OK , so this is global warming ?

Status
Not open for further replies.
In Siberia , mamoths snap frozen since god knows when ... with daffodils still between their teeth .. not just the north pole was warm once ... there has been massive changes in climate

thats kinda my worry .. Im trying to not play the blame game of its SUVs or farting cows ... if its CO2 , or a blanket of water vapour in the upper atmosphere caused by industry / aviation / kids spitting water at each other .. Im more concerned with that the climate seems to be changing , andhow thats going to affect me and mine initally , and everyone else after that . I dont want to be a frozen tequila drinking museum exhibit ... thatd just suck
 
We have no idea what overpopulation means. The constraints on human survival under current environmental conditions are primarily due to poor governance. Remove tyranny, civil war, poor planning, and uncontrolled pollution, and today's population levels could be comfortably maintained.

The essence of climate is change. Until we can predict weather a week ahead, I distrust climate forecasts for the next decade or more.
 
Esav Benyamin said:
We have no idea what overpopulation means. The constraints on human survival under current environmental conditions are primarily due to poor governance. Remove tyranny, civil war, poor planning, and uncontrolled pollution, and today's population levels could be comfortably maintained. .../QUOTE]

Remove poor governance? When may we expect that, Esav? When men become angels? :o

Population is increasing sharply, so the capacity of the Earth to support "today's population" will be relevant in fifteen years only if we "off" a billion people. But can we build Kornbluth's rocket ships fast enough?
Click to expand...
 
Its called climate change now , so that all bases can be covered. Cold snaps . droughts ,hurricanes, tornadoes, flooding....
 
Esav Benyamin said:
We have no idea what overpopulation means. The constraints on human survival under current environmental conditions are primarily due to poor governance. Remove tyranny, civil war, poor planning, and uncontrolled pollution, and today's population levels could be comfortably maintained. ..
Click to expand...

Remove poor governance? When may we expect that, Esav? When men become angels? :o

Population is increasing sharply, so the capacity of the Earth to support "today's population" will be relevant in fifteen years only if we "off" a billion people. But can we build Kornbluth's rocket ships fast enough?
 
Esav Benyamin said:
We have no idea what overpopulation means. The constraints on human survival under current environmental conditions are primarily due to poor governance. Remove tyranny, civil war, poor planning, and uncontrolled pollution, and today's population levels could be comfortably maintained.

The essence of climate is change. Until we can predict weather a week ahead, I distrust climate forecasts for the next decade or more.
Click to expand...

I believe global climates do change over time, but I have a hard time extrapolating the data that man is the sole cause...we have the propensity to damage, but I don't give us that much credit to change the global climate. Now, I do believe we affect local ecosystems through pollution, poor land management, improper strip-logging, contribute to erosion and really impact our water sources. Esav is more accurate about why the latter occurs and it does have to do with governance, education and poverty. If a civil war is happening, every day is a fight for one meal for the poor, or your government is so oppressive that imprisonment or death are constant worries; pollution, protecting water sources and proper land management are not even a consideration.

Sure, climates do change; even globally. I see the problem as politics focusing on something they can't fix vice improving their own backyard where contributions can effect the whole. Efforts, money and energy spent on "global climate change" would be much better spent on education, better farming techniques, preserving local ecosystems and improving the quality of life so people can focus on their actions instead of just surviving.

The political spin is just another pollution muddying the water to really fix the local issues that are much more manageable. As a person of faith and belief in God, it's pretty clear that there is "intelligent design" and we were charged with being good stewards but are failing. If you removed humans, global climates would still change. Where we have screwed up is not being good stewards and managers of our resources or properly caring for our eco-systems. We are so self-centered with the mindset of just paying taxes so some government can "save us all" from global warming; it's the wrong attitude. Personal responsibility starts with yourself, your family, your community and eventually forcing governments to focus on what we can fix vice something that is way outside our ability to affect within our current knowledge and limitations.

I don't advocate throwing out data, but using pieces of data to support a political agenda is just selfishness at a higher level. Where we really screw up is data manipulation to support political agendas and scientists who get involved become part of the problem muddying the water to really get after the understanding of macro/micro climate changes. When politicians talk about the disastrous affects of SUV emissions or cow flatulence to the ozone but ignore the extreme poverty in some parts of the world where people are literally crapping in their drinking water, strip mining/farming under oppressive governments...we miss the big picture on how to solve the smaller more manageable problems.

Wow...too much coffee this cold morning :D

ROCK6
 
Last edited:
Rock6 I agree with most of what you wrote there .
Specially about politics being just another pollution.. all the hot air from all them politicians has to have some kind of environmental effect .. if not the hot air , all the bulldust anyway ..
 
If we took all the hot air generated by politics to generate power we could close down all the coal, hydroelectric, nuclear generating stations, oh and all those fancy windmills too.
 
Bufford said:
If we took all the hot air generated by politics to generate power we could close down all the coal, hydroelectric, nuclear generating stations, oh and all those fancy windmills too.
Click to expand...

Not true. It's all vaporware.
 
InSpectre Gadget said:
How noble of you to attempt to educate me. Unfortunately, my response goes back to the same thing I originally said. The Bible claims to be the Word of God, so who it was written down by, or what it's history is claimed (by men) to be is irrelevant. What is relevant is the claim of divine inspiration, and whether or not you choose to believe its words, or those of men, which was what I said in the first place.
Click to expand...

Belief in a diety and belief in science isn't mutually exclusive. They exist side by side. They're for sure not at war with each other as some appear to want. I'll never understand ignoring what's in front of you for a feel good story. By the by my wife is a devout Christian who when asked if she believes in evolution she won't give you an answer. My guess is she believes that the earth was created 6000 years ago and just doesn't want a debate on the subject. Global warming she believes in though. Like I said it's not mutually exclusive.

2013 was the driest year on record in California. There's a photo project you can probably google where scientists set out to take photos in the exact location of photos that were taken 50 some odd years ago of glaciel ice. Even if you throw out all the temp data, it's hard to argue that the ice is melting. Unless you're just in denial.
 
Man only has limited control over the earth's environment. Climate change is happening slowly and from my point of view, there is little to be done about it other than to adapt to the changes. Whether or not a science fiction type event could happen as postulated in the movie "The Day After Tomorrow" is another thing. ? I have no idea. It is all about money, wealth and power over people. This is where belief in a deity comes as humans are social animals.

The natural enviornment has a far greater impact on humans than producing green house gases from burning carbon fuels. One major volcanic eruption and the earth cools for years. Man can't change that or even predict it with any sort of time line certainty.

There were two basic beliefs or theories in geological sciences and they involve slow continuous change over many thousands of years and changes that occurr very rapidly that impact the earth for many thousands of years. I tend to believe in major episodic changes as having the greatest impact relative to man and the environment.
 
Surely every sacred text claims divine inspiration? How does one choose the right version of the divinely inspired truth? There are even conflicting versions of the truth within the various religions. Let alone comparing religions with each other. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_text#Sacred_texts_of_various_religions

InSpectre Gadget said:
How noble of you to attempt to educate me. Unfortunately, my response goes back to the same thing I originally said. The Bible claims to be the Word of God, so who it was written down by, or what it's history is claimed (by men) to be is irrelevant. What is relevant is the claim of divine inspiration, and whether or not you choose to believe its words, or those of men, which was what I said in the first place.
Click to expand...

If the weather gets bad enough some areas could become unlivable. The worst case is you get displaced and have to start over somewhere else. Stuff is hard to move. You can only take your money and your skills with you. If you have somewhere to go you will be miles ahead of the joneses. If you are insured you are also way ahead. Don't worry the people who will be getting the worst of climate change are the poor in third world countries. Relocating and finding new work could be time consuming.

Bo T said:
Actually, this makes me more concerned. Our temperature changes over the last 10,000 years has been on the order of+/- 3 C. And I don't think your graph reflects the increase in temperature since 1950? If current predictions are correct, then our temperature will increase to levels not seen in the last 20,000 years within the next 100 years. I agree with your stance on the current population numbers. We are moving rapidly towards the carrying capacity of the earth. I believe an increase of a few degrees Celcius will derease that carrying capacity. So, as far as survival equipment is concerned, what are logical steps for people to take (in terms of gear and equipment) to enhance survivability? Underground housing, hydroponic gardens??
Click to expand...

Pretty much. Money, insurance, marketable skills. The usual "stuff" people look at to get them through any kind of natural disaster applies. Food, water, first aid, defense, sanitation.

Bob W said:
I would say financial wealth is the best bet, if not for actual survival at least for maintaining a basic level of comfort and security.
Click to expand...
 
Shotgun said:
Belief in a diety and belief in science isn't mutually exclusive. They exist side by side. They're for sure not at war with each other as some appear to want. I'll never understand ignoring what's in front of you for a feel good story. By the by my wife is a devout Christian who when asked if she believes in evolution she won't give you an answer. My guess is she believes that the earth was created 6000 years ago and just doesn't want a debate on the subject. Global warming she believes in though. Like I said it's not mutually exclusive.



2013 was the driest year on record in California. There's a photo project you can probably google where scientists set out to take photos in the exact location of photos that were taken 50 some odd years ago of glaciel ice. Even if you throw out all the temp data, it's hard to argue that the ice is melting. Unless you're just in denial.
Click to expand...




I never claimed mutual exclusivity, and in fact, I agree with your statement. I was asserting that one's way of interpreting scientific findings can change based on one's viewpoint.
 
sideways said:
Surely every sacred text claims divine inspiration? How does one choose the right version of the divinely inspired truth? There are even conflicting versions of the truth within the various religions. Let alone comparing religions with each other. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_text#Sacred_texts_of_various_religions







If the weather gets bad enough some areas could become unlivable. The worst case is you get displaced and have to start over somewhere else. Stuff is hard to move. You can only take your money and your skills with you. If you have somewhere to go you will be miles ahead of the joneses. If you are insured you are also way ahead. Don't worry the people who will be getting the worst of climate change are the poor in third world countries. Relocating and finding new work could be time consuming.







Pretty much. Money, insurance, marketable skills. The usual "stuff" people look at to get them through any kind of natural disaster applies. Food, water, first aid, defense, sanitation.
Click to expand...



I made my choice based on whether or not the things which were said held up under scrutiny. The Bible is the only book to do that thus far, and I've looked at quite a few other ones--mostly the ones with a book attached to them or a system of core beliefs.
 
dipbait said:
Its hard to believe how incredibly stupid this thread has become.
Click to expand...

Yes.

The topic is inherently political, not scientific. Certainly not religious. Placing it in Outdoor Gear, Survival Equipment & More was avoiding the Political Arena. By now, it has jumped the shark.

No more. Closed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top