• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Climate talk shifts from curbing CO2 to adapting

mpg said:
Climate talk shifts from curbing CO2 to adapting




overdue?
Click to expand...

Adapt or die.
Humans, ravens, and coyotes are among the most adaptable creatures on Earth. We'll survive.

Now, if only we'd quit emitting so much hot air arguing over whether global warming is real or not, perhaps we could slow it down that way.

but, we're not going to be able to slow it down much for real.

That said, here's my fool proof plan to end global warming (besides not emitting so much hot air, that is):

Send up a series of satellites full of aluminum foil, each with an explosive charge. Get them in orbit, then blow them up, creating a cloud of pieces of aluminum foil that will reflect some of the solar radiation back into space. Problem solved.

The only tiny, hardly significant at all flaw to that plan is that the exact amount of aluminum foil needed would have to be calculated pretty carefully, or we could wind up with a new ice age, maybe one of the coldest ever.

But, if that should happen, humans, coyotes, and ravens will still survive.
 
I think it is as much a matter of interpretation as it is scientific findings. Science has shown that CO2 can cause a greenhouse affect. I don't think anyone argues that. But is this actually happening to a degree that matters? The planet is warming and has been for quite a while. Nobody argues that even in the face of the global cooling we have experienced over the last decade. The problem arises when it becomes a political issue Even though CO2 can cause a greehouse effect, science doesn't know that it will cause one to the degree the political forces claim. Science can measure temperature but cannot agree on what causes changes in it. There are all kinds of theories. They stop being theories and become facts only when the political element gets hold of it. I don't think there is anything wrong with the science behind global warming. There are a ton of problems with the politics behind it.
 
Phys251 said:
And the Earth is flat. And dinosaurs and humans walked in the same place in the same era. And souls have mass. And Obama is a Marxist Kenyan fascist Muslim. And 9/11 was an inside job.

This is why I rarely debate around here any more. Many people accept blatantly absurd lies as truth and do the reverse as well. And when we try to call them on the BS, the kill-the-messenger crowd shows up in droves.
Click to expand...

Exactly. The national debt is a hard number while all the "hundreds of trillions of dollars that global warming will cost us" is typical smoke and mirrors. It is voodoo economics using numbers pulled out of someone's RSU. We have a national debt. We do not have a single dollar lost due to "global warming".

The pleas to do as the high priests of global warming say we must do now, making sacrifices they say we must make in order to avoid judgement day renders them startlingly similar to cult leaders.
 
CalGun said:
It's about growing government, redistributing wealth, and curbing capitalism. Nothing here has changed that.
Click to expand...

You are aware that your feelings about the proper organization of society, regardless of how true or fitting they might be in a human context, have the cosmic importance of a mosquito?

Black holes, comets, volcanoes, earth quakes, plague, or climate change (such as destroyed life's potential on Mars and Venus) are indifferent to human logic, morals, and ambitions.

Whether or not humanity evolves to be "the Great Race" of so many science fiction settings or crawls around in the post-apocalyptic ruins of a dying planet makes no difference to the universe as a whole.
 
Last edited:
Papa bull said:
Scientists also brought us the practice of bleeding, Freudian psychology and frontal lobotomies. Scientists brought us the next ice age, the hole in the ozone, acid rain, global warming and when that didn't pan out, "global warming".

But if you believe whatever scientists tell us must be true, then you believe in the petition project, right?


31,487 American scientists have signed this petition, including 9,029 with PhDs Global Warming Petition Project.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what it is you think you're trying to prove, you've mixed many different unrelated elements together as an "argument".

Not everything every scientist has ever done has been perfect. You may also notice that a lot of the things you mention are small blips, things carried out by relatively few outside of the mainstream of science. Some of them are also problems scientists have successfully solved... lol not sure what you're trying to prove.

Climate change science is not some fly by night fad, its been developing for 60+ years. There has been a large and intense amount of research done. If it were found out to be false it would be the greatest blunder in the history of science. This is highly unlikely but anything is possible.

Aaaaaand here we have pseudoscience bs with your petition. If you did any research on it you would see it holds little to no respect in the scientific community and is largely considered deceptive.
 
apdst said:
People used to believe everything the church said, too. Aren't you glad we figured out that just because the church said it doesn't mean that it isn't bull****? Taking a scientists word on a subject as being, "the gospel", is no worse than the blindly following church teachings during the Middle Ages. There are literally billions of dollars on the table that is ear marked for global warming research. it's very naïve to think that global warming researchers wouldn't stretch the truth to keep the cash flowing.
Click to expand...

Comparing science to the church is just... you can't be serious right?

Accusing the researchers of fraud because it is possible means nothing.
 
Dittohead not! said:
Adapt or die.
Humans, ravens, and coyotes are among the most adaptable creatures on Earth. We'll survive.

Now, if only we'd quit emitting so much hot air arguing over whether global warming is real or not, perhaps we could slow it down that way.

but, we're not going to be able to slow it down much for real.

That said, here's my fool proof plan to end global warming (besides not emitting so much hot air, that is):

Send up a series of satellites full of aluminum foil, each with an explosive charge. Get them in orbit, then blow them up, creating a cloud of pieces of aluminum foil that will reflect some of the solar radiation back into space. Problem solved.

The only tiny, hardly significant at all flaw to that plan is that the exact amount of aluminum foil needed would have to be calculated pretty carefully, or we could wind up with a new ice age, maybe one of the coldest ever.

But, if that should happen, humans, coyotes, and ravens will still survive.
Click to expand...
BBC - Science & Nature - Horizon

it may already have led to the starvation of millions
Click to expand...
 
How real and catastrophic AGW is depends on which "scientists" you want to believe. Contrary to the left's political propaganda, there are scientists in both sides and the most scientific thinking is "we're not sure".
 
Papa bull said:
How real and catastrophic AGW is depends on which "scientists" you want to believe. Contrary to the left's political propaganda, there are scientists in both sides and the most scientific thinking is "we're not sure".
Click to expand...

No, no, no, no, NO, no, NO, NO, no

NO

No they do not agree on being "not sure". There is a large consensus that unmitigated it will be catastrophic.
 
Verax said:
No, no, no, no, NO, no, NO, NO, no

NO

No they do not agree on being "not sure". There is a large consensus that unmitigated it will be catastrophic.
Click to expand...
link please

thank you
 
People who shrug it off as "we will just adapt" don't fully grasp the implications of what is already starting to happen. Climate change is causing food shortages, widespread displacement of people from their ancestral homes due to flooding and other natural disasters, the urbanization of human populations, and the gradual disappearance of coastal cities.

Most developing nations are already feeling the change. It's mostly people in the privileged nations who think that not much is happening, because they are usually the last to feel any major global reverberations.

I guess once New York starts getting submerged by yearly hurricanes, people still start caring. By then it will be too late though.

The aristocrats in power don't have to worry about any of this. They will be safe in their fortresses in the best locations in the world while everyone else is suffering major turmoil. That's why activism against climate change has always had to come from the People, and why the those at the top aren't enacting enough economic changes. They and industry holders are rich... they don't have to care. They can keep raking in the dough and then retreat to their safe havens when the going gets tough. As usual the general public will be who has to deal with it... the "trick down" effect in action.
 
Northern Light said:
People who shrug it off as "we will just adapt" don't fully grasp the implications of what is already starting to happen. Climate change is causing food shortages, widespread displacement of people from their ancestral homes due to flooding and other natural disasters, the urbanization of human populations, and the gradual disappearance of coastal cities.

Most developing nations are already feeling the change. It's mostly people in the privileged nations who think that not much is happening, because they are usually the last to feel any major global reverberations.

I guess once New York starts getting submerged by yearly hurricanes, people still start caring. By then it will be too late though.

The aristocrats in power don't have to worry about any of this. They will be safe in their fortresses in the best locations in the world while everyone else is suffering major turmoil. That's why activism against climate change has always had to come from the People, and why the those at the top aren't enacting enough economic changes. They and industry holders are rich... they don't have to care. They can keep raking in the dough and then retreat to their safe havens when the going gets tough. As usual the general public will be who has to deal with it... the "trick down" effect in action.
Click to expand...
No one said it was gonna be easy, but it might be easier than stopping it, and a combination of reduction and adapting might be best.
 
mpg said:
BBC - Science & Nature - Horizon
Click to expand...

Interesting. I think we knew that vapor trails were a factor in keeping global warming at bay, but I had no idea how much of an effect they were having.

So, rather than those clouds of aluminum foil, which would be permanent and could be disastrous, we need more jets in the sky. That way, if we overdo it, we can just scale back the numbers some.
 
mpg said:
That's very long. Where's the part about catastrophe consensus?
Click to expand...

There is a consensus climate change is man-made.

Climate Change: Consensus

Part of the body of work are the projections I linked earlier. The consensus on the projections is sort of implied. I probably shouldn't have stated it as though there is some sort of direct poll using the word catastrophe.

Scientific consensus -> man-made global warming -> projections of consequences.
 
Verax said:
Comparing science to the church is just... you can't be serious right?
Click to expand...

I'm very serious. "Science", used to say that lobotomies were the sure-fired cure for insanity.

Accusing the researchers of fraud because it is possible means nothing.
Click to expand...

Mean nothing, eh?

University of East Anglia emails: the most contentious quotes - Telegraph

It means nothing to you that billions of our dollars are being poured into a lie?

There's more credible evidence that Saddm Hussein had WMD than there is that global warming is real.
 
Verax said:
There is a consensus climate change is man-made.

Climate Change: Consensus

Part of the body of work are the projections I linked earlier. The consensus on the projections is sort of implied. I probably shouldn't have stated it as though there is some sort of direct poll using the word catastrophe.

Scientific consensus -> man-made global warming -> projections of consequences.
Click to expand...

There was a consensus that the Earth was flat at one time, too.

During the Civil War, doctors thought that gangrene was caused by a noxious vapor in the air.
 
apdst said:
There was a consensus that the Earth was flat at one time, too.

During the Civil War, doctors thought that gangrene was caused by a noxious vapor in the air.
Click to expand...

and they don't believe that any more, why?
Is it because the bloggers said it wasn't so, or did it have to do with scientific research?
 
apdst said:
I'm very serious. "Science", used to say that lobotomies were the sure-fired cure for insanity.



Mean nothing, eh?

University of East Anglia emails: the most contentious quotes - Telegraph

It means nothing to you that billions of our dollars are being poured into a lie?

There's more credible evidence that Saddm Hussein had WMD than there is that global warming is real.
Click to expand...

This boils down to him using the word "trick" and your mind associates that word with negativity therefore you interpret the entire scientific body of evidence supporting climate change as false. That is absurd.
 
Dittohead not! said:
and they don't believe that any more, why?
Is it because the bloggers said it wasn't so, or did it have to do with scientific research?
Click to expand...

The scientific research hasn't proven that man made global warming/climate change/abracadabra really exists. Some of the research has been faked to come to the appropriate conclusion.

I'm not opposed to scientific research. I'm only saying that we need to stop trying to make a record player needle out of a peanut.
 
apdst said:
There was a consensus that the Earth was flat at one time, too.

During the Civil War, doctors thought that gangrene was caused by a noxious vapor in the air.
Click to expand...

We've come a long way since then, apparently you haven't. What would you have us do? Reject science because it isn't perfect? By all means put your beliefs into action and start by turning off your computer.

Thinks this through... should we

a) Do nothing because science isn't perfect and we could be wrong.

b) Do what we can based on the best of our knowledge so far?
 
apdst said:
The scientific research hasn't proven that man made global warming/climate change/abracadabra really exists. Some of the research has been faked to come to the appropriate conclusion.

I'm not opposed to scientific research. I'm only saying that we need to stop trying to make a record player needle out of a peanut.
Click to expand...

The scientific research hasn't proven that man made global warming really exists to the satisfaction of the anti science bloggers, and never will.

and dismissing modern science because of disproved ideas of past is absurd. Because the "bad air causes gangrene" notion turned out to be false does not mean that every scientific theory is going to be false.
 
Verax said:
This boils down to him using the word "trick" and your mind associates that word with negativity therefore you interpret the entire scientific body of evidence supporting climate change as false. That is absurd.
Click to expand...

The global warming research was FAKED!

There are more scientists who say that global warming isn't real than the other way around.

Global warming models could be 'fundamentally wrong' | The Daily Caller

But, of course researchers are going to keep pushing the hoax, when The President of The United States promises to fund them indefinitely. Who's going to save us from greedy scientists?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom