So Assuming Global Warming Is Real, Is Caused By Humans, And Will Caus

[4588686]

:unsure:

 

http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2012/04/climate-action-cheap-david-kennedy

 

There is literally a massive amount of information regarding your question.  You clearly can use a computer so I'd suggest using google.  It's public information.  It's very public.  

 

Honestly, I doubt this is going to happen.  We have a lower house that is infested with the chronically stupid and deranged.  We have people who will not support climate change action because God promised Noah not to flood the earth again and Obama is feckless.  So maybe in another decade we'll get some mediocre cap and trade legislation.  

[add]

These changes may be due to normal environmental fluctuations and/or   For instance, the release of volcanic ash and gigantic solar flares/sun spots.

[4588686]

These changes may be due to normal environmental fluctuations and/or   For instance, the release of volcanic ash and gigantic solar flares/sun spots.

 

No.  No they are not.  I'm sorry, but this is really infuriating.  Those variables can be controlled for, and there have been EXTENSIVE experiments to see if just those sorts of variable are the factors at play and they are not.  Climate change is real.  If you want to be delusional then fine.  But admit what you are doing.  Just be honest and say "I don't want to deal with this uncomfortable aspect of reality."  That is just as irresponsible but far more honest than what you are currently doing.  

 

 

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-kochfunded-climate-change-skeptic-reverses-course-20120729,0,7372823.story

[add]

Did man cause the ice age?

[4588686]

Did man cause the ice age?

 

No.  But he did have a hand in the introduction into this world of the sort of sloppy reasoning that one can find in the argument your question is intended to give rise to.

[add]

Hasan, honey what are you so angry about? Have you always been afraid ?
Name calling is so unattractive, but if it makes you feel superior I really don't mind. So go ahead and take another cheap shot ( it's okay)

[4588686]

Hasan, honey what are you so angry about?  Have you always been afraid ?

Name calling is so unattractive, but if it makes you feel superior I really don't mind. So go ahead and take another cheap shot ( it's okay)

 

I'm angry that some people, like you, will be so irresponsible as to use sophistic reasoning to try to prevent meaningful political action against a major global issue that will lead to a lot of preventable suffering.  I'm not afraid.  I didn't call you names.  I did, however, point out that the argument you were leading to was sloppy reasoning.  I'm not superior to you.  But you are wrong on this issue and you are behaving in an irresponsible way.  

[add]

I'm angry that some people, like you, will be so irresponsible as to use sophistic reasoning to try to prevent meaningful political action against a major global issue that will lead to a lot of preventable suffering.  I'm not afraid.  I didn't call you names.  I did, however, point out that the argument you were leading to was sloppy reasoning.  I'm not superior to you.  But you are wrong on this issue and you are behaving in an irresponsible way.  

 

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=kFnFr-DOPf8

[add]

I'm angry - most of your post on this forum sound angry too.  that some people, like you, will be so irresponsible as to use sophistic reasoning - It his is the debate table, isn't it? to try to prevent meaningful political action - politics can not change the environment   against a major global issue that will lead to a lot of preventable suffering. - unless you join a Amish clan your are being very hypocritical  I'm not afraid. - then don't be angry with me   I didn't call you names. - you kind of did I did, however, point out that the argument you were leading to was sloppy reasoning. - Sloppy reasoning is not a term of endearment.

 I'm not superior to you. I don't know you or you me, we are all equal as far as I can see or care  But you are wrong on this issue and you are behaving in an irresponsible way. - behaving in an irresponsible way is also not a term of endearment

[4588686]

I'm combative.  I'm generally not angry.  Politics can change the environment.  I don't even know what to say to such an absurd claim that it can't.  If congress votes to dump ten gagillion barrels of oil into the Hudson then that will change the environment.  How am I being hypocritical?  It's not a term of endearment but it isn't a personal attack.  As you pointed out, this is the debate table.  

[Circle_Master]

#2 (of the original post) seems a good direction to go.  It's impossible to ask our entire society to give up all the benefits of modern science (and we shouldn't). The medicine's we have researched are game changing and significantly decrease suffering in our world.

 

I was listening to a lecture by a climate scientist a couple days ago and it really was an excellent lecture.  One part I hadn't heard before dealt with effects of global temperature change.  Climate scientist models predict between 3 and 8 degree (Celsius) increase globally in the next 100 years.  An example of what that actually looks like, is a few hundred thousand years ago core samples (and other data) indicate the earth was about 8 degrees cooler.  This resulted in most of America draped in glaciers.  For the increase, a current prediction indicates Montana will have climate similar to current day Alabama does now.

 

So, seriously significant, and hopefully as public opinion continues to shift the world can get behind proper earth stewardship.  It seems unlikely, and each nation will vie for political and financial gain, but necessary.  Perhaps this will be the destruction and ultimate failure of fallen humans.  Not only destroying each others lives in selfish pursuit, but destroying our entire planet. 

[XIX]

http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2012/04/climate-action-cheap-david-kennedy

 

There is literally a massive amount of information regarding your question.  You clearly can use a computer so I'd suggest using google.  It's public information.  It's very public.  

 

Honestly, I doubt this is going to happen.  We have a lower house that is infested with the chronically stupid and deranged.  We have people who will not support climate change action because God promised Noah not to flood the earth again and Obama is feckless.  So maybe in another decade we'll get some mediocre cap and trade legislation.  

 

It's just a suggestion, but I'm sure people would be more receptive if you didn't so constantly insult those of us who haven't yet grasped what it is that I'm assuming you clearly understand.  If we talked to you so condescendingly about abortion, you would probably be annoyed.  And you'd be right to be annoyed.

 

The article is interesting.  But it reads like this:

 

Propose bill

??????????

Eighty percent emissions reductions!!

 

Wiki rather similar.  Maybe I overlooked the ??????? part, but the ???????? part is exactly THE thing that we should want to know.  I can assure you that the information I am looking for is not nearly as easy to find as you suggest.

[4588686]

It's just a suggestion, but I'm sure people would be more receptive if you didn't so constantly insult those of us who haven't yet grasped what it is that I'm assuming you clearly understand.  If we talked to you so condescendingly about abortion, you would probably be annoyed.  And you'd be right to be annoyed.

 

The article is interesting.  But it reads like this:

 

Propose bill

??????????

Eighty percent emissions reductions!!

 

Wiki rather similar.  Maybe I overlooked the ??????? part, but the ???????? part is exactly THE thing that we should want to know.  I can assure you that the information I am looking for is not nearly as easy to find as you suggest.

 

I certainly haven't intended to insult you.  I do get spoken to about abortion in a less than positive tone all the time.  I've been told enumerous times that's I'm basically complicit in the Holocaust X 100.  I really wouldn't intentionally be rude to anyone like you you is genuinely asking questions.  I don't think it necessary, however, to be friendly towards the lies that that previous person put out which then either wrote knowing that they were deceptive/outright false or simply uncritically accepted what somebody told the, which is just intellectually and morally irresponsible n an issue as important as this if they are going to promote those unfounded claims to other people as fact.  

 

To quote Clint Eastwood in Unforgiven: "We all have it coming, kid."  I've at times been just as irresponsible as that poster and I've been smacked around for it and I don't think that I had a right to expect any better.  If you're going to try to bluff your way through then you need to be ready to be called out on it.  

I think the article links to a number of policy proposals.

 

 

 For example:

http://www.theccc.org.uk/carbon-budgets

[add]

Blame it on cows Big Fat Cows
Scientists claim that the slow digestive system of cows designates them a leading producer of methane – a potent greenhouse gas that receives far less social awareness than CO2. To further “digest” the impact of the flatulence produced by cows on climate change, Argentine scientists collected gas from their stomachs in plastic tanks attached to their backs. Researchers discovered that methane from cows accounts for more than 30 percent of Argentina’s total greenhouse emissions

Edited January 4, 2013 by add

[fides' Jack]

Since the cat is already out of the bag, I'll go ahead and post this:

 

http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterferrara/2012/05/31/sorry-global-warming-alarmists-the-earth-is-cooling/

 

I'm all for working harder to be more friendly toward the environment, but let's be real - the best evidence thus far in this thread for global warming is a bunch of links to articles written by some of the most slanted and biased news agencies out there.  The LA Times shouldn't be used in the debate board on PM.  As I've just shown, anyone can produce a news report that shows whatever they want to.  Personally, I believe this article - the Earth has been cooling for the last decade.

 

Argue if you want; I'm unlikely to check this thread again.

 

That being said, I would go with option 2.  I definitely think there are a lot of other options out there for power.  Even nuclear power has far more efficient, more powerful, and less environmentally unfriendly options out there which are already proven.