Climate change crisis

Discussion in 'Politics and Society' started by earl, Oct 22, 2019.

  1. earl

    earl ?

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2005
    Messages:
    1,623
    Likes Received:
    18
  2. juantoo3

    juantoo3 ....whys guy.... ʎʇıɹoɥʇnɐ uoıʇsǝnb

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    8,172
    Likes Received:
    444
    I'm not going here, I'll just leave this for consideration. I know you are old enough to remember, because I sure do:

    "Does anyone out there think we’re at the dawn of a new ice age?

    If we had asked that question just 40 years ago, an astonishing number of people — including some climatologists — would have answered yes. On April 28, 1975, Newsweek published a provocative article, “The Cooling World,” in which writer and science editor Peter Gwynne described a significant chilling of the world’s climate, with evidence accumulating “so massively that meteorologists are hard-pressed to keep up with it.” He raised the possibility of shorter growing seasons and poor crop yields, famine, and shipping lanes blocked by ice, perhaps to begin as soon as the mid-1980s. Meteorologists, he wrote, were “almost unanimous” in the opinion that our planet was getting colder. Over the years that followed, Gwynne’s article became one of the most-cited stories in Newsweek’s history.

    And Gwynne’s was no lone voice, at least in the popular press. Scores of similar articles, some with even more dire predictions of a “little ice age” to come, appeared during the 1970s in such mainstream publications as Time, Science Digest, The Los Angeles Times, Fortune, The Chicago Tribune, New York Magazine, The New York Times, The Christian Science Monitor, Popular Science, and National Geographic. A worldwide freeze proved irresistible to feature writers prowling for a sexy news peg. “The media are having a lot of fun with this situation,” observed climatologist J. Murray Mitchell."
     
    Last edited: Oct 25, 2019
    RJM likes this.
  3. Arif Ghamiq

    Arif Ghamiq Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2018
    Messages:
    509
    Likes Received:
    219
    I grew up in the 70's & 80's hearing about the end of the world because of the green house effect - it's getting old and maybe it's time for humankind to fade into extinction - the planet will go on.

    What the He'll are we doing here that's so Damn important that we need to keep on existing for thousands and/or millions of years anyway ?
     
  4. wil

    wil UNeyeR1 Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2005
    Messages:
    22,710
    Likes Received:
    2,454
    Too late...

    All of us that are older than 50 are aware of what the science was then...some of us at that age are aware of what the science is now.
     
  5. RJM

    RJM God Feeds the Ravens Admin

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2016
    Messages:
    8,251
    Likes Received:
    1,885
    The problem is that western nations are the only ones trying to bring down carbon etc, to the point where idiots are gluing themselves to underground trains in London -- electric trains mind you -- in order to create awareness of climate change by bringing the underground to a halt.

    But the rest of the world, which supposedly contributes most to global warming, has no interest in doing anything about it.

    And in the meantime where we need and have the ability for collective global action to combat such real and serious problems as the destruction of our Amazon 'lung' we are choosing instead to go for nationalism and isolationism.

    The climate change issue has been abducted by the lunatic fringe and is now just irritating the hell out of normal sensible people, imo. They have spoilt their own cause by exaggeration and disruption of other people's lives.
     
  6. juantoo3

    juantoo3 ....whys guy.... ʎʇıɹoɥʇnɐ uoıʇsǝnb

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    8,172
    Likes Received:
    444
    So since the science then is at diametric odds with the science now...what faith should I place in science? If they couldn't get it right then, why should I believe they have it right now? Technology will always improve, statistical data collection methods will always improve, but using past historical records and past performance to project I would think in about 20 years the "science/media" tag team will be touting another Ice Age again - Probably after Al Gore's carbon tax is instituted and everybody in this country is paying tax on the fact that they were born and draw breath...tax money that will be collected and spent by whom, exactly?

    The only thing the same between then and now is the sensationalist doomsday "sky is falling" predictions pasted throughout mass media.

    What is changing is the population of humans overcrowding the Earth. The solution to that is not pumping carbon into a hole in the ground, that doesn't make carbon go away, and it doesn't change the fact that life as we know it on this planet requires carbon.

    When I was a kid there were 5 billion people on the planet. We're pushing 8 billion now, we went from 7 to 8 billion in about ten years. The planet cannot sustain that kind of population growth. I propose a Malthusian solution - retroactive abortion. When politicians finish their term limited service, they report to the abortion station to be terminated. That would solve a LOT of the world's problems. ;)
     
  7. wil

    wil UNeyeR1 Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2005
    Messages:
    22,710
    Likes Received:
    2,454
    Science isn't at odds with science, it is at odds with politicians and ostriches.

    Sure you can find detractors, always have been able to find someone to disagree.

    I really don't want to continue this line of discussion with you. You have had my respect intellectually in the past... I've lost that.
     
  8. juantoo3

    juantoo3 ....whys guy.... ʎʇıɹoɥʇnɐ uoıʇsǝnb

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    8,172
    Likes Received:
    444
    Don't forget the Ozone! The Ozone is depleted too! The world is gonna end because the Ozone is disappearing!

    Then I learned about Ozone at ground level...
     
  9. juantoo3

    juantoo3 ....whys guy.... ʎʇıɹoɥʇnɐ uoıʇsǝnb

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    8,172
    Likes Received:
    444
    Not sure how one can say science is at odds with politicians...actually I can, but:

    It is politicians and the media who abuse science. My wake up call was when they cracked the Genome code...remember that? All over the news how it was going to solve all these medical problems, blah blah blah.

    Then I watched the Surgeon General and former head of the Genome Project scold a reporter over just this very issue. (Need a name? I shook the man's hand at a presentation)

    Numbers don't lie, but you can darn sure lie with numbers.
     
  10. Thomas

    Thomas Administrator Admin

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2003
    Messages:
    12,205
    Likes Received:
    2,513
    Oh, science has often been at odds with science ... Galileo was, Einstein was ... there are competing theories ... scientists are human, after all.
     
    juantoo3 and RJM like this.
  11. Cino

    Cino Big Love! (Atheist mystic) Admin

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2018
    Messages:
    3,226
    Likes Received:
    1,719
    What did you learn about ground-level ozone? Will it protect you from harmful solar radiation like the stratospheric ozone? Will it cause respiratory problems?
     
    RJM likes this.
  12. juantoo3

    juantoo3 ....whys guy.... ʎʇıɹoɥʇnɐ uoıʇsǝnb

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    8,172
    Likes Received:
    444
    I don't know, but apparently it isn't good for crops.

    But the World's still here!
     
  13. Cino

    Cino Big Love! (Atheist mystic) Admin

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2018
    Messages:
    3,226
    Likes Received:
    1,719
    In all its glorious complexity, yes. Good for us!
     
  14. juantoo3

    juantoo3 ....whys guy.... ʎʇıɹoɥʇnɐ uoıʇsǝnb

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    8,172
    Likes Received:
    444
    Agreed. The issue isn't science. Scientists - that is, the real ones who are actually doing the research and who are honest and not politically motivated - will be the first to say as much.

    The issue is those who pretend to speak on behalf of science to push a political agenda. Whether the world is going to freeze solid or do the quick roast is irrelevant inasmuch as "the sky is falling!" sensationalism to get people to stop reasoning and not look too closely and "must act now before it's too late!"

    The climate changes, it a natural occurrence. Has human activity over the past 200 years accelerated any of that? Probably, but not to the point the sensationalists would have us believe. The sensationalists are not scientists, I don't care how much they claim what they are saying is scientific - it isn't, it is sensationalist to get people to suspend critically analyzing the situation. The issue is with "way past the time for denial" and "irrefutable" which is clearly and unmistakably intended to silence any logical critique.
     
    Last edited: Oct 25, 2019
  15. juantoo3

    juantoo3 ....whys guy.... ʎʇıɹoɥʇnɐ uoıʇsǝnb

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    8,172
    Likes Received:
    444
    It is nothing to do with science and everything to do with mass group psychology
     
  16. Cino

    Cino Big Love! (Atheist mystic) Admin

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2018
    Messages:
    3,226
    Likes Received:
    1,719
    Psychology is a science, on the other hand.
     
    juantoo3 likes this.
  17. juantoo3

    juantoo3 ....whys guy.... ʎʇıɹoɥʇnɐ uoıʇsǝnb

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    8,172
    Likes Received:
    444
    Touche. It has nothing to do with climate science - meteorology, and everything to do with mass psychology - propaganda.
     
  18. muhammad_isa

    muhammad_isa Save Our Souls

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2019
    Messages:
    2,774
    Likes Received:
    587
    ..so according to you then, people are just being alarmist.
    I don't agree .. I think it's a very serious issue.

    I don't expect anything though. Generally, most people are more concerned
    about themselves than others :(
     
  19. juantoo3

    juantoo3 ....whys guy.... ʎʇıɹoɥʇnɐ uoıʇsǝnb

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    8,172
    Likes Received:
    444
    No, people with an agenda, politicians, are just being alarmist. Most of the rest...cattle in their eyes (ask Nietzche)...are oblivious and believe what they are told, especially if they are told over and over and over and over....as you pointed to. Come to think of it, Orwell covered this in 1984.

    Who broke ground on the whole global warming deal? Who started this, and more important why did he start it?

    I've already provided the answer. It's an inconvenient truth.
     
    Last edited: Oct 27, 2019
  20. juantoo3

    juantoo3 ....whys guy.... ʎʇıɹoɥʇnɐ uoıʇsǝnb

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    8,172
    Likes Received:
    444
    Have you ever set aside your personal inclinations and looked at something like this with fresh eyes? Set aside your predisposition and attempt a neutral look at a matter?

    That is what scientists are trained to do. That is what theologians are trained to do. That is what journalists purport to do, but haven't for some time now (and recently we have video and audio evidence of this). This is what academicians do when they are not fettered or tethered or otherwise obliged.

    The powers that be (specifically on the left in this case) don't want anybody to look into this deeply, pay no attention to the man behind the curtain. This is clearly evident in the vicious attitudes levelled as those who dare to question the propaganda mantra.
     

Share This Page