Global warming

Smellyman

I always try to break it down simply for the mouth breathers.

Do you think pumping billions and billions of tons of pollution into the atmosphere is bad?

tbergs

This thread should really be titled climate change, but whatever.

Anyway, kind of a follow up to the article the other day about our insane consumption of meat. Beans for beef anyone? It's like we just don't care. We bitch for hours about what the Trump admin is doing to environmental protections, but as citizens we're not making the change either. Trump may be verbally denouncing climate change, but our inaction is no different. I don't hear anyone complaining about the loose sanctions on our meat production industry. Too many live only in the here and now without consideration for long term. It's one of our biggest flaws.

https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2017/08/if-everyone-ate-beans-instead-of-beef/535536/

brianlux

tbergs said:

This thread should really be titled climate change, but whatever.

Anyway, kind of a follow up to the article the other day about our insane consumption of meat. Beans for beef anyone? It's like we just don't care. We bitch for hours about what the Trump admin is doing to environmental protections, but as citizens we're not making the change either. Trump may be verbally denouncing climate change, but our inaction is no different. I don't hear anyone complaining about the loose sanctions on our meat production industry. Too many live only in the here and now without consideration for long term. It's one of our biggest flaws.

https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2017/08/if-everyone-ate-beans-instead-of-beef/535536/

I'm not sure why that term "climate change" came into popular use but I suspect it's because many people are uncomfortable (not saying you are) with the notion that the planet is warming, thus "global warming".

You're absolutely correct about assuming all the blame being placed on this or any other administration.  We as individuals are responsible everyday for decisions we make.  I know a woman who is very climate concerned and yet used to travel a lot.  She finally came to the conclusion that she was being a bit hypocritical and travels fare less often now.  This is the kind of awareness people will need to adapt if we are going to slow that warming.  Every decision using energy relates to that.

PJ_Soul

brianlux said:

PJ_Soul said:

brianlux said:

PJ_Soul said:

I read recently about the expected "great northern migration" the other day. It's expected that by around 2040 - 2050, much of California and other hot states will be unlivable - aside from having no water, it will just be too damn hot to live there. The expectation is that many of those living there will migrate north, into Canada and Alaska.

And yet just down the road, about half way between Placerville and Sacramento, CA, the city of Folsom is building 10,000 new homes,  If the average household is 4 people that's another 40,000 people just in this one area.  CRAZINESS!

Yes, it is very crazy. I don't understand why development is happening there, as well as on the coast of southern Florida. It's so fucking stupid. I guess the developers don't give a shit as long as people are buying them, but the buyers should be smarter!!

They don't care!  When the news broke about those houses in Folsom the local station interviewed the developer and asked him about water concerns.  He basically said, "Oh no problem, got the covered."  Yeah right, covered my ass!  Follow the money, that's their game.  They don't give two shits about anything else.  Not even one shit.

For sure - property developers are out for money.... But that is just what they do. Always have. I blame the buyers in this case. The buyers are fools, and are the ones who give the developers a reason to build. If they couldn't sell the condos, then they wouldn't build them there! And it's not like water supply and flooding problems are secret issues or anything. The buyers really should know better.

brianlux

PJ_Soul said:

brianlux said:

PJ_Soul said:

brianlux said:

PJ_Soul said:

I read recently about the expected "great northern migration" the other day. It's expected that by around 2040 - 2050, much of California and other hot states will be unlivable - aside from having no water, it will just be too damn hot to live there. The expectation is that many of those living there will migrate north, into Canada and Alaska.

And yet just down the road, about half way between Placerville and Sacramento, CA, the city of Folsom is building 10,000 new homes,  If the average household is 4 people that's another 40,000 people just in this one area.  CRAZINESS!

Yes, it is very crazy. I don't understand why development is happening there, as well as on the coast of southern Florida. It's so fucking stupid. I guess the developers don't give a shit as long as people are buying them, but the buyers should be smarter!!

They don't care!  When the news broke about those houses in Folsom the local station interviewed the developer and asked him about water concerns.  He basically said, "Oh no problem, got the covered."  Yeah right, covered my ass!  Follow the money, that's their game.  They don't give two shits about anything else.  Not even one shit.

For sure - property developers are out for money.... But that is just what they do. Always have. I blame the buyers in this case. The buyers are fools, and are the ones who give the developers a reason to build. If they couldn't sell the condos, then they wouldn't build them there! And it's not like water supply and flooding problems are secret issues or anything. The buyers really should know better.

So true!  If there weren't people who bought into these bad ideas, they mostly wouldn't exist!

brianlux

The year 2050 seems to keep popping in my efforts to keep up with climate science.  It appears that the majority of people living in that year (I will be 99... maybe) will find themselves in a difficult position with increasing parts of the planet becoming uninhabitable.  Yes, this sounds like sensationalism and hyperbole, but I'm beginning to think not.  Global warming has already moved beyond previously postulated numbers in the years I've been following it and feed back loops like melting permafrost and a decrease in polar ice which reflects heat are happening.

So what do we do?  Throw up our hands and give in to despair?  Party ourselves into a blind stupor as a way to not think about it?  Ignore the problem and hope it will go away?  Or take action, speak out, and be personally responsible for our own contributions to the problem?

Humans tend to sometimes make bad choices but we'll see.  Some common sense action would be nice right about now.

brianlux

I sure hope with all the evidence Mother Nature is throwing at us, including, of course, Texas this week and this current local snap shot of which we have had more here than I can ever remember...

...that we can soon come to a point on not looking a Global Warming as a political subject, but rather as a situation in dire need of addressing.

tbergs

I don't usually do this, so I apologize for all the story links, but I've been following this for several weeks and don't like where things are headed. It seems clear that the Trump administration is quickly escalating the angle of weakening the NOAA and their findings.

First the NOAA says this is the second warmest year to date.

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/08/us-has-second-warmest-year-to-date-says-noaa.html

Next they predict a much more active tropical storm season. Seems to be spot on so far.

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/09/noaa-now-raising-tropical-storm-and-hurricane-forecast-for-2017.html

How does the WH respond? Dismantle the climate change committee. That seems reasonable.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/21/politics/white-house-climate-change-committee-dismantled/index.html

Then we get the propaganda wheel spinning over at Breitbart. Probably helps to have Bannon back spreading the truth. Solid move by Trump.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/08/23/delingpole-all-of-recent-u-s-warming-has-been-faked-by-noaa/

So now we might as well consider slashing budget because why support all this fake science.

http://www.theinertia.com/environment/noaa-and-epa-programs-that-are-threatened-by-serious-budget-cuts-from-washington-dc/

And finally, we kindly ask that you quit referring to it as climate change or global warming.

https://arstechnica.com/science/2017/08/us-government-burying-head-deeper-in-sand-on-climate-change/

These guys are ruthless and it's absurd how this has all happened in less than a month. This is one of the real issues everyone should be worried about.

brianlux

tbergs said:

I don't usually do this, so I apologize for all the story links, but I've been following this for several weeks and don't like where things are headed. It seems clear that the Trump administration is quickly escalating the angle of weakening the NOAA and their findings.

First the NOAA says this is the second warmest year to date.

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/08/us-has-second-warmest-year-to-date-says-noaa.html

Next they predict a much more active tropical storm season. Seems to be spot on so far.

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/09/noaa-now-raising-tropical-storm-and-hurricane-forecast-for-2017.html

How does the WH respond? Dismantle the climate change committee. That seems reasonable.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/21/politics/white-house-climate-change-committee-dismantled/index.html

Then we get the propaganda wheel spinning over at Breitbart. Probably helps to have Bannon back spreading the truth. Solid move by Trump.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/08/23/delingpole-all-of-recent-u-s-warming-has-been-faked-by-noaa/

So now we might as well consider slashing budget because why support all this fake science.

http://www.theinertia.com/environment/noaa-and-epa-programs-that-are-threatened-by-serious-budget-cuts-from-washington-dc/

And finally, we kindly ask that you quit referring to it as climate change or global warming.

https://arstechnica.com/science/2017/08/us-government-burying-head-deeper-in-sand-on-climate-change/

These guys are ruthless and it's absurd how this has all happened in less than a month. This is one of the real issues everyone should be worried about.

I had a neighbor 27 years ago who was a meteorologist (not a TV actor/weather man but a real meteorologist).  He told me way back then that all of this was going to happen.  He knew the science, followed the data, watched the trends and had it nailed, 27 years ago.  He wasn't alone.  Others knew what was happening. 

As a society, we dinked around, let ourselves be lulled, clung to our happy driving habits, expanded unsustainable suburbia, continued to move away from durable goods to a throwaway society and now are watching the results all unfold before us.  We are a foolish species.

dmaradona10

"ManBearPig is real, I'm super-serial you guys." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xf69EEL3WBk

Zod

The thing is.  I don't think most people against Global Warming are against the concept that the planet is warming up.   Most time's I encounter the argument, the argument is that it's natural and not being cause by people.

Thus they should probably rename it "Human Caused Global Warming" to be more specific.

I do agree that at this point it feels grim to me.   We're not making giant strides in reducing pollution, and the worlds population keeps skyrocketing faster than we make improvements.  It does seem like a reciple for disaster and keeping the planet at a level where it can sustain giant populations.

I keep wondering to myself.... how bad will it get and when.   Maybe I live another 50 years.. maybe I'll drop from old age before it get's crazy bad.

brianlux

dmaradona10 said:

"ManBearPig is real, I'm super-serial you guys." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xf69EEL3WBk

I feel sorry for the pig (they're such sweet critters!).  Imagine how it would feel to be stuck inside the same body with a human and a bear.  Horrible!  Haha!

Zod said:

The thing is.  I don't think most people against Global Warming are against the concept that the planet is warming up.   Most time's I encounter the argument, the argument is that it's natural and not being cause by people.

Thus they should probably rename it "Human Caused Global Warming" to be more specific.

I do agree that at this point it feels grim to me.   We're not making giant strides in reducing pollution, and the worlds population keeps skyrocketing faster than we make improvements.  It does seem like a reciple for disaster and keeping the planet at a level where it can sustain giant populations.

I keep wondering to myself.... how bad will it get and when.   Maybe I live another 50 years.. maybe I'll drop from old age before it get's crazy bad.

I'm happy to say I haven't run into anyone in quite awhile who doesn't acknowledge the reality of global warming. 

Yes, renaming it is a good idea.  In fact, it is now called by many by it's scientific name: anthropogenic global warming or "AGW".

It's hard to predict when the worst effects of AGW will kick in.  I worry about my grandnieces and grandnephews whose ages run between 2 and 10.  They are very likely going to have a rough time of it. I love them and I think kids are great but I'm so glad I never had any kids of my own.

tbergs

This is just depressing as hell. I'll see the beginnings of this if predictions hold true, but my children and grandchildren will most likely see these things in full effect. The earth will recycle us and start over. Dinosaurs will have their day again.

 https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/sep/09/this-is-how-your-world-could-end-climate-change-global-warming

brianlux

tbergs said:

This is just depressing as hell. I'll see the beginnings of this if predictions hold true, but my children and grandchildren will most likely see these things in full effect. The earth will recycle us and start over. Dinosaurs will have their day again.

 https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/sep/09/this-is-how-your-world-could-end-climate-change-global-warming

The bummer of all this is we've had time to do something about it.  Scientists have seen this coming for decades and yet still nothing with any substance has been done by any of the biggest offenders, wealthiest countries in the world starting numero uno with the US.  We're blowing it big-time.  Irma and her like and the wild fires raging across the west are a testament to that.

I doubt we will do anything big enough in time to stop our demise and the demise of many or most large mammals on the planet.  Maybe large mammals will come back and maybe pockets of humanity will survive in small isolated places.  Or maybe cockroaches will rule the planet.  We still have time to lessen our negative impact on the world.

As bad as things look, this does not mean we should stop trying.  First of all, we can still slow down global warming/climate change with strong action.  And I can think of at least two other reasons to try:

1.  "Hope is not the conviction that things will turn out well.  Hope is the conviction to do what makes sense no matter how things turn out." -Vaclav Havel

2.  “We are not concerned about the odds against us, nor are we concerned about winning or losing. We are here because it is the right place and the right time to be here. We stand strong in the present to change the future.” -Russell Means

We humans are capable of amazing things.  We might surprise ourselves yet.

CM189191

tbergs said:

This is just depressing as hell. I'll see the beginnings of this if predictions hold true, but my children and grandchildren will most likely see these things in full effect. The earth will recycle us and start over. Dinosaurs will have their day again.

 https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/sep/09/this-is-how-your-world-could-end-climate-change-global-warming

Don't worry, the kids are alright

JULIANA v. U.S.

Youth filed their constitutional climate lawsuit, called Juliana v. U.S., against the U.S. government in the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon in 2015. Other plaintiffs in the case include world-renowned climate scientist Dr. James E. Hansen, serving as guardian for future generations and his granddaughter, and Earth Guardians, as an organizational plaintiff.

Their complaint asserts that, through the government's affirmative actions that cause climate change, it has violated the youngest generation’s constitutional rights to life, liberty, and property, as well as failed to protect essential public trust resources.

JC29856

Exxon mobile public versus private position on climate change.

Now, a peer-reviewed study published August 23 has confirmed that what Exxon was saying internally about climate change was quantitatively very different from their public statements.

Specifically, researchers Geoffrey Supran and Naomi Oreskes found that at least 80 percent of the internal documents and peer-reviewed publications they studied from between 1977 and 2014 were consistent with the state of the science – acknowledging that climate change is real and caused by humans, and identifying “reasonable uncertainties” that any climate scientist would agree with at the time.

https://www.counterpunch.org/2017/09/12/i-was-an-exxon-funded-climate-scientist/

brianlux

JC29856 said:

Exxon mobile public versus private position on climate change.

Now, a peer-reviewed study published August 23 has confirmed that what Exxon was saying internally about climate change was quantitatively very different from their public statements.

Specifically, researchers Geoffrey Supran and Naomi Oreskes found that at least 80 percent of the internal documents and peer-reviewed publications they studied from between 1977 and 2014 were consistent with the state of the science – acknowledging that climate change is real and caused by humans, and identifying “reasonable uncertainties” that any climate scientist would agree with at the time.

https://www.counterpunch.org/2017/09/12/i-was-an-exxon-funded-climate-scientist/

Sadly, not surprising.   It leads me to wonder if the commonly cited statistic that says, "97% of scientists agree that global warming/climate change is real" should actually read 98% or 99% since obviously the findings of some scientists are being quelled.

Looks like Exxon is in favor of Ex-Earth.

CM189191

brianlux said:

JC29856 said:

Exxon mobile public versus private position on climate change.

Now, a peer-reviewed study published August 23 has confirmed that what Exxon was saying internally about climate change was quantitatively very different from their public statements.

Specifically, researchers Geoffrey Supran and Naomi Oreskes found that at least 80 percent of the internal documents and peer-reviewed publications they studied from between 1977 and 2014 were consistent with the state of the science – acknowledging that climate change is real and caused by humans, and identifying “reasonable uncertainties” that any climate scientist would agree with at the time.

https://www.counterpunch.org/2017/09/12/i-was-an-exxon-funded-climate-scientist/

Sadly, not surprising.   It leads me to wonder if the commonly cited statistic that says, "97% of scientists agree that global warming/climate change is real" should actually read 98% or 99% since obviously the findings of some scientists are being quelled.

Looks like Exxon is in favor of Ex-Earth.

Those deniers were debunked a couple years ago

brianlux

CM189191 said:

brianlux said:

JC29856 said:

Exxon mobile public versus private position on climate change.

Now, a peer-reviewed study published August 23 has confirmed that what Exxon was saying internally about climate change was quantitatively very different from their public statements.

Specifically, researchers Geoffrey Supran and Naomi Oreskes found that at least 80 percent of the internal documents and peer-reviewed publications they studied from between 1977 and 2014 were consistent with the state of the science – acknowledging that climate change is real and caused by humans, and identifying “reasonable uncertainties” that any climate scientist would agree with at the time.

https://www.counterpunch.org/2017/09/12/i-was-an-exxon-funded-climate-scientist/

Sadly, not surprising.   It leads me to wonder if the commonly cited statistic that says, "97% of scientists agree that global warming/climate change is real" should actually read 98% or 99% since obviously the findings of some scientists are being quelled.

Looks like Exxon is in favor of Ex-Earth.

Those deniers were debunked a couple years ago

Good!  Let them sleep on the floor.

brianlux

Here's a great graphic at the link for those folks you know who say, "But the climate has always changed. What's the big deal?"

It's a big deal!

https://www.vox.com/2016/9/12/12891814/climate-change-xkcd-graphic