67 years of street cred - climate dood quits, sez its all a big load!

[billvon 3,120]

> but one would think that "conservatives" would want to conserve our
> climate as it is and keep the planet in the state that has supported our
> species and allowed us to create this civilization.

That was the old conservative party; the party of Theodore Roosevelt. The new conservative party wants to conserve their investments in oil and gas companies, and (of course) protect their politicians who have hung their hats on climate change denial.

[turtlespeed 226]

Quote

Color me confused.. but one would think that "conservatives" would want to conserve our climate as it is and keep the planet in the state that has supported our species and allowed us to create this civilization.. rather than being on the cutting edge of changing it to the point that will make it harder for our species to exist.

I guess the cesspool analogy is working overtime,

Conservatives are just not as arrogant as to think they can control and push their views onto an entire planet.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[quade 4]

Quote

Is the planet going to die? No. Will life adapt? Yes.

Life will. Humans, on the other hand probably won't. At least not in a way that is recognizable as modern civilization.

Time and time again human civilization has proven just how fragile it really is when it comes to resources.

Another problem is minor variations in temperatures allow certain species to migrate to areas they've previously never occupied. A slight warming could mean something as seemingly inconsequential as a spread further north and south of mosquitoes and along with it; malaria.

There are a million things we haven't thoroughly considered yet, any one of which could do some incredibly bad things to +6 billion people.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[billvon 3,120]

>Conservatives are just not as arrogant as to think they can control and push
>their views onto an entire planet.

If conservatives really think that we're not changing the composition of the atmosphere of the entire planet - they need to go back to school for a bit.

[turtlespeed 226]

Quote

Quote

Is the planet going to die? No. Will life adapt? Yes.

Life will. Humans, on the other hand probably won't. At least not in a way that is recognizable as modern civilization.

Time and time again human civilization has proven just how fragile it really is when it comes to resources.

Another problem is minor variations in temperatures allow certain species to migrate to areas they've previously never occupied. A slight warming could mean something as seemingly inconsequential as a spread further north and south of mosquitoes and along with it; malaria.

There are a million things we haven't thoroughly considered yet, any one of which could do some incredibly bad things to +6 billion people.

Then perhaps it is our time to end and let the next generation of sentients to thrive.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[turtlespeed 226]

Quote

>Conservatives are just not as arrogant as to think they can control and push
>their views onto an entire planet.

If conservatives really think that we're not changing the composition of the atmosphere of the entire planet - they need to go back to school for a bit.

Consider that this just may be for the best.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[Amazon 7]

Quote

>Conservatives are just not as arrogant as to think they can control and push
>their views onto an entire planet.

If conservatives really think that we're not changing the composition of the atmosphere of the entire planet - they need to go back to school for a bit.

Uh... I seem to remember most of them more interested in sports and parties and we see the result daily in life

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Suddenly, within the last 150ish or so years, temperatures have shot up.

And still less than they were 1000 years ago (first attachment).

Quote

If that's not due to the huge population growth of the human species and industrialization of the planet, I'd sure as hell would like to know what it is.

Not the CO2, since it's been shown that levels were up to 20x the present concentration in the past (second attachment).

Also, this.

Quote

Ok, so what if it has nothing whatsoever to do with humans? What if, as has been suggested by some, that it's just a "natural" increase in temperatures?

Well, I guess an asteroid destined to hit the planet would also fit into the category of a "natural" way to end human civilization, but . . .

What was that about "don't even want to discuss the possibility", again? You kick into full-on "warmist" mode (as seen right here) as soon as the subject comes up.

Quote

We are now in a position where we -might- be able to do something about it.

FFS, at least stop making it worse.

That makes the HUGE assumption that it *IS* the CO2 and not natural cycles. Link. Looks like those natural cycles are a LOT better explanation than CO2.

Quote

You can, as some will, argue that it's not man made. So what? Are you just going to sit there and let it happen without ANY attempts at fixing it? None? Are you seriously not concerned for the health of the planet and situation you leave your DNA in? Really? Just screw the grand kids?

False argument - nobody arguing against GW here has said to not do anything about reducing CO2 and other pollutants - again, you exhibit the same close-mindedness you accuse the 'deniers' of.

Quote

That's what I'll never understand about the deniers. Never. You can't even get them into the room to talk about it. The minute you mention the subject, boom, denial mode kicks in and they don't even want to discuss the possibility of at least fixing what we may be able to. At least mitigating the issues as much as possible so that humanity continues.

So that your asteroid can come destroy the earth? Yeah, that's completely open-minded of you and a great way to acknowledge the points that the other side brings to the argument, Paul.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[Amazon 7]

So basically you are good with a world that supported Trilobytes and primitive sea creatures...great.. Consider for a second that that was a VASTLY different world ... one that had vastly differnet species both plant and animal.

[skipbelt 0]

i'm having a microclimate change , i'm developing moisture in my eyes, i'm becoming... verklempt !

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

So basically you are good with a world that supported Trilobytes and primitive sea creatures...great.. Consider for a second that that was a VASTLY different world ... one that had vastly differnet species both plant and animal.

This makes no sense.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Put more energy into the system... get out real nasty effects like more moisture and shifts in the old NORMAL weather patterns.

Only the sun puts more energy into a system. AGW theory suggests more is being kept by the system. AGW isn't based on ebergy in. It's based on energy out.

Incidentally, there is a new paper out there suggesting that putting less solar energy onto the earth RAISES temperatures.

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v467/n7316/full/nature09426.html

Taking data from the SORCE mission shows that for the visible wavelengths, the Spectral Irradiance Monitor ("SIM") (the instrument on the SORCE) suggests that the irradiance changes are opposite in sign to the changes in total solar irradiance ("TSI"). The TSI has decreased since 2003 but the SIM seems to indicate that the UV decreases are much larger than expected, while irradiance in visible bands has increased.

It says that when the sun's radiation decreases, more warmth is seen on the earth's surface.

People are scratchign their heads at this. If this new paper pans out, we can take every long term model and throw it out.

Note that this is subject to A LOT of verification and further analysis.

So, Jeanne, based on the uncontrovertible scientific consensus of two weeks ago, you would be correct. But you're a bit late...

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Amazon 7]

***

Quote

Quote

Put more energy into the system... get out real nasty effects like more moisture and shifts in the old NORMAL weather patterns.

Only the sun puts more energy into a system. AGW theory suggests more is being kept by the system. AGW isn't based on ebergy in. It's based on energy out.

Incidentally, there is a new paper out there suggesting that putting less solar energy onto the earth RAISES temperatures.

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v467/n7316/full/nature09426.html

Taking data from the SORCE mission shows that for the visible wavelengths, the Spectral Irradiance Monitor ("SIM") (the instrument on the SORCE) suggests that the irradiance changes are opposite in sign to the changes in total solar irradiance ("TSI"). The TSI has decreased since 2003 but the SIM seems to indicate that the UV decreases are much larger than expected, while irradiance in visible bands has increased.

It says that when the sun's radiation decreases, more warmth is seen on the earth's surface.

People are scratchign their heads at this. If this new paper pans out, we can take every long term model and throw it out.

Note that this is subject to A LOT of verification and further analysis.

So, Jeanne, based on the uncontrovertible scientific consensus of two weeks ago, you would be correct. But you're a bit late...

So basically.. lets just dump all that carbon into the air as fast as we can... and poision the oceans with garbage killing off large parts of the food chain.

Great... I suppose GOD is just going to rapture all of us out when this planet can't support our species.
What a great idea.. do whatever we want to despoil out only cage.. and our keeper will take care of us

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Sure, pretty much the entire US was covered in ice at one time. That said, it was a hell of a LONG time ago and well before humans could write about it. Then, conditions clearly stabilized enough for lots of very interesting things to happen and stayed that way for a very long time.

Suddenly, within the last 150ish or so years, temperatures have shot up.

Um, Paul. 150 years ago we were pulling out of the Little Ice Age. Before that was the Medievel Climate Optimum - when it was warmer than now.

Stability? No. Instability. And we're right in the middle of it. We know it was unstable because the Norse settlements on Greenland that started about 1000 AD, flurished for a couple of hundred years, and then died off when the climate worsened and couldn't support livestock anymore (from the Optimum to the Ice Age in a few hundred years).

It was unstable then. It's unstable now. And it's rising as quickly as it dropped.

Quote

The issue I have is if it's due to humans we HAVE to do something about it because we as a species will not be able to adapt to the rapid change.

Sure we can. It's why the Inuits survived on Greenland. They adapted. The arrogant Norse did not.

Quote

We are now in a position where we -might- be able to do something about it.

Ending civilization as we know it (which is EXACTLY what 80% cut backs in CO2 will do - put us in 1910) is rarely the save for civilization as we know it - especially if it looks like it won't work or will be unnecessary.

Quote

You can, as some will, argue that it's not man made. So what? Are you just going to sit there and let it happen without ANY attempts at fixing it?

Question, Paul. We entered Iraq without an exit strategy. We didn't know when our mission would be accomplished. We just went.

Tell me, Paul:
(1) What is broken?
(2) How do we fix it?
(3) When do we know if it is fixed?
(4) What about the other problems the cure will cause?

Quote

At least mitigating the issues as much as possible so that humanity continues.

Humanity WILL continue regardless of the climate change. Increasing the temperature of the planet by 5 degrees will cause cause the end of the human race. Do you seriously think that humans will be extinct by 2100 if we don't act now to fix the climate? By 2200? I hate to break this to you, Paul, but humans will not be extinct.

Civilization as we know it has changed in the last 20 years. I'll prove it - I met my wife on this forum and odds are we wouldn't have otherwise met. 25 years ago it wouldn't have happened.

Civilization changes and adapts. But we will not be extinct from climate change. No longer are fire and brimstone the sole province of protestant preachers. Fire and brimstone are the province of climate science.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

lets just dump all that carbon into the air as fast as we can

Oh, I'm sure we can do way more.

Quote

and poision the oceans with garbage killing off large parts of the food chain.

I'd prefer not to. Garbage in the ocean, however, has commonly been used by Asian cultures and marketed as an aphrodisiac.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[turtlespeed 226]

Quote

So basically.. lets just dump all that carbon into the air as fast as we can... and poision the oceans with garbage killing off large parts of the food chain.

Great... I suppose GOD is just going to rapture all of us out when this planet can't support our species.
What a great idea.. do whatever we want to despoil out only cage.. and our keeper will take care of us

Nope - Basically, just admit that it isn't as big an issue as you once believed it was and announce that publicly.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[quade 4]

Quote

Humanity WILL continue regardless of the climate change. Increasing the temperature of the planet by 5 degrees will cause cause the end of the human race. Do you seriously think that humans will be extinct by 2100 if we don't act now to fix the climate? By 2200? I hate to break this to you, Paul, but humans will not be extinct.

Extinct; you're right. Civilized and living as we are now with +6 billion people on the planet?

No. I see no way that's possible with a +5 degree increase in the course of the next 100 years. None.

Civilizations have completely collapsed with far smaller changes.

I have a book I want you to read;
http://www.amazon.com/Collapse-Societies-Choose-Fail-Succeed/dp/0670033375

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[turtlespeed 226]

Quote

Quote

Humanity WILL continue regardless of the climate change. Increasing the temperature of the planet by 5 degrees will cause cause the end of the human race. Do you seriously think that humans will be extinct by 2100 if we don't act now to fix the climate? By 2200? I hate to break this to you, Paul, but humans will not be extinct.

Extinct; you're right. Civilized and living as we are now with +6 billion people on the planet?

No. I see no way that's possible with a +5 degree increase in the course of the next 100 years. None.

Civilizations have completely collapsed with far smaller changes.

I have a book I want you to read;
http://www.amazon.com/Collapse-Societies-Choose-Fail-Succeed/dp/0670033375

Figures Amazon would have something to do with it.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[skipbelt 0]

this carbon fetish really bothers me , are we not carbon based creatures ? there is a strong vein of disinformation regarding carbon . that cO2 is a pollutant . it's not . if you science of gw lovers really love science , you'll know about the law of conservation of mass. there is as much carbon now as there ever was . one geologic theory holds that dinosaurs compromise our hydrocarbon deposits . before that carbon was readily available to create the dinosaurs . all in a cycle that includes water air and land. learn to love carbon , and unlearn hating it and calling it a pollutant !

[billvon 3,120]

>are we not carbon based creatures?

Well, that's one of the things we're based on. By molecular weight we're mostly water; by element weight we're mostly oxygen. But we do indeed have a lot of carbon in there.

> if you science of gw lovers really love science , you'll know about the law
>of conservation of mass. there is as much carbon now as there ever was .

Of course. It used to be underground, sequestered in coal beds, oil fields and natural gas formations. We're changing that.

>before that carbon was readily available to create the dinosaurs .

Yep. And carbonic acid, and CO2, and carbonate, and clathrates, and oil, and coal. Lots of things have carbon in them.

>learn to love carbon , and unlearn hating it and calling it a pollutant !

Try this. Go into a room full of CO2. After a few minutes, let us know if you love it, and whether you still think it's a perfectly safe, lovable gas.

[skipbelt 0]

everytime i hyperventilate over one of your posts i do. note to self, billvon inexoribally invested in Co2 is poisonous pollutant !

[quade 4]

Quote

Try this. Go into a room full of CO2. After a few minutes, let us know if you love it, and whether you still think it's a perfectly safe, lovable gas.

Bill, that's really an unfair test. I mean, after all, you're filling it with CO2 to begin with.

What he should really try is being locked in a perfectly normal air mixture without, as he says, changing any of the mass in it. Something like an airtight space capsule would do nicely. There would, in fact, be no change in the total mass of carbon, but I'm pretty sure that eventually he'd understand that keeping the total mass the same can have pretty bad effects as the gasses shift from being stored inside his fat cells to being released into the "atmosphere" in the enclosed capsule.

What's nice about that experiment would be it would also demonstrate pretty well how the increase in CO2 increases the temperature of the space.

Of course, once he finally expires and dies, the temperature will go back down, but hopefully we will have made our point by then.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[billvon 3,120]

>everytime i hyperventilate over one of your posts i do.

Sorry to bring science into a perfectly good anxiety attack, then!

[skipbelt 0]

how many plants do i get ? just a few then check on me in 24 hours . don't make me read your substandard posts the whole time. i probably wouldn't survive that . notice how i'm ignoring the veiled threat angle . note to self , both disappointing mods inexoribally invested in Co2 is poisonous pollutant !

[skipbelt 0]

Quote

>everytime i hyperventilate over one of your posts i do.
Sorry to bring science into a perfectly good anxiety attack, then!

completely out of context , as usual . but also very inadequate , no surprise here either !