Jump to content
toomuchbaloney toomuchbaloney (New Member) New Member

The Myth of Climate Change

Lounge   (15,052 Views 353 Comments)
2 Followers; 37,164 Visitors; 8,980 Posts
If you find this topic helpful leave a comment.
advertisement

You are reading page 3 of The Myth of Climate Change. If you want to start from the beginning Go to First Page.

Perhaps the iced Great Lakes will make up for the loss of Arctic ice.

yeah, no, probably not

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Virgin's Richard Branson wrote a blog Businesses Should Stand Up to Climate Change Deniers | Richard Branson and told investors the same basic theme as Tim Cook did with Apple.

he wrote:

Cook also touched upon what should be at the heart of any business - its purpose. "We do a lot of things for reasons besides profit motive," he said. "We want to leave the world better than we found it." This goes for Virgin too, and should go for every single organization in the world.

More businesses should be following Apple's stance in encouraging more investment in sustainability. While Tim told sustainability skeptics to "get out of our stock," I would urge climate change deniers to get out of our way.

Private sector key to fighting climate change, Richard Branson says | Global Ideas | DW.DE | 05.11.2013

Sir Richard Branson: We need a vision of a safer, cleaner, better world and the shared goal that increases in global temperature should be below 2 degrees Celsius is that vision. And, it’s the target prescribed by the best available science. Let’s reinvigorate that vision. We need to remember that tackling the issue of climate change will also allow us to empower and protect vulnerable populations around the globe and strengthen human rights. We need a solutions orientated approach. This will allow us to have a more focused and more relevant discussion and engage the best and brightest people. Let’s create a fair level playing field at the national and international level. If we do, deals will be done, and money will flow to low carbon technologies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those who believe that our climate is changing also believe that there will be significant alterations in water levels, severity of weather patterns, and agricultural capacity that will affect human habitation (because of the change).

In this country, the infrastructure is aging and fragile and will be (presumably) unable to respond to changes in sea level, drought, extremes in heat and cold, etc. We are deeply concerned about the cost of leaving our children and grandchildren with debt but seem little concerned with leaving them crumbling roads, patched together power grids, aging levies and dams, etc. Focus on austerity prevents the Federal government from exploiting high unemployment to invest in rebuilding, improving, and preparing our infrastructure to meet the needs of the future, the future of our children and grandchildren.

This, in my view, is narrow and short sighted in perspective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Very, Very Thin Wedge of Denial

By Phil Plait

To me, one of the most fascinating aspects of climate change denial is how deniers essentially never publish in legitimate journals, but instead rely on talk shows, grossly error-laden op-eds, and hugely out-of-date claims (that were never right to start with)...

http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2014/01/14/climate_change_another_study_shows_they_don_t_publish_actual_papers.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
advertisement

I'm ambivalent about climate change. I know just enough to follow the thread. There's one thing I've wondered about. Let's suppose the US does everything within their power to limit carbon emissions. Every expensive, complicated change is implemented. Our economy suffers. At least it makes sense to me that it would. What difference does it make to global warming if every other nation on the planet continues pouring pollutants into the air?

Does even the smallest change make a difference?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What would happen if we chose to agree that perhaps humankind is not the source of climate change?

What would happen if we agreed to agree that global climate change has occurred before and is very likely happening again because of the natural cycles and processes of a living planet?

How does denying the evidence that our climate may well be experiencing a significant change help to prepare us, as a species and as a society, for the changes that one might presume would accompany such changes?

Will the US be prepared for a projected 12" rise in sea levels by 2050? Is the US preparing the infrastructure and economy to accommodate the migration of people away from the affected coastlines? In 2010 more than 123 million Americans lived directly on the coast. What will our children and grandchildren do with those people?

The Natural Resources Defense Council reports that one-third of all counties in the lower 48 states - face higher risks of water shortages by mid-century as the result of climate change. More than 400 of these counties will face extremely high risks of water shortages.

According to The American Prospect "the country finds itself at a turning point as momentous as it faced in the 1970s when the clean-water law was enacted. It would be a mistake to continue on the current path, which threatens to lead to the reversal of much of the progress of the last several decades. The nation must recommit to implement the policies that served us well and turned the country's waters around. It must also employ new techniques that prevent pollution. Just as we face an urgent need to cope with the parallel problems of increasing drinking water scarcity and overconsumption, we must redouble our efforts to control water pollution."

The UN expects the global water situation to get considerably worse over the next 30 years. It estimates that by 2025 the proportion of the world's population experiencing moderate to high water stress will rise to two out of every three people. While very dry continents, like Australia, will surely suffer, the US will not be spared. Our current political environment, which denies that climate change is occurring, or that such change will have societal affects when coupled with a willingness to pollute our fresh water in pursuit of fossil fuel products and profits will likely have disastrous results and ramifications for our children and grandchildren.

Is it hyperbole for politicians to spend an entire night talking about climate change?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm ambivalent about climate change. I know just enough to follow the thread. There's one thing I've wondered about. Let's suppose the US does everything within their power to limit carbon emissions. Every expensive, complicated change is implemented. Our economy suffers. At least it makes sense to me that it would. What difference does it make to global warming if every other nation on the planet continues pouring pollutants into the air?

Does even the smallest change make a difference?

It is a problem for all on Earth.

I don't know where else people can go.

It is good that the United States is not the only country with people who are working on this and other problems.

International Women's Day Highlights Climate and Gender Links - Climate Change Policy & Practice

Study shows 64 out of 66 countries had put in place or were establishing significant climate or energy legislation in 2013

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/feb/27/report-progress-climate-change-laws

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm ambivalent about climate change. I know just enough to follow the thread. There's one thing I've wondered about. Let's suppose the US does everything within their power to limit carbon emissions. Every expensive, complicated change is implemented. Our economy suffers. At least it makes sense to me that it would. What difference does it make to global warming if every other nation on the planet continues pouring pollutants into the air?

Does even the smallest change make a difference?

At one time the US was a leader. We saw what was needed and did it. Now we are way behind the eight ball. Europe has embraced the idea of listening to science and using tools to assist the people. Look at the use of solar energy, wind energy and the price of oil based products. We subsidize the oil industry and allow our waters to become permanently polluted in the search for oil.

We now turn a blind eye to pollution such as is part of coal production. Again, water is the loser which means all people become impacted by the filth that is put into water.

We do have the ability to stop sending work to those places that create a great deal of pollution. I recall when I was in China that the air was yellow. In the US we can have cleaner industries that would employ many people. These things are our choices and can happen if we choose our legislators with a view of the future. Climate change deniers want to continue the status quo. We already know what that does. It means we continue to support industries that pollute. It means we do not fight to get jobs back in the US. It means we allow industry to violate all the EPA standards that have been set up to protect us.

Perhaps we cannot fix the entire world. We can fix stupid by voting them out. To not work to make sure our planet is habitable for our children's children is stupid. Recognize that rising sea levels have already started. To not talk about and prepare for this and other effects will not stop them from happening.

I was angry that my Senators were not appearing last night to talk about climate issues. Our state has many effects, as do all or almost all states. We need to talk about it and work towards the common goal of preparation for change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/20/mapping-gas-leaks-from-aging-urban-pipes/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0

Another example of the disregard the country has for the infrastructure that our children and grandchildren will inherit.

And we wonder why random buildings or streets explode in large cities like NY?

Let's hire people to do worthwhile work. Decrease unemployment and fix infrastructure as old as the WPA. Sometimes older.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
×