Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"Climate change" has always been with us and there is really nothing mankind can do about it ... except perhaps use it as an excuse to build an ever-burgeoning, expensive layer of bureaucracy (aka 'control') --- and support the pretense that politicians are actually "doing something to protect us from a dastardly fate!"
Thomas Jefferson understood this political tendency when he wrote, "May God protect us from politicians who take our money under the pretense of 'taking care of us'".
Im in my early 40s, weather and climate around my area are about the same as when I was a child, no real noticeable differences I can think of, so...?
This span of time isn't even noticeable in terms of climate. A mere blink in global time. You are talking about weather....that is local, variable from year to year, and just not very significant. We all have memories about "how it used to be" or not. Depending on where you are located (such as coastal Alaska, Greenland, Antarctica, continental subalpine areas, where glacial and sea ice conditions are noticeably different now), some change IS measurable. And before you say that those areas are not important for humanity, think again. They all contribute to our fresh water supplies, they affect that local weather which in turn impacts agriculture and the oceans...we all need the products from both.
Last edited by Parnassia; 11-01-2017 at 12:27 PM..
"Climate change" has always been with us and there is really nothing mankind can do about it ... except perhaps use it as an excuse to build an ever-burgeoning, expensive layer of bureaucracy (aka 'control') --- and support the pretense that politicians are actually "doing something to protect us from a dastardly fate!"
Thomas Jefferson understood this political tendency when he wrote, "May God protect us from politicians who take our money under the pretense of 'taking care of us'".
There is something we can do about it....analyze potential outcomes, prepare for change (agriculture, drought and flood cycles, fresh water retention, change in disease spread and vectors, relocation of vulnerable coastal populations, etc) and become more resilient. That is what we are not doing at least on a governmental scale. If citizenry doesn't do anything because they are too busy bickering, governments should quit adding to global finger-pointing and step in. I don't care which political party does it or who gets to claim the credit.
Last edited by Parnassia; 11-01-2017 at 12:26 PM..
The actual science is all on one side in this debate. It's gotten silly even to call it a debate anymore. In nearly every other such area, we ask out best minds to investigate and evaluate and then offer such options and alternatives as they might can see for us given such discoveries. In what other area is there any significant effort to ignore categorically everything that is discovered and reported?
There has never been an attempt to mitigate climate change or climate variation on a global scale before. This unique opportunity is possible (but unlikely) because one unit of greenhouse gas emissions has the same effect on the global climate, no matter where the source is, whereas the effects of most pollutants are local.
In the end, people, businesses, etc. will have to adapt locally to local climate change. But if you look carefully at the economics of adaptation and mitigation, it will generally cost more to adapt than mitigate. On the other hand, it is much easier to adapt to climate change, taking into account the uncertainty of the exact nature of local climate changes. It is also "voluntary". But the old adage, "You can pay me now, or pay me later", will still be true.
Yes the earth's temperatures have changed over time due to natural effects, that is a fact buried in geological records. What is also indisputable is that the rate of change has exponentially increased since the start of the industrial revolution. IF the rate continues then we will for sure be in trouble in 100 years. No doubt at all, it's just extrapolating the data we already have. We can argue over the causes but for someone to say the weather in my little microcosm of the earth hasn't changed in decades and then project that as if there is no change worldwide is just ignoring the facts.
I'd love to be the first person to say there man made climate change is a hoax, after all we could all go back to the 70's and pollute away, right? The change in the world population - we have doubled the population since 1970 is having a measurable effect in terms of deforestation and pollution, especially from India and China as their wealth increases, driving demand for cars, motorcycles, fridges and A/C.
So far the changes have been relatively small and ultimately correctable given the desire. The consensus of scientists who are paid to be objective, cynical and data driven is very clear - if we continue on this path we are doomed.
I have no ax to grind, no political position to take, but I am an engineer and scientist and know how to read scientific data. At the end of the day it isn't going to matter what the US or the EU does, for instance. The concern should be what happens in China, India and to a certain extent Africa and South America in the next 50 years.
PS - Finally note that I never used the term "global warming". There are regional variations due to climate change that mean there are losers and winners. Change is the keyword.
PPS this is a good, simple explanation from NASA for those who are interested in a simple, objective overview of the issue - https://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/
Last edited by timfountain; 11-01-2017 at 08:57 PM..
By the way, has anyone noticed how most of the climate change deniers have moved on to conceding that climate change is happening but that it's not caused by humans? Think about that. A decade ago, the idea that the global climate was changing was false! A lie! A conspiracy! Now? They admit it's real. Instead, they claim it's a natural phenomenon. What they're saying is "Okay, not long ago we were making a claim that we now admit was completely wrong. But this time we're right! Trust us!".
A few of them have even conceded human-caused climate change, but have progressed to yet another response - it's either a good thing, or we can't do anything about it, so why bother trying?
None of these claims ...
*The climate is not changing!
*Climate change is natural!
*Humans are changing the climate but whatchagonnadoaboutit?
... have any evidentiary commonalities.
So how on Earth is this group coming up with them all in succession?
The answer lies in what they oppose: any effort to regulate emissions. That's 'big government'. And it might cost them a buck or two today (and never spend a dollar today when you can kick the can down the road and saddle the next generation with the bill!). This is the commonality. This is the thread that binds these disparate and ever-changing claims regarding climate change.
That's it. All these think tanks and astroturf groups and paid Russian trolls who work feverishly to insist that all climate PhDs are wrong and some doofus with a blog knows 'the truth' are merely carrying water for their financial backers - those who see a potential ding to their profits if they have to actually stop doing environmental damage while making money. They rely on gullible people to buy what their shoveling. And they're rarely disappointed.
Between the sheer amount of highly profitable toxic manufacturing processes, coupled with the huge failures in the financial world, you'd think that more people could see the crux of the matter-- always---as money. Yes money makes the world go round, but it also is behind that low hanging smog in all of America's valley's. All the damage done to our collective ecosystem, has generally been caused by things which brings home the corporate bacon. So, anything that even hints at curbing the corporate generated, toxic effluent, will be immediately silenced or at the very least discredited--publicly shamed--and branded a traitor to the holy grail of American jobs.
We see the intent to pollute to the end, and, doing everything we can to speed up the arrival of that end. I don't care about the science involved, I don't care about the money involved, but I do care about the fact that so many are in denial when it comes to the destruction of an ecosystem we all need for survival. Any idiot can simply stand in the heart of any large metro area, and breathe deep the gathering gloom of polluted air. Look around and see the wilderness being downsized to the delight of corporate profiteers. See the Oceans being systematically depleted of their life sustaining yields, see farming becoming a megalopolis of corporate interest, all these are aspects of an alarming spread of ignorance, all this acceptance of a lopsided economic benefit, and people still maintain that this is just business as usual, or worse, that it just isn't true..
By the way, has anyone noticed how most of the climate change deniers have moved on to conceding that climate change is happening but that it's not caused by humans? Think about that. A decade ago, the idea that the global climate was changing was false! A lie! A conspiracy! Now? They admit it's real. Instead, they claim it's a natural phenomenon. What they're saying is "Okay, not long ago we were making a claim that we now admit was completely wrong. But this time we're right! Trust us!".
A few of them have even conceded human-caused climate change, but have progressed to yet another response - it's either a good thing, or we can't do anything about it, so why bother trying?
None of these claims ...
*The climate is not changing!
*Climate change is natural!
*Humans are changing the climate but whatchagonnadoaboutit?
... have any evidentiary commonalities.
So how on Earth is this group coming up with them all in succession?
The answer lies in what they oppose: any effort to regulate emissions. That's 'big government'. And it might cost them a buck or two today (and never spend a dollar today when you can kick the can down the road and saddle the next generation with the bill!). This is the commonality. This is the thread that binds these disparate and ever-changing claims regarding climate change.
That's it. All these think tanks and astroturf groups and paid Russian trolls who work feverishly to insist that all climate PhDs are wrong and some doofus with a blog knows 'the truth' are merely carrying water for their financial backers - those who see a potential ding to their profits if they have to actually stop doing environmental damage while making money. They rely on gullible people to buy what their shoveling. And they're rarely disappointed.
The climate always changes. Always will. Stopping climate change is nonsensical. And as for "halting" warming, why would anyone want to do that? We're coming out of the Ice Age cycle, and the current global temp of 11-12C is far below the historical (long term basis) average is 17C...so one would expect warming. Warmer temperatures are better, higher levels of CO2 are better, since it is food for plants and by extension, animals, including us and the animals that we eat.
Cold weather and Ice Ages kill people (and plants and animals)- but the warmer periods are great for biodiversity and an abundance of food.
The climate always changes. Always will. Stopping climate change is nonsensical. And as for "halting" warming, why would anyone want to do that? We're coming out of the Ice Age cycle, and the current global temp of 11-12C is far below the historical (long term basis) average is 17C...so one would expect warming. Warmer temperatures are better, higher levels of CO2 are better, since it is food for plants and by extension, animals, including us and the animals that we eat.
Cold weather and Ice Ages kill people (and plants and animals)- but the warmer periods are great for biodiversity and an abundance of food.
Good, succinct summary of the situation. [I can't rep you again just yet.]
I'll only disagree about your statement that we're coming out of the last ice age. Actually, we're well out of it and headed towards the next one. Place a straight edge on the following graph from the temp peaks between 8000bp and present. It's a downhill slope (from right to left) and the little blip of warming in the last 200 years (coming out of LIA) is just getting us back up to the "expected" down hill course of temps.
[CENTER][SIZE=2]This image was found at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Holocene_Temperature_Variations.png.[/SIZE][/CENTER]
A straight edge along the temp minima from 8000ybp to present plus the line drawn along the maxima gives us an error bar. Recent changes still keep us within that bar as we progress with global cooling.
We shouldn't donate our long johns to charity just yet. We may need them.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
