Global War(m/n)ing

given to grunge

Obi Once wrote:

Downing Street says that belated US recognition of global warming could lead to a post-Kyoto agreement on curbing emissions.

George Bush is preparing to make a historic shift in his position on global warming when he makes his State of the Union speech later this month, say senior Downing Street officials.

Full story: http://observer.guardian.co.uk/world/story/0,,1989997,00.html

Bush and Blair held private talks on climate change before Christmas, and there is a feeling that the US President will now agree a cap on emissions in the US, meaning that, for the first time, American industry and consumers would be expected to start conserving energy and curbing pollution.

'We could now be seeing the beginning of a consensus on a post-Kyoto framework,' said a source close to the prime minister. 'President Bush is beginning to talk about more radical measures.'

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/world/story/0,,1989997,00.html


Thx Bush, it was time already to take some huge steps!

searchlightsoul

polaris wrote:

weather is a global phenomena ... australia has been suffering mass drought the last decade or so ... it is not normal ...

the rate of sea-ice disappearance is far far greater in recent times vs any other time short of immediately post-glaciation ...

our biodiversity is decreasing daily ... much of it was due to habitat loss and development but now we are losing species due to climate change ... sure, some species may adapt better than others but in the grand scheme of things - our diversity is getting worse ... it is why we have scientists in each field studying the impacts and they aren't reporting good things ...

if you read the IPCC report on indicator species - you will see that the impacts lean heavily towards the negative ...

Well look we are back where we started. How can you tell that the current 'drought' isn't the regular climatic conditions and the previous era was simply a wet spell?

polaris

searchlightsoul wrote:

Well look we are back where we started. How can you tell that the current 'drought' isn't the regular climatic conditions and the previous era was simply a wet spell?

You can tell by what plants and animals existed there in the past.

At the end of the day - if you believe in the greenhouse effect - then you must believe that we are warming the planet. Regardless of your unproven theory is correct or not.

stuckinline

not only are we 'warming the planet', we are POLLUTING it. so, agree or disagree with the 'global warming theory', you can NOT deny that we are polluting the water, polluting the air, and destroying the land.

Pearl Jam and toast

gluten919 wrote:

not only are we 'warming the planet', we are POLLUTING it. so, agree or disagree with the 'global warming theory', you can NOT deny that we are polluting the water, polluting the air, and destroying the land.

EXACTLY

Pearl Jam and toast

polaris wrote:

You can tell by what plants and animals existed there in the past.

At the end of the day - if you believe in the greenhouse effect - then you must believe that we are warming the planet. Regardless of your unproven theory is correct or not.

And the greenhouse effect is fact. It exists and there's no denying that. Without the greenhouse effect we would have no atmosphere. It's common sense that if we put huge amount of the gases that created our ozone into the atmosphere that it's going to accelerate the process.

given to grunge

Pearl Jam and toast wrote:

And the greenhouse effect is fact. It exists and there's no denying that. Without the greenhouse effect we would have no atmosphere. It's common sense that if we put huge amount of the gases that created our ozone into the atmosphere that it's going to accelerate the process.

Yeah, BUT even if we STOP to spread greenhouse gases NOW, greenhose effect won't get smaller - it will continue for more 20-25 years....
so we have to think about future if it will be better for our children!

onelongsong

given to grunge wrote:

Yeah, BUT even if we STOP to spread greenhouse gases NOW, greenhose effect won't get smaller - it will continue for more 20-25 years....
so we have to think about future if it will be better for our children!

if we can stop china and the us from putting so many pollutants into the air; global warming will start to reverse. the plants and trees will use the CO2 and replace it with O2.

given to grunge

onelongsong wrote:

if we can stop china and the us from putting so many pollutants into the air; global warming will start to reverse. the plants and trees will use the CO2 and replace it with O2.

of course! that's the way it goes!

Pearl Jam and toast

given to grunge wrote:

of course! that's the way it goes!

Yep. We have an extraordinarily resiliant eco system, but we're hurting it much faster than it can fix itself.

onelongsong

Pearl Jam and toast wrote:

Yep. We have an extraordinarily resiliant eco system, but we're hurting it much faster than it can fix itself.

it wouldn't have gotten so bad if you didn't cut down all the bloody trees. acid rain has killed so many and the population boom = construction boom which wipes out even more.

midgey

onelongsong wrote:

it wouldn't have gotten so bad if you didn't cut down all the bloody trees. acid rain has killed so many and the population boom = construction boom which wipes out even more.

Yes, why is it that people, so many people don't really understand the value of trees?

surferdude

Pearl Jam and toast wrote:

And the greenhouse effect is fact.

And what percentage of global climate change is attributable to the greenhouse effect? That is the real question.

Pearl Jam and toast

surferdude wrote:

And what percentage of global climate change is attributable to the greenhouse effect? That is the real question.

True.

But it is fact that our climate changes as a result of the greenhouse effect (like you said, the degree is debateable),.. given the possibility alone you'd think everyone would be on the progressive side of this issue but there are somehow still people who shout heresy when someone mentions it.

Obi Once

surferdude wrote:

And what percentage of global climate change is attributable to the greenhouse effect? That is the real question.

What Effect Do Greenhouse Gases Have on Climate Change?

Given the natural variability of the Earth’s climate, it is difficult to determine the extent of change that humans cause. In computer-based models, rising concentrations of greenhouse gases generally produce an increase in the average temperature of the Earth. Rising temperatures may, in turn, produce changes in weather, sea levels, and land use patterns, commonly referred to as “climate change.”

Assessments generally suggest that the Earth’s climate has warmed over the past century and that human activity affecting the atmosphere is likely an important driving factor. A National Research Council study dated May 2001 stated, “Greenhouse gases are accumulating in Earth’s atmosphere as a result of human activities, causing surface air temperatures and sub-surface ocean temperatures to rise. Temperatures are, in fact, rising. The changes observed over the last several decades are likely mostly due to human activities, but we cannot rule out that some significant part of these changes is also a reflection of natural variability.”

http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/1605/ggccebro/chapter1.html

Add to this that a rise in temperature will do no good for anybody and can only cost human life, why not at least try to do anything about it?

searchlightsoul

Obi Once wrote:

Add to this that a rise in temperature will do no good for anybody and can only cost human life, why not at least try to do anything about it?

Where does this come from? What about the extension of the agricultural belt for impoverished nations, less people dying from cold temperatures, more available freshwater...

searchlightsoul

Pearl Jam and toast wrote:

given the possibility alone you'd think everyone would be on the progressive side of this issue but there are somehow still people who shout heresy when someone mentions it.

Some people I guess aren't suckers for a Greenpeace scare campaign?

Collin

searchlightsoul wrote:

Where does this come from? What about the extension of the agricultural belt for impoverished nations, less people dying from cold temperatures, more available freshwater...

Where did you get that? The impoverished nations will be the ones who will suffer the most.

polaris

searchlightsoul wrote:

Where does this come from? What about the extension of the agricultural belt for impoverished nations, less people dying from cold temperatures, more available freshwater...

do you work for an oil and gas exploration company by chance?

less people dying?? ... climate change has brought us deep cold spells too - people are dying as a result of climate change now ... people are most adept at coping with weather patterns that fall within the norm ... we have friggin' people dying of the cold in arizona where they are not used to it ...

severe drought is another impact of climate change affecting agricultural production ... and freshwater!! ... crikey man - we're polluting all the fresh water ...

Obi Once

searchlightsoul wrote:

more available freshwater...

this is the one thing you are completely wrong about.

http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn5011
Fresh water will be in ever shorter supply as climate change gathers pace. A that increasing temperatures will dramatically affect the world's great rivers.

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/289/5477/284
A large proportion of the world's population is currently experiencing water stress and rising water demands greatly outweigh greenhouse warming in defining the state of global water systems to 2025. Consideration of direct human impacts on global water supply remains a poorly articulated but potentially important facet of the larger global change question.

http://www.ec.gc.ca/water/en/info/pubs/FS/e_FSA9.htm
For thousands of years we have found it necessary to control water – in order to have it where we want it, when we want it. Nonetheless, some areas still suffer from drought, and some from flood. This is due partly to the natural variability of climate and partly to inappropriate land and water use. Now climate seems to be changing beyond that natural variability, and this is likely to impact on the availability and distribution of water.