*sigh* The heartbreak of early onset Algorezheimer's Disease.

by Nathan Natas 86 Replies latest jw friends

  • BizzyBee
    BizzyBee
    The earth has survived numerous ice ages and warming periods long before a single SUV or power plant existed. Do you honestly think that the temperature of the earth has been consistent throughout the history of the planet? Seriously?... the earth itself has always been changing...heck, the continents themselves have shifted...huge shifts...mountains and canyons have formed, volcanos have changed the landscape and atmosphere... The one thing you can count on is change.

    When it comes to climate change, (or nuclear holocaust, for that matter) it is not the survival of the earth, as you suggest, that is in question. It is the habitability of the earth by humans that is the question - how many, where, and what quality of life will they experience.

  • TD
    TD

    I don't dispute any of the science, (Obviously I'm not qualified to) but I do have a problem with some of the hysteria.

    I've read that dendrochronology is some of our best evidence for warming. Dendrochronology indicates longer summers and therefore suggests higher peak temperatures. (Longer growing season + Warmer temps = More growth) --Makes sense to me.

    I've also read recently that the cyclical die-off we have in forests is the result of climate change. (The gentleman making the claim was in fact a geologist, not a botanist, but whatever...) When pressed, the author of the claim allows that the true causes according to real botanists (Drought weakened trees become more susceptible to insects infestation and the damage in turn makes them more susceptible to disease) are directly attributable to climate change and therefore while indirect, climate change is still the cause.

    Here where I live, drought is a real concern. Five years ago, we were deep into almost a decade long drought. Thankfully we've had record precipitation the last few years. A few more years of this would be nice because every little bit helps and the forests certainly need it.

    Okay one of the reasons we know that an overall warming trend is real is because of the increased growth in forests and one of the reasons that this is bad is because it's stunting and killing the forests? When we're experiencing drought it's the result of climate change and when we experience increased precipitation it's also the result of climate change?

    Much of the public is already sceptical. When every phenomenon is linked to man-made climate change, it only makes them more so.

  • bohm
    bohm

    CB, Al Gore, BBC, and the media has ZERO credibility in my book, because i know for a fact the media make mistakes EVERY time they report on something i know a little more about than global warming.

    What matters is what scientists actually find out by observing nature, and what their models predict which is based on those measurements. i hope we agree on this point.

    I was in college when the "coming ice age" was first talked about and the news media had a field day with it

    yes the media.. so where did the media get their information? they selectively quotes a minority view, blew it out of proportions and there you have your mini ice age. Its very well-documented that the mini ice age simply did not exist in the scientific litterature.

    If your professors said that there was nothing to the fact that "the coming ice age" was heavily promoted...then they are changing their history.... kind of like the wt did regarding 1975.

    by who? the media? noone is changing history, the articles that were published in the 70s are still avaliable, and its fairly easy to look at what was published. please look at this video (especially around 3:30):

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EU_AtHkB4Ms

    I'm not saying it's us vs them.... it's the media that promotes this...it's good for their business to stoke the fires. The subject tends to get both sides slinging insults at one another. That is not healthy.

    but then lets look at what the data suggest, and what the models predict, and have an evidence-based discussion. i agree completely its not happening in the media because the media is not very good at that, but that our media and all gore suck and cap-n-trade stinks does not mean the earth is not warming.

    Incidentally, I'm not denying "global warming"... (there have been many warming cycles in the history of the earth) I'm just not on the sky is falling bandwagon

    i dont know much about the consequences either. I think its a fairly settled question human activity is causing the globe to warm, and this will lead to some sea-level rise and other bad stuff. how bad? i dont know. i dont think we will do anything to stop it so i just hope it wont be to bad.

    but the fact is that we dont know what will happend. it may be the case it will only be like 20cm of sea-level rise, it may be the case that the polar ice caps will collapse rapidly -- who knows? the last time the temperature rose, evidence suggest it happened quite quickly.

    how sure do we have to be that this will be really bad and not just somewhat bad before we do something? 10%? 90%?

  • coffee_black
    coffee_black

    Bohm said I think its a fairly settled question human activity is causing the globe to warm, and this will lead to some sea-level rise and other bad stuff. how bad? i dont know. i dont think we will do anything to stop it so i just hope it wont be to bad.

    Bohm, I don't think that it is settled by a long shot. There have been many ice ages and warming periods in the history of our planet. Before man, before machines, before electricity. A huge part of North America was once covered by glaciers. They have receeded over centuries because of warming. this isn't sudden and didn't just start in the past half century. SUVs didn't cause it. Power plants did not cause it. You should read Lindzen's work. He doesn't deny that the earth is going through a warming cycle. The earth goes through cycles of many kinds...natural cycles. What he doesn't go along with is the hype and hysteria and the doomsday message. There are a lot of people who stand to make a lot of money because of this issue, and politicians are using it for their own advantage... not ours. Characters like Al Gore do everyone a disservice... even those on his side of the aisle.

    Think about this... do meteorologists always get their forcasts right? They have messed up pretty badly in my area lately. It is far from an exact science. So if scientists can't always get it right in the very short term...what makes you think they have it right in the long term..and that it is settled?

    You might find this interesting. This link is to a document by the CIA compiled in 1974 that is entitled "A Study of Climatological Research as it Pertains to Intelligence Problems" You might find it interesting because it talks about climate change...specifically cooling...as it relates to National security. If you read it you will see that the numerous scientists they consulted were in agreement that a drastic cooling cycle had already started. It is evidence that scientists did indeed talk extensively about global cooling, contrary to what you have been taught.

    http://www.climatemonitor.it/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/1974.pdf

    The quality isn't too good... it was copied from micro-fiche...

    You also said this...not true. my university has a scientist the global-warming deniers like to quote for hire.

    You prove my point here.... you can't reference a scientist who disagrees with the status quo without disparaging him. It's a mindset.. and not an open mindset. You are discrediting what he says because he has a different opinion. Do you not think that scientists are paid for their work or for their seminars? Do you say that scientists who agree with the status quo are quoted for hire? Many are quoted, you know. Do you think that only scientists who agree with the status quo should get paid? Your bias is showing here.

    Bizzy

    When it comes to climate change, (or nuclear holocaust, for that matter) it is not the survival of the earth, as you suggest, that is in question. It is the habitability of the earth by humans that is the question - how many, where, and what quality of life will they experience.

    Do you think we can control the daily weather or the overall climate? How do you propose we do that? If man has so much negative effect on the climate of the earth...then that means we must have the ability to control that effect, right? In other words, man has changed the climate... so we have the ability to change it back. What if we wanted the earth's temperature to go up... could we all just drive more and turn on all of the lights in our houses and leave them on all the time... do you think that would work? Really? How long do you think it would take to make the earths temperature rise 1 degree?

    When I said that the earth has survived these things... it is obvious that people have as well. We have learned to adapt to heat and cold. The earth undergoes many cycles. In other words, the earth warms and then it cools and then it warms and then it cools.... cycles...the earth always correcting itself eventually...an equilibruim, if you will. Do you really expect the earth to have a constant temperature? There have always been fluctuations in temperature... in fact there have been periods when the earths temperature has been higher than it is now... and there have been times when the CO2 levels have been higher than they are now.... We have to adapt to the earth...not the other way around....unless you have a better solution? We can't keep volcanos from erupting. We can't stop earthquakes from happening... We can't stop the rain or the snow... (believe me I wish I could stop the snow right about now!) Life on earth can be harsh it has always been so... but compared to our ancestors, we have it pretty good. Getting stressed and worried about it doesn't change a thing. Getting mad at eachother doesn't change anything either.

    I'm not just concerned about our planet, by the way. I have 5 grandchildren who I want to grow up and have children and grandchildren of their own. I'm concerned about their futures... but there are things I am more concerned about than global warming in their future.

    Coffee

  • BizzyBee
    BizzyBee
    When I said that the earth has survived these things... it is obvious that people have as well.

    The earth endures. The human race endures. People - not so much. Weather (and natural disasters) kill people all the time. So, if you're saying, "the human race (as we know it) will endure," I tend to agree. Except I would add the caveat, "probably."

    A conservative assessment would be that the human population will be redistributed as parts of the earth become uninhabitable and that their way of life will be different - most likely grimmer.

    I have 6 precious grandchildren and I want the best for them also, but I'm afraid that their lives will be a little less easy than the last few generations and not just because of climate change.

  • beksbks
    beksbks
    Man, there's a world of difference between villabolo and beks. One can formulate rational responses to opponents while apparently operating under the assumption that they are neither dishonest nor stupid and one, well, can't.

    I see you are fairly new here "Liberty". We've had this discussion many times with various players. What was your first indication that this was a serious thread worthy of rational responses? The title?

  • bohm
    bohm

    CB, Bohm, I don't think that it is settled by a long shot. There have been many ice ages and warming periods in the history of our planet. Before man, before machines, before electricity .

    yes and each of those resulted in sea level rise. simply put, when the water heat up it expand. since the sea has allready heated up by quite a bit for the past 50 years, it has expanded -- its basic physics. on top of that you got effects like glaciers which are melting.. but its far more speculative.

    out of curiosity, which "natural cycle" are we supposed to be going through right now?

    Think about this... do meteorologists always get their forcasts right?

    no, but this is not a weather forecast, its a climate forecast. the models are very different.

    i did not deny some scientists talked about cooling, i denied the claim you made about an "ice age" and that this was a majority view. it was not and i believe the study quoted in the video i put in demonstrate that.

    the science was not settled in the 70s like it is today. today pretty much all experts on the subject agree, and more importantly, the data indicate the earth is heating up. finally, lets leave al gore out of it, i know some of you guys are not happy about him because of his political orientation, but that he has absolutely nothing to do with the science.

    You prove my point here.... you can't reference a scientist who disagrees with the status quo without disparaging him.

    how on earth am i doing such a thing? He is hired at my university, obviously i dont think thats bad!. i have never heard anyone say a bad thing about his work (which is about solar forsing), i have just seen the dataset he work with briefly in a class about dataanalysis.

    I described his work as something "climate change deniears like to quote" because im not that sure about what his personal views are... but i have seen him quoted many times. that a certain group like to quote him does not make him a bad scientist anymore than any renowed palentologist become a bad scientist because they have said something creationists like to quote them on.

    quite frankly i find your remark truly odd and i think your reading an agenda into what i write thats not there. i have nothing against the guy and no reason to suspect his research (which im not that familiar with!).

  • coffee_black
    coffee_black

    A conservative assessment would be that the human population will be redistributed as parts of the earth become uninhabitable and that their way of life will be different

    That is the way it has been throughout history. People move/migrate out of necessity...and they sometimes move because the grass is greener and there are opportunities elsewhere. I'm an optimist though... can usually find the silver lining in the cloud...so I don't think life will be necessarily bleaker.

    Coffee

  • bohm
    bohm

    CB, your not the person who have to live with a bunch of soaked dutch!

  • coffee_black
    coffee_black

    Bohm... I meant no offense... You characterized him as what sounded to me like a scientist for "Hire"... which sounded to me like you thought he was selling out. If I misunderstood.. I apologize.

    If you go to the document I linked, you will find that there was agreement aka concensus by many scientists of that time period on severe cooling. It is unfortunate that I used the term ice age in my earlier post (back then there were headlines that called it the coming ice age) .... my point was that they went from global cooling to global warming to climate change. The climate has always been in a state of change.

    Coffee

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit