Tree Hugging Hippie Crap:

[ispar]

Originally posted by Yoj:
Oh Dowding, surely it must be that simple - I mean, who is it that has been warning about emmisions?  Just scientists and their ilk.  They obviously don't know anything, and anyway, they have a political agenda.

Sorry - being facetious.  I do find it interesting that, in spite of the fact that global warming has been a concern, not of tie-dyed tree huggers, but reputable scientists backed up by reams of data based on observational evidence, we still hear people say "theres no problem, and here's why....", as though the environment of this planet was something simple.

- Yoj

Well said.

1776 - is that the year you are living in? "Fleas on an elephant." Ridiculous. We have been ourselves that for centuries, and we are finally realizing how wrong we were.

It's time to wake up from the dream.

[narsus]

Well just to throw something in here from a geologists point of view, My senior year of college I went out with the head of the department that was studying not global warming, but global cooling. All our evidence is from 100 years or so, not nearly enough time to make a statement on global warming or cooling.

Studying glaciers and ice caps is the "only" way to tell climatic changes over time. I am not stating one way or the other, which is happening but you find a scientist that says the earth is warming I'll find you one that says it's cooling.

narsus

[miko2d]

Originally posted by Yoj:
I do find it interesting that, in spite of the fact that global warming has been a concern, not of tie-dyed tree huggers, but reputable scientists backed up by reams of data based on observational evidence, we still hear people say "theres no problem, and here's why....", as though the environment of this planet was something simple.

 Not really. I see quite a few reputable scientists presenting well-founded opinions that there is no problem with human-induced global warming, no ozone problem etc.
 Some of the arguments I can even follow and I agree with them.

 There is a lot of people who staked their livelihood and careers (including political) on the issue, that is why you see controversial views. Many of the official vies and data on those "problems" are misrepresentation.
 Considering that misrepresentation is much more common in human history then anything else, why would anyone be surprised?

 miko

[Yoj]

The essence of the peer review system is concensus.  The concensus opinion changes over time as new evidence is found and models tested, created and rejected.  Right now the concensus opinion is that CO2 emissions from man made sources are causing a trend towards global warming.  That doesn't mean there aren't intelligent people who read the evidence otherwise.  My point is that with something where the impact is so potentially serious, saying "there is no problem", especially when a significant body of evidence is to the contrary, is a lot like sticking your head in the sand.  

That and the fact that I have a hard time with simplistic explanations of complex subjects.  If it was simple everyone would agree (well, almost everyone).  In this example, its not just CO2 emissions - impacts on ocean flora (algae) and rain forest depletion are impacts too, because it reduces the things that absorb CO2.

By the way - while as little as a couple years ago there was a solid split between the global warming and global cooling advocates, within the past year the evidence for warming and the role of CO2 has become compelling, which is why the concensus opinion now leans that way.  And of course, the biggest problem is that by the time there are obvious effects its far too late to do anything about it.

- Yoj

[ 06-28-2001: Message edited by: Yoj ]

[jihad]

The concensus opinion changes over time as new evidence is found and models tested, created and rejected. Right now the concensus opinion is that CO2 emissions from man made sources are causing a trend towards global warming.

BZZZZZTTTTTTT

I find it laughable that ANYONE would put credence in a model of earths atmosphere/ecological processes and human interaction with them.

Billions of dollars have been spent trying to predict the weather <unsuccesfully> - and you think people can model something as complex as human contributions to global warming?

If you heard Henny Penny cackle the sky is falling would you believe that also?

SHEESH!  

[Sparks]

People who know me in person know that I am a generally tolerant person but recently I've been loosing it.  Why ??? Because of the exponential increase in arrogant selfish tosspots that live on this planet.......

1776 - where the F**K do you get off saying this
 

Does anyone really think that mankind could change the climate? Even if we made it a global project to change the climate and all on earth worked towards that goal, it would never be achieved. Everything we tried to do would be determental to human beings and we would extinguish the flame of human existence first!! We human beings are like fleas on an elephant to "mother earth"!!

When is this pig ignorant attitude of "we can do what we want coz muvver nature can andle it" going to stop - when are we going to get our heads out of our bank books and look more than a quarterly balance sheet ahead.

I couldn't give a toss about what scientists say about global warming - I do give a toss about what I see in my life every day:-
I see 1 in 4 kids in our schools carrying inhalers for asthmer - it was almost unheard of when I was at school
I see every man and his dog with unexplained allergies
I see my and my neighbours and relatives dying of cancers of every type
I see millions of acres of every type of enviroment destroyed to make money - tropical forest in Africa for oil, rain forest in South America for timber and cattle, the North Sea polluted from UK to Norway with industrial waste agricultural runoff and sewage (go to and east coast town beach and tell me I'm wrong), Alaskan wilderness to be mined, Antartica to be mined....
I see the blind use of finite resources because they are there and cheap.

I am truly and deeply sick to my core of the attitude expressed by the majority of posters in this thread.  WHAT THE HOLY F**K do you all think is going to happen when all this cheap fuel runs out ??????  What do you think our grand kids are going to do when the last of the fossil fuel resources are controlled by one or two countries or corporations.

You know 4000 years is a mere gnat fart in the time of this planet and in that time we have MANAGED TO DAMAGE MORE THAN ANY OTHER CREATURE ALIVE ON IT. So 1776 why don't you look past your own selfish life and think what we might be capable of in another 4000 years. Maybe you should listen to the views of people who have been into space and looked back and realised what we have here.

WHY DO WE NEED A BUSINESS CASE TO JUSTIFY LOOKING AFTER WHERE WE LIVE ???

  :mad:I am not a tree hugging hippie Rip but why does earning a buck or building what you want give you the right to destroy just whatever you please ????

We strive for constant economic growth because the bean counters in grey suits say thats the only way for a country's economy to survive and so we fight for the resources to keep growing - and you know what?? - those resources have to come from somewhere, from other poorer people or from natural resource but from somewhere. Its a culture of pure greed and laziness and it's worldwide - poachers killing tigers in Russia or Shell digging for oil in Antartica its all the same "F**K you and everyone else there's money to be made here" .... and I tell you I am sick to the pit of my stomach with it.

God help us all

   

[ 06-29-2001: Message edited by: Sparks ]

[Maniac]

Amen!

Well look at the origin of the posters, US of A.

[Ripsnort]

Sparks:I am not a tree hugging hippie Rip but why does earning a buck or building what you want  give you the right to destroy just whatever you please ????

Who said anything about destroying whatever we please to pursue happiness?  This thread is about the roadkill they've been feeding you in the news and in college about us destroying our atmosphere.  Currently, the US has the most strict EPA laws IN THE WORLD! (So, Maniac, your comment goes unnoticed).  As a matter of fact, the US is trying to convince alot 3rd world countries to ADOPT our policies.

Its about being responsible in pursue of happiness, about respecting Mother Nature.  To listen to someone that says "If you drive a car, you're killing Mother Nature" is as rediculous as believing everything your Gov't has to say.

[Nifty]

I'm not going to argue in blinding reaping the natural resources, I don't like seeing the earth torn up either (rainforests being blazed so more cattle can graze, e.g.)

However, the medical issues for the -most- part are because we understand what cancer is now.  You didn't hear about cancer 100 or even 50 years ago because doctors had no clue what it was.  Same thing with heart disease.  You can't diagnose something you don't know to look for.  

As for asthma, I don't know. I haven't seen real studies that show if it's increased or not.  Same thing with allergies.  I haven't perceived an increase over here in the horrible USA.  Doesn't mean there is or isn't an increase though.  I certainly only see a very, very small portion of the US population.

edit:  just remembered something...  I read somewhere (can't remember where, it was awhile ago.) that the Vesuvius eruption back in 43AD (guessing, can't remember exact date) released more toxins and greenhouse gases than the entire human population has since the start of the Industrial Revolution!  I don't know whether to believe it or not.  If it's true, then air pollution is a bit alarmist on a global scale.  If it's not accurate, then it just shows you that you can't trust what you read.  *shrugs*

[ 06-29-2001: Message edited by: Nifty ]

[Yoj]

Originally posted by jihad:


BZZZZZTTTTTTT

I find it laughable that ANYONE would put credence in a model of earths atmosphere/ecological processes and human interaction with them.

Billions of dollars have been spent trying to predict the weather <unsuccesfully> - and you think people can model something as complex as human contributions to global warming?

If you heard Henny Penny cackle the sky is falling would you believe that also?

SHEESH!    

Oi!  Its tempting to get into name calling when presented with statements like this.  Weather prediction is unsuccessful???  I don't know what to say except to wonder what planet you've been living on.  

Climatic modeling is extremely successful, as is most computer modeling of dynamic systems. In any case, comparing it to weather prediction is comparing apples to aardvarks. Even if they were comparable, I'd take that level of success.  Of course, if you want someone to tell you exactly what the weather will be at your house at 3:00 PM two weeks from today, you'll be waiting forever, because it can't EVER be done.  But if someone tells me the climate is in danger with the same level of accuracy as the weather data that gets me safely from New York to Seattle in an airliner, I'm going to listen.  

- Yoj

[jihad]

Of course, if you want someone to tell you exactly what the weather will be at your house at 3:00 PM two weeks from today, you'll be waiting forever, because it can't EVER be done.

BwaHaHaHa -  and you think some moron with a climatic model will give you an accurate forcast 2 weeks from today - much less 10 or a 100 years from now?  

  It CAN'T be done, theres no way anyone can know and accurately model all the different dynamics that combine to create our climate/ecosystem.

You also don't take into account that they can't accurately input the data describing how much CO2 and other pollutants mankind pumps into the atmosphere daily, sure they can GUESS at numbers to input - but then the whole MODEL <snicker> is thrown off and the data output is garbage.

I suggest you educate yourself a bit more on this issue, go to www.pbs.org  and check out the NOVA articles on global warming, especially the articles about using ice core analysis to show climate history.

[funkedup]

Well look at the origin of the posters, US of A.

LOL

Yeah I think US should follow European ideas.
I mean you guys were doing really great until we got involved and set you straight.  Killing each other off in barbaric wars every 25 years.  Totalitarian governments in a couple of the larger countries.  

Great stuff!  I don't think it's a coincidence that the 20th century in Europe was a complete disaster until the USA came over to babysit.  50 years of peace and prosperity and now you geniuses think you know it all.  Here we go again...

Yep what the US needs is some good old European thinking ROFLMAO!!!  

I really like a lot of the Europeans I have met.  But you can stick your messed up political ideas waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay up your asses.  Very poor track record.    

[ 06-29-2001: Message edited by: funkedup ]

[MrRiplEy]

Funkedup are you a native american?

I didn't know that the indian tribes taught europeans any lessons..

[mietla]

Originally posted by MrRiplEy:
Funkedup are you a native american?

what's your point?

[Dowding]

<sigh> another European vs US argument.

Funkedup, when nations who have millenium old histories, with millenium old differences, hatreds etc live in close proximity there WILL be conflict.

And by the way, sweeping generalisations involving the word 'you' are a little tedious. But seem to be the norm among a certain number of individuals on this board. Why bother having an original thought?

The US has hasn't had such a smooth history either; America effectively stole the country from the native inhabitants, killed each over it and supported institutionalised racial segregation deep into 20th century. Just for starters.

Of course, the US has acted in a positive way in many instances - but then so have many European countries, which is something you can't be arsed to recognise.