This is the 332nd consecutive month with an above-average temperature.

[QUOTE=Brunch@Five]you're putting up a strawman. No one here, and no serious scientist or politician advocates that we stop using CO2 emitting technologies immediately. The UN has set goals that we can achieve with little economic suffering. Long-term we will benefit, both ecologically and economically. You're the guy panicking, not "us" who advocate going green.[/QUOTE]


Not really trying to make a strawman ( what the F is a Strawman?)....and will have to read up on the UN goals are..

- I'm more familiar with Cali's Co2 enviromental acts..

- California produces 2% of all the worlds Co2 emissions and yet we are trying to reduce/eliminate all green house gases...by 2030( by up to 17% from 1990)...wich look at what economic state we are in....it's strangholding jobs/ our economy.

- what longterm benifits?......what about right now?...China is currently constructing the equivalent of two, 500 megawatt, coal-fired power plants per week and a capacity comparable to the entire UK power grid ...so we stranglehold our state/nation so it can only be green in Cali.

China is by far the leader in green house gases.....and going YOLO on Co2 emmissions.....


so again I ask you.....what about Right now?......stranghold jobs and econimic growth to lower Carbon Footprint a little by 2030???


- and part of Cali's plan to reduce emisions is having more Hybrid vehicles...( more miles per gallon = less gas = less emissions)....how do we make batteries???......Mine the earth...( With big machines that run off of ethanol righ?...lets turn all the land into a giant corn field.....that will be much better)..:hammerhead: :hammerhead: :hammerhead:

[QUOTE=Nick Young]:applause: :applause: :applause:

I hate elitists. There are people like DeucesWallace out there making a career out of fearmongering.[/QUOTE]

This is true, but you need the DW's of the world to offset the Hawkers. Those who are extremists on either side are the most annoying, but they need to co-exist so they can spend their entire lives going back and forth accomplishing nothing.

:oldlol:

[quote]
The single individual cannot be blamed for failing to understand climate change, or not doing something about it. So I shouldn't fault you. I know you're not stupid, and care about your fellows, are thoughtful ... I've read your posts in the past ~10 years.
If you are as well-read about the subject as you suppose, you should be able to draw the connection between climate change and phenomena like hunger, malnutrition, migration and poverty.
[/quote]

Here is the problem....and where these arguments turn ugly and people revert to team mode and start using old talking points and making no progress.

Drawing a connection between hunger and poverty and such...and the climate....

Saying things like that force the other side to point out that every single thing you are connecting to it has existed since the dawn of time.

And when you start trying to tie it all together and people get the weather into it...you start to sound like ambulance chasers. Finding misfortune and turning it to suit your argument when misfortune has always been and will be. And much of it....especially poverty and hunger...isnt supply. Its greed of those who have east access to things. America wastes 170 billion dollars in food a year....enough to have saved every person who died of hunger in each year. And have some left.

And thats just america. Not the entire "first" world. And the dismissal of such things when someone has a point to make bugs me.

You can tie a thousand things to people not having food. But when we have enough for everyone...and we just dont give it to them...I wont blame the climate.

And when people have been dying by the hundreds of thousands in floods and storms for thousands of years I wont blame the industrial revolution.

Will I accept that the garbage we throw into the air can come back to haunt us in say....increased storm power due to slightly warmer water? Sure. Thats basic.

But im almost(and I hate to even use this word) offended when some idiot starts talking climate change(nice blanket statement to be able to cover everything outside) like a point is proven when people are dying in the streets.

It really does feel like ambulance chasing the way people use misfortune to whip up these arguments. You would almost think bad weather started in 1890....just rubs me the wrong way.

[quote]If additionally you trust in science that mankind is responsible for the recent drastic change (@alpha-wolf: .8

[IMG]http://patrick.net/forum/content/uploads/2012/03/what-if-we-make-a-better-world-for-nothing.jpg[/IMG]

[QUOTE=Droid101][IMG]http://patrick.net/forum/content/uploads/2012/03/what-if-we-make-a-better-world-for-nothing.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE]


- yes but how do we reach those goals posted in the comic?.....

- do you know how much money would need to be spent to lower our Green house gases just a little???....s

- and what does energy independence mean ( the #1 on the list)?.....If you can explain that for me please. ( How can we create energy in our country without creating Green house gas?)

I see now that i was left what seems to new a"you used to be cool" message over my feeling about polar bears......

Some of you are too sensitive to be grown....

[QUOTE=Kblaze8855]Here is the problem....and where these arguments turn ugly and people revert to team mode and start using old talking points and making no progress.

Drawing a connection between hunger and poverty and such...and the climate....

Saying things like that force the other side to point out that every single thing you are connecting to it has existed since the dawn of time.

And when you start trying to tie it all together and people get the weather into it...you start to sound like ambulance chasers. Finding misfortune and turning it to suit your argument when misfortune has always been and will be. And much of it....especially poverty and hunger...isnt supply. Its greed of those who have east access to things. America wastes 170 billion dollars in food a year....enough to have saved every person who died of hunger in each year. And have some left.

And thats just america. Not the entire "first" world. And the dismissal of such things when someone has a point to make bugs me.

You can tie a thousand things to people not having food. But when we have enough for everyone...and we just dont give it to them...I wont blame the climate.

And when people have been dying by the hundreds of thousands in floods and storms for thousands of years I wont blame the industrial revolution.

Will I accept that the garbage we throw into the air can come back to haunt us in say....increased storm power due to slightly warmer water? Sure. Thats basic.

But im almost(and I hate to even use this word) offended when some idiot starts talking climate change(nice blanket statement to be able to cover everything outside) like a point is proven when people are dying in the streets.

It really does feel like ambulance chasing the way people use misfortune to whip up these arguments. You would almost think bad weather started in 1890....just rubs me the wrong way.[/quote]

you really make it easy for yourself. So you acknowledge man-made climate change and the problems it causes, and then choose to ignore that knowledge and say "oh, that has always happened, so why care about it". The World Bank and most other development agencies aren't saying that climate change is throwing the Sustainable Development cause back decades. Other than problems in distribution and excessive waste in developed countries, climate change diminishes developing countries own capabilities to cope with all sorts of critical phenomena.
Also, science now can say with some confidence that recent extreme events (heat, precipitation etc.) can be tied to man-made climate change.



[quote]
I....support what I feel I can help change. I can help the old lady across from my grandmas house on thanksgiving. So im picking her up since all her family has passed and shes alone. Someone in my neighborhood gets her yearly. Ive known her 30 years and im happy to do it. I can help her.

Me trying to stop the climate from changing is trying to catch the wind.

Its an issue of how fast it happens. Not if it does. I can see how one might say thats like never going to the doctor when you are sure to die one day no matter what. But really....I can extend my life 10-20% by taking care of myself. At least its possible. I can do that myself.

I cant prevent the ice age from ending or starting back up. Too big. Too much to do. Too many billions headed the other way.[/quote]

No one is asking you to take responsibility for mankind. Just stop being a cynic and at least support those who do take responsibility in rhetoric.

the very earliest life on earth was shaped by the forces of nature to lie, cheat, steal, etc... anything at all to gain an advantage over its fellow life forms. to consume whatever resources it was surrounded with without any concern for sustainability, and always to keep reproducing... to keep reproducing as quickly as the local factors permitted... or risk going extinct.

in the end, this is how we still behave as a species. despite being tribal, community-minded creatures for as much as six million years or more... despite having arguably the most elaborate brains and technology in earth history... despite having a common urge to transcend our animal nature and be 'better' or even 'spiritual' or 'enlightened'... in the end we still behave like our programming as a species.


so, kevinNYC, brunch@five, deucewallaces and other like-minded individuals--

what makes you think that arguments, science and reason are going to change enough minds to create a critical mass at this point? also, what would be the purpose? isn't it already too late to get GH gases under control given the glacial progress of politics, self-interested financial mechanisms, the huge inherent resistance of the technology and resource-entitled, and the increasingly powerful natural feedback mechanisms in play?

at this point, isn't the only chance remaining to hope for 11th-hour solutions, like artificial carbon sequestration sinks and controlled atmospheric particulate sun-blocking agents? that, and to make peace with one's deity of choice and to enjoy each remaining day that we're gifted with?

i dunno... maybe i've just lost something along the way.

i lived most of my adult life as a very green person, gave up my car in '95, involved myself with community gardens, farm shares, co-ops... lived as simply as reasonably possible, dumpster-dived for a third of my possessions, donated time and money to orgs that i thought could make a difference on a local and a global level, tried to keep abreast of the science even though i'm more an art person than a science person, tried to have many, many reasonable conversations on sustainability, etc with many people i knew and with strangers... anything and everything i could think of to live up to my standards and be a responsible human being and as much of a decent example as i might.

in the end, it got me nowhere and changed nothing that mattered.

life is short and nothing in the universe lasts, so why not enjoy the moment and say "to hell with changing other people and trying to save the planet as we know it"? at least... that's one thought which strongly suggests itself to me these days. :P

[QUOTE]you really make it easy for yourself. So you acknowledge man-made climate change and the problems it causes, and then choose to ignore that knowledge and say "oh, that has always happened, so why care about it". [/QUOTE]

No. I accept that man may have some impact on the exact severity of things that have happened forever.....while also accepting that the most extreme weather we know about happened without our input. So I dont panic or get caught up in the whens and hows. The world with or without us will eventually have another ice age or eventually get hotter than we have ever known. As I said earlier...greenland was a forest and many deserts were under water...before we got here. If its a matter of when and not if....I focus on the things that can be changed not just....put off for a moment or altered slightly.


[QUOTE]The World Bank and most other development agencies aren't saying that climate change is throwing the Sustainable Development cause back decades. Other than problems in distribution and excessive waste in developed countries, climate change diminishes developing countries own capabilities to cope with all sorts of critical phenomena.[/QUOTE]

That "other than" part is the key to me.

When we have enough for everyone...and wont give it to the people who arent born in the right country and look the right way....how are we looking at preventing climate change for the solution?

Its an issue of humanity. You have to look at what we are...who we are as a people...and figure out why we dont care. Why we put so much over helping the people who need it.

You know there is a product called "Neuticles" which is a surgical implant for neutered dogs and cats that mimics the look of still having balls. And since they were released....Americans have spent 221 million dollars on them. We spent 45 billion dollars on pets last year. Just in America. Entire world over 100 billion.

Have you any idea how many HUMANS wouldnt have to die if someone made a real effort to put an extra 100 billion into getting them supplies? Clean water tablets? Basic medical supplies? Rice and beans? Im not talking the works. Just...the basics. What they would need to live like...a 3rd as well as a poor american.

We have trillions of dollars wasted yearly without any consideration paid to the poor. If you show someone a dying child in person and ask them for 20 bucks that goes to the kid they would give it to you. But...tell them there are 400 million of them out of sight and it doesnt register. Doesnt make them exactly selfish...I have given to various charities that I feel help people....but I sure as hell still have a couple big screens, 5 rooms of cable, internet, and so on....in each of my 2 houses. So its not like im doing all I can.

Im not trying to judge humanity and ignore my own disregard of those in need. I just wonder why its so easy to ignore them. And what we can do about it.

We need to see the world as one nation. Just...brothers in humanity. And until we do all the rest of these causes feel like a lot of drama over nothing. When this awful shit is still going on I feel as passionate about global warming as I do about saving the whales(I am pro whale for the record).

Really...if we find a way to prevent climate change(an absurd notion on a large scale...but lets say we slow it)....do the poor then get what they need? Will they be safe?

If so...why didnt they get it 200 years ago? Think the social imbalance showed up lately? The people dying in Africa and asia have been there barely making it for generations dying of the same diseases almost wiped out in developed countries, dying when crops dont come in, and not being sent relief.

The problem of us disregarding people we dont have to see is much deeper than global warming and really...is to me the biggest problem the world has.

Stopping global warming to help the poor or even humanity as a whole is a bandaid on the heart attack that is the selfish nature of man.


[QUOTE]
Also, science now can say with some confidence that recent extreme events (heat, precipitation etc.) can be tied to man-made climate change.
[/QUOTE]

Over a million people were killed in one flood in china in the 1800s. In the 1930s they had 2 years of droughts followed by crazy snow one winter then heavy rains and 7 huge storms in july alone killing around 3 million people. If that happens tomorrow....what are the odds someone like you connects it to global warming? Every single big storm someone comes on here and does it.

My question is this...and you may have an answer if its your field.

When these things have happened forever...thousands of years...billions...and we have no measurements and poor records kept until lately. How do you say with any confidence what causes them now....and didnt cause them then? What data do you have on the floods of 1287 in Europe that suggests what causes floods now could not have caused those?

I can see how that might sound a tad...smarmy(never had to write that word till now) but it is a serious question.

People seem to kinda treat this issue like a boogey man in the closet causing all forms of weather related misfortune. I wanna know....if we are at fault for some extreme weather why is history so littered with extreme weather?



This isnt "Its always happened so why care". Its me saying that it happening will never be as big a problem as the fact that people dont care that it happens. Because if people cared half the true misery in the world could be gone in our lifetimes. Im not worried about how preventing climate change can help feed people....we can feed them NOW....and dont do it. The world needs to help its people in literal physical ways...to start to care...before we put energy into trying to turn around climate change.

Because even if we turn it around...if the rich still shit on the poor they will be as bad off as they are now. Starvation is a hell of a lot older than the industrial revolution. Its just sadder now because we can end it and dont bother.





[QUOTE]
No one is asking you to take responsibility for mankind. Just stop being a cynic and at least support those who do take responsibility in rhetoric.
[/QUOTE]

Compared to a child who believes everything is but a wish away a responsible adult is a cynic. But hes still right that you need to take action to make things happen.

Like it or not the great majority of people who dont have faith in others on a large scale are justified and proven right. You can say that if they showed a little faith they might have made success more likely...but you cant say they were wrong in the end.

You rarely lose betting on humans to do the wrong thing given the chance.

You can call me a cynic. I dont care. I dont think you will be able to call me wrong. Well intentioned you may be. But until the people of the "first" world care about those in the "third" none of this will make a real difference.

And your problem is the same as mine. I hate extreme poverty...you seem to hate the apathy of most when it comes to climate change.

And neither of us will get what we want because its a few million pulling against the human nature of 7 billion. Who wins that tug of war is obvious cynic or not.

So I try on the small scale. I do give to charity. Im setting up a secret santa donation for a family I know who needs it. I try to feed the poor when I can. Im not doing all I can and nobody I know is. But I dont need to be called selfish for doing what I know I can and not pinning my hopes to a sudden change in human nature.

If there is a longterm solution to your problem and mine...its how we raise our children and how they raise theirs.

Selfishness is the blight of the world. And global warming isnt that high on the list of problems it causes. Its on the list. But its not the first I feel we need to tackle. Especially when its one of the least likely to be turned around.

I dont expect a real reply to all that...just...getting it out. Its been on my mind and I try to explain why I feel the way I do when people seem...offended...by it.

on a completely unrelated topic, willful ignorance and elaborate self-delusion makes the world go 'round. so god bless every cute little kitty out there in need of a hug.

I don't have much time right now, so I'll respond to a few points:

[quote]That "other than" part is the key to me.

When we have enough for everyone...and wont give it to the people who arent born in the right country and look the right way....how are we looking at preventing climate change for the solution?[/quote]

That's a legitimate criticism, but it shows here that we think on different scales. My point was that climate change hurts the developing countries' OWN capabilities to cope with their problems, and makes them even more dependent on foreign aid. That is not what development politics want.
Direct food and clothing aid is actually hurting those societies, as they are destroying the market. Things like these help in form of short-term humanitarian aid, but they do not help alleviate suffering long-term, as change has to come from within those societies.
And when we have man-made climate-change, disproportionally caused by the western world (per capita, China isn't even in the top 10 I believe), that hurts the less developed world's livelihoods and makes it virtually impossible for them to provide for their people, long-term, it becomes a moral responsibility for us to limit climate change.
Thankfully, science has enabled us to see beyond phenomena like hunger and diseases and tackle them at their roots. Donating food and clothes is nice, but not really helping. That's what the "Sustainable Development" paradigm is about. Man-made climate-change is severely hurting that case.

It almost seems like you believe third world poverty is a recent issue. Many of the same places that need help now have been struggling to take care of their people for as long as we have history to check.

Kings of Mali were among the richest rulers in world history and had the resources and land to wipe out poverty. Instead they set up caravans of silk covered slaves and camels carrying hugs sacks of gold and gems and spent so much they flooded the market and destroyed the economy of entire neighboring Kingdoms.


The haves take from the have nots. Poor people work to create goods they can't afford themselves and someone a world away takes it for granted.

The same kind of people have suffered forever. If preventing climate change were the key places like Africa and rural areas of Asia and other places wouldn't have been struggling before humans had the ability to cause trouble.

Is that not reasonable?

[QUOTE=Kblaze8855]It almost seems like you believe third world poverty is a recent issue. Many of the same places that need help now have been struggling to take care of their people for as long as we have history to check.

Kings of Mali were among the richest rulers in world history and had the resources and land to wipe out poverty. Instead they set up caravans of silk covered slaves and camels carrying hugs sacks of gold and gems and spent so much they flooded the market and destroyed the economy of entire neighboring Kingdoms.


The haves take from the have nots. Poor people work to create goods they can't afford themselves and someone a world away takes it for granted.

The same kind of people have suffered forever. If preventing climate change were the key places like Africa and rural areas of Asia and other places wouldn't have been struggling before humans had the ability to cause trouble.

Is that not reasonable?[/QUOTE]

You are of course right that limiting climate change won't feed and shelter or fairly distribute anything to anyone. It won't solve those problems.
However, and that's my (and the development researchers) point is that cliamte change will hit those who are most disadvantaged the strongest and make it virtually impossible to ever get out of their hole.
For meteorological and geological reasons, the regions around the equator and the tropics (low latitudes) face the most severe hazards due to climate change. They also have, due to underdevelopment, less capabilities to cope with these hazards.

The fact that climate change only adds to several structural disadvantages of less developed countries doesn't make it less important to combat it.

[QUOTE=Brunch@Five]You are of course right that limiting climate change won't feed and shelter or fairly distribute anything to anyone. It won't solve those problems.
However, and that's my (and the development researchers) point is that cliamte change will hit those who are most disadvantaged the strongest and make it virtually impossible to ever get out of their hole.
For meteorological and geological reasons, the regions around the equator and the tropics (low latitudes) face the most severe hazards due to climate change. They also have, due to underdevelopment, less capabilities to cope with these hazards.

The fact that climate change only adds to several structural disadvantages of less developed countries doesn't make it less important to combat it.[/QUOTE]


just feels odd to me to blame something that the problem predates by thousands of years. This is gonna make their recovery impossible....this. Not thethings that have kept them down forever. Its global warming they need to worry about?


Its on the list i suppose. number 1? Eh....

I was reading an article on Al Gores terribly missed predictions on the ice caps by 2013 and was reminded of this.

Those photoshopped pictures of an iceless world with hurricanes everywhere?

Alarmists hurt their own cause more than they know.

Lol Al Gore didn't predict anything. He put forth the highest end of some confidence interval a researcher developed; i.e. likely a model developed with the best data available at the time.

[QUOTE=DeuceWallaces]Lol Al Gore didn't predict anything.[B] He put forth the highest end of some confidence interval a researcher developed[/B]; i.e. likely a model developed with the best data available at the time.[/QUOTE]


That's not how Mr. Gore worded it.

He said "THE ICE CAPS ARE ALL GONNA BE GONE BY 2013!!!!!"


That's a prediction.


But obviously the climate fairies won't acknowledge that Gore BS'd, because they think that's equivalent to conceding climate change isn't real or something.


That's the prob in this country. Nobody is willing to be honest when the other side makes a valid point or when they screw up themselves, because they think it will nullify their entire cause.

Sad..