Very eeenteresting....

Things that make you go "hmmmm..."

Comments

[Sam Tresler]

Hmmm... one year of data that could have an explanation behind it.

800,000 years of data that say human intervention has caused change: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/5314592.stm

"The "scary thing", he added, was the rate of change now occurring in CO2 concentrations. In the core, the fastest increase seen was of the order of 30 parts per million (ppm) by volume over a period of roughly 1,000 years.

"The last 30 ppm of increase has occurred in just 17 years. We really are in the situation where we don't have an analogue in our records," he said. "

To take it a step further, I am pretty tired of skeptics, in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, picking on statistics that the experts themselves have already allotted for and claiming to know more than the people who dedicate their lives to studying this issue.

95% of all scientists agree Global Warming is happening at this point. NONE of them say it will happen overnight, or that there won't be cold winters anymore. MOST of them say there will be a trend of increasingly EXTREME weather.
The U.S. National Academy of Sciences, which in 2005 the White House called "the gold standard of objective scientific assessment," issued a joint statement with 10 other National Academies of Science saying "the scientific understanding of climate change is now sufficiently clear to justify nations taking prompt action." http://www.edf.org/page.cfm?tagID=1011

Purporting that the only possible outcome of a global temperature shift is warmer winters and hotter summers is akin to thinking you can overheat your car and only affect the radiator.

Seriously, I'm so frustrated with anyone who doubts this anymore I can't even explain. Are people doing it just to be contrary? What are they afraid of? Less pollution and better quality of air? Actually paying the price it costs to manufacture things in an environmentally sound way? Removing the strangle hold the car manufactureres have on the American Economy?

I mean seriously. EVEN IF THERE IS NO GLOBAL WARMING... what is the downside to the proposed changes?

To that articles author:
Please Sir, do a little more research before writing baseless inflammatory articles in your second rate newspaper casting aspersions based on data nobody could possibly interpret in the, oh, 1.5 months since it has been collected.

You do yourself, and many many people who have worked hard to help society a grave disservice.
----------------------------

Nothing in that article makes me go hmmmm, except perhaps wondering why people who write such ridiculous tripe get any credit at all.

[MOGS]

in the words of the great Bill Murray:

"Lighten up Francis"

But seriously, Sam, do NOT mistake skepticism over global warming for a disdain for any environmental improvements. They are NOT the same thing, and you sir, do ME and other skeptics a serious disservice by assuming that healthy doubt = a driving desire to rape, pillage and plunder.

I'm pretty disappointed that you would confuse not believing the hype with global warming with a complete disdain for conservation. I'm all for cleaner air, cleaner water, and reusable building materials:

What I'm not convinced of are:
1) Carbon tax credits do anything other than make people with nothing better to do feel better about themselves.

2) Hyrbids actually doing anything of benefit either - there seems to be plenty of data suggesting otherwise...

3) I highly we doubt we've gotten the entire climate model worked out yet. And as such, I'm leery of drastic action.

Happy Easter

[Sam Tresler]

Hiya Mogs. Happy Easter yourself!

Preface: I come here because I like healthy debate with intelligent people, I presume that it's a given that I respect everyone here. You'll note, I hope, that I took great care to lambaste the author of that article not you.

Furthermore, nothing in my reply points to you or anyone not being advocate of conservationism, you read into that, I didn't say it. I did say that the measures global warming advocates espouse are de facto pro-conservationist - I did not say you weren't a conservationist.

I do take this topic *very* seriously. The best analogy I can come up with, is that I view skeptics of Global Warming with the same vehemence that the majority of people on this site (myself included) view 9/11 conspiracy theorists. Ignoring boatloads of evidence to make a set of facts fit something that is convenient is just plain silly.

NOW, I find it interesting that your three bullet points pre-suppose that there actually is something going on, just doubts the significance of it.

I, also, have my doubts about Carbon Tax as it stands, but that is largely because people are trying to water it down. It's of little doubt that Carbon is causing a major problem for the public good. Thus making it a candidate for regulation. Let me be clear, I have little use for regulation of anything that isn't a public good issue. Carbon tax may not be the answer, but my neighbor's carbon is affecting my life. I'd rather this get dealt with through proper channels.

2) Hybrids are hype. People who research these things have agreed on that for a while but they also do 2 things that are of worth. First, they put people in a mindset of conservation that they weren't in before, and second, they allow for an easier transition to a method that does have an impact. Real diehards are going for full electric and petitioning their local power plant for cleaner power. Hydro electric isn't viable without a better electrical infrastructure in the US - it's great for Iceland.

3) I find it amusing that I have the exact same point. Except in the terms of climate, drastic action is what we have been doing by burning fossil fuels. "I highly we doubt we've gotten the entire climate model worked out yet. And as such, I'm leery of drastic action." You are right... we should stop the drastic action we took by building an industry based on fossil fuels.

As always, thanks for the thoughtful conversation.

[D. Ox]

Sam,
I'm just amazed at the unconscious socialism, scientism, and elitism in your comments S.T.
Global warming is not in doubt, duh. The human factor is, and the remedies proposed are worse than the "disease". Millions or billions of people would be devastated by your "program" of ending fossil fuel use. Folks like you are ready to doom the third world to extinction--or perhaps you are a Kyoto fan that would only put the brakes on Western economies? Your love for the planet over people is appalling. And the facts of the free market adjustment totally escape you. The U.S. has been cutting back on CO2 emissions faster than any other major industrial power without signing on to the reidiculous Kyoto treaty. Change is the nature of nature. Your presumed idea that some sort of ideal temperature of the planet exists is laughable if it weren't so dangerous. No doubt you miss the good ol' gulag days when your buds could liquidate people with diverse views of the science and of history!

[Sam Tresler]

Wow. Just wow.

I'd appreciate it if people read what I said instead of projecting what they think I think on me.

I haven't brought Kyoto or other countries into this conversation, although there are certainly factors to consider. Nor have I attacked anyone here. I'm promoting a discussion and frankly, I find the name calling offensive. I far from a socialist or an elitist, and I'm not even sure what scientism is - christian scientist? Unless you are claiming that the way I quote scientific research is in question?

The research I point to indicates that the human factor is no longer in doubt either. Global CO2 levels increase temperature - this can be proven by experimentation. They have now discovered that these levels are higher than they have been in the last three ice ages.

If you are agreeing that global warming is a problem and have issues with the proposed solutions lets discuss that, but the original post was a link to an article doubting that global warming is happening. So, saying "duh" and acting like no one is doubting it, doesn't make a lot of sense here. The author of that article is doubting it.

Now, if you are done casting aspersions about "folks like me" when you don't even know what I espouse, lets have a talk about what a good solution would be.

[Fred]

Sam, don't expect to have a discussion about what solutions are most sensible with some of these people.

Remember, there are too many folks who simply doubt scientific research. They don't believe that they don't know everything. They refuse to give up their prejudices or narrow conventional wisdom.

It's very hard for a lot of people to accept the fact that there are thousands of people who actually do know better (about one thing or another).

Often, the people who know better are the people whose job it is to do experiments and validate data. Scientists. Yes, that gross word: experts.

Those "elitists" who went to school for at least 25 years to merely qualify for the position of being of being lowest on the totem pole of other scientists. And then, their entire life's work is nearly exclusively thankless years of producing research and analysis and critical data.

Most of these scientists don't do it to become famous. They do it because they're fucking scientists.

D. Ox, on the other hand is passionately defending her ignorance by lying to protect her prejudices:

D. Ox: "The U.S. has been cutting back on CO2 emissions faster than any other major industrial power without signing on to the reidiculous [SIC] Kyoto treaty."

Oops...
U.S. projects steep rise in CO2 emissions
Report anticipates 9.2 billion tons of greenhouse gases in 2020
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17441481/

It's not worth debating solutions with a liar, Sam.

[The Mad Pigeon]

Holy [PIGEONED]! I go out of town for three days and look what happens. It seems everyone's fighting while at the same time agreeing a post-Loraxian environment would be bad juju (a free puce-colored thneed for the first person who know what I mean by "post-Loraxian").

Oddly enough, I had some thoughts on this topic almost a year ago:

Global Warming: The Pigeon's Response

Now how 'bout some fire and brimstone for the Tibet open Thread, fellas?

[Sam Tresler]

Oh right.... this wasn't the first time I went on a tirade about Global Warming with Mogs! Good times.

P.S. full disclosue: Fred is a co-worker of mind (who should watch his language on a family blog!)

[MOGS]

I propose a shift in focus:

Tibet perhaps?