Global warming

[KimB]

Arctic Melt
+An ice-free Northwest Passage, providing a shipping shortcut between the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans (Kerr 2002, Stroeve 2008)
-Loss of 2/3 of the world's polar bear population within 50 years (Amstrup 2007)

Now why is that a negative? Why should I care about polar bears?

They're a top predator. The disappearance of a top predator tends to have widespread negative impacts on an ecosystem.

In any event, this was only one of six negatives listed. Even if you didn't agree with one of the negatives, there are others there. But one they didn't mention is that the melting of arctic sea ice makes the arctic darker, which causes greater absorption of sunlight, which accelerates warming.

Nobody was saying global warming was causing more climate variation a few years ago, then when the previously noticable warming trend of 2000-2008 gave way to nasty winter storms, then it was due to global warming that these weather patterns occured...too convenient.

Convenient? Or simply changing views in response to the evidence? Because the global average temperature trend hasn't decreased at all. If anything, it's accelerating.

Not to mention stuff like epicstruggle quoted where climate scientists said that we'd say goodbye to winter in a few years isn't really helping their credibility.

Winters like this one and the previous one were normal some fifty years ago. Now they're rare events. Sounds like he hit the nail on the head to me.

 

[rpg.314]

Now why is that a negative? Why should I care about polar bears?

Fine, don't. But then, be prepared to accept whatever amount of "We told you so" comes your way in the aftermath of the next Katrina. Or when the Gulf stream shuts down.

 

[corduroygt]

Winters like this one and the previous one were normal some fifty years ago. Now they're rare events. Sounds like he hit the nail on the head to me.

Cold weather is far more disruptive to human economic activity and quality of life than warm weather. It'd be even better if northeast US and northern Europe never had any storms like this ever.

Increased CO2 is just a signal of increased human economic activity and prosperity. People are not going to give that up and return to the stone age. Accept and live with it until a suitable and economically feasible alternative for oil, both as an energy source and energy storage is found.

Fine, don't. But then, be prepared to accept whatever amount of "We told you so" comes your way in the aftermath of the next Katrina. Or when the Gulf stream shuts down.

Now Katrina is a result of global warming? I guess there were never any hurricanes, earthquakes, or any natural disasters before 50 years ago.

I won't live to see any of the effects of global warming, so I don't care, and I'm certainly not adjusting my lifestyle for the worse to save the polar bears.

 

[KimB]

Cold weather is far more disruptive to human economic activity and quality of life than warm weather. It'd be even better if northeast US and northern Europe never had any storms like this ever.

Snowfall is one of the primary cause of problems in cold weather. And despite causing warmer weather on average, global warming causes a net increase in snowfall, and especially an increase in the severity of storms in general, including snowstorms.

For example, have you heard of lake effect snow? That air passing over a lake tends to cause significant increases in snowfall? That this is the cause for the large snowfall that the Northeastern US experiences?

Global warming may reduce the number of days out of the year that are cold enough for snowfall in the Northeastern US, but it also will increase the frequency and severity of snowstorms that occur in the shorter period where snowfall is possible, because global warming translates to warmer lakes which translates to an increase in the magnitude of the lake effect.

Increased CO2 is just a signal of increased human economic activity and prosperity.

No, it's a sign of increased burning of fossil fuels. There are many other ways to obtain useful energy to drive a high-tech economy. Fossil fuels are just the easiest.

Now Katrina is a result of global warming? I guess there were never any hurricanes, earthquakes, or any natural disasters before 50 years ago.

Yes and no. Global warming increases the surface temperature of the ocean, which increases the temperature differential which hurricanes use to grow and strengthen. As a result, the severity of hurricanes has been on the rise. Katrina itself may not have been caused by global warming, but it was probably made worse. The dikes may have held if not for the extra kick provided by the warmer oceans.

I won't live to see any of the effects of global warming, so I don't care, and I'm certainly not adjusting my lifestyle for the worse to save the polar bears.

What? There are effects today. But beyond that, this point of view is positively asinine. You don't give a rat's ass for future generations? What is wrong with you?

 

[KimB]

Or when the Gulf stream shuts down.

I talked with some of the climate scientists at our sister institute, ICTP, about this a while back. It looks like this is actually highly unlikely. It basically requires Greenland to melt instantly.

Essentially, the idea of the gulf stream shutting down stems from the relationship between the gulf stream and salinity. The differences in salinity between the surface water and the deep ocean water affects this, and if too much fresh water is dumped in the surface, it could cause a shutdown of the gulf stream. However, it looks like far more fresh water is required in too short a time for it to actually happen.

 

[corduroygt]

Snowfall is one of the primary cause of problems in cold weather. And despite causing warmer weather on average, global warming causes a net increase in snowfall, and especially an increase in the severity of storms in general, including snowstorms.

It's not just snow. Cold by itself is far more damaging to industry, machinery, causes a lot of discomfort, energy use. It's also far more damaging to plants and crops. Batteries don't work well in the cold, if you're going to get electric cars. A couple degrees warmer is much better than a couple degrees colder.

What? There are effects today. But beyond that, this point of view is positively asinine. You don't give a rat's ass for future generations? What is wrong with you?

If there are effects today, they do not affect my life in any way. Future generations can pay themselves to combat global warming, if it still follows the trend, which no one can ever be sure of. It's not a problem of my time, so I'm not paying for it.

Future generations will have more money and better technology to combat it, provided the envrionmentalists aren't successful in sending them back to the stone age (like giving up meat or stop doing laundry lol), so I'm not really feeling sorry for them.

 

[KimB]

If there are effects today, they do not affect my life in any way.

Only because you are short-sighted and haven't paid any attention to the evidence.

Future generations can pay themselves to combat global warming, if it still follows the trend, which no one can ever be sure of. It's not a problem of my time, so I'm not paying for it.

Wow. You sure are an asshat.

Look, it is orders of magnitude more difficult to remove CO2 from the atmosphere than it is to not emit it. So what you are arguing for here is, basically, that your children/grand children should pay $100 (or more) in today's money so that you don't have to pay $1.

And never mind that the majority of the negative impacts will be felt in poor areas of the world, such that your attitude is basically, "Hey, I've got mine. The poor people can just go fuck themselves."

 

[corduroygt]

Only because you are short-sighted and haven't paid any attention to the evidence.

What evidence? I'm sick of environmental scaremongering. I've been told horrible things will happen all my life to the world and the environment, and guess what, nothing like that happened, so I'm sorry I'm a little skeptical.

I still don't believe that we can know the effects of CO2 concentration when we can't predict the weather accurately 3 days from now. I just don't think the science is advanced enough to make all those bold predictions. 40 years ago, ice age was coming, 10 years ago, we were all heating up and harsh winters were to be a thing of the past, now it's harsh winters are due to global warming. I'm sure there will be different predictions 10 years from now, and they won't be accurate either.

The scientists may believe that's the case, but they also all believed the earth was flat, or the Universe followed Newtonian physics, etc at one time as well. No need to destroy our economy for something that's in dispute.

When environmentalists stop blocking new Nuke plants from being constructed, then I'll think about going green again. But for now, they're just dirty hippies that are against civilization and modern conveniences who masturbate to Avatar.

And never mind that the majority of the negative impacts will be felt in poor areas of the world, such that your attitude is basically, "Hey, I've got mine. The poor people can just go fuck themselves."

Well, I'll let the Gates foundation help them for now, and if I'm so lucky to be a billionaire, then I'll help.

 

[gamervivek]

I still don't believe that we can know the effects of CO2 concentration when we can't predict the weather accurately 3 days from now.

well, you can't tell the time when a baby is gonna poop, but you can always guesstimate to what height it will grow to in 20 years.

The scientists may believe that's the case, but they also all believed the earth was flat, or the Universe followed Newtonian physics, etc at one time as well. No need to destroy our economy for something that's in dispute.

Scientists, when the earth was flat? And to "destroy our economy", are you sure that this will save it?

When environmentalists stop blocking new Nuke plants from being constructed, then I'll think about going green again. But for now, they're just dirty hippies that are against civilization and modern conveniences who masturbate to Avatar.

The funny thing about green people, few years ago they wanted to save environment for future generations, now it's don't have children to save the environment.
B3D crowd are a little behind.

http://www.inmalafide.com/2010/09/02/kill-them-all-james-j-lee-and-the-fraud-of-environmentalism/

Well, I'll let the Gates foundation help them for now, and if I'm so lucky to be a billionaire, then I'll help.

why wait to help? mooch off them. A fool and his money...

 

[Grall]

Now why is that a negative? Why should I care about polar bears?

Are you a sociopath?

What you're asking basically amounts to "why should I care about anything but me, myself and I?"

Why you should care about polar bears is because they're a part of the global ecosystem, and thus, an integral link in a chain of any number of species that balance and counterbalance each other. They're far from the only species that will be diminished or even wiped out by global warming I might add, they're just bigger and more visible than most plants, funghi, amphibians, birds and so on that will be affected, which is why they've become something of a symbol. But the problem is far more widespread than that.

Nobody was saying global warming was causing more climate variation a few years ago

Err, yes they were, but you probably chose not to listen.

When you have a community represented by these nutjobs, it's hard to take them seriously.

They don't represent anyone but themselves, and you're free to not care about them or listen to what they say; like I do. Like the pope doesn't automatically speak for all catholics, and so on.

I'm unconvinced that there's such a hurry to reduce emissions, and I'm definitely not paying a cent for it myself.

That's a rather stupid, short-sighted attitude to take. You don't care enough about this planet to leave it in a decent state for the kids growing up - perhaps including your own?

You know... Contrary to what you might think, but money ISN'T everything.

 

[gamervivek]

Are you a sociopath?

What you're asking basically amounts to "why should I care about anything but me, myself and I?"

and when I ask the same question of women, I am a misogynist.
strange world.

 

[Blazkowicz]

Just because (smart) people call it "global warming" doesn't mean the entire globe will get warmer, all the time. However if you're a conservative who likes to drive a car, it's more convenient to simply disregard anything that does not fit one's own world view.

fixed that for you.

 

[rpg.314]

Now Katrina is a result of global warming?

May be one a century isn't. But one Katrina a year will be.

 

[rpg.314]

I talked with some of the climate scientists at our sister institute, ICTP, about this a while back. It looks like this is actually highly unlikely. It basically requires Greenland to melt instantly.

Essentially, the idea of the gulf stream shutting down stems from the relationship between the gulf stream and salinity. The differences in salinity between the surface water and the deep ocean water affects this, and if too much fresh water is dumped in the surface, it could cause a shutdown of the gulf stream. However, it looks like far more fresh water is required in too short a time for it to actually happen.

Fair enough.

 

[rpg.314]

The scientists may believe that's the case, but they also all believed the earth was flat...

If you think SCIENTISTS believed earth to be flat, then, unfortunately, you are ignorant beyond repair. :|

No need to destroy our economy for something that's in dispute.

Plenty of people dispute nicotine's addictiveness and it's link to health problems. May be you believe the tobacco denialists as well.

 

[Squilliam]

Whilst the fact remains that the world is warming, the fiction or unknowns are the effects of the warming. So whilst we can say the world is warming and scientists have been very good at proving such things, the sensationalism roots itself in the predictions of the effects of the warming from both scientists, and the CTT/Media sides.

 

[FUDie]

Future generations will have more money and better technology to combat it, provided the envrionmentalists aren't successful in sending them back to the stone age (like giving up meat or stop doing laundry lol), so I'm not really feeling sorry for them.

You're a fool. More money? From where? The economy doesn't grow exponentially. Debt seems to, however

-FUDie

 

[corduroygt]

If you think SCIENTISTS believed earth to be flat, then, unfortunately, you are ignorant beyond repair. :|

Sorry, bad example, I meant to say they believed the Sun revolved around the Earth.

Plenty of people dispute nicotine's addictiveness and it's link to health problems. May be you believe the tobacco denialists as well.

I don't think that's true any more, it's not the 50s. Climate research is infinitely more complex than tobacco research though...

 

[corduroygt]

That's a rather stupid, short-sighted attitude to take. You don't care enough about this planet to leave it in a decent state for the kids growing up - perhaps including your own?

Maybe I'm unconvinced that high CO2 emissions are bad? Effects of global warming are greatly exaggerated and there are unknown feedback mechanisms yet to be discovered?

I wouldn't dump toxic waste into lakes, but CO2 is a naturally occurring gas and I am unconvinced that marginally high concentrations of it will result in serious consequences. Also, cold weather is far worse than warm weather as far as effects on quality of life is concerned.

 

[3dilettante]

Also, cold weather is far worse than warm weather as far as effects on quality of life is concerned.

Dale Gribble: [regarding global warming] I say let the world warm up...we'll grow oranges in Alaska.
Hank Hill: Dale you giblet head, we live in Texas. It's already 110 in the summer, and if it gets one degree hotter I'm gonna kick your ass!