Hurricanes and Global Warming - High Crimes

[Karlin]

Stronger Hurricanes and Global Warming are linked, says Mike Tidwell. He also says scientists at NOAA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, are being stifled in what they can say about this connection.

Mike Tidwell, USCEC director and author, has just released his sixth book, The Ravaging Tide: Strange Weather, Future Katrinas, and the Coming Death of America's Coastal Cities, which goes into great depth about global warming and its connection to hurricanes.

NOAA is actively covering up the strong and growing scientific evidence linking more powerful hurricanes to global warming.
Tidwell's new group, USCEC, is demanding that NOAA leadership fully disclose the link between hurricanes and global warming and end its intimidation of scientists. If it cannot make these changes, then we need new leadership at NOAA.

http://tinyurl.com/p4exx

K - so there you have it, the corporate/elite wealthy people of our planet are actively telling lies about how global warming caused the extra strength of Katrina that caused the levees to break.

Those who are still pushing , or not protesting, the continued use of FOSSIL FUELS as our primary energy source, indeed, the monopoly of FFs for energy, are ALL GUILTY.

By this time, there has been enough evidence showing the connection, and the reality of global warming, that those who are on the wrong side of the fence on emissions cannot defend their opinions any longer.

This is a high crime, perhaps the highest crime ever committed in all of human history, and it is time to beging prosecuting them, or at least draw up some legistlation to prosecute "global warmers", all those who continue to muddy the debate with fake science, and those who get in the way of alternatives.

We have a perfectly fine electric car, and we can build hybrids you can plug into a solar panel, but both have been tharted by the oil industry and their cohorts in the auto industry, and federal governments. This is high crime.

Finally, here is a link to an article about Bush' coal plants as evidence he is willing to allow MORE emissions and the worst of fossil fuels to expand, proof of his going the opposite direction from reducing global warming.

It is also the link to the Tidwell story above.

Read this one if nothing else:

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/082806R.shtml

With 153 new coal plants on the drawing board right now, the Energy Information Administration projects a 66 percent increase in coal-based power production and a 43 percent increase in CO2 emissions by 2030.

 

[TenPenny]

Stronger Hurricanes and Global Warming are linked, says Mike Tidwell.

That's just about the least surprising thing I've heard since someone said that water is wet.

 

[Gonzo]

It sounds bad, but I hope hurricanes continue to get stronger. The only way the human race will change is when it has a gun to its head. People are lazy. What does it take to change? Global catastrophe?

 

[humanbeing]

Change...

I used to believe this is for the most part just a natural phase, like some mucky muck professor from the U of Winnipeg who came and visited my class wwwaaayy back in grade nine told me.

Even if most of the climate change turns out to be linked to natural temperature trends, and not to humans, the degradation of our natural systems (which must be caused by humans) that I've been learning about through my experience in biology lead me to believe that we are fucked if we continue along as we have for many years to come. It will become more and more apparent to us, if it hasn't already. I don't think its fearmongering to say such things...

I'm hopeful that there will be technological fixes for many problems, but I am not stupid. Technology has not fixed everything yet. But who knows...

The most effective tech fixes we are likely to see (ones that will actually work) has us adapting ourselves to our environment, not us adapting our environment to ourselves, as we have been attempting to do. Such a fix might solve almost everything... this could see us becoming robots or software, or perhaps altering our own biology in some other way. I am pretty sure it will happen (regardless of whether or not we feel compelled to change ourselves due to the environment).

Mind you, it would mean heaps of goodness to the integrity of our biosphere, at least in the short term, if (or perhaps a matter of when, provided we don't screw things up) we end up developing technology which enables us to harness energy and resources in ways that create less of a footprint. For example, if we began to increase the efficiency of photovoltaics some more (as we have been doing since they were invented), whilst making them for less money & energy and finding more effective ways to store the power they collect, we could say buh-bye to oil and all the other crap we currently use. Bye to much of the CO2 emissions, bye to the need for large energy grids and power lines, bye to the need to buy gasoline, bye to the horrific US geopolitical strategy and resource wars in the middle East, bye to lots of things. Stuff like this has soooo much room to get better and better. (Don't get me wrong. Currently, photovoltaics sucks for lots of different applications.)

Anyways, as far as society goes, you could subscribe to the myriad of different folks with ideas for their own solutions on how to solve environmental catastrophe (deep ecology, primitivism, etc), or perhaps a totalitarian world government that enforces sustainability with murder - in other words, garbage that ends up murdering zillions of people, solving little, creating worse problems...

Or you could work towards more democratic control over the institutions with greatest sway over the economy, (govts and corporations), but these movements are fighting a losing battle, and any ground they make is often lost in some other area... it's nice to have the outlook that some of these people possess, but we aren't much closer to these things than ever...

So long as unsustainable is less costly than sustainable, the market tends to say that most things will be unsustainable. Relatively small markets in organic or locally grown foods, low impact products, et cetera, don't really count for much (at least, they don't so far). If you can get consumers to buy an unsustainable or unsafe product, and get 'em thinking you really care about the environment and have visions of "a sustainable future" on your mind, then it's all the power to you if you profit... even more easy is if consumers just don't think about the issues, and you expose them to endless marketing to make them buy up everything. Then you are in a situation where you are bound to be able to make a profit, for sure.

Anyways, my money is NOT on society changing its ways. Unless you know how to combat a trillion bucks worth of marketing and all those wonderful products people love to buy over and over, and get corporations to somehow put sustainable practice and R & D in sustainable goods above the interests of profit... good luck!

Technology is the most reasonable way to go. Though I hope there are other additional changes in the future to make things better, and I hope that the ecosystems are resilient enough to endure whatever we dish out, it's all just hope. Who knows what the future will actually bring?

 

[Karlin]

denial

That's just about the least surprising thing I've heard since someone said that water is wet.

Thanks for that, but the reason I had to post it is because it is being heavily DENIED at the highest levels. I suppose that is also as obvious as wet water, ok ok. I get your point.

Bush has been shutting up the experts, again [Sept 2006]:
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/092706C.shtml

 

[Toro]

This thread is funny since there has been zero hurricanes in the South this year.

 

[Tonington]

The fact that zero hurricanes have been witnessed in the south is a result of the warming in the Pacific this year. The high pressure creted by the warming of the pacific creates a trough, with more low pressure systems over the central Atlantic. You would think more low pressure systems would mean mor ehurricanes, but in fact surface winds over the hurricane spawning grounds actually hinders hurricane development.

 

[#juan]

What does it take to change? Global catastrophe?

That's about the size of it. It has to start costing big money. As soon as it does, we will see a change.

 

[Tonington]

Hurricanes have allready had an effect on insurance policies in the states. Some large firms down south are even referring their customers to manufacturers of green technologies when assessing claims. They base this on the influence of climate models on their cost projections. I hope they start charging more, much more to the worst polluting industries.

 

[typingrandomstuff]

Radicals

Realism
Radical

If I am a radical, I would like to say this, stop the money making, and every global warming would be done. Factories produce smoke and greenhouse gases because coal is the cheapest kind of material. Poor factories cannot use environmentally things because they cost too much. Yes, trade commerance can be done through object trading and money still let shoppers be cheated and rid. So, stop money making.

Realism
Non-radical

Oh no!