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.
What I do know is salt water did not come through the sewers in Miami beach 30 years ago like it does now. Areas of Maryland are now continuously flooded due to rising sea levels.
We can argue about the science, but the effects are already starting. States losing coast line would count as an emergency to me.
As the effects of climate change become more serious, it is becoming an emergency. Climate change will become the most important issue in the next 5 to 10 years. It doesn't matter what you all think. It will happen.
What exactly has transpired, in your opinion, from "climate change" that makes this an "emergency"?
We are entering a Grand Solar Minimum. Beard, if temps fall as a result of the Grand Solar Minimum, can we say (since CO2 is the source of all "climate change") that we must then INCREASE CO2 production to combat the cooling?
You see................ academic fraud is somewhat of a slippery slope. When temps fall (they can't go on faking them forever), there should be a logical demand for us to increase fossil fuel consumption. Will you support such measures? If not, you really don't believe in CO2 driven "climate change".
Step outside for a moment and analyze your position. When, if ever, is there a singular cause of any natural phenomenon? Do you not find it odd that little old CO2 is presumed to have this magical power to do nearly everything that is harmful to the planet?
You do realize, don't you, that CO2 provides the carbon that is the building block of organic life. All of the carbon compounds in your body were once CO2. Now, you hate CO2- the very gas that has been kind enough to allow you to exist on this planet. Would it not be more gracious to pick on another, less vital gas?
What I do know is salt water did not come through the sewers in Miami beach 30 years ago like it does now. Areas of Maryland are now continuously flooded due to rising sea levels.
We can argue about the science, but the effects are already starting. States losing coast line would count as an emergency to me.
...sea level in South Florida has risen 2 1/2 inches in the past 30 years....the rate is less than 1 inch a decade
that is a natural process, happens all the time.... as well as new species being discovered almost daily.
Laugh at the rerun vids of media and legislators claiming crisis at the border is manufactured..... well the forecast for life on earth ending within the next few years is a manufactured crisis the dems own.
If a crisis exists, it is from pollution, micro plastics, emerging pollutants, pharmaceutical tossed down the drain or toilet. Pollution will end life on earth long before global warming.
Went to Rutgers college of ag and environmental science.... told the climate was changing...its was getting cooler. Now told the climate is heating up. Okay.the climate is always changing.
the scam is the government going to reverse it if we hand over more hard earned cash.
The US leads in reduced emissions and advanced technology and green research. Doesn't do a whit of good to save life on earth by ourselves. Otherwise, the government cannot show real data on the results of their efforts to date. they rely entirely on theory.
efforts to identify SVPs socially vulnerable populations.... and remediation cost reductions thru city planning demonstrates a effort to adapt. That is what the feds need to be emphasizing.
The east coast land is being compressed and sinking and the waters are rising. Meanwhile, off Sea Bright, NJ, 2 million dollar condos are being built on the beach with the apparent approval of NJ EPA.
Dems since Obama, have done their best to push theoretical projections as reality. How is that working out? Remember Obama saying the safest places have the strictest gun laws? Pure theory based on an academic theory that no guns equals no gun violence.
affordable healthcare was anything but affordable to the greater majority of people.
if you eat too much and achieve an overweight status, you will be fat and suffer diabetes, heart disease and your immune system will be in the toilet. Not the fate of every overweight person!
Consumer choice is the key to respecting the environment. Consumers who fall into the warmer group, continue poor consumer choices and sit back and let the government cover for consumers' lack of initiative.
On the negative side, the loss of 90% or so of the species which now inhabit the earth. On the plus side, your bill for heating your home will go wa-ay down.
It is an emergency because time is running out. The IPCC report delivered by the UN last year was very clear that we will reach a tipping point soon beyond which we lose any chance of reversing the effects of human caused climate change.
Human history is full of examples of cultures that wiped themselves out through bad decisions about their ecosystem - the Anasazi, the Easter Islanders, the Maya civilization. We can make smart decisions and reverse the trend we are on now, or we can repeat the mistakes of these cultures and ignore what our scientists are telling us and put us on a path for severe cultural disruption.
We are entering a Grand Solar Minimum. Beard, if temps fall as a result of the Grand Solar Minimum, can we say (since CO2 is the source of all "climate change") that we must then INCREASE CO2 production to combat the cooling?
You see................ academic fraud is somewhat of a slippery slope. When temps fall (they can't go on faking them forever), there should be a logical demand for us to increase fossil fuel consumption. Will you support such measures? If not, you really don't believe in CO2 driven "climate change".
Relative to current levels, the Dalton Minimum represents a 0.08% decrease, and the Maunder Minimum represents a 0.25% decline in solar radiation at the Earth's surface. That's how stable solar activity is.
Feulner & Rahmstorf (2010) estimated that another solar minimum equivalent to the Dalton and Maunder minimum would cause 0.09°C and 0.26°C cooling, respectively.
Jones et al. (2012) (PDF available here) arrived at a nearly identical result, with cooling from a Dalton and Maunder minimum equivalent at 0.09°C and 0.26°C, respectively. Similarly, a new paper by Anet et al. (2013) found that a grand solar minimum will cause no more than 0.3°C cooling over the 21st century.
So in other words, it would barely make a dent in slowing down the rate of warming. Less than half of 1% difference in solar activity.
Quote:
Step outside for a moment and analyze your position. When, if ever, is there a singular cause of any natural phenomenon? Do you not find it odd that little old CO2 is presumed to have this magical power to do nearly everything that is harmful to the planet?
No one is claiming "little old" CO2 does nearly everything harmful. The increasing temperatures from higher CO2 levels are the actual concern.
Quote:
You do realize, don't you, that CO2 provides the carbon that is the building block of organic life. All of the carbon compounds in your body were once CO2. Now, you hate CO2- the very gas that has been kind enough to allow you to exist on this planet. Would it not be more gracious to pick on another, less vital gas?
First, no one hates CO2, I don't even think you believe that. Second, reducing CO2 emissions has the additional benefit of decreasing other emissions in the process, such as small particulate matter, sulfur dioxide, mercury and others. That is the primary reason I support cutting emissions. Even if it doesn't "fix" the climate, it will reduce other pollutants that are well known to cause issues with human health and cause other environmental damage.
- States that are projected to benefit from the largest average decreases in fine particle pollution (PM2.5) and summer ozone pollution detrimental to human health include: Ohio, Pennsylvania, Maryland, West Virginia, Illinois, Kentucky, Missouri, Indiana, Arkansas, Colorado, and Alabama (based on the top 6 states for each pollutant).
- States that are projected to benefit from the largest average decreases in sulfur and nitrogen pollution detrimental to ecosystems include: Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Ohio, Maryland, Kentucky, Delaware, Indiana, Illinois, and Missouri (based on the top 6 states for each pollutant).
- Most other states see improvements in both air quality and atmospheric deposition of pollutants which vary state to state.
See? Some people supporting reductions in "little old" CO2 are doing it because even if it has no impact on climate, it will have plenty of other pollution reducing benefits.
I know some like to say that higher CO2 is good for plants. Well, the other pollutants we generate with it are not.
"Our findings suggest that crops like corn, soybeans and cotton could benefit from substantial productivity gains under moderate carbon standards for power plants," said Shannon Capps, PhD, an assistant professor in Drexel's College of Engineering and an author of the study. "With policies similar to those in the Clean Power Plan, we're projecting more than a 15 percent reduction in corn productivity losses due to ozone exposure, compared to business as usual, and about half of that for cotton and soybeans. Depending on market value fluctuations of these crops over the next few years, that could mean gains of tens of millions of dollars for farmers -- especially in areas like the Ohio River Valley where power plants currently contribute to ground-level ozone."
So even if you don't think CO2 emissions matter at all, there are plenty of other pollutants that would be lowered substantially when they are reduced.
As the effects of climate change become more serious, it is becoming an emergency. Climate change will become the most important issue in the next 5 to 10 years. It doesn't matter what you all think. It will happen.
...hey folks...want to have an entertaining evening watching a comedy movie?...'Inconvenient Truth'...it'll have you in stitches...especially the part where al looks into the camera, forlorn look on his face, and tells us by 2007 manhattan will be under 27 feet of water...
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.
