• 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!

Is global warming really a bad thing?

Bucky said:
Assuming global warming is true, is it really such a bad thing like the media protrays? I could see some great economic benefits from global warming - such as easier access to oil in the Artic, less droughts, lower enegry costs by cutting down on heating bills, and perhaps a richer ecosystem by increasing the co2 level.

I'm not sure but perhaps global warming would improve our economy and make life better for the majority of people in the world.
Click to expand...

Its a complicated issue. But its full of misleading things. for instance
they focus on CO2 when its not the only nor is it the greatest contributing greenhouse gas.
Carbon credits, cap n trade is a money grab. buying off your irresponsibility and taking money from countries with money .. that doesn't accomplish anything except redistribute money.
China is the greatest greenhouse polluter but all these climate summits never hold their feet to the fire on improving. doesn't matter how much western countries reduce their emissions if eastern countries just continue to emit more.
Its not that warming and all that isn't an issue, but the actions in the world are a big money grab that solves nothing.
 
Gaius46 said:
I suppose if you don't mind putting the East Coast, West Coast, Florida, Louisiana and parts of Texas under water then those lower heating bills are pretty cool.
Click to expand...
They have tried to tie the ongoing sea level rise to AGW, but the two events may only have minimal links.
Resent papers discuss that the sea level rise is part of several long cycles interfering.
An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie
But besides the studies, the sea level rise has been steady since before the AGW issue.
Louisiana is sinking, in addition to a slight sea level rise, mostly from the changes made to the Mississippi river.
Galveston, TX has a fairly large subsidence problem.
The West coast does not have many sea level issues, the rate of the rise is very slow.
Portions of the East coast have some issues, but much of that may be land use.
From Delaware North, the sea levels have been falling for about 7 years.
https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends.html
 
ecofarm said:
We are already experiencing the change I've noted, across the globe. Weather has become more extreme, with less middle ground.
Click to expand...

There hasn't been enough global warming in the last 20 years to cause anything.
 
fmw said:
There hasn't been enough global warming in the last 20 years to cause anything.
Click to expand...

The evidence of extreme weather as a result of GW has been compiling for at least 20 years, warming began long before that.
 
When people argue about the "cycles" of "climate change", the one variable that only began 200 years ago, is the industrial and technological advances of humankind. Advances at the cost of the environment. That is the reason imo, for the search for other planets that will "support" life.
 
Rexedgar said:
When people argue about the "cycles" of "climate change", the one variable that only began 200 years ago, is the industrial and technological advances of humankind. Advances at the cost of the environment. That is the reason imo, for the search for other planets that will "support" life.
Click to expand...

We have a perfectly good planet that support life as we know it.....yet we refuse to take care of it because we are arrogant enough to think we will live forever without consequence for our actions and in-actions so we would search for another planet to pollute/contaminate/deplete/exploit because that is easier than cleaning up the mess we made here.
 
straykatz said:
We have a perfectly good planet that support life as we know it.....yet we refuse to take care of it because we are arrogant enough to think we will live forever without consequence for our actions and in-actions so we would search for another planet to pollute/contaminate/deplete/exploit because that is easier than cleaning up the mess we made here.
Click to expand...
Thank you for fleshing out what I was trying to say!
 
ecofarm said:
We are already experiencing the change I've noted, across the globe. Weather has become more extreme, with less middle ground.
Click to expand...

Weather has become more extreme​

Not in the United States:


25hho4h.jpg


MayOctMaxTempTrend.jpg

EF3-EF5-t.png


Precipitation is up, Maximum temperatures and Extreme tornadoes are down.
 
Tim the plumber said:
The Gulf stream is wind driven.

The prospect of an amount of fresh water at 0c adding to the cold, below 4c and already around 0c of around 1% of the volume of the Gulf stream being added to the water that mixes with the northern edge of the gulf stream during peak summer does not cause panic in anybody who has ever done any physics.

The Gulf stream will be unaffected by any melting of Greenland's ice.
Click to expand...

Actually, that is part true. On the other hand, only partly so.
 
ecofarm said:
Wrong. I don't need to. I don't care if you insist on remaining laughably ignorant. I post for the audience, not you.



I know it makes you feel special to deny the obvious and easily accessible. Using blue font also makes you feel special. Find a new source of self worth.
Click to expand...

If there is such science about you would have posted it. There is no such evidence for you to quote. The audience understands this.

And so do you.
 
Bucky said:
Assuming global warming is true, is it really such a bad thing like the media protrays? I could see some great economic benefits from global warming - such as easier access to oil in the Artic, less droughts, lower enegry costs by cutting down on heating bills, and perhaps a richer ecosystem by increasing the co2 level.

I'm not sure but perhaps global warming would improve our economy and make life better for the majority of people in the world.
Click to expand...

I posted this link with quotes on the Cooling Climate claims of the 1970s apparently. It was cause by humans and industries supposedly. Not that another ice age is not coming... it may be I don't know. I think Russian scientists believe the earth is entering another ice age. We are already in a mini-ice age.

Anyways, the link to the article that touches on the 1970s Global Cooling claims: Seven Big Failed Environmentalist Predictions
 
Bucky said:
Assuming global warming is true, is it really such a bad thing like the media protrays? I could see some great economic benefits from global warming - such as easier access to oil in the Artic, less droughts, lower enegry costs by cutting down on heating bills, and perhaps a richer ecosystem by increasing the co2 level.

I'm not sure but perhaps global warming would improve our economy and make life better for the majority of people in the world.
Click to expand...

We always have to adapt to changes with nature. The biggest problem is actually assessing how much change we actually cause. If we aren't making any significant changes, then we cannot change what is then natural.

The big damage I see is spending money where we don't need to.
 
ecofarm said:
The result is not geographically uniform. The result is greater extremes in a given locality. If somewhere has droughts, they will get worse. Floods will get worse. We effectively lose (reduce) the 'middle class' of weather in any given locality. Weather goes from the economic demographics of a developed country to that of a developing country, to use an analogy.
Click to expand...

You have no facts to support your contentions. There is also a chance things get batter rather than worse.

Speaking of the Californoa droughts, whet is we did make them worse. Not with CO2, but by building massive wind farms?

These wind farms cause higher pressures upwind of their locations. Higher pressure means less precipitation!

I say it is more likely that our land use changes cause far more change than CO2 does. Don't forget the changes in regional evapotranspiration when we cover natural vegetation with concrete, asphalt, and buildings. If we were to leave at least 70% of the land with vegetation, this effect would be insignificant.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom