Species wide suicide

[Cobalt_Kid]

Would you rather we immediately destroyed our economy and way of life on the off chance it would stop global warming? The cities would be the first to go with no more transporting of food to them and no heat or cooking facilities even if there was a bit of food. No water or sewer either.
I'm not advocating free spewing of pollution but it is not that simple to change a system that has evolved over many years just because s couple of gloom and doomers say so. These people? have cried wolf and lied a few too many times causing many unnecessary disruptions to peoples lives.

A little pain now to avoid a lot later, that's the choice, and it's a hell of a lot more than an off chance.

We're altering the chemical composition of the Earth's atmosphere at unprecedented rates and expecting what, a mild climatic response? If you look at the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum there was a slow buildup of CO2 in the atmosphere due to geological activity as the Indian plate moved rapidly(about 8 inches a year) northward to collide with Asia. C02 increased at less than +0.01 ppm per year and eventually resulted in a global average temperature spike of between 5-9 degrees C. The warming resulted in the repositioning of cold water submergence to lower warmer latitudes and saw a large release(death burps) of methane hydrates of which there was probably about 3,000 gigatonnes in seabed formations.

We're increasing CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere by over +2 ppm per year and there is probably over 5,000 gigatonnes of methane hydrates in tundra and seafloor deposits. Climatologists don't call it the climate bomb for nothing.

Claiming the economy is more important than the environment is absurd, without a stable environment the economy is eventually going to collapse anyway. With the inevitable change already in pipeline now, some scientists like James Lovelock are already predicting the collapse of many cities in areas that will not be able to provide the food and water resources necessary.

We're already heading into a crisis scenario.

 

[captain morgan]

We're already heading into a crisis scenario.

Still?

I've heard the same hue and cry 30 years ago.

 

[mentalfloss]

A little pain now to avoid a lot later, that's the choice, and it's a hell of a lot more than an off chance.

We're altering the chemical composition of the Earth's atmosphere at unprecedented rates and expecting what, a mild climatic response? If you look at the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum there was a slow buildup of CO2 in the atmosphere due to geological activity as the Indian plate moved rapidly(about 8 inches a year) northward to collide with Asia. C02 increased at less than +0.01 ppm per year and eventually resulted in a global average temperature spike of between 5-9 degrees C. The warming resulted in the repositioning of cold water submergence to lower warmer latitudes and saw a large release(death burps) of methane hydrates of which there was probably about 3,000 gigatonnes in seabed formations.

We're increasing CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere by over +2 ppm per year and there is probably over 5,000 gigatonnes of methane hydrates in tundra and seafloor deposits. Climatologists don't call it the climate bomb for nothing.

Claiming the economy is more important than the environment is absurd, without a stable environment the economy is eventually going to collapse anyway. With the inevitable change already in pipeline now, some scientists like James Lovelock are already predicting the collapse of many cities in areas that will not be able to provide the food and water resources necessary.

We're already heading into a crisis scenario.

Post#666!

:blob6:

 

[lone wolf]

Did anyone listen?

 

[captain morgan]

I couldn't tel you if that is/was the case

 

[Cobalt_Kid]

Still?

I've heard the same hue and cry 30 years ago.

So everything is OK?

The models from people like James Hansen that predicted the changes 30 years ago that we're already seeing today indicate very catastrophic consequences if we continue on the course we're on.

Keep in mind that it takes decades and even centuries for the full effects of the changes we're making today to come about.

Post#666!

:blob6:

FEAR ME!

Sorry, I couldn't resist.:lol:

 

[ironsides]

So everything is OK?

The models from people like James Hansen that predicted the changes 30 years ago that we're already seeing today indicate very catastrophic consequences if we continue on the course we're on.

Keep in mind that it takes decades and even centuries for the full effects of the changes we're making today to come about.



FEAR ME!

Sorry, I couldn't resist.:lol:

The important thing is that you feel good about yourself. :smile:

 

[taxslave]

Claiming the economy is more important than the environment is absurd, without a stable environment the economy is eventually going to collapse anyway. With the inevitable change already in pipeline now, some scientists like James Lovelock are already predicting the collapse of many cities in areas that will not be able to provide the food and water resources necessary.


So should I tell the bank there will be no mortgage payment this month? Somehow I don't think they will care all that much that our industries closed down and put us out of work because somebody thinks starving in a pristine environment is better than working on better methods of extracting the resources that we need.

 

[Tonington]

I think the banks will care if their customers can't repay their loans. I guess they can always get more bailouts...

 

[Cobalt_Kid]

So should I tell the bank there will be no mortgage payment this month? Somehow I don't think they will care all that much that our industries closed down and put us out of work because somebody thinks starving in a pristine environment is better than working on better methods of extracting the resources that we need.

Then go ahead and tell your kids their future is going to be a lot harsher than ours was, and that their grandkids and beyond may have no future.

Do I need to point out how ridiculous it is to focus on the short-term disruption of switching to a low GHG emitting energy model while ignoring the devastating effects of the current course we're on collectively as a species?

Read my original post and a few of the texts I've listed.

- there is no credible challenge to Anthropogenic Global Warming as Naomi Oreskes found in her survey of the ISI web of knowledge more than five years ago, the whole skeptic movement is almost totally industry funded the same way it was with tobacco and has involved some of the same players on the science side(Fred Seitz, S. Fred Singer and Richard Lindzen)

- According to one of the most experienced and well versed EXPERTS on climate change if we burn all fossil fuels then a runaway greenhouse is a "dead certainty", his words. In case you don't understand what that means imagine a world with an average global temperature of over 100 degrees C, kind of tough to find a job in that scenario don't you think. That's what James Hansen says we're heading for with our current course of massive construction of coal fired power plants and tar sands exploitation as well as exploring for and consuming every bit of oil and natural gas we can find.

- Climate change is already making the world a much more dangerous and expensive place to live, if you're a homeowner in Florida then the $100,000 deductable on home insurance in the case of hurricane destruction makes living in that state less and less tenable, not to mention the facts of stronger hurricanes. Many severe weather events will increase in strength due to the higher amount of water vapour in a warmer atmosphere. As climate is weather averaged over time, all current weather can be assigned a certain percentage due to Global Warming and the fossil fuel sector is already facing increasing lawsuits over weather related damage and it will increase in the future, so where's the economic future there anyway.

Even without a runaway greenhouse the effects of doing nothing to change for fear of the short-term consequences will result in ecological devastation. Sea level is going to go up no matter what we do now, the only question is how high. Greenland and West Antarctic are losing about 100 cubic kilometres of ice a year each and the breakdown of iceshelves means the acceleration of movement of land bound icesheets into the ocean. With the large scale breakdown of those two ice caps we're looking at an over 30 foot increase of sea level in the future, if the climate gets warms enough the East Antarctic sheet will lose stability and the sea level rise could exceed 200 feet, try and calculate the economic cost of the loss of all coastal cities and entire countries and states like Florida and Bangladesh.

Pretending this isn't happening or it isn't serious is human, it's easier to just go with the flow for many people and let someone else take responsibility for the consequences in the future... it's also one of least admirable qualities of our species.

The important thing is that you feel good about yourself. :smile:

When it comes to this issue all I get is a sick feeling in the pit of my stomach...