Political Correctness
Sort:
Yeah right... instead of this constant whining, why not embrace the changes? Evolution takes many forms, and at least humanity is a clever and adaptable life-form. I'm looking forward to growing tropical fruit in my garden... and if, as the scare-mongers would have it, it's going to be much colder in the UK, then I'd better learn to ski! No biggy either way.
Too right, you see those little eskimo kids running in the artic like it was a beach or something, we'll adapt, the Thames used to freeze over every year, can't remember the last time my pond froze over!!!!
Loads of parrots in London now, how cool is that!!!!
lol, I can't wait until I can grow pineapples in my backyard. I'll buy a few parrots, maybe I can plant a jungle and get a pet leopard or something. :D I'll be able to go surfing on the Great Lakes in summer and snowshoe to school in the winter. Global warming is awesome! lol
Maybe I'll move to Greenland and live in the forest.
Maybe I'll move to Greenland and live in the forest.
Global warming is a self-correcting problem. If it continues, the north Atlantic conveyor will shut down due to desalinization, the northern hemisphere will freeze over--Europe & Canada especially will be toast--coastal areas will be under water and temperatures in warmer equatorial regions will soar. The upshot is that there will be a lot less people, a lot less cars and a lot less ranches full of flatuent cows and sheep. Problem solved.
Sep 27, 2007
0
#26
Ray_Brooks wrote: Yeah right... instead of this constant whining, why not embrace the changes? Evolution takes many forms, and at least humanity is a clever and adaptable life-form. I'm looking forward to growing tropical fruit in my garden... and if, as the scare-mongers would have it, it's going to be much colder in the UK, then I'd better learn to ski! No biggy either way.
We, directly as humans, can face the change with perhaps not much more than a bruise or two. The problem is all the rest. And since we are dependant on all the rest to survive, things get a bit more complicated.
I'll just answer the argument that climate fluctuates all the time. It is true, however the problem now lies that it is so fast. Here's one of the problems: vegetation have a migration rate which allows them to face climate changes, but right now the warming is much faster then the migration rate.
Just another problem, the permafrost is full of methan (which is not an exploitable source of energy under it's form, at least for now and for a while still), which stays underground while it's frozen but as the methan will unfreeze, the gas will be released in the air. So the worse things will be, the faster it will accelerate.
THE SKY IS FALLING!! RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!! I am old enough to recall when the same chicken littles were warning of a new ice age in the 70s , and that the world oil supply would be completely gone by the year 2000. Need more be said?
Oct 15, 2007
0
#28
Reb wrote: THE SKY IS FALLING!! RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!! I am old enough to recall when the same chicken littles were warning of a new ice age in the 70s , and that the world oil supply would be completely gone by the year 2000. Need more be said?
But are we talking about predictions? We are talking about things that are actually happening. Yes, probably it won't be the apocalypse and we won't all die, however that doesn't mean that it (is) will not (causing) cause lots of problems, like desertification, or the melting of great masses of ice which have already huge negative on the local populations and environnment. Also the disparition of flora and fauna is a great scientifical loss, and a loss with more practical aspects than one could imagine.
Over the past 600,000 years,
bollocks, humans havent been taking data like this for 600,000 years, we've been taking it for hundreds at the most. Draw a diagram of the few hundred years we know about, to the billions of years we dont, and you wouldnt have a wall big enough to be able to see that tiny little dot. Humans just like to think they are involved in whats going on. A decade ago everyone was all up in arms about the hole in the ozone layers above the artic and antartic, but then it closed, o, now its openeing again, do you know what else changed along with that? The direction of our magnetic north. The gravitational fields were fluctuating at each of the poles, but could this have caused the increase in the size of the hole? of course not. that hole is caused by my fridge.
A few people have mentioned these cycles, and their right,they do happen, ice ages, the opposite of the ice ages (Global warming? no thats never happened before, cars werent invented then).
How can you say these climate fluctuations are fast? compared to what? what do we know? If all life was to be measured on a clock, all time, humans existance on the earth would be 1 second out of 60 minutes. 3600 seconds. And during our one second of existance, with us gathering data relevant to this during the last few milliseconds of time, we beleive we have enough information to asses whats going on with our planet?
Do yourselves a favour, if you have seen the movie "Inconvenient truth" by that prat Al Gore, forget it, the only thing 'inconvenient' about that movie was the use of the word "truth".
Bollocks
Oct 15, 2007
0
#30
frenchduke wrote:
Over the past 600,000 years,
bollocks, humans havent been taking data like this for 600,000 years, we've been taking it for hundreds at the most.
Shows what you know, we can know the temperature of very ancient time through analysing ice layers. Here's an article: http://www.seed.slb.com/en/scictr/watch/climate_change/proxydata.htm
Talks about the ice layers but also other means.
Don't underestimate science. So before saying "bollocks" and talking through your hat, what about informing yourself a bit?
"A decade ago everyone was all up in arms about the hole in the ozone layers above the artic and antartic, but then it closed, o, now its openeing again, do you know what else changed along with that? The direction of our magnetic north. The gravitational fields were fluctuating at each of the poles, but could this have caused the increase in the size of the hole? of course not. that hole is caused by my fridge."
The hole never closed, where did you get that from? And why would it have something to do with the magnetic poles? Source? The amount of bisons decreased over the years, maybe it's because of that too that the hole is getting bigger? Stop being such an arrogant ignoramus, and if you're going to say something, at least look up a bit about the subject, please.
yes, but surely that's a single temp, not a series of measurements, taken over the period of a few years, that can accurately show temperature fluctuations? I was aware of being able to take individual temperatures, what a difference is between now and 600 000 years ago hardly shows a rate of change incremental to the argument does it though?
Oct 15, 2007
0
#32
frenchduke wrote: yes, but surely that's a single temp, not a series of measurements, taken over the period of a few years, that can accurately show temperature fluctuations? I was aware of being able to take individual temperatures, what a difference is between now and 600 000 years ago hardly shows a rate of change incremental to the argument does it though?
Of course, the more you go back in time, the less precise it is, but there is more than one ice layers and other methods to add to it to come to certain conclusions. And we can know, for example, how long did it take to get in or out of an ice age, and the amount of time, even if rather imprecise is nothing like the speed it's going right now.
They cant even predict the weather accurately a week in advance and yet some believe that they can tell you what the weather was hundreds, even thousands of years ago?! LOL My goodness ! In any event a new ice age would be far harder for humans to survive than the earth heating up a degree or 2. So, why all the fuss? The earth goes through cycles of heating and cooling, this is a fact.
fair enough, my point however, is that even this 650 000-700 000 year old data, it still is insignificant when compared to earths 4500 million year existence. And that even if we have fluked the right answer, and it is a faster rate of change now then ever before, this may have a lot to do with the changing magnetic fields of earth. I mean the greatest force locale to earth may have a lot to do with everything else that is going on with earth. Hypothesis have shown that the magnetic fields reverse, effectively inverting our poles, at time intervals ranging from 10's of thousands to millions of years. The last time an occurrence such as this is theorised to happen, was 750 000 years ago. And with another one due (current rates continuing) we are due for another one in 3000AD, a thousand years from now. All im trying to say is this global warming crap is something we cant link a direct cause to. How do we know that the fields bipole to bipole deteriation of 15% over the past 150 years, with an acceleration over the last several (about the same as global warming) has something to do with it?
On the original topic: political correctness is absurd, it complicates things. Now regarding the topic of global warming... does Al Gore deserve that prize? Some people may be cynical about this, but we in the western Pacific, and perhaps other areas, are directly affected. Our typhoons become more devastating, and sometimes there's no rain at all! There's this roller coaster of drought and floods. And then there was that question of ice age, in which we are in the beginning of such? I guess the main thing that humans and societies can do is decrease the use of fossil fuels, and perhaps concentrate on environment-friendly sources of energy (e.g., solar, wind, etc.). We have only one planet.
Oct 15, 2007
0
#36
Reb wrote: They cant even predict the weather accurately a week in advance and yet some believe that they can tell you what the weather was hundreds, even thousands of years ago?! LOL My goodness ! In any event a new ice age would be far harder for humans to survive than the earth heating up a degree or 2. So, why all the fuss? The earth goes through cycles of heating and cooling, this is a fact.
If I asked you to predict what a topic on "political correctness" will be about, you will say "political correctness", but ah you were unable to predict 3 posts in advance that this was going to be about global warming, even though the first assumption was very correct and probably the most reliable one. But if you go look the posts before, it quite easy to realise, without knowing the exact content of each post, what the general trend of the topic is!
@frenchduke, unless you give a source or a reason why the magnetic fields have anything to do here, bringing this point is absurd. It is the same as my previous comparison that the global warming is caused by the disparition of bisons. We have verifiable data that greehouse gas cause global warming, we have no idea how the magnetic fields could cause that (I don't at least, bring a source to support this) why should we believe about your magnetic field theory then? Just to evade the question and delude ourselves?
The hole never closed, where did you get that from? And why would it have something to do with the magnetic poles? Source? The amount of bisons decreased over the years, maybe it's because of that too that the hole is getting bigger? Stop being such an arrogant ignoramus, and if you're going to say something, at least look up a bit about the subject, please.
The hole did shrink in size, and why wouldn't it have anything to do with the poles? Being that the hole was directly above the magnetic field, and within the focal point of the lines, i find it likely it would have a lot to do with the fluctuating size of the hole, especialy if the fields themselves are fluctuating. Bison's? i didn't link anything to the size of the hole, i linked the hole to something else. And as far as not looking up on a subject goes, I've done my research, your the one asking for a source before trying to ridicule, perhaps if you knew what you were talking about, you wouldn't have to question my sources.
Political correctness is the scourge of our times.
The PC technique of vilification and intimidation of those who do not comply or conform has been used by all totalitarian systems, including that headed by Hitler, the Red Guards in China, and the re-education camps of Pol Pot, Castro's Cuba and the former Soviet Union. PC = the scourge of our times.
Hey......I didnt mean to have that in bold and large letters.....how did I do that? Silly me.....
Oct 15, 2007
0
#40
frenchduke wrote:
The hole never closed, where did you get that from? And why would it have something to do with the magnetic poles? Source? The amount of bisons decreased over the years, maybe it's because of that too that the hole is getting bigger? Stop being such an arrogant ignoramus, and if you're going to say something, at least look up a bit about the subject, please.
and why wouldn't it have anything to do with the poles?
Come on, the burden of the proof is on you, not me.
"Being that the hole was directly above the magnetic field, and within the focal point of the lines, i find it likely it would have a lot to do with the fluctuating size of the hole, especialy if the fields themselves are fluctuating."
That's no proof at all, perhaps merely a hint that we could investigate a potential influence, nothing more.
"Bison's? i didn't link anything to the size of the hole, i linked the hole to something else."
Yes but do you have any proof that the size of the hole is not indirectly proportional to the amount of bisons? See? In such a claim, the burden of the proof would rest on me, same as your magnetic field theory. If I tell you there there is invisible, immaterial people all around you, and then when you ask me to tell you how I came to this conclusion, would you accept "why shouldn't there be? can you disprove them?" as a valid argument?
"And as far as not looking up on a subject goes, I've done my research, your the one asking for a source before trying to ridicule, perhaps if you knew what you were talking about, you wouldn't have to question my sources."
Well? Can you show us your sources then?
ok, I've got a plan. Once all the ice on Greenland has finally sloshed into the North Atlantic in about 10 years time, let's just plant one mother of a forest there to counter the ever-increasing CO2 levels. Problem solved :D
But seriously, I love the way politicians and scientists are giving it all this "We must act now before it's too late....". It was too late 100 years ago!! The industrial revolution started this whole acceleration process. We're talking about the global climate here. You can't just flick a switch. Once you've triggered a process, there ain't no going back folks... Pass the sun-cream...