Climate Change - Why are only the negative points presented?

by donny 25 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  donny

  I was reading some articles from the 1960's through the late 1970's where scientists were concerned about Global Cooling. Yes, Global Cooling! The articles talked about how the oceans would become more salty as the ice caps grew larger which would wipe out many types of marine life. They also mentioned how this would lead to more cool/cold "high deserts" as there would be less water in the atmosphere for rain to develop from. One "expert" even suggested the wealthy nations should get together and put together a project where black soot would be sprayed on the ice caps which would cause more of the suns rays to be turned to heat instead of being reflected back into space. Everything was all negative.

  Now for the past 25 years or so, we have heard about Global Warming. And once again, all of the news and articles about it are always in the negative tone. While I believe we need to be much more diligent in taking care of our wonderful planet, surely there has to be some good things associated with warming or cooling. Everything in both scenarios can't be all bad. Do politics have a lot to do with it being a one sided view?

  Don
• 

  Bonnie_Clyde

  I wouldn't mind a little more global warming. We had a real cold winter and April wasn't all that warm either. Thank God it warmed up since the last ice age.
• 

  SixofNine

  Do politics have a lot to do with it being a one sided view?

  No, the fact that while some effects of warming could be, on some level and for some very small segment of mankind "good", the overall effect is a change in symbiotic relationships that currently support 6.77 billion people and all plant and animal species - which can only be "bad"; that is the reason you see it portrayed as "one sided".

  IOW, it is one sided. It's all bad. If there was someway to stretch the warming out over a thousand years or so, well, then it might be ......... nope, it would probably still be bad, but not nearly as bad as it happening over two hundred years (with major changes happening in as small a window as 40 years).
• 

  villabolo

  The type of climate change we are creating will, not could but will, within a few decades change weather patterns throughout the world. This in turn will affect our crops and whether or not they grow. The corn in Kansas and the wheat in the wheat belt do not give a damn how comfortable you are nor whether manhattan gets flooded. We are looking at megadroughts; flooding, when it does rain-that too has a negative effect on crops; and migration of food growing areas northward.

  Archaeological evidence shows what happens to civilizations when the weather changes beyond a certain point. Jared Diamond's book Collapse just scratches the surface of what happens when nature does it and gives warning of what will happen with the man made version.
• 

  oompa

  so we can plant tomatoes in may in siberia..........that is a bad thing??
• 

  villabolo

  Oompa. As far as planting tomatoes in Siberia that is likely to come at the expense of our planting crops in our wheat belt.
• 

  villabolo

  As far as the cold snap we've had this year it is not proof that global warming is false. People who think like that miss the forest for the tree. These changes in temperature do not happen in a gradualist manner but in a rollercoaster manner. You will have a general trend of warming but it will be punctuated by temporary downward slide. You have to judge climate change like anything else by long term effects.

  There is photographic evidence from late 19th and early 20th century photographs showing shrinkage of glaciers around the world. There are satellite photographs from 1979 to the present showing a general shrinkage of ice. What do detractors of global warming do? they mindlessly point out a temporary cooling that takes place in this year or that.
• 

  ssn587

  Like was pointed out years ago it was global cooling, now its global warming, anyone want to speculate that people don't really know what the hell is going on, not now and not then, We haven't been around long enough to know, so all speculation is just tha spelculation, if the scientist really had the inside correct view then we would be in an iceage, not supposed global warming.
• 

  donny

  Unless I see some more striking evidence, I don't believe we will see as much radical changes in the weather patterns that is currently being predicted. While I understand some of the above comments, I still believe much of it is overdone. According to the "experts" in 1976, we should be in the beginning of an ice age here in 2009.

  I have a friend who is a meterologist for the Weather Channel and here was his take on it when I asked him last December.

  "Yes, there is good evidence that man has some effect on our current weather patterns, however the Earth has a remarkable way of maintaining its climate health. If it gets too cold, there will be less cloud formation which will allow more sun to reach the surface and this will result in more heat. If it gets too warm, more clouds will eventually develop and these will reflects much of the suns rays back into space. The best thing that has come out of this weather "scare", is that we are doing more and more to be better stewards of our planet home."

  Don
• 

  Blithe Freshman

  Donny, I remember growing up reading and learning about the coming ice age. I would count the years to see if I would still be alive, hoping to live long enough to see glaciers grow. I thought it would be cool. :) A global cooling would have as serious effects for mankind as a warming. What I see as a big difference is then , what would happen would happen and we'd have to make changes and adapt. There was a challenge for us. Now it is threats and fear . Bigger than the climate change is our attitude change.

  Blithe

  ps My brother from Pa,. says he looks forward to golf in January and will embrace a S.C. climate.