climate change

[wunfellaff]

What, vast tracts of uncultivated wasteland and forest supporting a bare handful of us while the rest starve? No farming, no irrigation, no logging? Good luck with that pitch.

In the real world, the onus is on humans to modify the environment entirely to our best interests like we have been doing for thousands of years. The fundamental issue is what our best interests truly are in the mid to long term, which is the only way in which ecological questions are even remotely relevant.

With regard to the OP, we might NOT all be Neil Lennon. but we are ALL 'looking after JoJo''

[ICTChris]

What, vast tracts of uncultivated wasteland and forest supporting a bare handful of us while the rest starve? No farming, no irrigation, no logging? Good luck with that pitch.

In the real world, the onus is on humans to modify the environment entirely to our best interests like we have been doing for thousands of years. The fundamental issue is what our best interests truly are in the mid to long term, which is the only way in which ecological questions are even remotely relevant.

My word, I entirely agree with this. Good man vikingTon.

[jojo]

With regard to the OP, we might NOT all be Neil Lennon. but we are ALL 'looking after JoJo''

pardon?

[~~~]

The temp is also rising on mars.....wonder if it has anything to do with that big hot yellowy thing in the sky?

NASA have been putting SUV's on Mars for years now

[wunfellaff]

Google it, with your last few posts on the riot thread, i think you would like it.

[xbl]

What, vast tracts of uncultivated wasteland and forest supporting a bare handful of us while the rest starve? No farming, no irrigation, no logging? Good luck with that pitch.

In the real world, the onus is on humans to modify the environment entirely to our best interests like we have been doing for thousands of years. The fundamental issue is what our best interests truly are in the mid to long term, which is the only way in which ecological questions are even remotely relevant.

Lets not take it to extremes eh? Obviously we adapt our environment, everyone adapts their environment. So taking my point and going to extremes is a bit silly. It makes financial and ecological sense to try and minimise our impact. I take a pragmatic view on this, not a wild hippy belief like you are implying.

[10 CC ICT]

You put your rubbish in the bin and you try and leave the place like you found it. I think thats the good way to go really. As a species, we should try and leave the planet like we found it.

How many of us consider what happens to the rubbish after we've put it in the bin? Barges of household waste have been dumped in the sea for years and there is evidence that marine life is now suffering because of it. Do we turn a blind eye to this as it's not going to affect our generation or do we stop the rot?

There is much we can do to minimise our disruptive effect on the planet while maximising the benefits to mankind. It's finding the right balance.

[vikingTON]

Lets not take it to extremes eh? Obviously we adapt our environment, everyone adapts their environment. So taking my point and going to extremes is a bit silly. I take a pragmatic view on this, not a wild hippy belief like you are implying.

Well that last posts doesn't read pragmatic at all. We should 'leave it as it is' appears to be stopping the clock at an entirely arbitrary point. Now? Because in the future we can do a lot better than we are now? Earlier?

But this is the bit I don't get:

It makes financial and ecological sense to try and minimise our impact.

In what way? How has the advance of farming into previously uninhabitable areas through modern technology been financially harmful for us? For the billions of people who are living on the breadline with food prices?

Obviously no-one here is advocating setting up huge chicken factories across the entire Amazon basin but the reality is technology has the power to make better efficiencies than we can now. GM would be a good thing. There's no stopping or setting back a clock, the world is currently an entirely human-influenced habitat. So doesn't it make sense that we improve what we have done until now?

[xbl]

Well that last posts doesn't read pragmatic at all. We should 'leave it as it is' appears to be stopping the clock at an entirely arbitrary point. Now? Because in the future we can do a lot better than we are now? Earlier?

But this is the bit I don't get:

In what way? How has the advance of farming into previously uninhabitable areas through modern technology been financially harmful for us? For the billions of people who are living on the breadline with food prices?

Obviously no-one here is advocating setting up huge chicken factories across the entire Amazon basin but the reality is technology has the power to make better efficiencies than we can now. GM would be a good thing. There's no stopping or setting back a clock, the world is currently an entirely human-influenced habitat. So doesn't it make sense that we improve what we have done until now?

I'm not talking about "stopping the clock" though. I'm talking about trying to minimise our impact. Thats a different thing. I'm saying we should be looking into more modern technologies, into better use of resources, so that we minimise our impact on the planet. Of course we will have an impact. All animals have an impact on the environment. But why not try and keep moving forward and come up with better ways to do things that don't involve raping the planet? I think you're reading my posts and assuming that I'm some sort of hippy. I'm not.

[Diamonds are Forever]

you no what, ive thought about it and ive come to the conclusion that the climate is changing and for the worse. the whole summer has been like a fucking rainy season.

A bit of rain for a weeks in an area which makes up a miniscule percentage of the Earth's surface is not evidence of climate change.

I don't think there is much doubt that humans have had an effect on the climate, the mistake is that people believe this is somehow 'unnatural' or 'wrong'. Humans, just like every other species on the planet, are programmed to exploit the resources available to them to survive and breed. If we exploit our resources to an extent where we can no longer survive then so be it, the same thing has happened to 99% of all species that have ever existed.

[10 CC ICT]

I take a pragmatic view on this, not a wild hippy belief like you are implying.

I think you're reading my posts and assuming that I'm some sort of hippy. I'm not.

A hippy pirate?

[lau03143]

All those decrying the science though are kind of missing the point. The planet has been around for millions and millions of years, man has been around for a tiny heartbeat of that time, and we've been able to accurately record climate date for a fraction of even that time. Accurately predicting climate change at the moment is like trying to predict the next fifty years of stock market trends based on a fraction of a second, recorded yesterday. At half seven at night. We've improved in recent years, we've got a lot more data, but its still experimental research. But that doesn't mean its not worth doing or looking into. People who mutter about how "they used to predict an ice age" are being stupid. Of course predictions changed, we got more data and know more!

By saying this, your basically saying your argument is a load of balls too.

How can you say that we can't accurately predict climate change, or say if climate change is a man made occurrence if by your own admission, it's impossible to predict anything or since the records only go back a small amount of time.

Also, saying someone is stupid in this debate is silly too. The thing is, scientists did predict a new ice age about 30-40 years ago. The big topic was Global Cooling. Now it's global warming. The only facts that we have is that no one has a clue whats happening, and that the climate has always changed.

There is no evidence to prove that global warming is a man made occurrence, evidence does not show "global warming". It just shows "localised warming" as there are areas of the world and in countries that the average temperatures are cooling. It only shows climate change is happening, and this is a natural occurrence and one that we can engineer solutions for to control nature.

And the argument that we "avoid" dealing with climate change is a load of rubbish too. The only reason climate change is getting so much exposure is that it is a future cash cow for governments. Tax everyone with a car. tax everyone who wants to travel, tax everyone who wants a BBQ. It generates high quality jobs in engineering, and the services around that.

[jojo]

did anyone watch david attenbourgh how many people can live on earth.

http://www.bbc.co.uk...n_Planet_Earth/

Basically, the earth is already using more resourses than we have. You can't close your eyes to this, all the leading scietists agree, it's common sense not to use abuse the earths resources until we're all hungry. 1.2 billion struggle to get enough water every day. The most frustrating thing is that the technology and scientific knowledge is there to make the world more sustainable but the greed of the powerful who rule the world wont listen.

This is not about climate change but it is a factor of the problem, and i coudnt be bothered starting a new topic. This is a serious matter, we're at a decision point, manage the earths resources sustainably and for every human on the planet or ignore all warnings and see what happens. We have to change our lifestyle as it's excesive and unsustainable.

When will governments start looking beyond the next election.

Edited November 24, 2011 by jojo

[renton]

By saying this, your basically saying your argument is a load of balls too.

How can you say that we can't accurately predict climate change, or say if climate change is a man made occurrence if by your own admission, it's impossible to predict anything or since the records only go back a small amount of time.

Also, saying someone is stupid in this debate is silly too. The thing is, scientists did predict a new ice age about 30-40 years ago. The big topic was Global Cooling. Now it's global warming. The only facts that we have is that no one has a clue whats happening, and that the climate has always changed.

There is no evidence to prove that global warming is a man made occurrence, evidence does not show "global warming". It just shows "localised warming" as there are areas of the world and in countries that the average temperatures are cooling. It only shows climate change is happening, and this is a natural occurrence and one that we can engineer solutions for to control nature.

And the argument that we "avoid" dealing with climate change is a load of rubbish too. The only reason climate change is getting so much exposure is that it is a future cash cow for governments. Tax everyone with a car. tax everyone who wants to travel, tax everyone who wants a BBQ. It generates high quality jobs in engineering, and the services around that.

In point of fact, calling it global warming was the worst possible name for the effect, it solidified in people's minds such that any time it was mentioned, the knee jerk response was to note how cold it was in the winter, as if that were a handsome rebuttal of the blaance of scientific opinion.

Localised warming and cooling is in fact consistent with a global rise in CO2 emissions. Whether or not it is man made is up for debate, as has been noted there are a great number of unaccounted factors that could effect greenhouse gas retention in the atmosphere. One thing is clear though, if it is man made, we should try and restrict carbon emissions now. If it is a natural occurence, we should still try and stop it.

Either way, the solution lies with the human race to try and avoid a global outcome that would be catastrophic for our species.

[yoda]

did anyone watch david attenbourgh how many people can live on earth.

http://www.bbc.co.uk...n_Planet_Earth/

Basically, the earth is already using more resourses than we have. You can't close your eyes to this, all the leading scietists agree, it's common sense not to use abuse the earths resources until we're all hungry. 1.2 billion struggle to get enough water every day. The most frustrating thing is that the technology and scientific knowledge is there to make the world more sustainable but the greed of the powerful who rule the world wont listen.

This is not about climate change but it is a factor of the problem, and i coudnt be bothered starting a new topic. This is a serious matter, we're at a decision point, manage the earths resources sustainably and for every human on the planet or ignore all warnings and see what happens. We have to change our lifestyle as it's excesive and unsustainable.

When will governments start looking beyond the next election.

While you probably make good points, everything you post reads like something a modern day teenage Robin Hood with some mild form of brain damage would post.

Sort this out, because you would probably get more people noticing you for the right reasons rather than groaning and facepalming everytime they see you have posted.

Edited November 24, 2011 by yoda

[Tryfield]

Amazing.

Climate change. 250 odd years of industrial revolution and each country gets 20 years to get its act together. Why the fcuk are Europe and America in such a position to dictate to India and China what they can and cannot do with their natural resources?

Warm spells, cool spells. It happens. Don't believe the Greenpeace videos made in July about ice breaking up for the poor wee polar bears and claiming it was December. Anyone can alter the date on their camcorder.

Al Gore is the only winner in this scaremongering.

[renton]

Amazing.

Climate change. 250 odd years of industrial revolution and each country gets 20 years to get its act together. Why the fcuk are Europe and America in such a position to dictate to India and China what they can and cannot do with their natural resources?

Warm spells, cool spells. It happens. Don't believe the Greenpeace videos made in July about ice breaking up for the poor wee polar bears and claiming it was December. Anyone can alter the date on their camcorder.

Al Gore is the only winner in this scaremongering.

The climate is changing, that at least is not in dispute.

[Iamajag]

Classic case of unspeak, handy that 'climate change' sounds a lot less unsettling than 'global warming', it's almost as if the people who changed this had some shares in oil or something..........

[caleyjaggi]

Talk about burying heads in the sand. If a lot of the views expressed here are indicative of general opinion, we're screwed!

[Tryfield]

Talk about burying heads in the sand. If a lot of the views expressed here are indicative of general opinion, we're screwed!

You have only chosen to believe what you want to believe(or have been brainwashed into)

A big fan of Al Gore then?