Whistle blowing on Global Warming

[33Vortex]

...well, them, and the people who empower them,

You mean the idiots, don't you? 

[CAP1]

You mean the idiots, don't you? 

in a rare moment, i was trying to be nice. 

[AKKuya]

lay off the sci-fi movies bro. theyre rotting your brain

Are you sure?  They sound more like science fact.  These are the facts that NASA put gag orders on their scientists to not alarm the public of global warming.

1) melting polar ice resulting in raising of sea level and cooling of certain water current streams
    NASA and NOA and other maritime organizations know about it but will take 2 to 3 centuries to happen
    Hollywood make movies on those premises.

2) Carribean Sea and Gulf of Mexico has been recorded with higher water temperature by the scientists
    scientists have predicted that more powerful and more frequent hurricanes will result in the next 25 years
   
3) The quadrupling of world's population to 7 billion currently and projected to 12-14 billion in next 50 years
    This along with de-forestation, resources dwindling, and plankton being reduced will lead to problems
     a) fresh water and food shortages
     b) rising levels of carbon dioxide without enough plants and trees to turn back to oxygen
     c) plankton dies and beging the breakdown of marine ecosystems leading to land ecosystem failures
     d) goverments will lose all control of social services and control of territories to crime and warlords


These are real world problems happening now in most of 3rd world nations in Africa, Asia, and South America in regards to military dictatorships and ethnic cleansing.  These are blueprints to what is yet to come in the next 50 to 100 years unless cheap and re-usable energy sources are discovered.  Fossil fuels are now in the category of being "finite" until technology is created to get to the fossil fuels underneath the tundra of Siberia and the continent of Anatartica.

The weather problems associated with global warming are just now being realized.  However, we know what needs to be done but it still revolves around one premise.  This will happen long after I'm dead, so why should I care?  That's the point of view of many people in government who have to worry about re-election.

I, myself, will be dead around 2060 or so.  At that time, I'll be 87 years old relying on an oxygen mask.  Not for my lungs since I don't smoke. It will be from lack of global oxygen falling to 18% or lower.  I'll be eating food that will be processed from non-meat, non-fruit, non-vegetable, and non-dairy sources but from labratory created food to contain protein and carb substances.  I'll be running the risk of so called "social programs" to end the life of elderly people to ease the burden on the existing younger population from either government, military, or religious leaders. 

Global warming is a problem.  Mother nature always finds a way to correct any problems.  Humans make too many problems too fast before Mother Earth can fix them.

Then again, this could all be a bunch of hogwash and nothing will happen and I can look forward to chasing the nurses in the retirement home in my levitating chair with thrusters!!!!!!!!
         

[mtnman]

Mother nature always finds a way to correct any problems.  Humans make too many problems too fast before Mother Earth can fix them.     

Do you have any examples of this?

Specifically, I'm interested in problems caused by man, that Mother Nature has fixed.

If that isn't possible, any examples of other problems she's corrected would be fine.

Thanks in advance!

[SEraider]

Do you have any examples of this?

Specifically, I'm interested in problems caused by man, that Mother Nature has fixed.

If that isn't possible, any examples of other problems she's corrected would be fine.

Thanks in advance!

I heard Carbon is an evil man-made element.  Oh wait, is it not a basic element of life? 

[MORAY37]

I heard Carbon is an evil man-made element.  Oh wait, is it not a basic element of life? 

So is H2O (well, a molecule if you want to get technical).  Drink about 3 gallons of it quickly.  (Warning: Don't do this)

You'll die from that "basic compound of life", by hypnoatremia. 

[AKKuya]

Do you have any examples of this?

Specifically, I'm interested in problems caused by man, that Mother Nature has fixed.

If that isn't possible, any examples of other problems she's corrected would be fine.

Thanks in advance!

Long before man started the industrial revolution.  Mother nature took care of overgrowth of foliage with forest fires.  Forest fires were taken care of by thunderstorms.  Thunderstorms precipitated overgrowth of foliage.  Hence one of the cylcles of nature most kids learn in Jr. high school during physical science.  Mother nature took care of the Earth very neatly.  

Mother nature also had a few tricks up her sleeve to change things up a bit.  Tornadoes and hurricanes as wild cards.  Ice ages and earthquakes to work on erosion and landscaping.

Man comes along and creates marvelous wonders of technology that actually hurt the enviroment and cause global warming.  Industrial age gives way to fossil fuels choking the atmosphere.  One of the most beneficial achievements to our society that saves lives and makes thing readily accessable - plastic.  The one creation that's not bio-degradable and has made quite a mark in the center of both the Atlantic and especially the Pacific Oceans.  The Great Pacific Garbage Patch.  There is a smaller one in the Sargasso Sea.  Never leave out the big guns that hammered the Bikini Island Atolls.  That plus the other testing sights in the world will have an impact also.

Mother nature has yet to solve these problems.  If all the humans disappeared, maybe in 10,000 years she might be able to heal all the wounds we scarred upon her.  

The only thing I know of that Mother nature has helped with in a very slow process is the Ozone.  The ozone hole is still there and according to reports is still growing.  However, the growth does have a slight reduction every once in awhile.  Lightning strikes does create O3, ozone.  Not very abundant but a few molecules here and there.

All of this I learned in school and watching the science and discovery channels.  After awhile, you formulate a general consensus of what's going on.  The real questions are do you believe that all interviews with scientists, politicians, and clergy are 100% truthful?  Are they telling the truth with the data that they say is accurate?  How do we as laymen know id the data is true or false?  Do we take their word for it at face value?  

This thread is about whistle blowing in our governments.  Politicians make policy.  They tell what the scientists can say and what not to say.  Scientists that come forward to show that the party line is false become targets of retribution.  

To paraphrase Tommy Lee Jones from the film Men in Black, "Individuals are smart.  People are dumb.  Everybody knew 2000 years ago that the world was the center of the universe.  500 years ago everyone knew that the world was flat.  15 minutes ago you knew that we were the only life in the universe.  Imagine what we'll know tomorrow.  People don't need to know, they got a good bead on things."   I know there's some more to that speech but it has been the most simplest explanation of many things.

If the government scientists from around the world knew with 100% certainty that all the emissions from human manufacturing, automobiles and other sources was going to destabilize the Ozone Hole, do you think that the corporations would stop doing business as usual from any government agency?  Profits are the most important thing in this world.  If the world was to go to hell in a handbasket 100 years from now, CEO's and politicians wouldn't care because they won't be here to see it.  Why stop all those profits?  

Governments treat their citizens as children.  What we don't know won't scare us.  What we don't know won't hurt us.  Governments might know some stuff on global warming.  They choose to not acknowledge it as factual to prevent one thing.  Anarchy.  If people knew that the world was going to have major climate shift changes 25 to 50 years in advance, how would this information affect the world stage?  An individuual would understand.  100 million people would panic and create a breakdown of society.

This is a subject that can be debated until the cows come home.  Botton line is that the average citizen has no real power to make the government tell the truth 100% of the time.  Once the words National Security is evoked, all matters are instantly dropped and the gag orders are put into affect.  Civil liberties are suspended for the greater good of the country.  

I love the good ole US of A!  Where every American is my equal but my government is my superior and all the alphabet agencies will be my watchdogs.    

[BiPoLaR]

Then again, this could all be a bunch of hogwash and nothing will happen and I can look forward to chasing the nurses in the retirement home in my levitating chair with thrusters!!!!!!!!

 

Dont believe half of what you see and all of what you read and hear

[RTHolmes]

Long before man started the industrial revolution.  etc...

to me, man made things like dioxins and radioactive waste present a much more massive threat to our environment than CO2 production, because there are already mechanisms to regulate CO2 concentrations in the long term. then again we already have the answer to disposal of man made toxins like these, its just a matter of implementing it.

[mtnman]

Long before man started the industrial revolution.  Mother nature took care of overgrowth of foliage with forest fires.  Forest fires were taken care of by thunderstorms.  Thunderstorms precipitated overgrowth of foliage.  Hence one of the cylcles of nature most kids learn in Jr. high school during physical science.  Mother nature took care of the Earth very neatly.  

Mother nature also had a few tricks up her sleeve to change things up a bit.  Tornadoes and hurricanes as wild cards.  Ice ages and earthquakes to work on erosion and landscaping.

Man comes along and creates marvelous wonders of technology that actually hurt the enviroment and cause global warming.  Industrial age gives way to fossil fuels choking the atmosphere.  One of the most beneficial achievements to our society that saves lives and makes thing readily accessable - plastic.  The one creation that's not bio-degradable and has made quite a mark in the center of both the Atlantic and especially the Pacific Oceans.  The Great Pacific Garbage Patch.  There is a smaller one in the Sargasso Sea.  Never leave out the big guns that hammered the Bikini Island Atolls.  That plus the other testing sights in the world will have an impact also.

Mother nature has yet to solve these problems.  If all the humans disappeared, maybe in 10,000 years she might be able to heal all the wounds we scarred upon her.  

The only thing I know of that Mother nature has helped with in a very slow process is the Ozone.  The ozone hole is still there and according to reports is still growing.  However, the growth does have a slight reduction every once in awhile.  Lightning strikes does create O3, ozone.  Not very abundant but a few molecules here and there.

All of this I learned in school and watching the science and discovery channels.  After awhile, you formulate a general consensus of what's going on.  The real questions are do you believe that all interviews with scientists, politicians, and clergy are 100% truthful?  Are they telling the truth with the data that they say is accurate?  How do we as laymen know id the data is true or false?  Do we take their word for it at face value?  

This thread is about whistle blowing in our governments.  Politicians make policy.  They tell what the scientists can say and what not to say.  Scientists that come forward to show that the party line is false become targets of retribution.  

To paraphrase Tommy Lee Jones from the film Men in Black, "Individuals are smart.  People are dumb.  Everybody knew 2000 years ago that the world was the center of the universe.  500 years ago everyone knew that the world was flat.  15 minutes ago you knew that we were the only life in the universe.  Imagine what we'll know tomorrow.  People don't need to know, they got a good bead on things."   I know there's some more to that speech but it has been the most simplest explanation of many things.

If the government scientists from around the world knew with 100% certainty that all the emissions from human manufacturing, automobiles and other sources was going to destabilize the Ozone Hole, do you think that the corporations would stop doing business as usual from any government agency?  Profits are the most important thing in this world.  If the world was to go to hell in a handbasket 100 years from now, CEO's and politicians wouldn't care because they won't be here to see it.  Why stop all those profits?  

Governments treat their citizens as children.  What we don't know won't scare us.  What we don't know won't hurt us.  Governments might know some stuff on global warming.  They choose to not acknowledge it as factual to prevent one thing.  Anarchy.  If people knew that the world was going to have major climate shift changes 25 to 50 years in advance, how would this information affect the world stage?  An individuual would understand.  100 million people would panic and create a breakdown of society.

This is a subject that can be debated until the cows come home.  Botton line is that the average citizen has no real power to make the government tell the truth 100% of the time.  Once the words National Security is evoked, all matters are instantly dropped and the gag orders are put into affect.  Civil liberties are suspended for the greater good of the country.  

I love the good ole US of A!  Where every American is my equal but my government is my superior and all the alphabet agencies will be my watchdogs.    

While I agree with some of what you say, I really have trouble buying into the Mother Nature taking care of anything idea.  Sorry.  That's just too romantic for me.

For one, those events (fires, thunderstorms, growth of forests) aren't really problems at all.  They're all localized events, that really don't threaten anything in a global sense.  Fires don't pop up because Mother Nature or the earth decide to thin out some forests.  As a matter of fact, the forest wouldn't burn at all if it weren't for the forest, since it's the one supplying the fuel.  And then again, the forest actually benefits from the fire.  Look at Yellowstone.  It might be easier to argue that the forests start fires.

Second, none of those events are intentional or intended to solve a perceived problem.

Rain doesn't start in response to a fire popping up.  Neither does a hurricane.  Or a tornado.  Volcano's don't erupt because there are too many trees on the mountainside.  Glaciers don't form because the landscape needs to be altered.  While natural events will alter the planet, I'm not going to buy into the idea that their purpose is to do that.  That those events will be taken advantage of by a host of living organisms I don't doubt for an instant.  What I doubt is that those events occur on purpose, in order to solve a problem.

Mother Nature isn't correcting anything, because in a sense nothing needs to be corrected in the natural environment.  

While I took quite a bit of science in school, the schools I went to really didn't teach much about Mother Nature.  I don't remember her popping up much at all.  We went over things like ecosystems, plate tectonics, biology, weather, etc, instead.

To take that into the discussion at hand, I don't see the Mother Nature stepping in to solve the current problems facing many of the earth's current residents.  I don't see her saying "oops, too much smog, better make some ice!".  It's a real shame that the integrity of science is played around with like this for political or monetary gain.  In the event GW is real, which I'm not saying it is, who do we turn to for possible solutions?  The ones we may need to trust are the ones we can't trust.

[Motherland]

While I took quite a bit of science in school, the schools I went to really didn't teach much about Mother Nature.  I don't remember her popping up much at all.  We went over things like ecosystems, plate tectonics, biology, weather, etc, instead.

I think he's using 'Mother Nature' as a personification of all of the things you mentioned. That's generally what it's used as.

[mtnman]

I think he's using 'Mother Nature' as a personification of all of the things you mentioned. That's generally what it's used as.

Even so, I don't see "her" acting with intent.  The planet won't act to protect itself. 

The only ones who care about us, are us.  I doubt any of the non-human planetary residents have a conscious thought regarding the welfare of their species.  The planet could exist just fine without us, or for that matter, without life at all.  Jupiter looks to be doing fine; doesn't even look bored or lonely.

[Anaxogoras]

I love how the final denier defense always resides in the most abject cynicism.

[DMBEAR]

Jupiter looks to be doing fine; doesn't even look bored or lonely.

I hope Al gore has a plan to stop that crazy storm on Jupiter. 

[33Vortex]

I hope Al gore has a plan to stop that crazy storm on Jupiter. 

I'm sure he does. Just send him all your money and he'll tell you all about it.