climatic changes, what do you think about that?

[wex-q 0]

We (humans), like all other animals, are here for only one thing, try to defend our territories from rival species, and breed.

But the problem is, our brains got so advanced, that we could take over animal territories: ever seen rats and pigeons in a town? That's our fault, just fyi.

So, it's our own fault that we're destroying the world, it's the result of the greatness of mankind.

If it wasn't for our brains, we wouldn't have these problems, but then again, we wouldn't know all the things we know now, such as the world is not the center of the universe.

But of course, if we were more primitive we wouldn't have to know that

I think that the most important thing is the choices of the individual, that's what's going to be the largest changes.

Industry always got to use alot of fuel for transport and alike, so it's not going to change at the larger steps up.

For example, EU is helping european farmers alot to get their excess food/crops (which is alot, since they get alot help with producing/harvesting alot of food/crops), so they send it to Africa. African farmers loose all their money since they cannot compete with the european excess food/crops, since EU even help with export, so the price is like half of the african prices.

So now, African economy is crashed, and to solve that, the EU pumps in alot of money. An evil circle, based on control.

That is a very good example of where you can spend money on better things, and work on better solutions for the whole world, instead of just concentrating on what's closest to you.

This may stray a bit off topic, but what could happen, is that if the african societies rise by themselves, they can "fuel" themselves, and the EU could spend all that money on producing more effective energy (via research on nuclear power etc), and perhaps find a way to turn all the excess food and crops into energy.

This is done to an extent, for example, with the popular fuel E85 (85% ethanol and 15% gas), which is purer (less CO to the atmosphere), gives more energy (you get longer on the same amount of fuel) and is relatively cheap (compared to gasoline).

But more effecient fuels should be on the way, lets just hope that the welfare of mankind gets higher priority then the money of a single one.

And of course that we let nations develop more sophisticated means of producing energy, seeing as NK now got oil in return for shutting down their nuclear power plant.

I understand why, but I think it's a step backwards for all sides.

Another result of human greatness.

That's my opinions

[Necromancer- 0]

As I said before..

Enforce a worldwide one-child policy for about 100 years and we have enough energy for that period untill we find something better.

Less people -> less CO2 production -> more resources left for mankind.

The only problem is that it would ruin the world economy in the very long term, but if we don't accept this solution then we have 2 problems -> More global warming and barely any resources left which results in a permanent economical crisis.

Of course this isn't a permanent solution, but it buys us more time.

Sadly no politician of the western society dares to support this idea.

...sigh... the powerless of a random individual in a society where people only listen to big mouths..

[wex-q 0]

Why don't we start a true world war, and do it for like 12 months, and all surviving will make a new world!

[kakagoegie 0]

Positive feedback loop, but please read the thread - cause it IS really a pain to explain it for the 20th time.

I think you are talking about this post:

Quote[/b] ]Water vapoir haven't incriesed the past 30 years as opposed to other greenhouse gasses, such as CO2. So water vapoir is a constant, something else is shifting the balance.

Noone really knows what to do, and which changes are to be made. Perhaps nothing is possible, but we have to try. If we keep doing what we are doing now, CO2 will incriese exponentially as the ocean co2 buffer become saturated. Then the small fishes wont be living there, which means that eventually the bigger animals die on the land.

I've looked into wikipedia but I can't seem to find anything about the composition of the greenhouse gasses. I can only find tables which show man made greenhouse gasses. Does anyone has found a table about a composition of the greenhouse gas, made up out of all the different gasses, including water and co2. I want to see how big percentage of the greenhouse gasses they are.

Further more your post I quoted above kinda shocks me. Are you really prepared to spend like 1% of your GNP on something which you aren't sure off? I certainly ain't.

[Necromancer- 0]

Why don't we start a true world war, and do it for like 12 months, and all surviving will make a new world!

Wars require a lot of resources. A law system is the better system a long with indoctrinating our children different values than we do now.

[Espectro (DayZ) 0]

Positive feedback loop, but please read the thread - cause it IS really a pain to explain it for the 20th time.

I think you are talking about this post:

Quote[/b] ]Water vapoir haven't incriesed the past 30 years as opposed to other greenhouse gasses, such as CO2. So water vapoir is a constant, something else is shifting the balance.

Noone really knows what to do, and which changes are to be made. Perhaps nothing is possible, but we have to try. If we keep doing what we are doing now, CO2 will incriese exponentially as the ocean co2 buffer become saturated. Then the small fishes wont be living there, which means that eventually the bigger animals die on the land.

I've looked into wikipedia but I can't seem to find anything about the composition of the greenhouse gasses. I can only find tables which show man made greenhouse gasses. Does anyone has found a table about a composition of the greenhouse gas, made up out of all the different gasses, including water and co2. I want to see how big percentage of the greenhouse gasses they are.

Further more your post I quoted above kinda shocks me. Are you really prepared to spend like 1% of your GNP on something which you aren't sure off? I certainly ain't.

I'm not sure who you're asking cause the post you qouted weren't entirely from me.

But of course i'm ready to use money on a more lasting energy source which generates less CO2 and other pollutive gasses and particles. No question about that.

I don't think we should go on a CO2 rampage shutting down everything that produces CO2, that would simply ruin the economy. But closing our eyes would be the dumbest thing mankind have done in its existence especially now, where we have the oppertunity to fix things this early. I'm 100% convinced that we are able to make a change, but if we want the change to matter, we have to do something NOW, and not in 50 years.

[kakagoegie 0]

I'm not sure who you're asking cause the post you qouted weren't entirely from me.

3th post from the bottom

I'm not saying we shouldn't reduce polution and CO2 output. I just don't want it to be done for the wrong reasons.

IF we say now: "We should reduce energy consumption because CO2 causes global warming" and 20 years later it turns out it wasn't the CO2 lots of people will say "Wtf, I got bummed" and noone will ever be as eager to reduce energy consumption as most people are today.

[Espectro (DayZ) 0]

I'm not sure who you're asking cause the post you qouted weren't entirely from me.

3th post from the bottom

I'm not saying we shouldn't reduce polution and CO2 output. I just don't want it to be done for the wrong reasons.

IF we say now: "We should reduce energy consumption because CO2 causes global warming" and 20 years later it turns out it wasn't the CO2 lots of people will say "Wtf, I got bummed" and noone will ever be as eager to reduce energy consumption as most people are today.

Ah, sorry... It was me who typed that .

Yea, but it's not only about global warming, it's also the effects CO2 has on other things. The chemical acid/base balance is shifted due to CO2 pollution which makes some of the oceans uninhabitable for some species.

We should decrease CO2 production to a minimum simply because of these direct concequences CO2 has. Global warming comes second, but sadly global warming is the main focus by the media right now. Must be because there simply are NO arguments against these directly associated problems with CO2 in our oceans, so no 'liberals' dare to take it into a discussion or dialog.

[mr burns 131]

If anybody has to reduce CO" emissions it´s got to be the big industries - i.e. USA and China.

Why the hell do german politicians need to think about putting another tax on less CO2 efficient cars while some bigass countrys make all the effort futile from the start?

I gotta admit though that i really like the warm weather

[Gisen 0]

Guys, here is a short video that encapsulates the most sensible position on climate change. Please watch it.

http://video.stumbleupon.com/#p=p6o08udcmw

I'm not going to summarise it because then you won't watch it. Its very short and should make you think.

[Sc@tterbrain 0]

Guys, here is a short video that encapsulates the most sensible position on climate change.  Please watch it.  

http://video.stumbleupon.com/#p=p6o08udcmw

I'm not going to summarise it because then you won't watch it.  Its very short and should make you think.

Sorry but the "silver bullet" is a dud.

The video is good.  A well thought out argument with good reasoning.

It does however leave one big hole in the presentation.  

Those that believe that Global Climate Change (GCC) is occuring, wheather they think it's man made or not, are not certain that anything can be done to stop it.

Thus not all possibilities are included in his matrix.  There is the possible out come of we do nothing and it happens, and that we do "everything" ........and it still happens.

This by no means shatters his argument, but there is no guarantee that any "cost $" is a viable solution.

So, deliberate and sensible thougt must be put in to how we are going to spend time and resources in preparing for an uncertain future.

So far with things like blindly promoting the use of CFL bulbs that contain mercury, we are doing a poor job. It's not that i think he's wrong, its just that the same sensible approach as this guy has is vacant from those promoting "solutions."

[Gisen 0]

I don't understand what you mean. If global warming is caused by humankind's actions, in what sense is it impossible for humans to stop doing those actions? They might not WANT to, but if the climate change is caused by humans then it can be stopped by humans.

[Sc@tterbrain 0]

I don't understand what you mean.  If global warming is caused by humankind's actions, in what sense is it impossible for humans to stop doing those actions?  They might not WANT to, but if the climate change is caused by humans then it can be stopped by humans.

I meant exactly what I said.  The premise that "if the climate change is caused by humans then it can be stopped by humans..." is flat out WRONG.  The same folks that insist there in undoubtable evidence that:

a. Global Warming exists

b. Humans are the cause

...also admit that any immediate actions could be fruitless.  This is not my version of the evidence, it's what was in the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) summary.

In short, the belief is that immediate action will only reduce the negative consequences....maybe.  This was the same point I made in my previous post.  There is no guarantee that immediate and drastic changes will have the promised results of "saving the world."  Especially when you consider some of the asinine things the "Green" movement suggests like using CFL bulbs!!!!!

And thus, you cannot rule out that maybe there are other significant environmental factors beyond the waste that humans produce. Meaning: We may put forth the "Cost $" as described in the video, and reduce the negative consequences of global warming.

Or we may find out that Global Climate Change had less to do with humanity then we thought and be up sheet creek because we had not prepared for another possibility.

If you still don't know what I mean read this article.  It also contains a link to the IPPC summary.

Global Warming is Unstoppable and Humans are to Blame

[Gisen 0]

The premise that "if the climate change is caused by humans then it can be stopped by humans..." is flat out WRONG.

WHY? You're just throwing assertions about with nothing to back them up.

The only reason that any measures taken would fail is if the measures don't go far enough.

If change is happening because of human actions, stopping those actions will stop the effects of those actions.

In any case, even if you were right (which you aren't, IMO) it still doesn't make any difference to the guy's argument in the video.

The consequences of not taking action are far far far worse than the consequences of taking action and it being unnecessary.

[Sc@tterbrain 0]

The premise that "if the climate change is caused by humans then it can be stopped by humans..." is flat out WRONG.

WHY?  You're just throwing assertions about with nothing to back them up.

The only reason that any measures taken would fail is if the measures don't go far enough.  

If change is happening because of human actions, stopping those actions will stop the effects of those actions.

In any case, even if you were right (which you aren't, IMO)  it still doesn't make any difference to the guy's argument in the video.  

The consequences of not taking action are far far far worse than the consequences of taking action and it being unnecessary.

Nothing to back it up?  Can you click and READ?  I'm not sure how do deal with people like you, those that don't even understand the basis of your own argument.

I guess you could call me a skeptical believer, but I have no patience for those that degrade the debate with ignorance.

Just read and learn.  I find it less than humorous that you debate me on a position that you can't even understand supports your own. The fact also remains that we may take hasty and plainly stupid actions that don't reduce the consequences.

Read and learn...no more spoon feeding you.  Guess this topic needs to die...

Global Warming is Unstoppable and Humans are to Blame, says UN Report

[Necromancer- 0]

Global Warming is Unstoppable and Humans are to Blame, says UN Report

So you're asserting that semi-armageddon does happen?

[Gisen 0]

Nothing to back it up? Can you click and READ? I'm not sure how do deal with people like you, those that don't even understand the basis of your own argument.

I guess you could call me a skeptical believer, but I have no patience for those that degrade the debate with ignorance.

Just read and learn. I find it less than humorous that you debate me on a position that you can't even understand supports your own. The fact also remains that we may take hasty and plainly stupid actions that don't reduce the consequences.

Read and learn...no more spoon feeding you. Guess this topic needs to die...

Global Warming is Unstoppable and Humans are to Blame, says UN Report

No, sorry, I do understand the point you are making but I stand by what I said. Your claim "if the climate change is caused by humans then it can be stopped by humans..." is flat out WRONG." is NOT backed up by any evidence, even in the link you provided.

In order for you to back that up, you'd have to have irrefutable evidence of some sort - which noone thinks is possible at this stage.

You really do not understand the point of the argument I linked to. I shall rephrase it so maybe you can see where you are going wrong.

No matter what the potential cost of acting on climate change, if it gives even a small chance of averting the doomsday scenario it is worth doing. What exactly don't you understand about this?

[USMC NEEDER 0]

Global warming is real and WILL happen in about 1,000 years because the temperature raises like 00.01 every 1-10 years. I think The democrats are just trying to scare you and they are trying to make you think that they are gonna help stop it if you elect them.

Just my opinion.

[Guest Ti0n3r]

Global warming is real and WILL happen in about 1,000 years because the temperature raises like 00.01 every 1-10 years. I think The democrats are just trying to scare you and they are trying to make you think that they are gonna help stop it if you elect them.

Just my opinion.

You have to be a US citizen to vote in the US elections dude

Your theory proved wrong.

[USMC NEEDER 0]

I dont get what your saying, i am a US citizen.

[Guest Ti0n3r]

I know wikipedia isn't the best source for information on the web, but I think you really need to read this if your post was serious in ANY WAY

[Sc@tterbrain 0]

You have to be a US citizen to vote in the US elections dude

Your theory proved wrong.

Actually that's not true.  You can vote in many states with out even proving your registered, or even showing an ID.

It's called a "provisional ballot."  It then becomes the job of the SOS's elections division (of that particular state) to verify the registration and residency of the person voting.

Seems reasonable, but it's totally FUBAR.  Now with all of the electronic voting, and having seen the way things run from the inside, I have little faith in our Election process.

NEEDDER, they are helping.  What do you call movies, rock concerts, and forcing people to use CFL bulbs?

~On yet anothr tangent, wikipedia IS the worst thing to reference when making ANY claim of "proof." To prove a point, an old history professor once showed us his posting of how he named his blind dog as the inventor of Pilates. I think its still there.

[Radnik 18]

Well...it has never been like this!...

This is temparature record for my city in last 121 year...well it`s not enjoyablly at all...

I need to add the hot wind 8m/s...:pistols:

Belgrade,Serbia,Balkans - 24.07.2007

[Shahnaz 0]

The climate changes, guess what; it always has. It is now getting warmer and the cycle of ice ages suggests we're nearing the midpoint of the warm period, of course it's going to be hotter in some places. In other places it's getting colder. Things change. Wow, I'm stunned!

Yes - don't be wasteful. Yes - find solutions to the oil driven dependancy on dictatorial regimes in South America, the Middle East and Asia. Yes - invest in the future. But; No bigger government, no eco-taxes, no over dramatisation and most of all, no more ridiculing science. Truth is not established by majority vote.

[Sc@tterbrain 0]

The climate changes, guess what; it always has. It is now getting warmer and the cycle of ice ages suggests we're nearing the midpoint of the warm period, of course it's going to be hotter in some places. In other places it's getting colder. Things change. Wow, I'm stunned!

Yes - don't be wasteful. Yes - find solutions to the oil driven dependancy on dictatorial regimes in South America, the Middle East and Asia. Yes - invest in the future. But; No bigger government, no eco-taxes, no over dramatisation and most of all, no more ridiculing science. Truth is not established by majority vote.

Amen Shahnaz! Unfortunately this forum is no place for reason and open eyes.