they need to make up their minds.

Global Warmnig to be postponed in 15 years by mini ice age:

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-N...n-just-15-years-scientists-say/2751436649025/

Solar scientists, armed with the best data yet regarding the activities of the sun, say the Earth is headed for a "mini ice age" in just 15 years -- something that hasn't happened for three centuries.

Except not so much.

http://www.world-science.net/othernews/150711_sunspots.htm

A new model of solar activity cycles predicts that the Sun’s surface will be unusually calm in the 2030s—conditions that last occurred four centuries ago and coincided with a “mini ice age.”

The scientists behind the model indeed predict a similar cold spell, but only if they’re right about something else too: that solar, and not human, activity is causing global warming today. Most climatologists believe the opposite.

So if they are right it will slow the warming which is a good thing as it buys us more time to do something about it, but in reality the insulative effect of the greenhouse gasses we've released will still swamp the reduction in solar flux.