|
|
|
|
jmlangford
Jul 31, 2002, 3:23 AM
Post #1 of 228
(16965 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 2, 2001
Posts: 1569
|
A while back there was a post by someone lamenting the fact that us evil humans were melting all the good ice routes by our lifestyle. He complained about the glaciers melting, etc. and that we were causing it. I couldn't find that thread, so I am starting a new one.
The information below was obtained from a presentation by Dr. Patrick Michaels, Climatologist, University of Virginia titled "The American Legislative Exchange Council Energy Sustainability Project". The presentation was made on July 2, 2002 at the California State Capitol.
*There is currently no known mechanism which can stop global warming.
*The earth has been on a macro-warming trend since the 1600's. That makes it difficult to blame industry for most of about 300 years or so.
*Full implementation of the Kyoto Protocol would void only 7/100 of one degree of global warming by 2050. Scientifically this infinitesimal temperature change is undetectable.
*Most apparent "global warming" occurs over Siberia and extreme north-western North America where most of the earth's coldest and driest air is.
*The Kyoto Protocol was being pushed by some in an attempt to tear down the United States' trade advantage because there is no trading bloc large enough to compete with our productivity.
*Warming in the past 100 years was 0.8 degrees. Reliable estimates show a continued trend of warming 1.6 degrees over the next 100 years.
*The mean temperature of Antartica is unchanged. Some parts have warmed while other parts have cooled.
So the next time your ice route is a little shorter, just accept it as a cycle of nature and don't try to ruin the great American way of life by implementing scientifically unsound regulations.
[ This Message was edited by: jmlangford on 2002-07-30 20:28 ]
|
|
|
|
|
marcel
Jul 31, 2002, 4:01 AM
Post #2 of 228
(16965 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 30, 2002
Posts: 523
|
I'd check to see if Dr. Patrick Michaels owns stock in an oil company, or if he was paid by G.W.!!!!!!!!!!!!!! We need to start thinking about what we are doing to this earth and not be too gready to see that we are defecating in our own nest. We need to remember that we will pass this earth onto our childern, and theirs. Anyone who thinks we have not contributed to global warming has his head in the sand, or maybe he has spent too much time at high altitude. The only scientifically unsound reasoning in this debate is to keep doing nothing!
|
|
|
|
|
billcoe_
Jul 31, 2002, 4:01 AM
Post #3 of 228
(16965 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 30, 2002
Posts: 4694
|
So - let me see if I can achieve a summation there Jim.
We Americans have a God given right to squander all of the oil thats left on the earth in a short time period JUST BECAUSE WE CAN. So therefore WE SHOULD. AND F-THE REST OF THE F---EN WORLD THEY DON'T GET ANY THEY CAN GO PISS UP A ROPE.
LETS USE IT UP, RUN OUT OF IT AND THEN WE'LL FIGURE SOMETHING OUT. WE SHOULD STILL HAVE QUITE A BIT OF COAL LEFT!!!!!
NO NEED ANY AMERICAN SHOULD BE INCONVINECED AND HAVE TO GIVE UP DRIVING A SUBURBAN 20 MILES TO WORK EVERY DAY.
Seems like real weak s--- to me Jim. But there it is.
Guess you know what I think - eh? Goes way beyond "global warming" to me. I will not argue that we may have a major long term weather pattern dictating the warming.
But mama always said: "stupid is as stupid does."
Hope that helps you some.
Bill Coe
|
|
|
|
|
jmlangford
Jul 31, 2002, 4:44 AM
Post #4 of 228
(16965 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 2, 2001
Posts: 1569
|
Hey, All I am asking for is scientific proof before I give up my "Suburban". I have yet to see any from anybody. A lot of hyperbole and rhetoric, yes, but no facts. I will even say that I am open to changing my mind, if the facts are proven. 10,000 years ago or so Yosemite was covered by glaciers and they started melting way back then. It surely wasn't industry! By the time all the present oil is used up in a few hundred years, it will have replenished itself. Who says oil just stops developing? BTW, that computer you were cussing at is made out of petroleum products-shame on you! I admit this is an inflammatory subject, but let us remain civil and let us remain friends, even if we have to agree to disagree.
|
|
|
|
|
tim
Jul 31, 2002, 4:51 AM
Post #5 of 228
(16965 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 4, 2002
Posts: 4861
|
Are you claiming that carbon dioxide and methane do not promote increases in latent heat retention inside the atmosphere? That NOx is nontoxic? I disagree with you...
That, beyond any shadow of a doubt, HAS been proven. (cf. the planet Venus) And your 'Suburban' pumps several tons of excess CO2 and methane into the atmosphere each year. Not to mention the lovely effects of NOx on mammalian lungs (eg. yours, mine, everyone's)
There is a difference between being open-minded and being a Luddite. (Actually, Luddite is too nice -- Flat Earther is closer to the spirit here) I do believe in cyclical climate fluctuations, but I do not disbelieve the physical and chemical bases for (eg.) emissions control, and I am fairly confident that our American Way of Profligate Waste will remain unthreatened by any piss-weak laws that may pass. The rich get richer, the poor get poorer; for once maybe the rich (eg. energy companies) could get a little poorer, too, since their product is no longer reliable in much of the USA!
|
|
|
|
|
jmlangford
Jul 31, 2002, 4:52 AM
Post #6 of 228
(16965 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 2, 2001
Posts: 1569
|
P.S.
Quote
We Americans have a God given right to squander all of the oil thats left on the earth in a short time period JUST BECAUSE WE CAN. So therefore WE SHOULD. AND F-THE REST OF THE F---EN WORLD THEY DON'T GET ANY THEY CAN GO PISS UP A ROPE.
I ask you this question, what has the rest of the world EVER done for us? They bomb our towers, they vote against us every chance they get in the UN, they won't turn over terrorists to us because we have the death penalty(France), but who do they call on every time they need help? US! We had to bail the rest of the world out of two world wars for crying out loud. I DON'T care what the rest of the world thinks. We live in the greatest country this world has EVER seen. Do you see people trying to get out? No! They are coming here by the millions! they are fighting to get IN! And we are not using all of our oil...we are using the Arab's oil first.
|
|
|
|
|
ffaallliinngg
Jul 31, 2002, 4:59 AM
Post #7 of 228
(16965 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 21, 2002
Posts: 33
|
I concede it is impossible to prove that the daily dumping of tons and tons of gaseous garbage into the atmosphere has any effect on the earth's climate. The only way to irrefutably prove that would be to take two planets identical to earth in every way, pollute the atmosphere of one, and leave the other atmosphere pristine, then measure what happens to the climate--and then repeat the same experiment at least 20 times.
Conversely,it is equally impossible to prove that spewing tons and tons of s--- into the atmosphere every day has no influence on the climate.
Given the absence of any definitive proof, I would nonetheless be a lot more reassured if temperatures were not setting new records every year.
jmlangford does make one valid point. The Kyoto protocols are what my father-in-law would call "a pimple on the ass of an elephant" compared to what needs to be done.
Or, as President-elect Gore put it in his book Earth in the Balance, "the maximum that is politically feasible falls far short of what is practically necessary" to combat human-induced global climate change.
So, as a futile gesture, my next car will be a hybrid vehicle. More practically,I will certainly not be investing in ski company stock or real estate on the Florida coastline.
|
|
|
|
|
jmlangford
Jul 31, 2002, 5:23 AM
Post #8 of 228
(16965 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 2, 2001
Posts: 1569
|
Man is responsible for sending about 7 billion tons of CO2 into the atmosphere every year. A lot you say? Not when you consider the fact that nature herself sends about 200 billion tons into the atmosphere annually. BTW, when NASA scientist James Hansen started the "global warming" furor in 1988 by talking about increased temperatures, he failed to tell us that he only measured land temperatures. Forget the fact that oceans cover 73% of the earths surface! That kind of "science" is full of holes.
|
|
|
|
|
wildtrail
Jul 31, 2002, 5:27 AM
Post #9 of 228
(16965 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 6, 2002
Posts: 11063
|
Okay, everybody. Don't get me wrong on this. I'm not "bashing" anyone. Bare with me, if you have questions or take offense, please ask or PM me. Thanks all for being so cool! Steve
I'm with you Jody. Global warming is not due to human beings. I'm not sure any of you are aware of this, but you do realize that at every moment of every day since the birth of this Earth, the orbit is narrowing closer and closer to the sun, right? Well, if you didn't know, now you do. It has been proven a long time ago that humans have nothing to do with global warming. Our "Green House" gases only depleted Ozone, which is more a less a "filter" to lessen the effect of radiation from the sun. Layman's terms, the Ozone is sunblock. No smart answers off this one. We all know the sun's "heat" is not what causes the burn.
Being environmentally concious is a great thing, but people seem to jump and react before information is in hand and understood.
I'm with Jody. I'm not giving up my SUV either.
Some really don't know or are too set in their ways. This isn't wrong, but these are the types of people that usually try to tell you what you can and can't do, and that is wrong.
Go example. I met a girl on-line. We decided we would meet up at our local crag for a night of camping and a day or two of climbing. She is a nice girl, but has gone to college for environmentalism (specific degree escapes me). Now, she is a good example. You could tell that her age and naivety were in direct correspondance with the fact that she was still hanging on everyone else's words and idealisms. Specifically, what she learned in college. This is fine, because college doesn't teach you about life or how to use your knowledge to be your own person. This is something that you develope later with the wisdom you received and carry. So, I was (more or less) told I was stupid because I drove an inefficient vehicle. This was her big thing. Fossil fuel consumption. Not just the consumption, she could care less about pulling it from the Earth. It was using it that she hated. Fossil fuel use was bad, I was worse because I have a vehicle that uses even more of it, however, she still showed up in a car, now didn't she?
I blew it off, we didn't blend. She will grow up some day and realize that certain things can't be stopped and there are other things more worthy of the effort and time spent. She'll eventually lose the "brain washing" and become more of her own person. I'll say this. She is very intellegent and will do well. Just like man not being responsible for global warming, it can't be helped. So until there is hard evidence, I'm not giving up a car with room and power for some shatty compact. What I will do is give everyone a lift! Hey, I got room for eight in that sucker and with a roof top luggage rack, plenty of room to lug our gear!
Steve
[ This Message was edited by: wildtrail on 2002-07-30 22:31 ]
[ This Message was edited by: wildtrail on 2002-07-30 22:33 ]
|
|
|
|
|
jmlangford
Jul 31, 2002, 5:39 AM
Post #10 of 228
(16965 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 2, 2001
Posts: 1569
|
Thanks Steve! I was beginning to feel outnumbered!
|
|
|
|
|
dmon
Jul 31, 2002, 5:40 AM
Post #11 of 228
(16965 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 6, 2002
Posts: 216
|
Hmmm... well Mr Langford, I have been hanging around this site for a while, and generally have found your contributions extremely informative and worthwhile. Here however, you seem to be talking out your arse.
Look at your attitude. Do you really wonder why other cultures find you offensive enough to want to commit attrocities against you (please note that I in no way support the actions of september 11)? This arrogance is amazing. Do you even realise that there are Australian and other troops in Afghanistan? I doubt it.
Your country is large and wealthy - that is not necessarily the same as RIGHT. The scientific data on the Greenhouse Effect is pretty much irrefutable. Burning fossil fuels produces carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide. These gases trap heat in the atmosphere. Other substances such as CFC's, used mostly by developed countries like yours (and mine) had an even greater effect until they were banned.
As a world leader, your country should not be trying to fight initatives such as the Kyoto Protocol, but supporting them, and more.
Don't get me wrong, Australia also refused to ratify the Protocols, but only because the US did.
Quoting some guy with a PhD. does not make you right, either. Tobacco companies refused to believe that smoking caused cancer, we thought the world was flat, the amount of mistakes made in the elucidation of the structure and function 0f DNA defy belief. Scientists can be wrong (I am a science undergraduate), doctors can be cranks, crooks and have vested interests.
Your comments serve only to re-inforce the view held by many about people's attitudes in your country. I'm sure that the majority of US citzens are intelligent and compassionate individuals who care about the world. Perhaps you should think more about what you are saying - maybe do a little more research.
Your country only becomes great through great deeds. Defending your right to f--- up the earth by driving big cars is not great. Its selfish.
By the way, adding a smiley to your post does not validate your views.
Have a good day, and enjoy the smog.
Duncan
|
|
|
|
|
dmon
Jul 31, 2002, 5:50 AM
Post #12 of 228
(16965 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 6, 2002
Posts: 216
|
Right, just read Wildtrail's post. Here's some more.
First, and most importantly, there is a difference between Greenhouse gases and ozone depleting gases. Greenhouse gases trap heat in the atmosphere, creating a "greenhouse" effect. Ozone layer depleting gases deplete the ozone layer, meaning more UV light can get through. UV light, apart from making our planet hotter, CAUSES CANCER! These two concepts together (greenhouse gases and ozone depletion) form global warming.
Second, the sun is getting closer?! This is by such an infintesimally small amount that it is for all intents and purposes, negligible.
Third, driving a big car is not a right, it is a luxury. The fact that this girl of Wildtrail's drove a car may very well have been because she had no alternative! Did she have it converted to LPG?
Duncan
|
|
|
|
|
nutterd
Jul 31, 2002, 5:51 AM
Post #13 of 228
(16965 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 4, 2002
Posts: 9
|
Jody (and Stephen),
There is so much mis/disinformation in your postings, it's hard to know where to begin, or even whether to begin, since anything said will probably fall on deaf ears. However, I'l l give it a shot.
Certainly, the planet is in a natural warming trend. JUST as certainly, the actions of mankind, and particularly Americans, have exacerbated the problem. Perhaps global warming is unstoppable. That doesn't mean it's not ameliorable. Evidence shows that species higher up the trophic ladder (that'd be HUMANS) suffer disproportionately from increased surface temperatures. Email me if you want the citation from the journal Nature. The Kyoto Protocol wasn't perfect; far from it. Sure there were some parties endorsing it to undercut U.S. trade. But so what? We Americans (and a host of other first-world countries) have been living high on the hog on the backs of third-world countries for...oh, 300 years or so. Don't think so? Let's talk slavery. Let's talk the coffee trade. Those Nikes on your feet. The computers you and I are typing on. Do you think the people putting this stuff together DRIVE home from work every day? hahahahaha!
Warming estimates: from 0.8 degrees/100 years to 1.6 degrees/100 years. That's a DOUBLING of the RATE of increase. Remember that brain teaser about how many pennies you'd have if you doubled over each square of a checkerboard? Now do that with the Earth's temperature.
What "proof" of global wariming is acceptable to you? The loss of coastal towns to rising sea levels, maybe? Well, that's already happening. Been to Louisiana or the Chesapeake Bay lately? Skin cancer rates? Oh yeah, they're on the rise too.
And just how fast do you think oil "replenishes" itself? Replenishment implies self-sustainability. Oil ain't. Unless we kill all the vertebrates, find JUST the right marsh to put them in, and somehow accelerate their decomposition and fossilization and whatever the hell other processes turn them into oil. Sorry. Not a geologist. BUT, what it took 3 or 4 million years for geological processes to CREATE, humans will deplete in the 100 years, give or take a few, after the invention of the internal combustion engine.
Finally, it's disingenuous to pull out arguments from 1988 data, VERY early on in this area of scientific endeavor, to prove a point. Linus Pauling used to think nuclear weapons were a good thing, too.
And Stephen, where oh where do I start with your "facts?" Um. "Proven" a "long time ago?" Got any citations for this piece of wisdom? I can give you citations for pretty much all of my points. What was the last science book or peer-reviewed journal article you read? Many times, infornation IS understood, but some people, not understanding the implications themselves, think that if they can't understand it themselves, then NO ONE understands it. Age and naivete (note spelling) may be correlated negatively, but I'd bet that age and a propensity for self-indulgence are even more strongly positively corellated.
I now bow out of this debate, as it is clear that few if any facts by anyone knowledgeable in this area will be presented. Flame away, if desired.
[ This Message was edited by: nutterd on 2002-07-30 23:01 ]
|
|
|
|
|
wildtrail
Jul 31, 2002, 5:59 AM
Post #14 of 228
(16965 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 6, 2002
Posts: 11063
|
Yes, but Green House gases are not responsible for global warming. Check the facts. It is true. No one is starting any fights here. Just good conversation. I think Jody's point is clear. It is obvious and scientifically proven that man does not have to do with the warming of the planet, so those who dislike the fact that we drive something that only gets 17 highway, need to get over it. If anything, we are "draining" the planet faster.
However, my wife just battled cancer, so these issues (though I love the planet) are of little importance to me right now. I think I'll fight a battle a little more obtainable than the inevitable destruction of the planet. That would be finding a cure and better treatments for cancer.
Steve
|
|
|
|
|
jmlangford
Jul 31, 2002, 6:04 AM
Post #15 of 228
(16965 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 2, 2001
Posts: 1569
|
Duncan,
I appreciate what you are trying to say, but there is absolutely NO proof that global warming is actually happening and if it is, there is no proof that WE are causing it. I just have a problem with huge alterations to our awesome lifestyle based on what unproven computer models tell us might happen in the next 1000 years.
BTW, "Great deeds make a country great". Last time I checked, if it wasn't for the terrible, arrogant, non-caring, industrialized United States of America, this world would have had its butt kicked twice in world wars and we would probably be living under Adolf Hitler or something! I am just sick and tired of people trying to subjugate our country's sovereignty by telling us how to run our country. Also, the United States of America, in all of its filthy rich glory, just happens to supply 1/3 of the world's food. The U.S. also shells out billions upon billions in foreign aid to those countries less fortunate. We also happen to have the best medical research and treatment facilities in the world! We are a pretty good country, and I am fed up with the rest of the jealous world trying to bring us down with unproven "scientific" studies. Show me the proof!
My most valid statement to date!
BTW, I have nothing personal against anybody that disagrees with me. I realize that I am probably in the minority on this site. Since my wife won't let me argue with my relatives anymore, and since I haven't been in a good argument lately, I thought I would do it here. Sorry if I have offended anybody with my "non-climbing" opinions.
|
|
|
|
|
wildtrail
Jul 31, 2002, 6:08 AM
Post #16 of 228
(16965 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 6, 2002
Posts: 11063
|
Nutterd,
I don't flame. Frankly, I don't care at the moment (please read last post) about any of this anyway. As far as misinformation, no. Man is NOT responsible for global warming. CFC's, green house gases, etc. We haven't done anything. Nature has been on a course long before we got here. Temperature have been rising and will continue and started before we could have been accountable for it in the first place. Anyway, all is moot. Why? Because you aren't going to be changed by me, nor I, you. We all are entitled to our beliefs, but working for the environment I have learned a long time ago that we aren't responsible for global warming. Either way, again, moot.
I'm going back to the cancer thing anyway. I've taken this year and next year off worrying about what can't be fixed.
Steve
Like I said, no flames. Its sad to see that some one would flame you for your opinions and beliefs. Isn't the internet ridiculous?
|
|
|
|
|
wildtrail
Jul 31, 2002, 6:12 AM
Post #17 of 228
(16965 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 6, 2002
Posts: 11063
|
Damon,
Sorry. I missed your post. No she didn't have it converted. Yes the Earth moves very slowly towards the Sun. This is the reason for the "slow" warm up. The Earth has gone through warming before, it will again, until eventually at an estimated 46 billion (can't quite remember, but that sounds right) years, the Earth crashes into the Sun.
I understand the whole "cancer/ozone" thing, thanks. She didn't get cancer from that, though.
Steve
|
|
|
|
|
nutterd
Jul 31, 2002, 6:20 AM
Post #18 of 228
(16965 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 4, 2002
Posts: 9
|
Stephen,
You can keep saying over and over again that humans don't cause (or, more appropriately, exacerbate), global warming, but repeating an untruth over and over doesn't make it true. I'll stick to the peer-reviewed literature, which, even though there's plenty of disagreement as to the extent, shows quite a bit of consensus on this issue.
For the 2 or 3 people who care about or are even reading this, a summary of fairly current research at a fairly nontechnical level:
http://www.esa.org/education/factsheets/globalclimatechange.htm
Or, I'd be happy to email you a pdf of:
Confronting Climate Change in California: Ecological Impacts on the Golden State, published by the Ecological Society of America and the Union of Concerned Scientists.
|
|
|
|
|
pinto
Jul 31, 2002, 6:20 AM
Post #19 of 228
(16965 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 25, 2002
Posts: 22
|
Wow, my car is going to crash into that big wall coming up and there's nothing I can do about it!! How 'bout I just press the accelerator and hold it for a while. Why bother with the brake or the steering wheel? I'm sure they don't work. Somebody told me so.
|
|
|
|
|
wildtrail
Jul 31, 2002, 6:29 AM
Post #20 of 228
(16965 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 6, 2002
Posts: 11063
|
Okay Doug,
I've been to that site before and just rebriefed myself with its info again. Firstly, understand I have no intentions of making enemies here. I am only enjoying conversation.
I have studied that info many times and, frankly, it still doesn't prove anything.
Like you said, I can say it over and over. Man is not responsible for global warming. We are responsible for a lot of bad things, but not global warming.
The study of the Earth is complex, and I leave this thread on this note. It's been there before and will be there again.
Sorry, forgot one thing. It will most certainly survive the human race.
Regards to all,
Steve
[ This Message was edited by: wildtrail on 2002-07-30 23:33 ]
[ This Message was edited by: wildtrail on 2002-07-31 12:56 ]
|
|
|
|
|
biggernhell
Jul 31, 2002, 6:43 PM
Post #21 of 228
(16965 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 7, 2002
Posts: 563
|
I'm gonna start by apologizing. I have read very little of this thread. I skimmed it really quickly. I Just had to say something immediatly.
Jody you scare the sh it out of me.
"What has the rest of the world ever done for us"
That is the most ignorant ethnocentric statement i have ever heard. For shame. I really expected better from you .
America is nothing more than a mix of the cultures of other countries. They've given us everything we have. I won't even get non western with this one. Because I'm pretty sure that if I did I would just get dismissed as a "new age" eastern minded idealist with no grouning in the real world. Hell, I've written people off that way before. Why shouldn't you?
So lets stick to the west. Shall we?
You took issue with France. Ok historically most of the conquorers of the Britich Isles have come either from or directly through that country. I know they hate to admit it but a great deal of English culture originated in France. Tats ENGLISH CULTURE. Where do you see American culture as coming from?
Thats one very general example of what other countries have done for us.
Now what have we done for other countries?
Find me a good example of another country asking us to come in and help[ them with more than just money that we have agreed to that we did not gain more from than they did. Sure as hell wasn't Vietnam.
Oh yeah, and your computer models are just as unproven as my computer models. Only I have more of them.
[ This Message was edited by: biggernhell on 2002-07-31 12:59 ]
|
|
|
|
|
biggernhell
Jul 31, 2002, 8:04 PM
Post #22 of 228
(16965 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 7, 2002
Posts: 563
|
Wild trail- At least you admit that Your SUV is sucking things away faster. Why don't you just do something about it. Knowing that you are helping to create a problem and not doing anything about it just so you can live easier is a sign of laziness and greed.
I mean, come on, we all know that this can't last forever. We're going to have to give up some comfort in order to survive. It just seems that nobody wants to be the one to do it.
|
|
|
|
|
jmlangford
Jul 31, 2002, 11:45 PM
Post #23 of 228
(16965 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 2, 2001
Posts: 1569
|
Okay, okay, okay. I got a little carried away with that comment biggernhell. I had not gotten personal and ridiculous on this thread until billcoe went off and flamed! (See his profanity-laced tirade). I basically let him get me fired up. I am sorry it upsets everyone so much but I am still the same person I've always been. Relatively well-liked(until now) and bending over backwards to help people out on this site(and in real life). I always get myself in trouble with these kinds of subjects. There are just certain things that trouble me and the "environment is going to hell in a handbasket" bandwagon is one of them. Part of my personality is to be very skeptical of the 'majority' opinion. I have a great deal of respect for Dixie Lee Ray. She is the former governor of WA state. She served as the chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission, assistant secretary of state in the U.S. Bureau of Oceans, and she has been(until her death) a longtime member of the zoology faculty of the University of Washington. She has also received the United Nations Peace Prize. She has written two books that are must reads for people concerned about the environment-Trashing the Planet and Environmental Overkill. These books were actually a turning point for me in not worrying so much about all the Doomsdayism being bantered about in the major media, etc. I would probably surprise you with how sensitive I am to the landscape, especially when backpacking in the mountains, etc. I am just not willing to make major and expensive changes to the American way of life without real proof. I may not continue this thread as it seems to have pissed some people off more than it should have, including some people I have considered friends.
|
|
|
|
|
ergophobe
Jul 31, 2002, 11:48 PM
Post #24 of 228
(16965 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 1, 2002
Posts: 150
|
Sorry Wildtrail - you're right that man doesn't cause global warming (or cooling) but we do contribute and we are probably knocking the system out of whack. Read on!
You want some facts, but let's start with an opinion - a quote from George W. Bush. Yes, that's
right, our oil executive president disagrees with Patrick Michaels:
A quote from George W. Bush
Quote:
First, we know the surface temperature of the earth is warming. It has risen by .6 degrees Celsius over
the past 100 years. There was a warming trend from the 1890s to the 1940s. Cooling from the 1940s to
the 1970s. And then sharply rising temperatures from the 1970s to today.
There is a natural greenhouse effect that contributes to warming. Greenhouse gases trap heat, and thus
warm the earth because they prevent a significant proportion of infrared radiation from escaping into
space. Concentration of greenhouse gases, especially CO2, have increased substantially since the
beginning of the industrial revolution. And the National Academy of Sciences indicate that the increase
is due in large part to human activity. ...
Our country, the United States is the world's largest emitter of manmade greenhouse gases. We account
for almost 20 percent of the world's man-made greenhouse emissions. We also account for about
one-quarter of the world's economic output. We recognize the responsibility to reduce our emissions. We
also recognize the other part of the story -- that the rest of the world emits 80 percent of all
greenhouse gases. And many of those emissions come from developing countries. ...
I also call on Congress to work with my administration to achieve the significant emission reductions
made possible by implementing the clean energy technologies proposed in our energy plan.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/06/20010611-2.html
Some facts and evidence
1. Patrick Michaels is the editor of World Climate Review, an *industry* publication started and
funded by the Western Fuels Association, a trade group of US coal suppliers (no surprise that he is at
the U. of Virginia).
2. There are many factors that go into climate change and the earth has cycled through hot and warm
spells essentially forever. The last "mini ice age" came in the seventeenth century. One thing we
learn from that, by the way, is that small temperature changes have large effects, as witnessed by the
stagnant European populations during this period.
3. Yes, the earth is probably warming regardless of human impact.
4. Human impact is still significant. The system has been roughly balanced for millennia and the human
contribution, though a small portion of the total, is pushing the system out of whack. If it
continues, we run the risk of pushing the climate cycle out of the secular oscillation between cold and
warm, and moving it towards increasing warmth. We can't reasonably reduce the amount of natural
production, but we can control human inputs.
5. I would rather trust large-scale conclusions from independent organization like the United Nations,
The American Academy of Sciences and other rather than any single person on any extreme (and Michaels
is on the complete extreme fringe of science). As a brief note - President Bush asked the National
Academy of Sciences for an independent, objective analysis of the evidence and they came bace and told
him that the administration opinions on global warming (which are actually more moderate than
Michaels') are overly optimstic and the threat is real.
6. Good information for this is so prevalent, all one need do is look a little. I will spare you
reports from people World Wildlife Fund, Sierra Club and so on since they, justifiably, might be
attacked as having vested interests similar to Michaels and the Western Fuels Association. So I send
you only to neutral sources like the UN, National Academy of Sciences, Pew Trust.
A. From the UNITED NATIONS
The UN's report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change called Global Warming: The
Scientific Basis. I direct you to pages 10-12 in particular.
http://www.ipcc.ch/pub/spm22-01.pdf
You may find particularly interesting, the quote:
Emissions of CO2 due to fossil fuel burning are virtually
certain7 to be the dominant influence on the trends in
atmospheric CO concentration during the 21st century.
You can find other reports at
http://www.ipcc.ch/
B. The National Academy of Sciences, the group commissioned by G.W. Bush to study the problem
http://www4.nas.edu/onpi/webextra.nsf/web/climate?OpenDocument
Check out: Are We Changing the Climate?
which has a hopelessly long URL, but which you can get to from the main page mentioned above. The
report notes that there are many uncertainties, but concludes:
Quote:
The report notes that the cooling trend in the Earth's stratosphere -- documented by satellite data
since 1979 --- is so pronounced that it would be difficult to explain through natural variability
alone. The cooling is believed to be partially a result of the buildup of greenhouse gases and the
depletion of stratospheric ozone, which warms the atmosphere at low levels but cools it at high levels.
C. The United States Environmental Protection Agency
http://www.epa.gov/globalwarming/climate/
You may find the "Uncertainties" section interesting.
D. You can also check out the Pew Trust's pages which has several reports
http://www.pewclimate.org
Check out in particular their "Facts and Figures" chapter
http://www.pewclimate.org/book/ff_chapter.pdf
and
The Science of Climate Change: Global and U.S. Perspectives
http://www.pewclimate.org/projects/env_science.cfm
Some conclusions and opinions
Does this mean that you have to get rid of your SUV? I would still support your decision to drive
whatever vehicle you want. For example, a person who lives in a 1000 square-foot apartment and drives
an SUV two miles to work everyday probably has much lower impact than someone who has a 3000
square-foot house in the suburbs and drives 40 miles to work each day in a hybrid vehicle. Everyone
makes their choices. I think it's incumbent on all of us, however, to pick and choose what's important
to us and try to save where we can. I think it's also important not to hide your head in the sand and
pretend that contributing huge amounts of greenhouse gasses is not exacerbating climate change problems
around the world. If you want to have a clean conscience, live cleanly - a lot more cleanly than I do,
so don't think I'm throwing stones at you in particular. If you don't want to live cleanly, at least
own up to the fact that you are damaging the planet. I am and I don't try to deny it. I try to
limit my impact, but I know it is still excessive.
In short
- try your best
- own up to what you do
Same rules as for everything else
Tom
PS to JMLangford - I've lived abroad and can see the "bad old USA" in perspective - United States has
some wonderful things that I can't see in any other country, but let's have the honesty to admit our
flaws. Per capita we do use a phenomenal amount of resources. I love living in the US, but I'm more
than happy to learn both from other countries and from alternate views in the US. Anyway, I don't see
how you can say that the National Academy of Sciences, the US EPA or the UN have a vested interest in
bringing down the USA. There are many legitimate criticisms of the US these days and we can't rest on
your "we beat Hitler" laurels forever.
[ This Message was edited by: ergophobe on 2002-07-31 16:49 ]
|
|
|
|
|
jmlangford
Aug 1, 2002, 12:11 AM
Post #25 of 228
(16965 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 2, 2001
Posts: 1569
|
Dang egro! That was outstanding! I will go back and check the links when I have more time. One exception to your 'neutral' references-the United Nations. I would differ with the statement that they are neutral. The UN, in my opinion has an agenda against the U.S. That is another subject entirely. Thanks for an intelligent response, now I have some "facts" to study.
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
