| Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Death Kill
Caldari
direkte
   |
Posted - 2007.09.18 04:24:00 -
[91]
 Originally by: voogru
Edited by: voogru on 17/09/2007 23:43:46
Global warming is a scam.
Why do I get the feling your name is billy bob, you drive a pick up, work in a coal factory and live in Texas?
We used to have snow in october here, last year we got snow on Christmas EVE. The climate is rapidly changing and only an ignoranus would refuse to see that.
STAND OUT! |
Atama Cardel
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.09.18 05:44:00 -
[92]
I used to have snow every couple of years, now I've gotten it 3 years in a row, curse this global warming 
|
Asperger
Foundation
R0ADKILL
|
Posted - 2007.09.18 07:39:00 -
[93]
Originally by: voogru
Science can be wrong, and it has been wrong in the past.
Wasn't it the scientests that thought the earth was flat 500 years ago? 
We know that the Earth is a round, near spherical object since the greeks. They were actually so smart as to calculate the size of the Earth within 10% accuracy and the distance between the Moon and the Earth!
That knowledge didn't get lost in the middle ages, noone serious thought the Earth is flat even then. It's just a myth.
About science being wrong, now that's an interesting thing. Science creates hypotheses and tests them with empirical evidence and mathematics. In this sense what you call science being wrong, I call progress. When science is proven wrong, we actually mean "heeey, look at that! This alternative theory explains our empirical observations better!" In most cases, the latter theory is treating the old one as a special case, like in the case of Relativity and Newton's laws.
There isn't a case in mainstream science when scientists said here is theory X, but it cannot actually be used to explain/predict something, that you cannot validate your theory with evidence. When you cannot validate a theory, it is not science. Validation is done by falsification, as Karl Popper shown so aptly.
Every time you disprove a theory, science gains something and scientists are thrilled. Someone after all, just added another piece of contribution to science by showing that something we didn't know to be false before, is.
|
Asperger
Foundation
R0ADKILL
|
Posted - 2007.09.18 07:42:00 -
[94]
Originally by: Atama Cardel
I used to have snow every couple of years, now I've gotten it 3 years in a row, curse this global warming
The name global warming can be a bit confusing. Climate change is much better. Global warming simply means that the annual mean temperature of the Earth is increasing. Currently it's something like 14˚C. It actually means that more energy is stuck at Earth, leading to more extreme weather, which can mean extreme cold at some places and extreme hot weather at another.
|
Kastar
Memphis Technologies
|
Posted - 2007.09.18 07:56:00 -
[95]
Global warming is a natural process and has always been there with a peak or a low.
Do humans speed up the process ? - probably. Is this something to worry about ? Not certain, most likely not. There have been volcanic eruptions in the long and short term past who ejected nearly instantaneous more than humans did in several decades.
Should we worry ? - why now ? We already did a good job destroying ourself before Global Warming became the next hype.
The earth will survive. Plant and animal life will survive. humans in our current situation will probably have a harder time adapting as we should. The best thing that can happen to this planet is that we get slapped around and get a hard time.
We should and probably will adapt. Whether all humanity in t's totality will adapt is another thing. For all I know the planet is finally starting to try to heal itself from the virus called mankind.
-----------------------------------------------
|
Kastar
Memphis Technologies
|
Posted - 2007.09.18 08:08:00 -
[96]
Edited by: Kastar on 18/09/2007 08:09:22
Originally by: Death Kill
Originally by: voogru
Edited by: voogru on 17/09/2007 23:43:46
Global warming is a scam.
Why do I get the feling your name is billy bob, you drive a pick up, work in a coal factory and live in Texas?
We used to have snow in october here, last year we got snow on Christmas EVE. The climate is rapidly changing and only an ignoranus would refuse to see that.
The climate rapidly changed 1000's of times in the past in either direction. Whether it's due to a comet, humans ejecting gases or an earthquake on the seabeds releasing billions of tons of methane has no importance.
It just happens. From what I read, humans are causing this version of global warming to go faster. They did not cause it at all, just speeding up a process already there.
I wouldn't be surprised if the hype would be partially fed by the energy lobbies all around the world. The real challenge for humanity will not be the climate. We already adapted to that, people will only have to move from certain coastal regions or move to others with more agricultural possibilities.
Final point, We ought to prepare and argue about the rapidly approaching energy crisis and the destruction of ecological variety that has been ongoing and pcking up speed the last century.
I find it ridiculous that people are arguing about a climate change, but not about us destroying everything we encounter. A climate change means it will become warmer here and there, wetter on other spots and colder in yet other places. On the other hand, a rainforest that is gone is gone forever since humans take it's place, with according disappearance of all lifeforms.
We're an odd lot, and we're too many.
-----------------------------------------------
|
Cornucopian
Gallente
Orias Fringe Enterprises
United Freemen Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.09.18 08:08:00 -
[97]
Originally by: voogru
Edited by: voogru on 17/09/2007 23:43:46
Global warming is a scam.
It's intended to create things, such as the Kyoto protocal, which claims to want to reduce greenhouse gases by making industry buy carbon credits.
So, these 'carbon' credits, which are pulled out of someones ass, and they can emit 1 ton of carbon or whatever.
Then, individual companies have to buy a certain amount of carbon credits depending on how much they go over their so called pollution quota.
Lets say, that the US signed onto the Kyoto protocal or something similar. Now, lets say Ford has to spend 10 billion dollars a year in carbon credits.
However, Mexico isnt signed onto the Kyoto protocal, so, Ford can cut their yearly costs by 10 billion dollars by going out of the US and moving to mexico.
What happens? We lose jobs.
Scenario 2:
A US company identicle to a company in... lets say... Romania.
Produces the SAME amount of pollution.
Creates the SAME product with the SAME quality.
They are identicle.
The governing body, tells the US company they are polluting too much and need to buy carbon credits.
The romanian company is ignored.
The romanian company is now at an advantage, they can undercut the US company, and force them out of business.
It's all about the money.
to quote southpark:
'dey tuk ur joabs!!!'
-----------------------------------------------
"post with your main. delete your alt, you sad little exploiting metagamer."
Originally by: Royaldo
complete win by Cornucopian!
|
Asperger
Foundation
R0ADKILL
|
Posted - 2007.09.18 08:12:00 -
[98]
Originally by: Kastar
Global warming is a natural process and has always been there with a peak or a low.
Do humans speed up the process ? - probably. Is this something to worry about ? Not certain, most likely not. There have been volcanic eruptions in the long and short term past who ejected nearly instantaneous more than humans did in several decades.
Should we worry ? - why now ? We already did a good job destroying ourself before Global Warming became the next hype.
The earth will survive. Plant and animal life will survive. humans in our current situation will probably have a harder time adapting as we should. The best thing that can happen to this planet is that we get slapped around and get a hard time.
We should and probably will adapt. Whether all humanity in t's totality will adapt is another thing. For all I know the planet is finally starting to try to heal itself from the virus called mankind.
"Measurements of CO2 levels over the past 50 years do not show any significant rises after eruptions. Total emissions from volcanoes on land are estimated to average just 0.3 Gt of CO2 each year". Source: clicky
|
Kastar
Memphis Technologies
|
Posted - 2007.09.18 08:13:00 -
[99]
Originally by: Asperger
Originally by: voogru
Science can be wrong, and it has been wrong in the past.
Wasn't it the scientests that thought the earth was flat 500 years ago? [/quote
That knowledge didn't get lost in the middle ages, noone serious thought the Earth is flat even then. It's just a myth.
Not quite accurate. There's still a difference between general belief and the knowledge a few have. In Western/christian Europe people indeed generally believed the world was flat. That some other cultures knew otherwise has nothing to do with that. what's generally accepted is usually the norm, whether one or two people contest that or are simply smarter is not even close to relevant.
-----------------------------------------------
|
Kastar
Memphis Technologies
|
Posted - 2007.09.18 08:14:00 -
[100]
Originally by: Cornucopian
Originally by: voogru
Edited by: voogru on 17/09/2007 23:43:46
Global warming is a scam.
It's intended to create things, such as the Kyoto protocal, which claims to want to reduce greenhouse gases by making industry buy carbon credits.
So, these 'carbon' credits, which are pulled out of someones ass, and they can emit 1 ton of carbon or whatever.
Then, individual companies have to buy a certain amount of carbon credits depending on how much they go over their so called pollution quota.
Lets say, that the US signed onto the Kyoto protocal or something similar. Now, lets say Ford has to spend 10 billion dollars a year in carbon credits.
However, Mexico isnt signed onto the Kyoto protocal, so, Ford can cut their yearly costs by 10 billion dollars by going out of the US and moving to mexico.
What happens? We lose jobs.
Scenario 2:
A US company identicle to a company in... lets say... Romania.
Produces the SAME amount of pollution.
Creates the SAME product with the SAME quality.
They are identicle.
The governing body, tells the US company they are polluting too much and need to buy carbon credits.
The romanian company is ignored.
The romanian company is now at an advantage, they can undercut the US company, and force them out of business.
It's all about the money.
to quote southpark:
'dey tuk ur joabs!!!'
It's not a scam, the only problem is that our capitalist system is not fit to provide a solution on a glabal scale.
That same system is a problem for many more topics. 
-----------------------------------------------
|
Cornucopian
Gallente
Orias Fringe Enterprises
United Freemen Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.09.18 08:16:00 -
[101]
Originally by: Celeste Coeval
Edited by: Celeste Coeval on 17/09/2007 23:02:00
I'm done banging my head against a brick wall.
The trojans were warned what was inside the horse. Lets see what happens then shall we? All the data and anecdotal evidence i have seen states that ALL of the earths support systems are in decline. Your heat island effect can also be contribute to warming as urbanization not only creates heat island but er...it expands into natural carbon sinks...being forests and the like.
forests are only carbon sinks during the day: at night when fotosynthesis stops, they expell carbon..... just putting an edge on that.
-----------------------------------------------
"post with your main. delete your alt, you sad little exploiting metagamer."
Originally by: Royaldo
complete win by Cornucopian!
|
Asperger
Foundation
R0ADKILL
|
Posted - 2007.09.18 09:44:00 -
[102]
Originally by: Kastar
Not quite accurate. There's still a difference between general belief and the knowledge a few have. In Western/christian Europe people indeed generally believed the world was flat. That some other cultures knew otherwise has nothing to do with that. what's generally accepted is usually the norm, whether one or two people contest that or are simply smarter is not even close to relevant.
No, what I ment to say is that people didn't generally believe that the world was flat. It is just an urban myth, a stereotype.
Let me quote wikipedia: "The modern misconception that people of the Middle Ages believed that the Earth was flat first entered the popular imagination in the nineteenth century, thanks largely to the publication of Washington Irving's fantasy The Life and Voyages of Christopher Columbus in 1828."
|
Erilias Ilthis
Gallente
Ilthis Investment Syndicate
|
Posted - 2007.09.18 09:50:00 -
[103]
Originally by: Asperger
Originally by: Kastar
Global warming is a natural process and has always been there with a peak or a low.
Do humans speed up the process ? - probably. Is this something to worry about ? Not certain, most likely not. There have been volcanic eruptions in the long and short term past who ejected nearly instantaneous more than humans did in several decades.
Should we worry ? - why now ? We already did a good job destroying ourself before Global Warming became the next hype.
The earth will survive. Plant and animal life will survive. humans in our current situation will probably have a harder time adapting as we should. The best thing that can happen to this planet is that we get slapped around and get a hard time.
We should and probably will adapt. Whether all humanity in t's totality will adapt is another thing. For all I know the planet is finally starting to try to heal itself from the virus called mankind.
"Measurements of CO2 levels over the past 50 years do not show any significant rises after eruptions. Total emissions from volcanoes on land are estimated to average just 0.3 Gt of CO2 each year". Source: clicky
I think that's a fair point. However, have there been any major eruptions in the last 50 years ? What we consider major because a town has to be evacuated in Indonesia might be something different from eruptions in the past where entire islands explode, seabeds rise and drop and 100 km's of earth crust *****s. I'm thinking Santorini eg.
|
Asperger
Foundation
R0ADKILL
|
Posted - 2007.09.18 10:13:00 -
[104]
Originally by: Erilias Ilthis
I think that's a fair point. However, have there been any major eruptions in the last 50 years ? What we consider major because a town has to be evacuated in Indonesia might be something different from eruptions in the past where entire islands explode, seabeds rise and drop and 100 km's of earth crust *****s. I'm thinking Santorini eg.
At least according to the Volcanic Explosivity Index Santorini was a type 6 eruption. We had at least 3 type 6 eruptions in the 20th century and at least one, Pinatubo in the past 20 years. The VEI is a logarithmic scale, increasing from 0 to 8.
Type 7 or 8 eruptions are relatively rare, in the past 1500 years only a type 7 eruption occured in 1815, which means even if they dump large amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere, they do it rarely. Volcanoes actually decrease the global mean temperature because apart from greenhouse gases they also dump large amounts of areosols in the atmosphere which forms a global layer of sulfuric acid haze in case of a big eruption, which in turn cools the planet more than the added CO2 warms it.
For example in the case of Pinatubo, wikipedia has this to say:
The injection of aerosols into the stratosphere is thought to have been the largest since the eruption of Krakatoa in 1883, with a total mass of SO2 of about 17 million tons being injectedùthe largest volume ever recorded by modern instruments (see chart and figure).
This very large stratospheric injection resulted in a reduction in the normal amount of sunlight reaching the earth's surface by up to 5% (see figure). This led to a decrease in northern hemisphere average temperatures of 0.5û0.6 ¦C (0.9û1.1 ¦F), and a global fall of about 0.4 ¦C (0.7 ¦F).
|
Death Kill
Caldari
direkte
|
Posted - 2007.09.18 10:49:00 -
[105]
Originally by: Kastar
The climate rapidly changed 1000's of times in the past in either direction. Whether it's due to a comet, humans ejecting gases or an earthquake on the seabeds releasing billions of tons of methane has no importance.
It's true that the climate has changed in the past and it continues to do so, it all runs in cycles etc etc. But now we got human emissions on top of that as well as the damage done from agriculture and so on.
Quote:
I wouldn't be surprised if the hype would be partially fed by the energy lobbies all around the world. The real challenge for humanity will not be the climate. We already adapted to that, people will only have to move from certain coastal regions or move to others with more agricultural possibilities.
I beg to differ.
Houndreds of millions of people can die or replaced if the sea rises. This will lead to flooding, witch will poision drinking water, create outbreaks of disease witch leads to poverty, crime and so on. Bangladesh is in deep trouble, and on long term so are Holland, denmark and other countries.
We have adapted thousands of years ago, if everything gets turned upside down we would have to adapt again witch will be more difficult especially if infra structure is damaged.
Quote:
I find it ridiculous that people are arguing about a climate change, but not about us destroying everything we encounter. A climate change means it will become warmer here and there, wetter on other spots and colder in yet other places. On the other hand, a rainforest that is gone is gone forever since humans take it's place, with according disappearance of all lifeforms.
Depends on where you live I suppose. Most people over here are very concerned about dissapearing species as well as global warming. thing is, global warming is much more important as it is a genuine threat to human civilisation.
Quote:
We're an odd lot, and we're too many.
I agree. 2 billion would be more than enough. But with Asia and Afrika where family planning is unknown the population will only increase.
STAND OUT! |
Asperger
Foundation
R0ADKILL
|
Posted - 2007.09.18 10:50:00 -
[106]
Originally by: voogru
I just figured out the true cause of global warming.
...ITS THAT BIG SHINEY THING IN THE SKY THAT WE CALL THE SUN!!!
Hey, the sun has cycles where it emits more heat or less heat doesnt it, sometimes even having solar flares!
Hmm...
2+2 = 9182
Quoting wikipedia:
A 2006 study and review of existing literature, published in Nature, determined that there has been no net increase in solar brightness since the mid 1970s, and that changes in solar output within the past 400 years are unlikely to have played a major part in global warming. Source.
|
Celeste Coeval
The Gosimer and Scarab
|
Posted - 2007.09.18 13:50:00 -
[107]
Originally by: Cornucopian
Originally by: Celeste Coeval
Edited by: Celeste Coeval on 17/09/2007 23:02:00
I'm done banging my head against a brick wall.
The trojans were warned what was inside the horse. Lets see what happens then shall we? All the data and anecdotal evidence i have seen states that ALL of the earths support systems are in decline. Your heat island effect can also be contribute to warming as urbanization not only creates heat island but er...it expands into natural carbon sinks...being forests and the like.
forests are only carbon sinks during the day: at night when fotosynthesis stops, they expell carbon..... just putting an edge on that.
carbon is absorbed into the tree and some is respirated back into the atmosphere, but the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is truely revealed during the winter months when the absorbtion is minimal. These levels are rising. You cannot deny that a forest of carbon based lifeforms being replaced with concrete is not detrimental to the absorbtion of carbon in the atmosphere.
"If you are out to describe the truth, leave elegance to the tailor."
-Albert Einstein
A blog of truth (not mine)
|
Celeste Coeval
The Gosimer and Scarab
|
Posted - 2007.09.18 13:54:00 -
[108]
Originally by: Asperger
Originally by: Erilias Ilthis
I think that's a fair point. However, have there been any major eruptions in the last 50 years ? What we consider major because a town has to be evacuated in Indonesia might be something different from eruptions in the past where entire islands explode, seabeds rise and drop and 100 km's of earth crust *****s. I'm thinking Santorini eg.
At least according to the Volcanic Explosivity Index Santorini was a type 6 eruption. We had at least 3 type 6 eruptions in the 20th century and at least one, Pinatubo in the past 20 years. The VEI is a logarithmic scale, increasing from 0 to 8.
Type 7 or 8 eruptions are relatively rare, in the past 1500 years only a type 7 eruption occured in 1815, which means even if they dump large amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere, they do it rarely. Volcanoes actually decrease the global mean temperature because apart from greenhouse gases they also dump large amounts of areosols in the atmosphere which forms a global layer of sulfuric acid haze in case of a big eruption, which in turn cools the planet more than the added CO2 warms it.
For example in the case of Pinatubo, wikipedia has this to say:
The injection of aerosols into the stratosphere is thought to have been the largest since the eruption of Krakatoa in 1883, with a total mass of SO2 of about 17 million tons being injectedùthe largest volume ever recorded by modern instruments (see chart and figure).
This very large stratospheric injection resulted in a reduction in the normal amount of sunlight reaching the earth's surface by up to 5% (see figure). This led to a decrease in northern hemisphere average temperatures of 0.5û0.6 ¦C (0.9û1.1 ¦F), and a global fall of about 0.4 ¦C (0.7 ¦F).
i love it when people talk all specific
See that? actual figures with sources.... shame some of the scientists (aka as computer engineers in other threads) can't follow this fellas example, rather than spew rhetoric.
"If you are out to describe the truth, leave elegance to the tailor."
-Albert Einstein
A blog of truth (not mine)
|
Arvald
Caldari
House of Tempers
|
Posted - 2007.09.18 14:53:00 -
[109]
Originally by: Death Kill
Originally by: voogru
Edited by: voogru on 17/09/2007 23:43:46
Global warming is a scam.
Why do I get the feling your name is billy bob, you drive a pick up, work in a coal factory and live in Texas?
We used to have snow in october here, last year we got snow on Christmas EVE. The climate is rapidly changing and only an ignoranus would refuse to see that.
i belive he was talking about the human element of it all 
-----------------------------------------------
ya cant stop the rokh
and no i have not nor will i ever contribute anything constructive to your thread |
Thanos Draicon
|
Posted - 2007.09.18 15:14:00 -
[110]
Yikes, I was going to support some of the arguments made here, but it would probably take a week just to find all the sources and write out the arguments clearly. 
To summarize: Global Warming is real and it is dangerous.
|
Born Slippy
|
Posted - 2007.09.18 15:26:00 -
[111]
More global warming = less holiday makers = less badger banes = reduced global warming untill the world is so hot nobody needs to go on holiday = global warming solved. Global warming is a win win situation!
Cheaper holidays 4tw!
|
Sokratesz
Paradox v2.0
Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2007.09.18 16:35:00 -
[112]
Lots of wannabe science in this thread
Originally by: Captian Internet
Did some one say IBTL? because I think I just heard some one say IBTL
|
Frygok
Minmatar
Mean Anglo-Danes
|
Posted - 2007.09.18 16:35:00 -
[113]
Edited by: Frygok on 18/09/2007 16:37:13
Whether or not Global Warming is a "hoax" or a real threat (personally I believe the latter), I don't see all these excuses for not trying to make the global environment better.
Some people in here seem to go by the idea that "global warming is a lie, go nuts with polluting, and if people somewhere else in the world suffers, they should just move!" - That's a bit tricky for the hundreds and hundreds of millions in the Southeast Asia and other parts of the world, where floodings are a VERY real threat.
Why is it that we need to drive big trucks 4 km to work, while getting fatter? People should just get off their asses and on a bike, it's healthier both for the globe, and for the individual (as an example). And just FYI, pollution is lethal. I cannot remember the specific report, but it concluded that the pollution in big cities was just as dangerous as smoking a pack of cigarettes a day, if not more... So much for laughing at the eco-geeks.
Whether or not we humans are causing the global warming, or "just" adding to it (who is to say we are not only increasing the rate at which we reach the "peak" of global warming, but also raising that peak far beyond it would have gone naturally?), there need to be a mental shift in the way we think, as this thread portrays ever so well. Just because it's not 100% certain that we are the cause of this global warming, there is no excuse not to do something, all the way down to the individual level.
|
UPA Terf
Scorn Again.
|
Posted - 2007.09.18 16:51:00 -
[114]
Umm but wasnt it already releasing this before the last ice age when it was frozen? considering the negligible amount of co2 etc we actually put into the atmosphere its not that much of a worry.
|
Surfin's PlunderBunny
Minmatar
Sicarri Covenant
|
Posted - 2007.09.18 16:55:00 -
[115]
Originally by: voogru
Edited by: voogru on 18/09/2007 00:46:53
Guys,
I just figured out the true cause of global warming.
...ITS THAT BIG SHINEY THING IN THE SKY THAT WE CALL THE SUN!!!
Hey, the sun has cycles where it emits more heat or less heat doesnt it, sometimes even having solar flares!
Hmm...
2+2 = 9182
YOU LIE!!!! 
Yeah, I'd also take the monkey
Originally by: Liz Kali
Tic Toc Tic Toc , time is ticking
Originally by: TheDagda
*click*
For the love of the jovians stops necroing
|
DarkMatter
Sintered Sanity
|
Posted - 2007.09.18 17:00:00 -
[116]
Edited by: DarkMatter on 18/09/2007 17:00:30
Quote:
Just because it's not 100% certain that we are the cause of this global warming, there is no excuse not to do something, all the way down to the individual level.
As soon as all the politicians, actors & other rich people prove to me they are making individual sacrifices to save the planet, I'll think about it...
Until then, they can shove it!
My Current Project |
Frygok
Minmatar
Mean Anglo-Danes
|
Posted - 2007.09.18 17:12:00 -
[117]
Originally by: DarkMatter
Edited by: DarkMatter on 18/09/2007 17:00:30
Quote:
Just because it's not 100% certain that we are the cause of this global warming, there is no excuse not to do something, all the way down to the individual level.
As soon as all the politicians, actors & other rich people prove to me they are making individual sacrifices to save the planet, I'll think about it...
Until then, they can shove it!
If the people made a stand during elections with their votes, then maybe politicians and companies would have to pay attention to the environment? Just saying "Oh well, since the politicians and other elites don't do anything, I won't either".
In my own country the environmental debate has certainly moved some votes from one party to another, and made way for vast improvements and regulations on pollution and pesticides. Hell, it's even helped my country becoming one of the biggest windmill-producers in the world. On top of that, there is a plan that by 2025, half the energy production in my country should be made by windmills. That has happened because of eco-organizations and a few politicians standing up for it.
But if people and politicians are labeled as "environmental nerds", "tree-huggers" and other stuff like it, no wonder they won't speak up.
|
DarkMatter
Sintered Sanity
|
Posted - 2007.09.18 17:17:00 -
[118]
Quote:
But if people and politicians are labeled as "environmental nerds", "tree-huggers" and other stuff like it, no wonder they won't speak up.
Then they are weak minded and would never get elected anyways...
Politicians and actors continually ask the general public to sacrifice, and then you see them flying around in their Leer Jets, wasting more resources with their wealth in a month than I ever could in my lifetime...
Sorry but that's not going to work, lol!
My Current Project |
Asperger
Foundation
R0ADKILL
|
Posted - 2007.09.18 17:27:00 -
[119]
Originally by: DarkMatter
Quote:
But if people and politicians are labeled as "environmental nerds", "tree-huggers" and other stuff like it, no wonder they won't speak up.
Then they are weak minded and would never get elected anyways...
Politicians and actors continually ask the general public to sacrifice, and then you see them flying around in their Leer Jets, wasting more resources with their wealth in a month than I ever could in my lifetime...
Sorry but that's not going to work, lol!
Environmental concerns only partly influence my choices in using more environmentally friendly technology. The other influence is trying to save money. Compact fluorescent bulbs, choosing a car with good fuel efficiency, solar collector on your roof, good insulation, etc. are not only more environmentally friendly but much cheaper.
|
Iyachtu Achlysiel
Caldari
Caldari Independent Navy Reserve
|
Posted - 2007.09.18 19:31:00 -
[120]
There's good news and bad news when it comes to climate change and environment.
The good news is that the climate has been oscillating between ice ages and warm interglacial periods for 3 million years now. The changes have often been extreme and rapid; during the latest jump (the end of Younger Dryas period, which was a millenium-long cold period that followed after the latest ice age), global mean temperature rose 7C in 10 years, and the rainfall doubled. The great flood legends in Bible and other mythologies may actually date back to that period.
This means that the current environment is a survivor of repeated, extreme climate changes. Such species that couldn't adapt to that have already died off. Global warming alone wouldn't be a threat to nature.
The bad news is that it will nonetheless put a lot of pressure on it. Many species are already under stress from habitat loss, pollution, hunting, invasive species and other factors. They may not be able to take any more. Moreover, humans use a lot of landarea. For those species able to coexist with us (and there's far more than you may think, even in big cities), it's not a big deal. Those that can't may well find that they cannot migrate north or south in response to temperature changes, because there's a ton of concrete and hordes of bipedal apes blocking their way.
I think that many people underestimate the adaptability of our contemporary biosphere, but the results of climate change on nature won't most likely be that pretty, either.
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |