So in other words, Global Warming means ... nothing

[The Assistant]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience...nce/globalwarmingdirepredictionfortheyear3000

So really, according to this article, the end result of all of this global warming BS is that in 1000 years, the sea levels will rise by as much as 10ft..........my question is, SO WHAT?

WTF kinda difference is 10 ft going to make in this world a whole 1000 years from now?

I mean honestly, what kind of screwed up people actually care about a 10 ft rise in sea level A THOUSAND YEARS from now, and what kind of totally messed up people keep trying to push "being green" on everyone?

Like....why? seriously....WHY??? What is up with all of the sheer ignorance and stupidity in his world?

 

[SharinganUser]

Your first mistake is that you get the news from yahoo.

 

[L B]

Global warming was just a distraction when the economy was going well. People have nothing better to do so they stand behind it to feel important.

Within a thousand years, a major earthquake or a minor shift in the earth and sea might be lowered by 10ft. You just can't predict that far in the future. Where's my daily flying car they've been predicting for several decades.

 

[synergy1]

People want to feel that they matter. It took painstaking efforts on astronomers behalf to debunk the geocentric model of the universe, as this would infer some sort of mediocrity. Obviously the same could be said for any logics which contradict the bible - it diminishes our importance.

I believe that global warming is something we give ourselves too much credit for. It gives us a sense of grandeur, and a sense that we 'matter'. Fact is, we haven't taken concrete data for more than a small blip of the history of the earth, so its difficult to conclude just how "permanent" this global warming is. How crushing indeed must it be to realize that whatever we do, the earth is mostly indifferent to our actions? Look at Chernobyl and the wildlife which has sprung up and thrived since the accident!

Switching gears, even IF global warming was a serious issue, we aren't/can't stop burning fossil fuels on a whim. Our infrastructure depends on it - coal and oil for heating and transportation especially. Its easy for pundit 24601 to be righteous for an imaginary cause, but I promise you that ones mind would change if the supermarkets suddenly had no food. Such a radical change would be very disastrous for most folks..more so than the thought of a polar ice cap losing some snow..

 

[Forty0ztoFreedom]

Imagine the people of the year 1011 AD predicting the plight of the world in 2011.

 

[EA Gold]

I remember some one saying that back in the early 1900's the fear was that if the population continued to grow that their would be a manure problem. Their would be horses everywhere and not enough people to pick up the S#it on the ground forcing people to abandon cities. I guess that fear no longer exists..

One day maybe we'll have flying cars like the dolorean, that takes CO2 and garbage as fuel. I wonder what that would look like..

"Marty, you got to come back with me!.. Where? ... "back to the future".. the line always cracks me up

 

[spider_007]

Like....why? seriously....WHY??? ...'s not like you and I will be around anyways.

 

[ChalengeGuyFan]

Before sea level rises by 10 ft, there should be real concerns one should have, like extreme polution or forever rising prices of oil.

Regarding the former: I do care if some factory poisons the soils and the water that keep me alive and I do care if cars fvck up the air that I breathe (will I get lung cancer by 50 if I cycle in town for 30 more years? Will I have a weakened immune system if everything that I consume contains stupid chemicals?)

And regarding the latter: I do care if the oil runs out fast (or if they make us believe so) because I'll have to pay more for my electricity, for my clothes, for my food and everything else...

So yeah, I care about going green, but not because of sea levels 1000 or even 100 years from now, but because it influences me today and in the near future.

 

[Quiksilver]

I'd be a happy person if I never heard the word Green or the prefix Smart (smart water, smart grid, smart car, smart etc.) again in my life.

Until there is reasonable evidence of unadaptable anthropogenic climate change, then it will be simply a boogieman in my mind.

 

[PRMoon]

A lot of people who aren't intelligent like to follow popular ideas that make it appear as if they are because research and objectivism require too much effort. Global warning is just one of those many instances. Not taking into consideration how long the earth has been here coupled with the very short existence of self proscribed most intelligent species ever in man kind gives lackeys something to exploit for their own ego. Most global warning peanut gallery fans don't understand the first thing about earth sciences or even what they themselves are spewing. Something of the consequences of dire fate that most of then describe will take decades upon decades of research to confirm because the earth experiences changes far more drastic then it has since our inception which was relatively a short time ago.

Bottom line, people should calm the f*uck down.

 

[Alle_Gory]

Like....why? seriously....WHY??? What is up with all of the sheer ignorance and stupidity in his world?

Ignorance, like advocating that people shouldn't give a damn about what's happening to their environment?

Stupidity, like getting your news from Yahoo?

 

[BBbardot]

you all silly


do you know what this sea raise represent?
it might sound tiny but it would meet the disaparision of manhattan, venise and every major city near the water. And it's not in 1000's of years, venise that was like the first real republic ever to which civilisation as we know it owe so much as already started disapearing, the maldives and its population, getting off the map. Don't you think those poeple have the right to keep their lives, homes?
have you ever heard of the tsunamis, the huricanes, that killed dozen of million poeple and keep killing poeple years after they arrived (because of increased poverty etc)
the extention of a huge part of the wild life/sea life and not only polar bears^_^
you all should get out of you ignorance watching a few documentaries about the issue.
I mean i can't even start making a list.
*sigh*
just get a book, or download something on itunes to make yourself aware, please.

arcbound, he is not saying that there is no consequenses to climate change like those silly above, your expert only says its not caused by human activity and this guy and poeple that think the same are a tiny minority in scientific world


synergy- for your "oh but we love our oil" thing: oil is running out. Soon it will too expensive and then done.
the us, even the opep (middle eastern oil countries) are investing massively in green energy. Because it's simply our future. We might still use kerozene for planes but soon we will use bioenergies like algae ethanol etc to fill up our cars. Even oil companies invest a looot in this ( and this is insider info i have a friend that owns a bio energy company, for their reasersh, they get money from everywhere, private investers, governements, biggest oil companies in the world pay to be kept inform of whats going on in their labs. So yes we are adapting to that. We've no choice for that matter.

 

[ArcBound]

William M. "Bill" Gray (born 1929) is Emeritus Professor of Atmospheric Science at Colorado State University (CSU), and head of the Tropical Meteorology Project at CSU's Department of Atmospheric Sciences. He is a pioneer in the science of forecasting hurricanes[1] and one of the world's leading experts on tropical storms.[2]

"the obdurate William Gray of Colorado State University, “a towering figure of American hurricane science,” who has for many years produced remarkably accurate forecasts of the upcoming Atlantic hurricane season and who repeatedly and loudly denies—in congressional hearings and everywhere else—that humans have any role in climate change. Seeing himself as a strict empiricist whose hurricane predictions are based on decades of “crunching huge piles of data,” Gray is convinced that the atmosphere is too complicated to be captured in computer simulations, at one point fulminating that “any experienced meteorologist that believes in a climate model of any type should have their head examined.” He believes that changes in ocean circulation have warmed the Atlantic and increased hurricane activity in the past decade and that this is simply the result of normal oscillation in natural climate cycles."

 

[ArcBound]

Bbardot if we are silly try arguing with William Gray, one of the world's leading experts in matters of storms and climate.

Or this list of leading and well known scientists from research institutions such as Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, Princeton University, the Danish National Space Center, Hebrew University of Jerusalem etc. etc.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_opposing_the_mainstream_scientific_assessment_of_global_warming

 

[synergy1]

Before sea level rises by 10 ft, there should be real concerns one should have, like extreme polution or forever rising prices of oil.

Regarding the former: I do care if some factory poisons the soils and the water that keep me alive and I do care if cars fvck up the air that I breathe (will I get lung cancer by 50 if I cycle in town for 30 more years? Will I have a weakened immune system if everything that I consume contains stupid chemicals?)

And regarding the latter: I do care if the oil runs out fast (or if they make us believe so) because I'll have to pay more for my electricity, for my clothes, for my food and everything else...

So yeah, I care about going green, but not because of sea levels 1000 or even 100 years from now, but because it influences me today and in the near future.

How do you know that this isn't some sort of periodic/cyclical anomaly of our planet? To liken our current situation to high frequency data collection - what we measure could be nothing more than an outlying data point.

I could write an essay on the whole 'going green' movement, which is nothing more than ignorant people leveraging fear to try and push their own agendas ( corn ethanol). Here is a pro tip : every source of energy has its pitfalls; its impossible to get something without a cost. Do you honestly think that windfarms, or solar arrays has zero consequences on our environment?

The only way we truly go green is to stop using oil which means stopping our quality of life as we know it. It won't happen. You like your car, your plastic bottles, your house, and your food too much to do so. Its easy for clowns to say 'go green', but I don't see anyone actually changing.

I can agree on the fact that human's emit CO2 as part of our practice of consuming hydrocarbons. But scientists also agree that there are other forms of CO2 emissions too. What I am not sure on is the proportions; does the earth do more of it or do we? I am not sure the community has come to agree upon this...

 

[JustLurk]

Gray is convinced that the atmosphere is too complicated to be captured in computer simulations,

No kidding. This is what the butterfly effect was really talking about: You round to, like, 60 significant figures just to find out that the slight inaccuracy makes your stimulation turn up a hurricane where there really shouldn't be one. Also, we just cannot be accurate enough with the data. Why are we trusting these people to make accurate predictions about something a millennium from now when these yahoos can't even predict next month's weather accurately?

 

[Rogue]

William M. "Bill" Gray (born 1929) is Emeritus Professor of Atmospheric Science at Colorado State University (CSU), and head of the Tropical Meteorology Project at CSU's Department of Atmospheric Sciences. He is a pioneer in the science of forecasting hurricanes[1] and one of the world's leading experts on tropical storms.[2]

"the obdurate William Gray of Colorado State University, “a towering figure of American hurricane science,” who has for many years produced remarkably accurate forecasts of the upcoming Atlantic hurricane season and who repeatedly and loudly denies—in congressional hearings and everywhere else—that humans have any role in climate change. Seeing himself as a strict empiricist whose hurricane predictions are based on decades of “crunching huge piles of data,” Gray is convinced that the atmosphere is too complicated to be captured in computer simulations, at one point fulminating that “any experienced meteorologist that believes in a climate model of any type should have their head examined.” He believes that changes in ocean circulation have warmed the Atlantic and increased hurricane activity in the past decade and that this is simply the result of normal oscillation in natural climate cycles."

The weather is not climate. Meteorologists don't study ice core samples or any other geographical evidence. It's true that one ought not rely on any one specific individual forecast model, but that is true of every other science. The details of how fast the changes will occur, how hot it will be, how far the oceans will rise, are all details under vigorous debate and immense uncertainty—and consequently the reliance on any particular forecast model is full of caveat emptor. But to focus on the disagreement of scholars over specific details to cast doubt over the entire field, as if to say "If they can't reach agreements, why should I believe anything?—maybe the whole thing is bull," is a tactic of denial movements (see Michael Shermer; Why People Believe Weird Things). While I don't knock the credentials of William Gray, in general the field of meteorologists is unscientific. They aren't research scientists. In general, they don't have graduate degrees and half don't even have a degree in atmospheric science (source). It comes as no surprise the field of meteorology is a treasure trove of climate change deniers—they aren't scientists and they are uneducated.

It's the typical populist argument that the ivory-tower eggheads are pulling a fast one on the world: "These scientists know that if they do research and results are in no way alarming, their research will gather dust on the shelf.... But if they do research that sounds alarms, they will become well known and respected and receive scholarly awards and, very importantly, more research dollars will come flooding their way.... Their like-minded PhD colleagues reviewed their work and hastened to endorse it without question."

This distrust of scientists is all the more evident when you realize that most TV meteorologists are not scientists -- and certainly not climate scientists. Few of them have graduate degrees, and only half have college degrees in atmospheric science.

There's nothing necessarily wrong with this; you don't need a PhD to accurately forecast the weather. But climate change is an extremely complex issue, and (with all due respect to TV meteorologists) their specialty is short-term, local weather, not the science of long-term global climate patterns.

The danger is that the public will assume that [John Coleman] and other global warming deniers are speaking from a position of personal expertise on the subject, that their skepticism about global warming comes from first-hand knowledge of the issues instead of right-wing talk shows and conspiracy-theory Web sites.

 

[Quiksilver]

...

have you ever heard of the tsunamis, the huricanes, that killed dozen of million poeple and keep killing poeple years after they arrived (because of increased poverty etc)

THESE THINGS HAVE HAPPENED SINCE THE DAWN OF TIME. AND WHILE POVERTY IS UNFORTUNATE IT BEARS NO RELEVANCE TO THE CHANGE IN MEAN NORTHERN HEMISPHERE LAND TEMPERATURE OVER THE NEXT 100 YEARS.

the extention [EXTINCTION] of a huge part of the wild life/sea life and not only polar bears^_^

WILD POLAR BEAR POPULATION HAS RISEN OVER 300% SINCE 1985. WILDLIFE AND PARTICULARLY SEA LIFE THRIVES IN WARMER 'GREENHOUSE' TEMPERATURES. AGAIN THIS IS IRRELEVANT TO NORTHERN HEMISPHERIC LAND WARMING.

you all should get out of you ignorance watching a few documentaries about the issue.

SUCH AS?

I mean i can't even start making a list.

PLEASE DO.

*sigh*
just get a book, or download something on itunes to make yourself aware, please.

PLEASE POINT ME TO THESE BOOKS CONTAINING CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE OF UNADAPTABLE ANTHROPOGENIC CLIMATE CHANGE, I AM EAGER TO LEARN WHAT YOU APPARENTLY KNOW.

...

Response in bold.

 

[synergy1]

synergy- for your "oh but we love our oil" thing: oil is running out. Soon it will too expensive and then done.
the us, even the opep (middle eastern oil countries) are investing massively in green energy. Because it's simply our future. We might still use kerozene for planes but soon we will use bioenergies like algae ethanol etc to fill up our cars. Even oil companies invest a looot in this ( and this is insider info i have a friend that owns a bio energy company, for their reasersh, they get money from everywhere, private investers, governements, biggest oil companies in the world pay to be kept inform of whats going on in their labs. So yes we are adapting to that. We've no choice for that matter.

Ah yes, the algae thing.

Can algae oils replace conventional petrol? On a energy density basis , yes. Actually ,algae derived biofuels would be cleaner burning and contain more BTUs per unit volume , and could in theory be used to sequester CO2 during production. However the big problem with algae is the cost. What does it cost to produce a gallon of algae derived biofuels? Like the tar sands in canada, you need 1 barrel of oil to produce two thus the net return is not so great. Some feel that a synergistic combination of the best in class technologies could today provide commercial scale algae production in anywhere between 5-10 years. Exxon partnered with Synthetic Genomics feels that algae is promising to the tune of 600 million ( around 2009). They are probably the largest investment that I know of on this technology. DARPA and other branches of the military are working on it as well..

I am curious as to your friends success. What is their name and how much money have they raised? Are they anywhere near showing any sort of large scale commercial feasibility?

**as a side note, they have used jetropha/algae blends and already flown commercial airplanes in 2010. its certainly possible. The question is if it is so on a large scale. I'll be excited to find out**

 

[PRMoon]

Response in bold.

Thank you Quicksilver.
Again no global warming theorist even consider the fact that whatever changes that are happening to the earth could of happen happened regardless of humans being here. The list of natural climate changes that the planet has undergone is endless and the"studies" on human impact are very inconclusive at best.