Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
climbski2
Mountain climber
Anchorage AK, Reno NV
|
|
|
Oct 21, 2012 - 12:11pm PT
|
Rate of change matters Cheif. Humans are affecting that.
|
|
the Fet
climber
Tu-Tok-A-Nu-La
|
|
|
Oct 21, 2012 - 12:11pm PT
|
MissJ:
If you linger on this thread and DO NOT succumb to the prevailing way of thinking, you indeed will face more of the same as you read from the likes of Malmute and certainly that of Bruce, Dr.F, Chiloe, Fet etal.
By your admission of being a "Christian", you just became a target of opportunity for them to demean and spit on.
Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. The Chief, you are one of the most demeaning people on this thread. But I doubt you'd be brave enough to admit that.
If you actually payed attention you'd see my position on AGW is that I believe it is likely happening, but we should be skeptical of any solutions called for because there will be economic ramifications of anything we do about it.
You have to lump everyone "pro AGW" (even though no one is pro AGW) together and assign them extreme positions as a strawman to argue against because if you actually looked at things objectively you couldn't justify your positions and beliefs. You seem to be a very angry and close minded, with a martyr complex, and the person that suffers the most because of an attitude like that is you.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Oct 21, 2012 - 12:20pm PT
|
Nature will force us to change when we are/go against nature.
We can only be harmonious with nature.
When we become disharmonious with nature then our material bodies and our environment depending on our bodies including (all living entities) will undoubtedly suffer until we become harmonious again with nature.
This is not too difficult to understand.
Even a simple layman can understand this .....
|
|
climbski2
Mountain climber
Anchorage AK, Reno NV
|
|
|
Oct 21, 2012 - 12:23pm PT
|
Rate of change matters. Infact few concepts in math are more applicable to real life issues than the concept of rate of change.
Hypotheticals to illustrate a broadly applicable concept
Faster currents in a harbor are different than slower currents
20 foot rise in sea level over 500 years is different than 20 foot rise in 50 years.
Higher rates are generally more difficult to adapt to.
|
|
climbski2
Mountain climber
Anchorage AK, Reno NV
|
|
|
Oct 21, 2012 - 12:33pm PT
|
Exactly. If one cannot adapt and overcome then one suffers.
I suggest we adapt and overcome the portion of the problem significantly of our own making. (CO2 percentage in the atmosphere) (Werner might call that getting back in harmony with nature)
If we do it should buy us time to deal with the slower portion of global warming that we cannot control but also does not pose such a fast changing and more difficult to adapt to outcome.
|
|
climbski2
Mountain climber
Anchorage AK, Reno NV
|
|
|
Oct 21, 2012 - 01:01pm PT
|
At a certain basic level AGW is fairly simple physical science.
Very possible to replicate various different levels of CO2 in the atmosphere in a lab environment and measure it's greenhouse effects.
FACT We have increased the levels of CO2 significantly.
Based on known greenhouse effects of CO2 it's pretty impossible for us not to have raised atmospheric temperature.
That is about the extent of my level of understanding of AGW. The rest of my opinion is based on a somewhat personal level of experience in how science is published and consensus is gained in that community.
It is a pretty good system for determining facts. The best I have seen and much better than the legal system or this forum for that matter. On the overall scale it is has been immune to widespread corruption. It is designed that way.
When Hundreds of scientists come to consensus after vast amounts of peer reviewed studies have been done I have about the highest level of confidence in the outcome as I can without having actually done the science myself.. and even then I would be more skeptical of my own results if they differed greatly.. than I would several hundred other scientists work
|
|
the Fet
climber
Tu-Tok-A-Nu-La
|
|
|
Oct 21, 2012 - 01:06pm PT
|
Chief no I don't think we should implement a carbon tax. So much of our (the USA) economy is dependent on carbon fuels and since we are in such a tepid recovery I don't think we should do something that we hurt the recovery as well as make us less competitive globally. However I do think there are environmental costs associated with carbon consumption that are absorbed by everyone such as health care costs from smog, so I do think it makes sense to give green energy sources tax breaks because they don't produce those costs for everyone else to absorb.
Cap and trade may be a pragmatic solution to reduce carbon emissions, but as I said a solution like that has huge economic consequences, so we'd have to be very careful about how it's implemented, and unfortunealty because it would be a law passed by politicians there probably be pay back to their special interests built into it (both dems and reps would be guilty of it).
I'm in favor of the most fair, efficient way to reduce carbon emissions, e.g. If carbon sequestration is cheap and effective then do that, but I think we need to be careful that anything we do doesn't make us less competitive globally or result in limiting economic growth.
One of the best solutions is to invest in better efficiency. For example we passed a law requiring us automakers to double fuel efficiency. Cars will be a little more expensive but in the end us companies will be building cars that are more competitive globally and save consumers money in the long run by reducing gas cost. Automakers wouldn't do that on their own because they know the price of the car is the first thing buyers look at, but if all car makers do it they are on a level playing field. Also green building techniques have improved recently so houses cost a little bit more but save homeowners money in the long run..
Also green energy investments are very important because developing nations will use more and more energy offsetting much of the gains we make. So if the US invested in green energy we can hopefully develop energy sources that don't emit carbon and not only created more enrergy without the environmental costs but also make us more competitive globally.
|
|
climbski2
Mountain climber
Anchorage AK, Reno NV
|
|
|
Oct 21, 2012 - 01:25pm PT
|
The Cheif is a bit of a bully at times I have noticed.
For a guy who seems to have served our nation so honorably He really should be ashamed of his behavior here.
|
|
corniss chopper
climber
breaking the speed of gravity
|
|
|
Oct 21, 2012 - 03:02pm PT
|
The harmony of Nature was referenced earlier and how humans will
have to return to its basic rules if we are to survive.
Nature is the strong eating the weak and civilization cannot exist
where that happens exclusively. But when taken too far and there are to many weak --47%-- living off the work of the strong, civilization is in danger collapsing. Advocates for continuing down this path to collapse are the real enemies of the human race.
Nature is simple: the strong eat the weak. You don't see Orca's bringing fish to hungry seals on ice flows. No food stamps here. Nope. They just eat the seals.
|
|
MissJ
Social climber
|
|
|
Oct 21, 2012 - 03:08pm PT
|
whoa Miss J, I didn't say that we should hunt all narcissists down and shoot them!
Bruce, I did not want to discuss this any further but since you addressed me .... I never wrote what you infer in your above writing. Please Don't put words in my hands.
You obviously missed my point.
I would not tell someone they are un-sensible even if they hve any old opinion. It's there's and they are entitled to it.
My question ? What are each one of you ,who are supporting AGW, doing personally to stop it.
I'm not the least bit thin skinned. I was hoping to have a decent discussion with mature adults who show respect for one another and when I asked for an explanation for a chart I never received one but instead got a less than gentlemanly response.
I contribute a lot to my community.
I have one Son, no grandkids.
Good day.
|
|
the Fet
climber
Tu-Tok-A-Nu-La
|
|
|
Oct 21, 2012 - 04:07pm PT
|
My question ? What are each one of you ,who are supporting AGW, doing personally to stop it.
Again no one "supports" AGW, most here would probably say the scientific consensus shows it is very likely happening.
Personally I try to reduce my impact as much as I can while still doing what I want to do. I believe in some balance between my resource intensive lifestyle and the impacts on others (especialy those in third world countries where the impacts may be felt the hardest) Instead of the SUV I used to own in the 90s that got 18mpg I have an awd car that gets 25. I combine trips and carpool. I limit my heating and cooling by using a blanket, a whole house fan, etc. I support policies that promote development of green energy and energy efficiency. I'm not a granola who isn't going to cook my food because it uses energy, but I'm also not going to waste resources, deny what is clearly happening and contribute to a problem that results in costs absorbed by everyone and a degradation of the natural environment for other species as well.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Oct 21, 2012 - 04:40pm PT
|
Job security ring a bell?
Like me actively advocating for more funding and support for more carriers and SAR OP helo's/equipment while I was active.
Newflash, Chief Running Mouth, just because you advocated in your self interest doesn't mean everyone else is taking positions to advance their self interests.
We all know air pollution scientists working in government are just rolling in the dough...LOL.
Nice to see big oil gets a pass in your book.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Oct 21, 2012 - 04:54pm PT
|
Pass? You rail against Dr. F for supposedly being conflicted because he is an air pollution scientist yet say nothing about scientists working for big oil. Yep, a total pass. What a joke.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Oct 21, 2012 - 04:54pm PT
|
I would not tell someone they are un-sensible even if they hve any old opinion. It's there's and they are entitled to it.
Hi Lois.
|
|
rottingjohnny
Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
|
|
|
Oct 21, 2012 - 05:46pm PT
|
I feel bullied and unsafe...The AGW site feels unsafe with Miss J and the Chief posts...I'm off to hike and smoke the other half of my Camels...RJ
|
|
mountainlion
Trad climber
California
|
|
|
Oct 21, 2012 - 09:39pm PT
|
I'm with Dr.F, Ed, Base and all the other scientists on this thread. My dad taught me "I don't know everything but I can find out who to ask. When I find the person who is the expert on something I'm not. Ask what I need to know and then listen to them". By the way I like your book "rock and road" Craig!
Chief you do yourself a disservice on the political threads. Thanks for your service. You seem to be a kickass climber and most climbers have a screw loose. Your screw seems to actually have fallen out!
Peace Eric
|
|
corniss chopper
climber
breaking the speed of gravity
|
|
|
Oct 22, 2012 - 12:19am PT
|
Is that all? Only 400,000? Insignificant Dr f.
More than 135 million are born per year while only 57 million people die.
That's disastrous. Since no one seems to want to start huge wars anymore
we need some process to control the population. Climate needs to step up and get busy saving the world by wacking more people.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Oct 22, 2012 - 12:28am PT
|
There's one thing I really dislike, and I'm serious.
99.999% of my posts are never serious here.
corniss chopper you want other people to die for population control and that's how many people think also.
That's pretty pathetic selfish attitude.
You should be the first one to die for population control to set the example since you like that ......
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Oct 22, 2012 - 09:46am PT
|
Now go find yourself a small teenie weenie hole to stick that Dirtbag puss infested pin sized pee pee of yours into so you can find more useless shet to regurgitate.
It's called a "penis" chief: not a "weenie" and not a "pee pee." Adults use the term "penis." Maybe you should run along now and let the grown-ups talk science.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Oct 22, 2012 - 10:07am PT
|
LOL...I post something at 6:46 a.m. and 3 minutes later, Chief Running Mouth responds. Poor chap was probably up all night glued to this thread, pondering one inch wee-wees.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!