Earth Hour: Turn Off the Lights!

[barney]

People that pay taxes to fund idiotic environmental projects that the likes of WWF, Green Peace and David Suzuki convince idiotic politicians we need.

So because of one harmless gimmick, two organizations and one individual that have done much to inform people of the reality behind the degradation of our biosphere and atmosphere get condemned to 'idiotic'? (Granted WWF definitely have their issues, Green Peace is very much a feel-good organization and Suzuki, regardless of his understanding of natural systems, is a mianstream player.)

And in response to those who talked about leaving their lights on full blast during earth hour as some kind of counter-statement. I gotta say, that's just sad...and irresponsible.

I mean, if this were promoting the purchasing of new lighting systems from a private company (a la high-efficiency fluorescent bulbs--not good for you btw) or served as an excuse to charge/tax people for things they cannot do without (a la emissions test that rich people can get out of because they have a new car every year), then I would say do what you gotta do. But I see no evidence of that.

If you don't like the idea, then don't participate and leave it at that.

Personally, I don't really go for this kind of thing but I participate anyway because I think it's good that people see that their neighbours are just as concerned about the whole problem as they are. (Although I admit I completely forgot about it this year--my area remained lit up so I had no visual reminders either.)

As for the earlier comment about Freeman Dyson being a GW-denier: he merely denies that climate models are unable to take sufficient--particularly surface-based--factors into account to make accurate predictions and that the claim that there is an increase in average global temperature is false (effects are localized--colder regions are getting warmer, not the whole earth).

Dyson basically suggests that increased CO2 is not a big problem so long as we can maintain sufficient plant growth to convert it to oxygen (let's just forget his GMO hyper-efficeint plants will save us theory for now shall we?). [Note that he's implying that clear-cutting huge swabs of forest is akin to retardation of colossal proportions.]

I think one would have to agree, if only based on superficial evidence: if the temperature increase were global, everybody near the equator would already be dead.

Dyson does not in any way deny all of the other harmful effects proven to be caused by the myriad of surface and atmospheric pollutants being belched out on a daily basis by our industries.


Just a note: Earth Hour is not just about GW/CC, it's about reducing pollution effects in general (e.g. emissions produced by coal/oil/gas-burning power plants which are then breathed by local communities).

One thing, I have to admit I'm incredulous of Al Gore as a spokesperson for the GW/CC awareness movement: I mean, c'mon people...Al-the-so-square-he-makes-Harper-look-hip-Gore?! You can do better folks.

 

[YukonJack]

Re #240.

The Pope of the Global Warming crazy IS AL Gore.

If the news iten had been saying that Gore's house was dark for an hour, you would have been - no doubt - all enthusiastic about it.

If you don't care about what Al Gore says or does, you don't care about Global Warming/Climate Change.

Regarding the last two sentences in your post: get your liberal mind out of the gutter - if it is possible.

 

[Cannuck]

...and Suzuki, regardless of his understanding of natural systems, is a mianstream player.)

Oh really, you should ask the man how much water it takes to make a pound of beef.

From the Suzuki website:

"Meat production requires more water than raising crops. For example, 283 grams (10 oz) of beef requires 85 times more water to produce than the same amount of potatoes."

If you really want, we can pick apart those numbers and showcase just how out of touch with the mainstream the guys is. He is either a fool or he has an obvious agenda (and I don't think he's a fool).

That is the problem with this issue. It is all about agendas and WWF's agenda is to make money and as I've said, I think they have their eye on mine.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

SirJosephPorter, time and time again you declared that you take everything you see on CNN and read in the Globe and Mail as true, because these two news sources are unbiased, truthful and objective.

CNN reported that "more than 2800 cities and towns participated worldwide in 83 countries and 24 time zones" in Earth Hour, which was ridiculed as "trick", "sham" and "flimflammery" by the Globe and Mail.

Yukon Jack, I was skimming through the posts and I saw this little post by you. Now, earth hour is over (until next year anyway) and we should move on. However, I don’t want to leave you with the impression that I have changed my opinion about CNN and Globe and Mail. They are still excellent, highly reputable, respectable and reliable publications.

As I understand, CNN did not come up with the figure of 100 million people, 2400 cities and 83 countries independently, they asked WWF. It is quite possible that the figure WWF gave CNN were preliminary figures, before all the news, all the results were in. When CNN talked to WWF, that was probably the best estimate. It wouldn’t surprise me if WWF had the same figures on their website at that time.

However, as earth hour spread to other time zones, more news came in, they revised their estimate, and it became 1 billion, 4000 cities and 88 countries. So the two figures are not inconsistent, they probably just represent different points in time.

So CNN is not at fault here, they may be at fault to the extent that they should have waited perhaps another day before they talked to WWF. But in my opinion, CNN was not unreliable there, the two figures are not inconsistent.

Now, if CNN had said that its independent estimate suggests that 100 million people participated in earth hour, I would attach some importance to it. But they were simply quoting WWF, and in that case the two figures are not inconsistent.

As to Globe and Mail saying earth hour was "trick", "sham" and "flimflammery", big deal. The fact that I consider Globe and Mail a reputable publication does not mean that I have to agree with each and every opinion expressed there (maybe it means that to you, perhaps that is why you consider FOX to be a reputable publication, you probably agree 100% with their extreme right ideology).

Thus last two elections Globe and Mail endorsed Conservatives, I voted Liberal. Reputable and reliable publication means that if it published a factual story (e.g. that 4 more soldiers died in Afghanistan, or that conservatives are leading Liberals in opinion poll 35 to 30), I will believe it. But as far as I am aware, they are not contesting any of the numbers, they are just expressing an opinion. I don’t have to agree with their opinion to consider them a reliable and reputable publication.

So you may rest easy, in my opinion, CNN and Globe and Mail still remain highly reputable, respectable and reliable publications. It is just that they are irrelevant in this case.

 

[captain morgan]

Hello CM
Nice to see another canada.com person here.

Hello VI... It's been a while, hasn't it?

 

[Cannuck]

It is quite possible that the figure WWF gave CNN were preliminary figures, before all the news, all the results were in. When CNN talked to WWF, that was probably the best estimate. It wouldn’t surprise me if WWF had the same figures on their website at that time.

Nice wiggle. Unfortunately, WWF was floating the 1 billion number before this all began. In the first post of this thread you posted...

"This year 2,848 cities, towns, and municipalities are joining the eco-blackout. The event’s organizers say that they are shooting for 1 billion people to participate. The event started in 2007."

However, as earth hour spread to other time zones, more news came in, they revised their estimate, and it became 1 billion, 4000 cities and 88 countries. So the two figures are not inconsistent, they probably just represent different points in time.

Wrong again. As earth hour spread to other time zones Carter Roberts told CNN that he expected they would have 100 million...well short of what they expected. It's obvious to everybody that WWF made some ridiculous estimate and rather than admit that their exercise was not quite what they had hoped, they have decided to pump it up and make it more than what it was. It's unfortunate that they feel they need to lie about this...not surprising mind you but unfortunate nonetheless.

So CNN is not at fault here, they may be at fault

Of course not...and Faux is not "at fault" when Rush or Ann spew their intellectual diarhea. :lol:

 

[captain morgan]

I have arguments, I just haven't presented them here. You have.

That is an understatement.

PhD? Who said anything about a PhD? My thesis is not for completion of a Doctorate.

Please accept my apologies. It is glaringly evident that I formed a particularly heinous assumption.

You don't know what you're arguing. You are in essence arguing that Earth's climate is either responsive to natural cycles, or to human influence, and that it can't be both.

Wrong again... I am arguing that input from humanity is so minute compared to the natural forces and input... In no manner can humanity's emissions be considered a primary driver in global warming/climate change or whatever other cliche that is developed by the applicable enviro marketing teams.

I bet if I posted a solid paper and a crappy paper, you wouldn't be able to pick out what's wrong. It's not a slight, most people aren't privy to how it works. You actually have to have some practice.

Let's give that a try. Post a solid paper and one of your compositions and we'll compare.

No, it's meant for those like you who don't have any tacit knowledge on the subject, and make ignorant claims that exemplify their own fundamental ignorance.

What?.. No emboldened content?.. Understand that I can't hear you when you yell at the screen... You'd better stick to embolding your stronger opinions.

Humanity is irrelevant when it comes to discussing past climate change. If you disagree with that you should get your head checked.

Yeah.. It's such a razor-thin association between your claims that anthropomorphic sources of ghg's cause global warming and the actual presence of humanity that it should be considered irrelevant.

(I still can't believe that you stated this... Twice!)

None the less, it is clear that you can't develop any form of argument, explanation or otherwise to address the multiple incidents of glaciation without admitting that you are wrong.... Sad that you can't admit to the reality... Even sadder that you can't see it...

 

[petros]

Wrong again... I am arguing that input from humanity is so minute compared to the natural forces and input...

Name this natural source that isn't being monitored and is slipping under the noses of all of us.

Moon volcanoes? Bird dung? Cabbbage farts?

Name it.

 

[VanIsle]

Hello VI... It's been a while, hasn't it?

It has indeed. How are you anyway? We have a sky so dark with clouds that I know big rain is coming in but I also know that most of AB is snowed in. I'm glad I'm not you right now.:smile:

 

[captain morgan]

These would be the very same natural forces that produced multiple ice-ages over the millenia.

 

[petros]

These would be the very same natural forces that produced multiple ice-ages over the millenia.

Which are what? Describe them in detail please.

 

[Tonington]

None the less, it is clear that you can't develop any form of argument, explanation or otherwise to address the multiple incidents of glaciation without admitting that you are wrong.... Sad that you can't admit to the reality... Even sadder that you can't see it...

I bet you didn't even know what the Milankovitch cycle is until I posted the wiki for you...

You stated earlier that the cause of glaciation was the biggest hurdle. It's not a hurdle at all. Knowledge of past climate cycles is what present sensitivity measurements are in part based on.

In fact, it is well known that Milankovitch cycles alone cannot explain the warm interglacials. The forcing isn't large enough. It is amplified by greenhouse feedbacks.

You don't need man 33.7 million years ago to shift the climate, just as you don't need a change in orbital precession now to warm the climate. The climate responds to forcings. This should be fairly obvious.

Why would you think that past glacial cycles undermine the body of knowledge that has accumulated on this subject?

 

[captain morgan]

It has indeed. How are you anyway? We have a sky so dark with clouds that I know big rain is coming in but I also know that most of AB is snowed in. I'm glad I'm not you right now.:smile:

I'm doing just fine. Sorry to hear about the rain. That is one thing that I don't miss about the West coast. When the weather is good, it is paradise, but when the clouds and drizzle set in, it is miserable.

Here in my neck of the woods, we've received somewhere between 25 or 35 cm of snow over the last 2 weekends. It is going to be a mucky spring when all this snow melts.

 

[petros]

I bet you didn't even know what the Milankovitch cycle is until I posted the wiki for you...

You stated earlier that the cause of glaciation was the biggest hurdle. It's not a hurdle at all. Knowledge of past climate cycles is what present sensitivity measurements are in part based on.

In fact, it is well known that Milankovitch cycles alone cannot explain the warm interglacials. The forcing isn't large enough. It is amplified by greenhouse feedbacks.

You don't need man 33.7 million years ago to shift the climate, just as you don't need a change in orbital precession now to warm the climate. The climate responds to forcings. This should be fairly obvious.

Why would you think that past glacial cycles undermine the body of knowledge that has accumulated on this subject?

Don't confuse the poor guy with facts.

 

[captain morgan]

I bet you didn't even know what a Milankovitch cycle is until I posted the wiki for you...

You stated earlier that the cause of glaciation was the biggest hurdle. It's not a hurdle at all. Knowledge of past climate cycles is what present sensitivity measurements are in part based on.

In fact, it is well known that Milankovitch cycles alone cannot explain the warm interglacials. The forcing isn't large enough. It is amplified by greenhouse feedbacks.

You don't need man 33.7 million years ago to shift the climate, just as you don't need a change in orbital precession now to warm the climate. The climate responds to forcings. This should be fairly obvious.

Why would you think that past glacial cycles undermine the body of knowledge that has accumulated on this subject?

Yeah, sure... No one could have had any familiarity with Milankovitch cycles until you saw fit to enlighten us all... They just didn't exist before, right?

That said, previous episodes of glaciation do not undermine research, theory or understanding. To date, each period of massive glacial advance has been followed by incidents of warming that caused the recession of said glaciers. In the eyes of many, this provides very strong support for the notion that the global climatic system is cyclical and what is being experienced are trends within the overall cycle...

To suggest that the overall system is complex is a dramatic understatement. There are a myriad of primary drivers and a vast number of extraneous variables that contribute into the system. All natural drivers as well as variables exact their impact in one form or another, however, there is no possible way, with our current understanding and technology that anyone can claim to have a complete or even a sadly incomplete understanding of this system.

That understanding simply does not exist today.

 

[petros]

followed by incidents of warming that caused the recession of said glaciers.

What triggered the warming?

 

[YukonJack]

"WWF is one of the biggest scams going."

Its greatest achievement is stealing an acronym legitimately used by World Wrestling Federation, by judicial fiat.

The second is producing (claiming) figures for their Earth Hour event that would make "million men march" Louis Farrakhan proud.

 

[Tonington]

Yeah, sure... No one could have had any familiarity with Milankovitch cycles until you saw fit to enlighten us all... They just didn't exist before, right?

You certainly didn't seem to know about them. You replied fair enough when I mentioned them to you.

That said, previous episodes of glaciation do not undermine research, theory or understanding. To date, each period of massive glacial advance has been followed by incidents of warming that caused the recession of said glaciers. In the eyes of many, this provides very strong support for the notion that the global climatic system is cyclical and what is being experienced are trends within the overall cycle...

I know, I've already agreed with you a couple times now that there are cycles in the system.

But that doesn't negate man's influence. There are carbon cycles, and nitrogen cycles, all sorts of cycles that man can and does influence/negate/overwhelm. In this case, man only has to overwhelm the natural variation in earth's climate. When looking at the paleoclimate, the climate is very stable. It get's unstable at the beginning and end of inter-glacials, but this is still on a timescale that is comparatively slow when held up to man's influence.

To suggest that the overall system is complex is a dramatic understatement.

No it isn't. Complex fits just fine. Many parts working in intricate arrangements. There is no need to modify.

All natural drivers as well as variables exact their impact in one form or another, however, there is no possible way, with our current understanding and technology that anyone can claim to have a complete or even a sadly incomplete understanding of this system.

You don't need to have complete knowledge of how a complex system works to say we have a good understanding of it. That's the crux. Do we understand it well enough? Yes.

Do we understand protein folding completely? No, that doesn't mean we can't build useful models that are now being used to create drugs that help man overcome illness and disease.

That understanding simply does not exist today.

Why do you think we need to know everything about the system? You don't need to capture 100% of the variability to make useful predictions. If that were the case, science wouldn't progress at all. It would move at glacial speed (pun intended).

 

[YukonJack]

SirJosephPorter, if CNN can not come up independently with a number, that fact alone disqualifies it to be considered reputable, or reliable or objective. The figures I quoted were reported by CNN may have been before or after the fact, but if CNN reports them prematurely, CNN's credibility is in great jeopardy.

Two things I knew for certain: 1. You would accuse me of being an unconditional follower of FOXNews, and believe everything I see there. 2. That you would give your "reputable" news source, the Globe and Mail, - that clearly proved your gullability - a clear and free pass.

In spite of the fact that I stated repeatedly that I DO read left-wing publications and watch left-wing TV, (as opposed your insistence, and thereby revealing your ignorance, that you don't read or watch anything that unsubstantiated rumour deemed "left-wing") you still accuse me of believing 100% in what I see on FOXNews. You don't know me, you don't know what I beleve and/or think, and you certainly don't know bugger all about FOXNews, by your own admission.

If you were as open-minded about FOXNews as I am about CNN, New York Times, Globe and Mail etc., we would not have most of these debates. And we would see you post - occasionally: "Sorry, I am wrong".

As you were skimming through these posts, you missed - either by accident or design - my two other post #229. (And here I am giving you far greater benefit of doubt than you probably deserve.)

Is it OK if I call you "Jesse" from now on?

 

[Extrafire]

Goodness, are you guys still at it? Enough already, earth hour is over, was a huge success, let us move on.

Extrafire, I got my information from the WWF website, not from Sydney Herald or anybody else. As Sir Francis remarked, always go to the source. If WWF says that 1 billion people participated, I believe them. After all, I haven’t seen any estimates by anti-environmentalists, only sniping at how earth hour was not successful..

You got your information from a liar. Go back and read my post again. Read it slowly and carefully to make sure you understand what it's saying. The claim of particiption by 1 billion people and 4000 cities was published before earth hour for 3/4 of the earth. Think international date line, time zones. They totaled up the number of people participating before most of them even had a chance to participate. Got it? They made the number up ahead of time.

And your point is? Because they are a travel agent, that proves that one billion people couldn’t’ have participated in earth hour?

Thinking about it, it makes perfect sense. They are a wildlife organization, so it is natural that they organize wildlife excursions all over the world..

That post had nothing to do with how many people participated. They're hypocrites! How did you miss that point???:lol: It was to show you that while they demand we all reduce our lifestyles and carbon footprints, they continue to spew it out by the thousands of tons! The top of their page says "Reduce your carbon footprint" and shows a graphic of a guy with a backpack on a bike. Now that would be an appropriate method of travel for an evironmentalist, or and environmentalist organization, in fact that's what they keep telling us to do, get out of our cars, ride a bike. But there they are selling private jet excusions. Vacations, holidays! Not like it's something necessary, like business trips. It's play! They tell us we have to stop flying and they're in the private charter jet business? You seriously mean to tell me you can't see the contradiction, the hypocracy? They're as bad as Al Gore!

Anyway, if WWF says 1 billion people participated, then 1 billion people participated as far as I am concerned, in spite of what any far right website or blog may say.

Sucker!:roll: