Extreme weather (climate even?)

Remove all ads!

Yeah and in relation to the SUV-thread, I just ask myself, what is god thinking ? Three decades ago, we where per-capita polluter number one, changed our ways and that's the outcome Texas is turned into wet and green.

On the other hand, you'll have migration from north in a new-scale.

 

That is just your misanthropy intefering with your pragmatism. At the current rate we are clearing tropical forests, they will be completely destroyed within 25 years. Almost all higher forms of marine life have been completely wiped out. We create massive man-made lakes through damning of ancient rivers. We are slowly turning the world into a place where the only forms of life will be us and our domesticated species such as livestock, pets and agricultural staples. It is nonsense to say that this world is not "ours". The Earth and its creatures are being molded by the hand of man. The question is not whether that is occuring or not, but how that molding should be applied. The notion that Mother Earth is unassailable and permanent is exactly the kind of idealistic denial that is going to brown the whole globe.

 

@ Late-Night-Thinker

I think we are arguing about two different things. Are we talking about global warming, or about environmental pollution? If we are talking about pollution of our own environment and time, than yes, I completely agree with what you have to say - our consumption of natural resources and fossil fuels (and everything else) is WAY too high - we are polluting our direct environment, and we need to do something about that.

My problem (and my argument) is that "global warming" is not the problem - if we are going to talk about our smaller (on a time-scale) ecosystem, then again, yes - I agree completely with your arguments. But if we are going to talk about "global warming" and the destruction of the entire earth, then I have a serious problem (due to all of the data that I have previously cited).

I have a strange analogy for this (yes, it's weird, but just bear with me). Let's take a puppy for example - assume that it is an indoor pet and you are training it to sleep in a kennel at night. A puppy (again, if it is kept in its kennel at night, every night) learns very early on not to defecate in its kennel - its direct environment - because (it quickly learns) this leads to sickness, sleepless nights, and a really bad odor (not to mention death). Compare this to the human race's direct environment - if we mess it up, then yes, sickness, death, and a really bad smell will occur (and is occurring today). Unfortunately, we, as a human race, just haven't learned not to crap in our kennels yet.

Yes - if we mess up our environment today, we will get sick tomorrow - just don't try to say that the temperature in the entire house is rising and that the house is going to explode because of the smelly pile of crap in the dog's kennel.

 

From Falstaffs quote:

From my quote:

Obviously, one statement of those two has to be wrong and I am inclined to think that it's your quote, Falstaff. A rise of about a 1/3 in about 100 years compared to 18000 years isn't exactly steady.

From Falstaff quote:

From my quote:

So, the first quote is true, as it states a truism. Before humans, no human pollution. Yet it obviously omits that there are factors known which caused this warmer periods, which are missing now.

Falstaff wrote:

False, the centuries before are looked at by anyone, not only by some.

 

My point was that humans are indeed the cause of the 20% increase in CO2 concentration. The only other causes of this would be either a rapid increase in the output of CO2 due to glycolysis (i.e. life increased by 20% on the planet) or an increase in volcanism. To be honest, I am not sure about the volcanism. However, I imagine if the last century was known for its increased volcanism, I may have read about this. I have not. I could do some research on it...but I got class in a half hour.

But...barring volcanistic causation, humanity can be the only other viable cause of an increased CO2 concentration. An increased CO2 concentration means a higher temperature planet...hence, humanity is causing the planet to warm. That is called Global Warming irregardless of the politics or ideologues whom surround the facts.

[ January 28, 2004, 01:41: Message edited by: Late-Night Thinker ]

 

On the carbon dioxide issue, I'd go with a small increase due to hydrocarbon oxidation. That is, humans. Figure something like one hundredth of one percent.

But people are kidding themselves if they think humans even *remotely* come close to what a single volcano puts out, or what other land animals produce.

Also, the earth doesn't operate on 1000 year cycles. Much less 100. Or 30, if you want to discuss satellite data.

 

I have just listened to radio and heard interesting information from a meteorologist expert (and physician).
I suppose everyone knows about the Pentagon report which shocked many people, predicting horrible things to 2010 or after it.
That report was made by strategic analysts, with the help of experts. So not a scientific report actually. So the situation is not so bad, and it is not proved yet that it is the consequence of human activities, but in spite of this we should still pay attention and not release too many CO2 for example (and it is US and Russia, the greatest CO2 releasing countries, which did not accept the Kyoto contract! According to the expert, they will change their mind some day anyway).

Although, by mentioning the expert who I listened to, my real purpose was to correct a few things: not only me, but many others mentioned that the weather has been very extreme in recent years in his/her country. A radio listener made a question to the physician about this, asking whether this extreme weather phenomenon has to do anything with the global warming; and that people did not experience such things in the past.
His anwer was that there *were* such things, just we do not remember. And even if the recent years were much more extreme than the past, it still is caused by natural processes. The Chaos Theory applies to this process in Earth. The point of Chaos Theory: difficult systems are able to perform difficult changes without outer interruption.
He said they made a simulation in a computer, a simulation of the world weather. And a part of the simulation showed very hot summers each year for 15 years, and in natural way! But if we have extreme weather for 15 years, it takes to a man to believe this! But it is true.

In conclusion, the extreme weather in different parts of the world do not have to be the consequence of global warming. The expert added though, that if we hear about a huge hurricane or flood somwhere in the world, it is very likely caused by the global warming.

[ February 27, 2004, 17:16: Message edited by: Baronius ]

 

Sorry for resurrecting an old topic, but I found the satellite images here comparing the ice cap in 1979 vs 2003 to be rather alarming.