Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 156 (8135 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 10-01-2014 6:19 PM
112 online now:
Coragyps, Coyote, PaulK, RAZD (4 members, 108 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Tali_Zorah
Post Volume:
Total: 736,912 Year: 22,753/28,606 Month: 54/1,786 Week: 243/384 Day: 54/69 Hour: 0/6


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
1
234Next
Author Topic:   Climate Change Delusion
No Name Available
Unregistered


Message 1 of 52 (624124)
07-16-2011 5:48 AM


Thread Copied from Proposed New Topics Forum
Thread copied here from the Climate Change Delusion thread in the Proposed New Topics forum.
    
Malvern
Junior Member (Idle past 764 days)
Posts: 20
From: Mesopotamia, Ohio USA
Joined: 04-22-2011


Message 1 of 52 (624133)
07-15-2011 1:15 PM


Aren't we deluding ourselves into thinking that cap and trade, reducing our carbon footprint, eco-friendly products and a host of other politically correct pronouncements will in fact slow or stop any facet of climate change?

I've read all too many articles on what will happen with melting glaciers, rising sea levels, increased CO2 levels, etc, etc. So the brakes on the Climate Change Cement Truck have been released and we think we'll throw out some scientific spike strip and stop it? Really?

(:raig


Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by Larni, posted 07-16-2011 6:55 AM Malvern has responded
 Message 7 by jar, posted 07-16-2011 9:00 AM Malvern has not yet responded
 Message 8 by fearandloathing, posted 07-16-2011 5:16 PM Malvern has not yet responded
 Message 9 by ZenMonkey, posted 07-16-2011 7:22 PM Malvern has not yet responded

    
Admin
Director
Posts: 11431
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002


Message 3 of 52 (624136)
07-16-2011 6:47 AM


Thread Copied from Proposed New Topics Forum
Thread copied here from the Climate Change Delusion thread in the Proposed New Topics forum.
    
Larni
Member
Posts: 3753
From: UK
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 4 of 52 (624138)
07-16-2011 6:55 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Malvern
07-15-2011 1:15 PM


Giving them a chance.
If my grand kids said to me "if only you could have slowed down global warming when you had the chance, we would have had long enough to use our new fangled technology and ideas to put things right: but you didn't do we can't" I'd be kicking myself.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Malvern, posted 07-15-2011 1:15 PM Malvern has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by frako, posted 07-16-2011 7:00 AM Larni has responded
 Message 12 by Malvern, posted 07-18-2011 12:01 PM Larni has not yet responded

    
frako
Member
Posts: 2402
From: slovenija
Joined: 09-04-2010


Message 5 of 52 (624139)
07-16-2011 7:00 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by Larni
07-16-2011 6:55 AM


Re: Giving them a chance.
If my grand kids said to me "if only you could have slowed down global warming when you had the chance, we would have had long enough to use our new fangled technology and ideas to put things right: but you didn't do we can't" I'd be kicking myself.

Well we have the technology to scrub Co2 from the air a form of plastic when dry collects co2 when wet it releases it. The technology still on paper is how to store the gas when we get it cause there would be vast amounts of it. Some ideas are to store it underground but imagine if the gas brakes free it would suffocate everything in the vicinity of where it breached the surface.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Larni, posted 07-16-2011 6:55 AM Larni has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by Larni, posted 07-16-2011 8:30 AM frako has not yet responded
 Message 33 by Taz, posted 07-20-2011 1:46 PM frako has responded

    
Larni
Member
Posts: 3753
From: UK
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 6 of 52 (624151)
07-16-2011 8:30 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by frako
07-16-2011 7:00 AM


Re: Giving them a chance.
Best give our kids as much time as we can.

Do you think we answered the OP appropriately?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by frako, posted 07-16-2011 7:00 AM frako has not yet responded

    
jar
Member
Posts: 24678
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 1.8


Message 7 of 52 (624152)
07-16-2011 9:00 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Malvern
07-15-2011 1:15 PM


If all the changes fail, then it won't much matter will it?

But the only things we have any control of are the man made contributions and so they are the only places we can make change.


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Malvern, posted 07-15-2011 1:15 PM Malvern has not yet responded

  
fearandloathing
Member (Idle past 589 days)
Posts: 990
From: Burlington, NC, USA
Joined: 02-24-2011


Message 8 of 52 (624243)
07-16-2011 5:16 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Malvern
07-15-2011 1:15 PM


Malvern writes:

I've read all too many articles on what will happen with melting glaciers, rising sea levels, increased CO2 levels, etc, etc. So the brakes on the Climate Change Cement Truck have been released and we think we'll throw out some scientific spike strip and stop it? Really?

I have also read and seen much on the climate change issue and think some of it is alarmist "the sky is falling" talk. The bottom line is in our past there has been much more co2 and warmer temps.

source

We will adapt to our ever changing climate, but can we provide for all the people who live on our planet? Nature will balance the scales one way or another, even if that means billions of people dying. I don't see anyway we wont use every last available fossil fuel until they are all gone. When they are all gone what will we do? If we can't find alternatives for the fertilizers we obtain from fossil fuels, often as by-products, then there will no doubt be mass starvation, war over fresh water ...ect

Greenhouse gases are one of many problems we face, but I feel we should be more worried about pollution, deforestation, overfishing to name a few. If we do not become better stewards of our planet then future populations will surely suffer from the mistakes of their predecessors. The more we poison our oceans and eco systems then the harder it will be to find the proper balance of population vs available resources.


"No sympathy for the devil; keep that in mind. Buy the ticket, take the ride...and if it occasionally gets a little heavier than what you had in mind, well...maybe chalk it off to forced conscious expansion: Tune in, freak out, get beaten."
Hunter S. Thompson

Ad astra per aspera

Nihil curo de ista tua stulta superstitione.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Malvern, posted 07-15-2011 1:15 PM Malvern has not yet responded

    
ZenMonkey
Member (Idle past 954 days)
Posts: 428
From: Portland, OR USA
Joined: 09-25-2009


(1)
Message 9 of 52 (624254)
07-16-2011 7:22 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Malvern
07-15-2011 1:15 PM


1. If we try to stop anthropogenic climate change and it turns out that we were too late, it won't matter because we'll make the planet uninhabitable, at least by us.

2. If we try to stop ACC and succeed in stopping drastic or even catastrophic change, then good for us.

3. If we attempt to stop ACC and it turns out that it wasn't going to happen anyway, see cartoon above.

3. If we do nothing and catastrophic change does happen and we end up with a second Venus in our solar system, then bad on us. To say the least.

4. If we do nothing and nothing catastrophic to the climate happens, we're still left with a polluted planet and the dire economic and social consequences of having the petroleum products eventually giving out without us switching to new sources of energy in time. (Non-renewable means that sooner or later there won't be no more.)

So, it looks like doing something - capping emissions, serious investment in renewable, non-polluting energy sources, etc. - has no downside, and that the best we can hope for by doing nothing is that we end up with only very bad consequences instead of global disaster.

Take a guess at which course of action I'd reccommend.

Edited by ZenMonkey, : Fixed acronyms.


Your beliefs do not effect reality and evidently reality does not effect your beliefs.
-Theodoric

Reality has a well-known liberal bias.
-Steven Colbert

I never meant to say that the Conservatives are generally stupid. I meant to say that stupid people are generally Conservative. I believe that is so obviously and universally admitted a principle that I hardly think any gentleman will deny it.
- John Stuart Mill


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Malvern, posted 07-15-2011 1:15 PM Malvern has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by hooah212002, posted 07-16-2011 7:47 PM ZenMonkey has not yet responded

  
hooah212002
Member
Posts: 3179
Joined: 08-12-2009
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 10 of 52 (624255)
07-16-2011 7:47 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by ZenMonkey
07-16-2011 7:22 PM


has no downside

You don't invest in oil, do you? That has to be one of the biggest reasons there is such a push back against alternative energy: there's money in the "black gold", the "Texas Tea" and lots of it.


"Why don't you call upon your God to strike me? Oh, I forgot it's because he's fake like Thor, so bite me" -Greydon Square
This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by ZenMonkey, posted 07-16-2011 7:22 PM ZenMonkey has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by Rrhain, posted 07-16-2011 9:34 PM hooah212002 has acknowledged this reply

    
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 5720
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 11 of 52 (624259)
07-16-2011 9:34 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by hooah212002
07-16-2011 7:47 PM


hooah212002 responds to ZenMonkey:

quote:
quote:
has no downside

You don't invest in oil, do you? That has to be one of the biggest reasons there is such a push back against alternative energy: there's money in the "black gold", the "Texas Tea" and lots of it.


There will always be a need for petroleum. It was used because it was a better alternative to whale oil. There are only so many whales and we cannot use them for our needs. But even if we come up with a better source for electricity than coal, convert our cars to electricity, etc., there will still be a need for oil-based products. Airplanes won't be able to run on electricity, ships will still need oil-based fuel, not to mention all the other industrial products made from petroleum such as plastics.

Oh, there will be a huge drop in demand, yes, but a smart energy company should realize that they are an energy company and how much profit they could make by getting into non-oil fuel sources early. We dropped the ball with the hybrid car: The engine in a Prius? It was developed by Ford. But the US market was screaming for huge SUVs and Ford sold it Toyota. Given what happened with regard to the auto industry in the US, imagine how much better it would have been if the best-selling car would have been an American car....


Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by hooah212002, posted 07-16-2011 7:47 PM hooah212002 has acknowledged this reply

    
Malvern
Junior Member (Idle past 764 days)
Posts: 20
From: Mesopotamia, Ohio USA
Joined: 04-22-2011


Message 12 of 52 (624511)
07-18-2011 12:01 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by Larni
07-16-2011 6:55 AM


Re: Giving them a chance.
If my grand kids said to me "if only you could have slowed down global warming when you had the chance, we would have had long enough to use our new fangled technology and ideas to put things right: but you didn't do we can't" I'd be kicking myself.

"new fangled technology" Such as...?

At least if we built a dike around Florida or provide all Floridians south of Orlando with hip-waders, it would be something we can see. But, not new fangled.

I would tell my grand kids, "We'll try to fix things, but in the meantime, stay away from the Mississippi River basin and it's tributaries (floods), Texas and the Southwest (drought), southern Florida (new shallow sea) and the Central Plains (tornadoes). Now, run along and go play and don't worry so much".

(:raig


This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Larni, posted 07-16-2011 6:55 AM Larni has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by frako, posted 07-18-2011 12:36 PM Malvern has responded

    
frako
Member
Posts: 2402
From: slovenija
Joined: 09-04-2010


Message 13 of 52 (624513)
07-18-2011 12:36 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by Malvern
07-18-2011 12:01 PM


Re: Giving them a chance.
"new fangled technology" Such as...?

Well as i said before a form of plastics abosorbes loads of Co2 when dry and releases it when its wet a very cheap way of scrubbing execs co2 from our atmosphere. The only problem now is storage where to put all that freeking gas but if we slow down the effects of global warming enough we might find a solution i we dont we might get screwed big time.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by Malvern, posted 07-18-2011 12:01 PM Malvern has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by Malvern, posted 07-18-2011 1:29 PM frako has responded

    
Malvern
Junior Member (Idle past 764 days)
Posts: 20
From: Mesopotamia, Ohio USA
Joined: 04-22-2011


Message 14 of 52 (624515)
07-18-2011 1:29 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by frako
07-18-2011 12:36 PM


Re: Giving them a chance.
Any new fangled technology to trap the methane gas being released from the Artic permafrost? I understand it has 20 to 30 times the "kick" of carbon dioxide.

And as to storing CO2 gas? I'm sure the standard response will be similar to storing atomic waste. "Great idea. Just not in my state."

(:raig


This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by frako, posted 07-18-2011 12:36 PM frako has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by frako, posted 07-18-2011 1:53 PM Malvern has responded

    
frako
Member
Posts: 2402
From: slovenija
Joined: 09-04-2010


Message 15 of 52 (624520)
07-18-2011 1:53 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by Malvern
07-18-2011 1:29 PM


Re: Giving them a chance.
Any new fangled technology to trap the methane gas being released from the Artic permafrost? I understand it has 20 to 30 times the "kick" of carbon dioxide.

Nope thats why we cant let that gas escape, the way to do that is to stop or lower co2 production so the temperatures dont rise any higher.

I think that gas is the point of no return when it stats to escape on a massive scale we are only heading on one direction.

And as to storing CO2 gas? I'm sure the standard response will be similar to storing atomic waste. "Great idea. Just not in my state."

Well no you would probably have to store it where you pumped the oil out because of the massive volume the gas would take. The problem being if it gets out everything in the vicinity gets suffocated.

Edited by frako, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by Malvern, posted 07-18-2011 1:29 PM Malvern has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by Malvern, posted 07-18-2011 2:45 PM frako has not yet responded

    
1
234Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2014 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2014