Global Warming Scam

[Buckaroo]

Seriously though, what is the worst thing that could happen? Lets deal with the risks rather than trying to promote something with inefficient evidence.

So the earth is hotter than it ever has been in the past 400-1000 years, woop de do right?

Even if it was hotter now than it ever has been in the past 4million years! Still not all that hot right? considering how long the earth has been around?

I for one don't plan on living by the shore 300 years from now. Buy beach front property in Nevada haha!

Global warming is good for the earth but bad for unprepared people. Prepare them no?

How do you propose we "prepare" for a possible global depression? Stockpile canned goods and fuel, and learn how to shoot? Watch Mad Max multiple times, until we're used to the idea? Come up with inventive recipes for mud biscuits, because the majority of the arable land that we've established has turned to desert?

Not my idea of living. But, as much as I've disagreed with you on this thread, I think you may be correct on the basic point (though our reasoning is different) that adaptation is the only real strategy. We're screwed already.

 

[Buckaroo]

This is all old hat. I doubt I will ever really start caring about the environment any time soon as long as we have the indoors to work with.

If you actually believe this, then you are beneath contempt.* I think you're now being deliberately provocative.

*Edited to remove namecalling, as it is unbecoming.

 

[Ceritus]

I care about the world my children get.

Here in Australia the current drought has been changed in classification from 1 in 100 years to 1 in 1000 years. This is unprecedented, with many accepting that this is not just a drought that comes and goes, but a permanent change in climate. That is water is going to be much scarcer. Rainfall when it comes will be a lot less usefull, as runoff will be reduced. That is, when the ground is dry, the runoff into dams doesn't work until the ground the rain is on is soaked. For the projected 30% reduction in rainfall, we will get, say, 50% less runoff. The droughts will be much more severe.

1 in a 1000 years!!! oh no!!!! how old is that continent again? So if it happened 1000 years ago what cause it then? Global warming? caused by humans? please. Permanent change in climate, ok. Take a look at the african deserts, were they caused by AGW? I'm sorry but climates change, and never permanently. Define permanent please. There are shifts in the earth crust that makes the idea of a permanent climate ludicris. Worse comes to worse you either die adapt or move to a place more hospitable. That is why we have the wonderful melting pot in the world today, because people tend to move from places that do not suit them.

As sad as it sounds I only care about myself and my own, which includes my family and if the tables were reversed I would start planning on moving fairly soon depending on how much I bought into the fear mongering. If you die it probably will not effect me if the entire country of australia bit the dust or got displaced it would have a slight effect on me for a brief period of time, because the news will only cover the aussies and not the person getting shot 45 miles away from where I live which would be more entertaining.

If you really did worry about the future of your children you would be working out a fine place to move rather than trying to fight something that cannot be faught.

 

[Ceritus]

How do you propose we "prepare" for a possible global depression? Stockpile canned goods and fuel, and learn how to shoot? Watch Mad Max multiple times, until we're used to the idea? Come up with inventive recipes for mud biscuits, because the majority of the arable land that we've established has turned to desert?

Not my idea of living. But, as much as I've disagreed with you on this thread, I think you may be correct on the basic point (though our reasoning is different) that adaptation is the only real strategy. We're screwed already.

Start engineering floating houses perhaps? Better cheaper boats? Humidity harvesters? Teaching people how to move efficiently?

 

[varwoche]

We're screwed already.

I don't disagree, however I think it would be wise if we didn't think of being screwed as a binary situation. (Not to imply that you think that way.)

 

[Ceritus]

If you actually believe this, then you are beneath contempt, and an idiot to boot.* I think you're now being deliberately provocative.

*Note that I have not violated forum rules, in that this is a contingent statement.

I am being deliberately provocative just like you. Because all in all I just hear whining and it is annoying.

What would stop the whining ultimatley? If nothing could stop it then its pretty futile even discussing the topic.

What exactly would make you happy to see be done if it could be done?

 

[Buckaroo]

I am being deliberately provocative just like you. Because all in all I just hear whining and it is annoying.

Since you're just trolling to get a rise out of us, and are therefore not worth any further thought...

What exactly would make you happy to see be done if it could be done?

... how about invoking the "ignore" list? Which I now happily do.

 

[Ceritus]

That is it, ignore the legit questions.

Look at my post history and notice I am in no way a troll. I just have a different opinion than you when it comes to the GW political scam.

We are on the same team its just I need much, much more convincing.

 

[a_unique_person]

What do you classify as whining?

 

[BobK]

I care about the world my children get.

Here in Australia the current drought has been changed in classification from 1 in 100 years to 1 in 1000 years. This is unprecedented, with many accepting that this is not just a drought that comes and goes, but a permanent change in climate. That is water is going to be much scarcer. Rainfall when it comes will be a lot less usefull, as runoff will be reduced. That is, when the ground is dry, the runoff into dams doesn't work until the ground the rain is on is soaked. For the projected 30% reduction in rainfall, we will get, say, 50% less runoff. The droughts will be much more severe.

I don't know where you've been getting your material from, but you might consider questioning the source. Your 1000 year drought seems to be pretty normal for your country. So why are you whining about it?

Here the black line is the Australia 11 year running average from your own Bureau of Meteorology


Click the image for full-size.

 

[lenny]

I don't know where you've been getting your material from, but you might consider questioning the source. Your 1000 year drought seems to be pretty normal for your country.

from the same location as the graph you posted (did you not see this? if so the claim that this is "normal" is rather silly. at the same time i am not sure how to evaluate the statement that this is a "1000 year drought" given the length of the observational record. but would you stand by your claim of "pretty normal" given the words below?)

http://www.bom.gov.au/announcements/media_releases/climate/drought/20061103.shtml

Drought Statement - Issued 3rd November 2006


Statement on Drought for the 3, 6, and 10-month periods ending 31st October 2006
ISSUED 3rd November 2006 by the National Climate Centre

Drought intensifies over eastern and southern Australia as spring rains fail
Rainfall deficiencies have been gradually spreading over southern and eastern Australia during 2006, but the situation has taken a distinct turn for the worse from August, with a near total failure of the late-winter to mid-spring rains. In the historical record dating from 1900, it was the driest August to October period averaged across SA, the second driest averaged over Victoria and the Murray Darling Basin, and the third driest for NSW whose state-average was boosted by above-normal falls along the north coast.

 

[a_unique_person]

I don't know where you've been getting your material from, but you might consider questioning the source. Your 1000 year drought seems to be pretty normal for your country. So why are you whining about it?

Here the black line is the Australia 11 year running average from your own Bureau of Meteorology

http://img220.imageshack.us/my.php?image=rainfallaustraliaxx1.gifhttp://img220.imageshack.us/img220/1093/rainfallaustraliaxx1.th.gif
Click the image for full-size.

The North is getting more tropical rain, the South is getting less. This year, which is not yet finished, the drought is hitting really hard. Areas which have never had a crop failure are now experiencing water supplied for towns and cities running out, and crops failing.

 

[BobK]

The North is getting more tropical rain, the South is getting less. This year, which is not yet finished, the drought is hitting really hard. Areas which have never had a crop failure are now experiencing water supplied for towns and cities running out, and crops failing.

I assume by south you mean the Murray-Darling Basin where over half Australia's population lives and 40% of your food is produced.

According to this link your country is already using 80% of what used to flow to the sea.

Jennifer Marohasy has a rainfall graph of the basin on this page so I won't reproduce it here. If doesn't look much different than the one for the entire country. Actually a little better than the country the last couple years.

You might want to consider the drought as being caused by population increase and subsequent over-use of what appears to be relatively normal resources. If you Aussies kept it in your pants more often maybe you wouldn't be having this problem.

 

[Steve]

I care about the world my children get.

Here in Australia the current drought has been changed in classification from 1 in 100 years to 1 in 1000 years. This is unprecedented, with many accepting that this is not just a drought that comes and goes, but a permanent change in climate. That is water is going to be much scarcer. Rainfall when it comes will be a lot less usefull, as runoff will be reduced. That is, when the ground is dry, the runoff into dams doesn't work until the ground the rain is on is soaked. For the projected 30% reduction in rainfall, we will get, say, 50% less runoff. The droughts will be much more severe.

A 1 in 1000 year drought is not unprecedented. By definition it occurs approximately once every 1000 years. I sincerely doubt that humans had any influence on the causes of the previous 1 in 1000 year droughts. This drought is not, by any stretch, a permanent change in climate as there is no such thing as a permanent change. Climate has experienced short and long term fluctuations for several billion years and will continue to do so long after the human race has disappeared. Based on the current research that I am familiar with, including discussions in these forums, there does not appear to be any strong consensus on how much human activity is contributing to the current warming trend and how much is naturally occuring. I cannot speak for others but personally I find the type of hyperbole contained in the above post to be distracting, and a little inflammatory in terms of encouraging those with a different point of view to over-react in their responses

Having said that, I accept the evidence that there is a human-caused component to the current warming trend. I do not, at this point, accept that is is primarily caused by human activity. I also recognize that a sustained warming trend could have serious repercussions for many millions of people, regardless of the causes. The ongoing study of the current trend is very much warranted in order to find both short-term and long-term solutions to these potential problems, including modifications to human activity that is contributing to the problem. I appreciate the opinions of those involved in the discussions on these boards. I also appreciate the time and effort put into finding the relevant research and posting the links here. It has certainly led me to modify my opinion on the subject - I started out as an AWG "denier".

 

[Piggy]

Because a bunch of our so-called intelligentsia think they and people like them would do a better job controlling the economy than the "invisible hand" of the market economy. To this end, any and every suggestion that there might be a possible emergency in the works is whipped up and exacerbated in the public mind, so that the public will be malleable to the notion of emergency control of the economy in order to save us from an impending catastrophe.

It's an old trick. I fancy most of the pseudo-intellectual psuedo-intelligentsia of today care as little about the climate as the average SUV-driving, gas-guzzling Republican. Their real aim is simply to take the "captains of industry" down a peg or two.

What planet are you living on?

Who are these "intelligentsia"?

How does global climate change actually fit into some plot to "control the economy" (which, by the way, the "invisible hand" can be lousy at, in many circumstances, such as the recent post-deregulation Thai land boom/bust)?

Who is doing the "whipping up", exactly?

How do you square this with the fact that the tendency in the US is, and has long been, to downplay or deny the warming?

And more importantly, aside from your conspiracy theories, how is the mainstream science wrong?

 

[Piggy]

Global warming is a political scam and any intelligent person knows it.

Who is perpetrating this scam and why?

And how did they get the vast majority of mainstream scientists in the field on their side?

 

[a_unique_person]

Global warming is a political scam and any intelligent person knows it.

You mean any intelligent person or real scotsman.

 

[casebro]

from the same location as the graph you posted (did you not see this? if so the claim that this is "normal" is rather silly. at the same time i am not sure how to evaluate the statement that this is a "1000 year drought" given the length of the observational record. but would you stand by your claim of "pretty normal" given the words below?)

http://www.bom.gov.au/announcements/media_releases/climate/drought/20 061103.shtml

Criminitaly, Lenny, don't you know how to read? Your own quote from the Au Meterology site covers only 10 months, and it says "In the historical record dating from 1900, it was the driest August to October period averaged across SA,.." and the rest of the periods are NOT records. If that ain't a once in 100 year drought, what is your definition? Is a three month dry spell even considered a drought at all?

And, it's obvious from the graph, that the black line shows a trend to greater rainfall, not less.

 

[Ceritus]

Who is perpetrating this scam and why?

You for one, as well as many others. People who want to jump on the whistle blowing band wagon claiming doom and gloom.

You for one would probably vote for a person who claims to care about the environment and will do anything and everything to reduce GW "causing" gasses vs a person who wants to help the homeless or to enhance the war on drugs.

All of which are quite useless stances in my opinion.

 

[a_unique_person]

I don't know why this is always brought up as a false dilemma. Homelessness, the poor, etc, has nothing to do with AGW.