Did 2021 deal a fatal blow to climate-change denial?

Warrigal said:
How to reverse this effect? Several solutions are possible but not all are liveable.

#1 Start nuclear war - fill the atmosphere with smoke and other particles that will block out the Sun's radiation. That will lead to rapid cooling and depopulation, which will also reduce the production of CO2.

#2 Stop cutting down forests and reforest urban areas by removing all single storey buildings and making everyone live in 30 storey towers with 15 above ground and 15 below ground. (I'm not really serious here but we must preserve and increase the wilderness spaces because these are the lungs of the planet that convert CO2 to O2.)

#3 The most practical and effective way of dealing with the problem is to stop burning all forms of fossil fuel to produce energy. At the same time industrial processes need to reduce greenhouse emissions or capture and store them. Reuse, recycling and repurposing of waste materials also has benefit for the environment in general in addition to reduction of CO2 being pumped into the atmosphere.
Click to expand...
I suspect #3 is the most likely to happen. The problem is that we have no real agreement, even within the scientific community, as to what should or could be done, and even if we did there is just no way to get worldwide agreement and action on it. Hell, we can't even get the small group of people on this forum to agree!
 

Our perceptions are caused by information colored by our conditioning. The spectrum can go from absolute fantasy to strict scientific fact. Somewhere in between is what our personal perception of all things come from. I have yet to meet anybody that has the market on truth. So the only way to find common ground is by participating with each other rather than defending our position.

"Scientific Consensus: Earth's Climate Is Warming ​

1309_compare_obs_2020_768px.jpg

In Brief:​

A consensus on climate change and its human cause exists. Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals show that human activities are the primary cause of the observed climate-warming trend over the past century.

Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals1 show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree*: Climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities. In addition, most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position. The following is a partial list of these organizations, along with links to their published statements and a selection of related resources.


AMERICAN SCIENTIFIC SOCIETIES​



Statement on Climate Change from 18 Scientific Associations​


"Observations throughout the world make it clear that climate change is occurring, and rigorous scientific research demonstrates that the greenhouse gases emitted by human activities are the primary driver." (2009)2"

4 min read...all 18 studies described

https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

Those who lean towards science, this is important. Those who lean towards fantasy, not too much. :)
 
Gary O' said:
Oh, I do believe the climate is changing.

Stats?......pfffft

The upswing shown could very well be because we didn't record or have means to even know the events like we do now
Click to expand...
I agree. It could be argued that the reported number of any types of event is related to the growth in communications. In the early 20th. century, we had the telephone and the beginnings of a radio network. After WW2, television started to take off and with the invention of the personal computer and the internet, the ability to hear about events across the world was available virtually in real-time.

I too believe that the climate is changing, but I also believe that we are only partly responsible for it.
 
Grampa Don said:
The earth is ever changing. But, the major changes usually take thousands of years. The current change is hundreds of times faster.

Fact: Glaciers and sea ice are disappearing rapidly.
Fact: The oceans are getting warmer.
Fact: The percentage of CO2 in the atmosphere is increasing drastically.
Fact: CO2 is a green house gas.
Fact: Most of this additional CO2 is produced by burning fossil fuels.

All of these have been measured, and the numbers are there if you want to search for them. Do you think maybe there's a reason to start worrying a little?
Click to expand...


If I have to search for it ?...... I don't see it as a problem frankly. No I'm not worried.

Ok, do you wish to stop burning fossil fuels ? And rely on the sun ? Which does not shine here , sometimes for the entire winter . {Last year we had 43 straight days of no sunshine] Or perhaps rely on the wind ? ...... There is not even a breeze out there just now.

Where are we going to get all the electricity needed to charge the batteries in these electric cars ?

Maybe we could ride horses ..... which dump roughly 200 tons of horseshit on the street [in any sizeable city] Not to mention thousands of gallons of horse-piss as well .... There's a nice alternative <sarc>

No lights, no tv/radio .... no pumps to pump the water . Burn wood ? for heat .

Doesn't a 'warm' age .......... beat the hell out of another ice-age ?

Trust me ....... I Luv Polar bears all animals [except snakes] The animals will learn to evolve with / adapt to, what ever mother nature throws at them ....... just like they always have .......... they don't need us ........... jmo.
 
IFortuna said:
Science changes often, just ask a neuroscientist or a psychologist, or a medical doctor, etc. :)
Climate change has been happening at many times during history. and that has been proven.
Click to expand...
Yes, and that is why we know what is happening today is man-made. We know that not only because we know of past events but we also know what has happened on other planets. Refusing to accept that is like refusing 2 plus 2 does not equal 4. When there is enough carbon dioxide in the air, there is global warming. When the planet gets hot enough, people start dying, the earth itself starts dying because of drought, methane that has been frozen in-ground is released, and that increases the temperature. If this can not be stopped soon enough, it will be too late to stop it and where will all the people go when their land is gone because of rising seas, or there is no water because of no end to the drought? This is really equal to 2 plus 2 equals 4. This happens and then that happens.
 
O
Alligatorob said:
I don't think so, most people, on both sides, base their opinions on belief and short term personal observation. Reality can only be determined by good science (inexactly at best) and long term widely spread averages. So I don't see much chance of change, not in a more rational direction anyway.

I don't think so, science itself is relatively stable, but interpretations change. Its just a part of good science, as more data becomes available and more bright minds look into it accepted interpretation changes. While we may not all be scientists we do need to remember this, keeping it in mind when listening to scientific conclusions. They may change.

A changing paradigm is a sign of good science, and should not raise concern.
Click to expand...

Vida May said:
Yes, and that is why we know what is happening today is man-made. We know that not only because we know of past events but we also know what has happened on other planets. Refusing to accept that is like refusing 2 plus 2 does not equal 4. When there is enough carbon dioxide in the air, there is global warming. When the planet gets hot enough, people start dying, the earth itself starts dying because of drought, methane that has been frozen in-ground is released, and that increases the temperature. If this can not be stopped soon enough, it will be too late to stop it and where will all the people go when their land is gone because of rising seas, or there is no water because of no end to the drought? This is really equal to 2 plus 2 equals 4. This happens and then that happens.
Click to expand...
You might be interested in a monograph by a friend of mine, Auckland University Maths professor retired after 40 years, Chris King, Symbiotic Existential Cosmology. He speaks about extinction. Just Google his name and his work will come up. :)
 
Jackie23 said:
I believe that one of the most important ways to reverse climate change is to vote for politicians that take climate change seriously.
Click to expand...
We are not supposed to be political, but what you said amuses me. People thought pharaohs could control what happens and we know they could not so why do we keep thinking the president has the power of gods and blame them for things that are out of their control?

In Mesopotamia, a bad weather event would result in the people throwing out their ruler and getting a new one. Bad weather events have brought down several civilizations. Why do we continue to behave as though our rulers can have the power of gods? Especially in the US where a new president can completely undo what the previous president has done?

President Carter had us conserving and highly invested in developing alternative energy, and Reagan said that was not necessary and undid everything Carter put in place. At least half the nation would vote for someone who thinks as Reagan thought. If the masses are not well educated and act like people in ancient times, good things will not come out of this. We must focus on all of us being well educated and all of us refusing products wrapped in plastic, etc..
 
@rgp -- You make some valid points. That's why I am not optimistic about a solution. We are so dependent on fossil fuels that it will be extremely difficult to replace them and still maintain our current lifestyle. But, consider this: Even if the climate change were not a problem, eventually the fossil fuels will run out. What happens then?

I personally feel we should consider nuclear power again. Yes, it's scary. But we now have the knowledge and experience to do it more safely. And maybe someday we will finally figure out how to use nuclear fusion. There is also unlimited energy beneath our feet if we could get to it.

None of this is really my problem. In a few years, I will be history. It's the young people and future generations who will have to deal with it. I'm afraid it may not be pleasant.

You mention that animals will adapt. Some will, but many will just disappear. Which group will we be in?
 
Capt Lightning said:
I agree. It could be argued that the reported number of any types of event is related to the growth in communications. In the early 20th. century, we had the telephone and the beginnings of a radio network. After WW2, television started to take off and with the invention of the personal computer and the internet, the ability to hear about events across the world was available virtually in real-time.

I too believe that the climate is changing, but I also believe that we are only partly responsible for it.
Click to expand...
Do you believe what is happening today regarding global warming would be happening if humans were doing nothing to cause what is happening? I ask because all though I think the rapid global warming is man-made, history and science tell us we are not the only cause of climate change. This planet has had at least 5 mass extinction events long before we got here.

I do not understand why mystery novels are so popular but not science and history books. There are so many really fun things to talk about. Like how about the Mayan calendar and the end of the Great Cycle? Remember how nervous we got as we neared 2012? Nothing suddenly happened and we forgot all about the Mayan calendar. But, for whatever reason, a lot is happening now and there may be more than one explanation of this.
 
Grampa Don said:
@rgp -- You make some valid points. That's why I am not optimistic about a solution. We are so dependent on fossil fuels that it will be extremely difficult to replace them and still maintain our current lifestyle. But, consider this: Even if the climate change were not a problem, eventually the fossil fuels will run out. What happens then?

I personally feel we should consider nuclear power again. Yes, it's scary. But we now have the knowledge and experience to do it more safely. And maybe someday we will finally figure out how to use nuclear fusion. There is also unlimited energy beneath our feet if we could get to it.

None of this is really my problem. In a few years, I will be history. It's the young people and future generations who will have to deal with it. I'm afraid it may not be pleasant.

You mention that animals will adapt. Some will, but many will just disappear. Which group will we be in?
Click to expand...
When I saw the title of this thread, I wanted to say the fires we had 2 years ago were a wake-up call for me. I thought global warming was happening but that I would be long dead before that mattered to me. Now it is clear we are not talking about a distant future but here and now.

Scientists have had to invent a new term for labeling more extreme drought than "extreme". We now have "exceptional" drought areas that are more extreme than extreme. And the size of these drought areas is large. Where there is exceptional drought conditions, the earth starts dying, nothing can live on that land and if this continues all that land will be a desert. When land gets too dry, rain does not soak in but rolls off like water on concrete.

I live in timber country and we now live in fear of fires more than we ever did. We know trees are dying and our forest is threatened. Our farmers are extremely aware of the problem and we have fought over an increasingly diminishing water supply. We depend on a snowpack for year-round water and it is melting too fast.
 
It is not an argument of climate change rather, what is the impact of mankind on our environment. There are a few undeniable facts proving man is contributing. First is removing forest land to build cities & communities. Second is the obvious pollution we omit with vehicles and factories. Another is the methane gas from animals raised by man. Dumping waste and plastics in our oceans is another. Add these to natural changes and we have a very serious problem.
 
Most of the problems we're facing today are the result of people not believing in science.

I was watching The News Hour last night and they had a woman wearing a hijab doing analysis of current events, including the pandemic. Now why in the hell would I want to listen to analysis from a religious nut? So I turned off the politically correct B.S. I support her right to practice her religion, but I have no interest in the religious perspective on science.
 
Vida May said:
We are not supposed to be political, but what you said amuses me. People thought pharaohs could control what happens and we know they could not so why do we keep thinking the president has the power of gods and blame them for things that are out of their control?

In Mesopotamia, a bad weather event would result in the people throwing out their ruler and getting a new one. Bad weather events have brought down several civilizations. Why do we continue to behave as though our rulers can have the power of gods? Especially in the US where a new president can completely undo what the previous president has done?

President Carter had us conserving and highly invested in developing alternative energy, and Reagan said that was not necessary and undid everything Carter put in place. At least half the nation would vote for someone who thinks as Reagan thought. If the masses are not well educated and act like people in ancient times, good things will not come out of this. We must focus on all of us being well educated and all of us refusing products wrapped in plastic, etc..
Click to expand...
Yes, well I did not say this was going to happen anytime soon......believe me I realize that when half the country believe that Climate Change is a weather event it's bloody unlikely to happen soon....many more people will have to die of "weather events" before they realize the're voting for the wrong people.
 
Jackie23 said:
Yes, well I did not say this was going to happen anytime soon......believe me I realize that when half the country believe that Climate Change is a weather event it's bloody unlikely to happen soon....many more people will have to die of "weather events" before they realize the're voting for the wrong people.
Click to expand...
I have heard talk of other countries suing countries for their losses. If Nations can sue nations, that might be a game-changer?

Some countries have already lost a significant amount of land, and land loss is expected to affect 50.465 million people in China. The Chinese are long-term planners. I wonder if that prediction is determining their decisions now?

[quoter]Climate action lawsuits against governments and corporations have spread across 28 countries, according to a new analysis.

The study reveals that more than 1,300 legal actions concerning climate change have been brought since 1990.

While the US – with 1,023 cases – remains the leader in climate litigation, other countries are increasingly seeing individuals, charities and states take action.
https://www.theguardian.com/environ...firms-28-countries-sued-climate-crisis-report [/quote]
 
Warrigal stated : "The trouble is that most people have zero understanding of thermodynamics or climate which is often
confused with weather. It is a fact that the earth is warming. The reason for the increase is that the earth receives radiant energy from the sun and reflects some of it back into space but not all of it. This is the greenhouse effect and it is caused by gases like carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane (CH4). If the green house gases keep increasing, the warming will keep happening."
That is the heart of climate change, and well stated.
When even the Pope and most religious leaders admit to the facts of climate change; there are some, who will still deny it, even with overwhelming scientific evidence. These are the types, who still argue the earth is flat. I think we should acknowledge that this is their unchanging view, and move on to alleviate this serious world problem
 
Grampa Don said:
@rgp -- You make some valid points. That's why I am not optimistic about a solution. We are so dependent on fossil fuels that it will be extremely difficult to replace them and still maintain our current lifestyle. But, consider this: Even if the climate change were not a problem, eventually the fossil fuels will run out. What happens then?

I personally feel we should consider nuclear power again. Yes, it's scary. But we now have the knowledge and experience to do it more safely. And maybe someday we will finally figure out how to use nuclear fusion. There is also unlimited energy beneath our feet if we could get to it.

None of this is really my problem. In a few years, I will be history. It's the young people and future generations who will have to deal with it. I'm afraid it may not be pleasant.

You mention that animals will adapt. Some will, but many will just disappear. Which group will we be in?
Click to expand...


"eventually the fossil fuels will run out. What happens then?"

Are you sure ? I'm not so sure they will ? And IMO, if & when that might happen ..... that might likely bring about the end of the world ?

I agree about nuclear ... But it scares so many , to the point of craziness , that I think will only get harder to sell ?

"There is also unlimited energy beneath our feet if we could get to it."

What is all this fuel ? If you believe fossil fuel will run out ?


"You mention that animals will adapt. Some will, but many will just disappear. Which group will we be in?"

We IMO will be among those that will just disappear ....... but of course [again opinion] that will be millennina away. I do think that for some , some , time to come though .... us and the other animals will adapt as necessary along the way. But at some point ...... it will all just end.
 
@rgp -- There is not an infinite amount of fossil fuel. We have already gotten the easy stuff. And, we are going through it faster than we ever did in the past. I don't know how long it will last, but eventually our descendants will have to do without it. If we don't have alternatives, that could be rough.

The energy beneath our feet is heat, not fuel. It is already being used in areas like Iceland where magma comes near the surface. Theoretically, if you could bore down deep enough, you could draw on it anywhere. Our current technology can't, but that could change.

I suspect you may be right that we will disappear. But, even if it is millennia away, that does not give me a warm fuzzy feeling. And, why rush it?
 
rgp said:
"eventually the fossil fuels will run out. What happens then?"

Are you sure ? I'm not so sure they will ? And IMO, if & when that might happen ..... that might likely bring about the end of the world ?

I agree about nuclear ... But it scares so many , to the point of craziness , that I think will only get harder to sell ?

"There is also unlimited energy beneath our feet if we could get to it."

What is all this fuel ? If you believe fossil fuel will run out ?


"You mention that animals will adapt. Some will, but many will just disappear. Which group will we be in?"

We IMO will be among those that will just disappear ....... but of course [again opinion] that will be millennina away. I do think that for some , some , time to come though .... us and the other animals will adapt as necessary along the way. But at some point ...... it will all just end.
Click to expand...
The problem with nuclear energy is the waste and how to dispose of it. Nobody wants it in their backyard (NIMBY).

But now that so many companies are getting into the rocket business, we could just launch all that waste into outer space. In another 100 years, we'll have clean energy sources that eliminate that waste, or perhaps cold fusion power or whatever new technology comes along that doesn't have waste materials that need to be disposed of. For now, dumping it into outer space would take care of the problem.
 
Irwin said:
The problem with nuclear energy is the waste and how to dispose of it. Nobody wants it in their backyard (NIMBY).

But now that so many companies are getting into the rocket business, we could just launch all that waste into outer space. In another 100 years, we'll have clean energy sources that eliminate that waste, or perhaps cold fusion power or whatever new technology comes along that doesn't have waste materials that need to be disposed of. For now, dumping it into outer space would take care of the problem.
Click to expand...
True. But the problem with blasting the waste into space is that Uranium is really heavy. That's why spent uranium is sometimes used in artillery shells. And shooting stuff into space is really expensive and uses a lot of fuel. We could safely store nuclear waste if we had the will to do it.
 
Grampa Don said:
True. But the problem with blasting the waste into space is that Uranium is really heavy. That's why spent uranium is sometimes used in artillery shells. And shooting stuff into space is really expensive and uses a lot of fuel. We could safely store nuclear waste if we had the will to do it.
Click to expand...
Those are good reasons why we shouldn't use nuclear energy.
 
Devi said:
Nuclear? One word: Fukushima.

The issues are still ongoing.
Click to expand...


Not to be nit-picky but ....... The original problem was nature .... the earthquake / Tsunami . Not the nuclear plant. Had the Tsunami not happened .... Fukushima would still be working properly.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top