First of all, please describe the error that mainstream science and media have made. For example, is there global warming, but not as much as they say, or is there none, or is it really there but not man's fault and we can't help things by limiting our emissions, etc. Then what will things be like? Will there be "climate change" of some sort, but not global warming? What will happen to our coastlines? Will they stay roughly the same, or will some beach properties still wind up underwater, or will they perhaps grow as the shore recedes? Will many species die out, or should we not expect an abnormal extinction event? Will the large scale storms continue, or are they just pretty much at the normal levels, and the same kind of hurricanes and such you might expect to experience in like 2050 or 2100? Will atmospheric composition remain roughly the same, or will the constituent amounts change a bit but not make a big deal? Will it be easier or harder to grow food? Or will it stay the same? (Or actually shouldn't it get easier thanks to technology). Are there other things you think the climate will do? Like an ice age or something? Will there be any disruption to people, or polar bears or anything like that? I guess just be as descriptive as you can. Just envision and then paint your future world in which you are right and the climate change concern people are not. Because whatever the planet is going to do, we should know about it and plan for it. Back in the day, when Africa kept flip-flopping its climate, we adjusted to it, and this played a part in making us who we are, because we had to learn how to think to adjust to radically changing circumstances. No matter who is right in this debate, any change may still require adjustments.
People will still deny the science, no matter how you try to approach the issue. I came here, because I thought that people would be smarter than the last site I was on. And it turns out that they are by a long shot. However the denial propaganda is still the same, just expressed more intelligently. i.e. My old site " It's the sun ya stoooopid f*g" This site " The large ball of Hydrogen, 93 million miles from here, has increased it's solar output"
And does the record breaking heat of the summers mean global warming or does the record breaking cold and record snow falls mean global cooling?
Taxcutter says: Probably nothing noticeable. Taxcutter says: Stay roughly the same. Taxcutter says: Nothing beyond the ordinary. Taxcutter says: About the same as we've seen over the last couple centuries. Taxcutter says: About the same as we've seen the last couple centuries. Taxcutter says: Probably easier. Taxcutter says: Probably another Ice Age in a few thousand years or so. Taxcutter says: Barring an asteroid strike or supervolcano explosion...no. Whatever happens people will adapt. They are good at it. Only cockroaches and coyotes are better at it.
You do understand that if the North is warmer the rest of the planet can get cooler? The planet has these things called fronts, jet streams and ocean current. When these things change, the transfer of heat from one place to another is effected.
Dr. Bjorn Lomborg has wondered if a carbon tax or cap and trade system would take centuries to actually reduce global warming. I prefer the idea of heavy investment in desalination of ocean water to turn deserts green because every cubic meter of ocean water that is desalinated will not be on top of New Orleans. New Jersey, Bangladesh, Holland or much of Florida! http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/02/090205142132.htm If you think that greening the deserts is impossible... just look at this: http://saharaforestproject.com/projects/qatar.html
Dr. Chaim Henry Tejman states that plants have a stabilizing effect on climate..... neither warming nor cooling sounds nice!!!!??? http://www.grandunifiedtheory.org.il/globalW2.htm (Dr. Chaim Henry Tejman) - - - Updated - - - Exceptionally good post!!! About a year ago I saw a National Geographic documentary on how the climate is affected by currents from Antarctica.... the whole process sounded highly complicated .... and somewhat fragile as well!!!!????
There is going to be climate change. On that most scientists, even the AGW deniers are in agreement. To quote Seven of Nine "We will adapt" There will be winners and losers. One of the biggest losers might be the USA, which still makes a good deal of our prosperity through being the breadbasket for the world. The winner there might be Canada, as the Great American grain belt shifts North into Manitoba and Saskatchewan. Canada will also benefit from the thawing of the Northwest passage and an overall warmer climate. America, however, might very well see the return of the Great American Desert, a natural climactic cycle, with a particular vengeance. Coupled with increasing storms, hotter summers and more snowy winters our climate might become even badder than the worst in the world (which most meteorologists think it is, due to its extreme variablilty) Overall, however, it will not be an easy thing worldwide, (change never is), and the major concern of the AGW advocates is that we should not continue to make it even worse, whether we are the main cause or not. The major changes are expected to be 3 to 7 degrees over the next century, no matter what is done, which doesn't seem like much until you realize that only 10 degrees separates us from the Ice Age. 10 degrees hotter could return us to the Carboniferous, with jungles to the poles and the entire tropics being a huge belt of deserts. That won't happen in a century but even over a millennia it doesn't seem a pleasant prospect.
The important thing is not to confuse weather with climate. A record breaking year of heat or cold means nothing, a trend of say 5 out of 7 record breaking years points to potential for a trend. Then we need to see if there is some overlaying mechanism that is not long term climate change causing the variations. Australia has had two record hot summers in a row, divided by the driest winter ever recorded. Some point to proof positive of climate change. But this is not that unusual for Australian weather, and could really be a symptom of the Southern Oscillating changing (which happens at least once a decade)
I have been on both sides of this argument over time. But I am beginning to think that the naysayers are becoming a bit like King Canute before the incoming sea. Its is or is going to happen whether the naysayers want to ignore the facts or not. Whilst they are up to their necks in water in New York or London will they still be saying "It's not happening" or will they have found another reason like "It's the GOP's fault" or "Democrats inactivity".
I would love to get your opinion on HAB Theory? I suspect it could be the key to saving New Orleans from being swallowed by the Gulf of Mexico?! http://www.politicalforum.com/polit...conservatives-worry-about-climate-change.html HAB Theory and getting Conservatives to worry about climate change! Dr. Albert Einstein took The HAB Theory very seriously: http://www.habtheory.com/1/100.php Expanded Discussion of The HAB Theory Gershom Gale .....
Or is it because we fail to take advantage of information that gives a little bit of credit to our political opponents?! http://www.politicalforum.com/political-opinions-beliefs/322565-gods-peace-plan-holy-land.html God's Peace Plan for the Holy Land I read this intriguing plan for peace in the Middle East twice already! It is about fifty pages and well worth your time to consider! http://www.godspeaceplan.org/ (Scroll down to the link: Click Here to Download Your Copy of the Peace Plan). - - - Updated - - - What has been happening in Greenland is nothing short of astonishing!!!!!!
It might sound nice, but I don't think that's what you're going to get. The climate doesn't stay the same forever, that's been true even over the last century. Contrary to the statements in the media, though, global warming would have good, while global cooling (ice age) will be bad; agriculture was more productive when it was warmer, during the medieval warm and some roman times.
global warming is a natural phenomenon that occurs on any planet with an atmosphere. The dispute revolves around the role that heavy industry and big cattle play in the situation. The car planet earth is headed for a global warming wall. Heavy industry and big cattle are stepping on the accelerator. That's a grotesque yet accurate simplification. And it happens to be factual as well. GW deniers are in the same boat as Big Tobacco and cancer deniers of the last generation.
You can put all the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere you want, it won't keep the planet warm if the sun's output goes down. Carbon dioxide is 0.0397% of the atmosphere. Other gases, like "Perfluorotributylamine", are "7,000 times more powerful than CO2." http://www.theguardian.com/environm...-gas-powerful-chemical-perfluorotributylamine But then, even if they actually do them, they don't widely publicize studies on greenhouse effectiveness. Another claim is that carbon dioxide is more dangerous, than, say, water vapour, a much more abundant gas, because it is more "persistent," harder to get rid of. But, I haven't seen a study on it's persistence either. It would stand to reason that it it were persistant it would have built up over millennia past that, for instance, had more volcanic activity.... It can't be that persistent if it's 0.0397% of the atmosphere, unlike Nitrogen which is 78% of the atmosphere. I would call that a persistent gas.
If they could predict global warming with computer simulations, they could run your economy, too. Too bad, would have been nice.
If our government really believes that there is global warming, why haven't they accepted the use of autos that get 300 miles to a gallon of gas? http://jimstonefreelance.com/slapintheface.html Why don't they have a crash program for the development of alternative energy? And why isn't there a lot of propaganda in regard to having smaller families? None of these things are happening, are they? Why?
