Global warming - an urgent problem requiring radical solution (no politics or religion)
Sort:
Question: how much impact would not farming cows and pigs and such have on the environment?
1 day ago
0
#27162
"Wind chill isn't imaginary." - from EE.
What a stupid statement!
Who said it is? Nobody.
Typical shallow EE. I didn't read any further in his post following his strawman premise.
And he's probably going to delete his own post anyway. How do I know?
He's been deleting for months.
Madness and stupidity
You happy to be paying for something that trees do for free?
1 day ago
0
#27166
ukace wrote:
@elroch "...the majority of those in positions of power are only interested in using the scientific facts to guide their policy making..."
Lol. The majority of those in power appear to be only interested in lining their pockets at the expense of the rest of us.
Even those who have no true good motives understand that reality will bite them on the backside if they deny it. That is why there is essentially no dissension from the international consensus about anthropogenic global warming: even those who would like to lie for the sort of reason you draw attention to knows they would look very stupid to deny reality and then be proven wrong.
And this is the thing that really gets me.
People think the same politicians who can lie about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq resulting in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis in that war and it's aftermath really care about saving the planet?
(and you can substitute any of the major subsequent wars too).
A characteristically daft reason for disbelieving the global scientific community, the source of all relevant information about climate science (which may be news to you).
There is literally no plausible line of reasoning between your randomly picked piece of modern history (one I am very familiar with but won't discuss here) and the state of scientific knowledge which is largely respected by those in power across the entire world.
1 day ago
0
#27167
ukace wrote:
You happy to be paying for something that trees do for free?
Trees are great, but it's a matter of the numbers. We would need a new, large continent planted entirely with trees whose carbon is sequestered when they are cut down in order to balance current human emissions.
So, in the real world, we need technological solutions.
Largely respected..... Not by China and India (or Trump). Actions here speak louder than words. CO2 emissions:
We don't need technological solutions for such a minimal problem
1 day ago
0
#27170
Right, so having proposed a solution that fails to work, you then switch to ignoring the problem based on your poor understanding of the consequences?
1 day ago
0
#27171
China has the 25th highest emissions per capita in the world - lower than the US, Australia, Russia, Canada and many others - but it is the fact that it has a larger proportion of the world's population than any other country other than (the much poorer) India that makes its emissions per capita of particular importance.
China's emissions are not expected to rise significantly from now, but the important thing is how quickly they fall. Most analyses only expect very small reductions in the near future. On the plus side, China is creating gargantuan renewable energy capacity, and is the world leader in both solar and wind.
1 day ago
0
#27172
ukace's silliness acts as a 'foil' for Elroch to post the actual facts.
ukace trying to imitate Washey by having 'sources' (unlike EE and IPG) .
but like Washey simply falling flat again and again. Masochistic he is.
But he hasn't got the 'Maso' energy Washey had.
playerafar wrote:
Besides low temperature there's something called wind-chill ...
but the obviously silly theme being pushed by the deniers here is to pretend that global warming is okay because global cooling would be worse.
In doing so - they don't realize they're conceding that global warming is going on.
But they have a cycle of tactics.
Like pretending its about averages.
The latest stupidity by them here seems to be to pretend that since most of the world's people live in warmer climates that 'warming' must be 'okay'.
Most of the people in the world live within three hours plane ride of Hong Kong ...
which has been returned to China.
Does that mean that China and India and Indonesia and the other heavily populated countries in the circle are 'benefiting from the warming'?
Short answer: No.
When you say "because global cooling would be worse" I hate to be the one that has to state the blindingly obvious to you. Global cooling IS worse. If, for some still unknown mysterious reason you believe global warming is worse than global cooling, lets see you come up with 21 different reasons why.
We came up with over 20 reasons a warmer climate is better than a colder one. My guess is you won't come up with those reasons. Because you can't.
1 day ago
0
#27174
Global warming can lead to a wide range of effects, including: rising sea levels, ocean acidification, increased frequency and intensity of extreme weather events like hurricanes and heatwaves, widespread biodiversity loss, melting glaciers and ice caps, disruptions to agricultural yields, altered precipitation patterns, coastal erosion, mass species migration, increased risk of wildfires, impacts on human health, economic disruptions, displacement of populations due to rising sea levels, changes in ecosystem dynamics, permafrost thaw, and potential impacts on marine life due to warmer water temperatures and altered ocean chemistry.
Detailed breakdown of effects:
Physical Impacts:
-
Rising Sea Levels:Melting glaciers and ice sheets cause sea levels to rise, inundating coastal areas and displacing communities.
-
Ocean Acidification:Increased CO2 absorption by oceans leads to a decrease in pH, impacting marine life, particularly coral reefs.
-
Extreme Weather Events:More frequent and intense heatwaves, droughts, floods, storms, and wildfires due to changes in atmospheric circulation.
-
Glacier Retreat:Melting glaciers and ice caps reduce freshwater availability and disrupt water cycles.
-
Permafrost Thaw:Melting permafrost releases large quantities of greenhouse gases, further exacerbating warming.
-
Changes in Precipitation Patterns:Altered rainfall distribution, leading to increased droughts in some regions and heavy precipitation events in others.
-
Coastal Erosion:Rising sea levels and storm surges lead to increased coastal erosion.
Ecological Impacts:
-
Biodiversity Loss:Species unable to adapt to changing climates may face extinction, leading to significant biodiversity loss.
-
Species Migration:Animals and plants may migrate to new areas in search of suitable habitats, disrupting ecosystems.
-
Coral Bleaching:Warmer ocean temperatures cause coral reefs to bleach and die, impacting marine ecosystems.
-
Disrupted Food Webs:Changes in species distribution and abundance can disrupt food chains and ecosystem dynamics.
-
Loss of Wetland Habitats:Rising sea levels may inundate coastal wetlands, affecting wildlife populations.
Human Impacts:
- Health Risks: Increased heat stress, spread of vector-borne diseases, and respiratory issues due to air pollution
- Water Scarcity: Reduced freshwater availability in regions experiencing prolonged droughts
- Food Insecurity: Disruptions to agricultural yields due to extreme weather events and changing climate conditions
- Economic Losses: Damage to infrastructure, property, and coastal communities due to flooding and storms
- Climate Migration: Displacement of populations due to rising sea levels and extreme weather events
- Social Disruption: Conflicts over water and land resources may arise due to climate change
1 day ago
0
#27175
And ,of course, global warming is happening. Global cooling isn't.
Senior, those are all great guesses, some of which I believe are actually true like coastal erosion and disruption of agricultural yields. Of course we covered every one you mentioned, such as decreased yields in one area resulting in increased yields in other areas.
My comment wasn't that global warming can't cause harm, it can. It was if global warming is WORSE than global warming. So some of your reasons, like "impacts on human health" go in the global cooling column. Most of your reasons actually go in the global cooling column as they negatively impact people MORE in cooler climates versus warmer ones.
The challenge isn't to come up with 20 reasons global warming is bad. It's to come up with 20 reasons why it's WORSE than global cooling. Because it was player who made the comment "because global cooling would be worse".
Senior-Lazarus_Long wrote:
And ,of course, global warming is happening. Global cooling isn't.
Absolutely. But here is the problem for the hysterians. All the doom and gloom projections are NOT happening.
Those who claim global warming is bad can only talk about what might possibly happen some day. Those who claim global cooling is worse talk about what has already happened. In other words, proof. In the past, we can clearly see the harm of global cooling and the benefit of global warming. We have all this evidence in the rear view mirror.
But global warming alarmists talk about what could be. What might happen. Even your comment from a couple minutes ago says "global warming CAN lead to....". How about less what might happen and more what WILL happen, based on previous similar events.
1 day ago
0
#27178
Oh. Real immediate problems are worse than potential problems no question.
1 day ago
0
#27179
All of the things on my list are currently,right now,today, happening around the world.
Senior-Lazarus_Long wrote:
All of the things on my list are currently,right now,today, happening around the world.
Again, I'm not saying most of them aren't happening. Most of them are. But also most go into the column of global cooling is worse. Your example of "impacts on human health". We know for a fact, based on past events, colder climates are worse for human health than warmer ones. So it's not just about rattling off a bunch of reasons you think global warming is bad. They have to fit Players criteria. They have to be WORSE than global cooling.