by sweetstuff 42 Replies latest jw friends
I know, I know, someone is going to say, there is no proof that global warming is real, or that its man-made. Yeah, un-huh. Just like there is no proof that JW's teach lies. Here's an eye opener for all of us, scary stuff I think.
http://news.aol.com/story/_a/accelerating-arctic-melt-worries-experts/20071211220409990001
It is scary. National Geographic did an article on it recently. The pictures in the magazine certainly show this is a real problem. I feel for the poor animals this is affecting.
I thought there was a similar melt in previous centuries just as there were periods of cooler weather.
Sweetstuff, According to books on weather cycles I read, the global temp. has changed many times over a few thousand years resulting in some extinction and changes. There were many Ice ages and global warmings. {Frozen Mammoths in tropical Siberia???} Scientific speculation that New York and half the planet will be under water has no basis in fact whatsoever...{Like 607 b.c.e and the Witnesses}where's the data? How did you come to this conclusion? How can you measure such a thing? I think many years from now, when your kids have had their own families, you will look back and say....ya Know that 007 was right!! How did I get suckered into another end of the world scam?
Witness 007:
According to books on weather cycles I read, the global temp. has changed many times over a few thousand years resulting in some extinction and changes
No, it's changed a few times over many thousands of years. There's good reason to believe that the current rate of temperature change is unprecedented, and even if not, as you rightly point out such changes can lead to mass extinctions.
There were many Ice ages and global warmings. {Frozen Mammoths in tropical Siberia???}
Mammoths are now extinct of course as are many other species who could not cope with sudden severe changes in climate (although in the particular case of mammoths, there is considerable evidence to suggest that it was humans who led to their demise).
Scientific speculation that New York and half the planet will be under water has no basis in fact whatsoever...
Currently around 70 percent of the planet is underwater and New York is a series of islands barely above sea level, a level that's currently rising. This "speculation" has a very strong basis in fact.
where's the data? How did you come to this conclusion? How can you measure such a thing?
http://www.ccsr.columbia.edu/information/hurricanes/ discusses the effect rising sea levels are likely to have on New York City. It includes the relevant data and how these were used to extrapolate likely future scenarios.
I think many years from now, when your kids have had their own families, you will look back and say....ya Know that 007 was right!! How did I get suckered into another end of the world scam?
I doubt it. Nobody is suggesting that the world is going to end, merely that the damage we are doing to our planet is of a sufficient scale to have severe worldwide negative consequences in the near future. True, that is an unprecedented situation but so are the rates of habitat destruction and emission of greenhouse gases by humans. It would be foolish to ignore the evidence merely because of a passing similarity to the predictions of apocalyptic cults.
doubt it. Nobody is suggesting that the world is going to end, merely that the damage we are doing to our planet is of a sufficient scale to have severe worldwide negative consequences in the near future. True, that is an unprecedented situation but so are the rates of habitat destruction and emission of greenhouse gases by humans. It would be foolish to ignore the evidence merely because of a passing similarity to the predictions of apocalyptic cults.
Very well said. I think you made an interesting point about the cult thing. I believe a lot of people have a hard time accepting climate change because it demands a change in life style, it's a scary situation and a lot of people think it's all hype. The poles are our "canary in a coal mine" when it comes to climate change.
Through-out even human history, there have been "ice-ages" and "global warming" this was before cars and polution ??? Many scientist disagree with Al Gore's theories.....I'm saying have we all been "brainwashed" into another one-sided dooms day cult? Look at both-sides of the arguement. Is it Natural or caused by pollution? The idea that in 50 years half the planet will be under water is a stupid panic. Like in the 70's when scientists thought the alignment of the planets would lead to massive earthquakes and calamity...nothing happened!!
There's good reason to believe that the current rate of temperature change is unprecedented, and even if not, as you rightly point out such changes can lead to mass extinctions.
The human species has procreated at an unprecedented rate and with an increase in technology, live far longer than previous data show us. T
In 1800 there were only 1 billion people on the earth.
In 1930 we had grown to 2 billion people - it took us 130 years to reach that figure.
Jump forward now - 1960 we reach 3 billion people - that only took 30 years.
In 1974 we reach a total of 4 billion people - now we are populating like vermin cos that only took 14 years.
The next 13 years we managed to squeeze out another 1 billion people and in the last 11 years we increased that by another billion.
Humans live longer because of improvements in communication, social shifts in ideology and medical advances etc. The greatest source of methane in the air is not your car - it's factory farming of cows. Six billion people consume tons of beef on a daily basis and as the population continues to grow, so will the gasses. Plane travel accounts for a small percentage and so does vehicle travel. Do supporters of space travel think that a mega blast into the air doesn't account for a lot of damage? The destruction of our forests also destroys our air supply - but as more people occupy the planet, more land mass is used up. After every natural or man made calamity for example - the plague, the french revolution - other extreme tragedies in history where masses of people died off - the people left rose up over the years healthier both physically and financially. This is the way that the population remained under control.
Unless we stop populating the earth at the rate we are - nothing you do will stop the warming - nor the water shortages or the pollution and destruction of the lands or the water. Point - we use the small florescent bulbs to help the environment as far as air - but we don't take it a step further to figure out how to effetively destroy the bulbs with harming the land - the bulbs contain mercury and although in small particles, it's small enough for some states to enforce hazmat laws that run into your home to sweep up a broken bulb and dispose of it...last known cost was $2,500.00.
Unless we stop building Mcmansions and utilize our space more efficiently we will lose. Perhaps it's time to take a step back and recognize that the economic advantage of having workers fill your factory 24 hours a day, and having to run electricity for all of those hours might be good for the corporation and their $$$ but the effect on the environment and people (studies now show that shift workers have higher rates of cancer) are not a fair exchange.
All in all - I think it's sad that animals will suffer - but we can moan all we want until we drastically change the way we think and live all around the globe.
Sorry for the rant - must need more coffee......sammieswife.
Ice ages are caused by changes in orbital (earth going around sun) parameters and are EXPECTED and can be calculated based on the physics of this system. Levels of greenhouse gases fluctuate between certain high (interglacial) and low (glacial) levels that have been reconstructed by looking at ice cores going back now, 850,000 years. Yes, these changes happen and we know exactly what part of or physical system causes them. The fluctuations in temperature and Greenhouse gases (GHGs) they produce are termed the "natural range of variability".
So in almost 1 million years CO2 and CH4 and other greenhouse gases have not been higher than certain levels. Now they are. The only way to account for the unprecedented rise is to factor in the amount of GHGs we have released since the industrial revolution.
Temperature can be "predicted" or "hindcast" by combining what would expected given our current orbital parameters, solar output and volcanic activity. These factors have accurately hindcast temperatures over the past few hundred years- except recently when the only way to account for the rise in temperature is to factor in the warming that is caused (there are accurate equations that will determine exactly how much warming can be expected for a certain increase in gases that trap and reradiate heat) by the release of a specific amount of GHGs.
Temperatures and GHGs are OUTSIDE of the natural range of variability. It is THIS fact (not that things are changing) and also the accelerated RATE that they are occuring at that concerns the people that study them. The RATE of increase in CO2 and CH4 is an order of magnitude higher than previous rates of increase in these gases that occur after the end of an ice age.
And it isn't Al Gore's science (how laughable) but rather he took the time (starting in the early 1980s) to learn these things from the actual scientists and to present this information to the public.
If you want a non-politicized book about the climate (if you feel uncomfortable w/ Al Gore's book) please read "The Weather Makers".
Anyhoo, that's the facts, 'mam.
-K
Even if it is a natural occuring event, should we simply stick our collective heads in the sand? No. Just because big oil says it's a hoax does not mean we do not deserve clean air, does it? It is crazy not to preserve our air. Even Republicans and oil companys require fresh air.
