The Great Global Warming Swindle

[Renton 22031]

Who's managing the facts dare I ask?

[Park Life 71]

Who's managing the facts dare I ask?

 

I agree generally with Fop, both sides are guilty. But I'd have to say the corporate side that has been funding the skeptics- 'anti-global warming' research has shown less interest in the truth rather than muddy the waters.

I suspect it will take a another tsunami/Florida or two to set aside all the squabbling.

[Renton 22031]

Who's managing the facts dare I ask?

 

I agree generally with Fop, both sides are guilty. But I'd have to say the corporate side that has been funding the skeptics- 'anti-global warming' research has shown less interest in the truth rather than muddy the waters.

I suspect it will take a another tsunami/Florida or two to set aside all the squabbling.

 

Not sure what tsunamis have to to do with it mind.

[Park Life 71]

Who's managing the facts dare I ask?

 

I agree generally with Fop, both sides are guilty. But I'd have to say the corporate side that has been funding the skeptics- 'anti-global warming' research has shown less interest in the truth rather than muddy the waters.

I suspect it will take a another tsunami/Florida or two to set aside all the squabbling.

 

Not sure what tsunamis have to to do with it mind.

 

 

The real issue ultimately will be is whether China and India take it seriously.

[Guest alex]

I see they are plans for a new 'clean' coal-fired Power Station to be built in the UK.

[Rob W 0]

I see they are plans for a new 'clean' coal-fired Power Station to be built in the UK.

 

 

going to be bloody tough if we all have to go back to candles tho'

[Guest alex]

I see they are plans for a new 'clean' coal-fired Power Station to be built in the UK.

 

 

going to be bloody tough if we all have to go back to candles tho'

Tealights are all the rage man.

[Super_Steve_Howey 0]

Is Gloal warming happening? Yes.

Is the future of life on this planet in danger? Yes.

What or whom is to blame? The facts are being managed.

It's not for us to worry about it won't happen for years. Wrong. Insurance companies are factoring in climate change issues into their policies as we speak, especially to do with coastal areas and shipping.

Is there still time? Nobody really knows.

 

how exactly?

 

who says global warming will actually kill people, rather than just having a massive economic impact?

 

as opposed the death toll of, say, increaes ant-biotic resistance, nuclear proliferation, over-population etc ect?

[Renton 22031]

Is Gloal warming happening? Yes.

Is the future of life on this planet in danger? Yes.

What or whom is to blame? The facts are being managed.

It's not for us to worry about it won't happen for years. Wrong. Insurance companies are factoring in climate change issues into their policies as we speak, especially to do with coastal areas and shipping.

Is there still time? Nobody really knows.

 

how exactly?

 

who says global warming will actually kill people, rather than just having a massive economic impact?

 

as opposed the death toll of, say, increaes ant-biotic resistance, nuclear proliferation, over-population etc ect?

 

It's pretty nailed on it will kill people through starvation tbf (along with over-population), although I doubt it will wipe out human life altogether.

[Super_Steve_Howey 0]

Is Gloal warming happening? Yes.

Is the future of life on this planet in danger? Yes.

What or whom is to blame? The facts are being managed.

It's not for us to worry about it won't happen for years. Wrong. Insurance companies are factoring in climate change issues into their policies as we speak, especially to do with coastal areas and shipping.

Is there still time? Nobody really knows.

 

how exactly?

 

who says global warming will actually kill people, rather than just having a massive economic impact?

 

as opposed the death toll of, say, increaes ant-biotic resistance, nuclear proliferation, over-population etc ect?

 

It's pretty nailed on it will kill people through starvation tbf (along with over-population), although I doubt it will wipe out human life altogether.

 

presumably if they stay where they are. Starvation kills people right now. It's not a blanket everywhere turns to desert scenario as I recall, current cold areas will become usable for farming.

[Guest alex]

The more intangible the statement the less easily it can be disproved

[Fop 1]

Is Gloal warming happening? Yes.

Is the future of life on this planet in danger? Yes.

What or whom is to blame? The facts are being managed.

It's not for us to worry about it won't happen for years. Wrong. Insurance companies are factoring in climate change issues into their policies as we speak, especially to do with coastal areas and shipping.

Is there still time? Nobody really knows.

 

how exactly?

 

who says global warming will actually kill people, rather than just having a massive economic impact?

 

as opposed the death toll of, say, increaes ant-biotic resistance, nuclear proliferation, over-population etc ect?

 

It's pretty nailed on it will kill people through starvation tbf (along with over-population), although I doubt it will wipe out human life altogether.

 

presumably if they stay where they are. Starvation kills people right now. It's not a blanket everywhere turns to desert scenario as I recall, current cold areas will become usable for farming.

 

TBH global temperature increase will kill most in those areas that are currently grossly overpopulated for the current conditions anyway.

 

But the end of the world stuff is pretty much all nonsense, just that parts of the planet probably won't be very habitable in any real numbers.

 

Another issue that will kill both directly and indirectly is likely mass migration on a huge scale.

 

 

 

For global warming to wipe out human life or even life full stop is almost inconceivable, especially if human activity driven.

[Super_Steve_Howey 0]

Is Gloal warming happening? Yes.

Is the future of life on this planet in danger? Yes.

What or whom is to blame? The facts are being managed.

It's not for us to worry about it won't happen for years. Wrong. Insurance companies are factoring in climate change issues into their policies as we speak, especially to do with coastal areas and shipping.

Is there still time? Nobody really knows.

 

how exactly?

 

who says global warming will actually kill people, rather than just having a massive economic impact?

 

as opposed the death toll of, say, increaes ant-biotic resistance, nuclear proliferation, over-population etc ect?

 

It's pretty nailed on it will kill people through starvation tbf (along with over-population), although I doubt it will wipe out human life altogether.

 

presumably if they stay where they are. Starvation kills people right now. It's not a blanket everywhere turns to desert scenario as I recall, current cold areas will become usable for farming.

 

TBH global temperature increase will kill most in those areas that are currently grossly overpopulated for the current conditions anyway.

 

But the end of the world stuff is pretty much all nonsense, just that parts of the planet probably won't be very habitable in any real numbers.

 

Another issue that will kill both directly and indirectly is likely mass migration on a huge scale.

 

 

 

For global warming to wipe out human life or even life full stop is almost inconceivable, especially if human activity driven.

 

It won't kill that many people as the rate of change will be bareley perceptible. People will migrate without too much fuss. This is not more of a risk than the threats I mention in my opinion

 

compare to the effect of Australia virtually drying up - people haven't died, they've just adapted their supply chains

Edited March 13, 2007 by Super_Steve_Howey

[Fop 1]

Is Gloal warming happening? Yes.

Is the future of life on this planet in danger? Yes.

What or whom is to blame? The facts are being managed.

It's not for us to worry about it won't happen for years. Wrong. Insurance companies are factoring in climate change issues into their policies as we speak, especially to do with coastal areas and shipping.

Is there still time? Nobody really knows.

 

how exactly?

 

who says global warming will actually kill people, rather than just having a massive economic impact?

 

as opposed the death toll of, say, increaes ant-biotic resistance, nuclear proliferation, over-population etc ect?

 

It's pretty nailed on it will kill people through starvation tbf (along with over-population), although I doubt it will wipe out human life altogether.

 

presumably if they stay where they are. Starvation kills people right now. It's not a blanket everywhere turns to desert scenario as I recall, current cold areas will become usable for farming.

 

TBH global temperature increase will kill most in those areas that are currently grossly overpopulated for the current conditions anyway.

 

But the end of the world stuff is pretty much all nonsense, just that parts of the planet probably won't be very habitable in any real numbers.

 

Another issue that will kill both directly and indirectly is likely mass migration on a huge scale.

 

 

 

For global warming to wipe out human life or even life full stop is almost inconceivable, especially if human activity driven.

 

It won't kill that many people as the rate of change will be bareley perceptible. People will migrate without too much fuss. This is not more of a risk than the threats I mention in my opinion

 

compare to the effect of Australia virtually drying up - people haven't died, they've just adapted their supply chains

 

Well Australia "drying up" as you put it isn't really that big a deal, they still don't used "recycled" water for anything but agriculture in most of Australia and still think it is “unhygienic” to used water that has “been though someone” (as opposed to say London were any bit of water will have been though 10? or is it 15+ people?) and still have a low population density.

 

But in a lot of the places where death is likely to occur it's down to very high birth rates combined with stuff that effects infant mortality and give an ever increasing population, but without all the technological backup of say a western country (frankly most western countries standard of living would decrease with the rate of population growth in some of these areas).

 

 

 

Also the rate of change may well be small on average, but that's not how real life works, they will (and are) yearly fluctuations up and down from the median and those will (and have) killed. A couple of years of drought kills many in those overpopulated but resource poor areas, even if it is surrounded by years of plenty.

 

Not to mention that the average global temperature produces wide variations (irrespective of yearly variation), so a very small average global rise may produce a very high average temperature rise in specific areas (and could even produce average temperature drops in other areas).

[Park Life 71]

I see you are all well versed in crystal ball gazing the future effects of global warming...

 

 

"Populations will just migrate"..

 

 

Yeah it will all be a piece of piss like.

 

 

No one really knows and I don't think we really want to find out either.

 

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...7030101484.html

 

 

Ban said that global warming is "an inescapable reality" and warned that the destruction it inflicts -- including the loss of arable land to droughts and coastal flooding -- is likely to be a "major driver of war and conflict" in the coming decades.

 

The stakes in confronting global warming were bolstered last month when an international panel of 113 climate scientists concluded that human activities are heating the planet at a dangerous rate. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change concluded that it is 90 percent certain that human-generated greenhouse gases account for most of the global rise in temperatures over the past half-century.

Edited March 13, 2007 by Parky

[Fop 1]

I see you are all well versed in crystal ball gazing the future effects of global warming...

 

 

"Populations will just migrate"..

 

 

Yeah it will all be a piece of piss like.

 

 

No one really knows and I don't think we really want to find out either.

 

 

Tbh we will find out though.

 

Assuming it is largely human driven even if every country in the world worked together flawlessly (and many simply did not industrialise at all) we're still only talking about a reduction in increase at any time in the next 50 years (add industrialisation of India, China, Africa, Central an South America and it's even worse). So we're screwed and we need to look at preparing for changes (it's just not a problem we can really directly act upon and “fix”, like say the ozone issue was).

 

Assuming it is not human driven but something else, then again we're screwed and need to look at preparing for it.

 

But bizarrely doing what we can to prepare for it seems to be on almost no ones agenda at the moment….. I guess there’s no economic, green or political mileage in it.

[Super_Steve_Howey 0]

I see you are all well versed in crystal ball gazing the future effects of global warming...

 

"Populations will just migrate"..

 

Yeah it will all be a piece of piss like.

 

No one really knows and I don't think we really want to find out either.

 

 

 

What's not to extrapolate? Why would gradual migration be so lethal to the world population. Has there not been a huge economic migration to Europe in the last 10 years without any wars or mass hysteria?

 

If we do nothing because any claim effects are 'crystal ball gazing' why are targets and actions being set now?

 

I see a far greater possibility of future wars over the reduction in water supply and cheap energy sources than anything that will result from global warming

[Park Life 71]

I see you are all well versed in crystal ball gazing the future effects of global warming...

 

 

"Populations will just migrate"..

 

 

Yeah it will all be a piece of piss like.

 

 

No one really knows and I don't think we really want to find out either.

 

 

Tbh we will find out though.

 

Assuming it is largely human driven even if every country in the world worked together flawlessly (and many simply did not industrialise at all) we're still only talking about a reduction in increase at any time in the next 50 years (add industrialisation of India, China, Africa, Central an South America and it's even worse). So we're screwed and we need to look at preparing for changes (it's just not a problem we can really directly act upon and “fix”, like say the ozone issue was).

 

Assuming it is not human driven but something else, then again we're screwed and need to look at preparing for it.

 

But bizarrely doing what we can to prepare for it seems to be on almost no ones agenda at the moment….. I guess there’s no economic, green or political mileage in it.

 

The Dutch seem to be getting on the case.

 

http://www.truthout.org/issues_06/020707EB.shtml

[Fop 1]

I see you are all well versed in crystal ball gazing the future effects of global warming...

 

 

"Populations will just migrate"..

 

 

Yeah it will all be a piece of piss like.

 

 

No one really knows and I don't think we really want to find out either.

 

 

Tbh we will find out though.

 

Assuming it is largely human driven even if every country in the world worked together flawlessly (and many simply did not industrialise at all) we're still only talking about a reduction in increase at any time in the next 50 years (add industrialisation of India, China, Africa, Central an South America and it's even worse). So we're screwed and we need to look at preparing for changes (it's just not a problem we can really directly act upon and “fix”, like say the ozone issue was).

 

Assuming it is not human driven but something else, then again we're screwed and need to look at preparing for it.

 

But bizarrely doing what we can to prepare for it seems to be on almost no ones agenda at the moment….. I guess there’s no economic, green or political mileage in it.

 

The Dutch seem to be getting on the case.

 

http://www.truthout.org/issues_06/020707EB.shtml

 

 

They are also experimenting with flood proof housing I think as well, although I guess they have a more pressing need to prepare for potentials than most.

[Park Life 71]

I see you are all well versed in crystal ball gazing the future effects of global warming...

 

 

"Populations will just migrate"..

 

 

Yeah it will all be a piece of piss like.

 

 

No one really knows and I don't think we really want to find out either.

 

 

Tbh we will find out though.

 

Assuming it is largely human driven even if every country in the world worked together flawlessly (and many simply did not industrialise at all) we're still only talking about a reduction in increase at any time in the next 50 years (add industrialisation of India, China, Africa, Central an South America and it's even worse). So we're screwed and we need to look at preparing for changes (it's just not a problem we can really directly act upon and “fix”, like say the ozone issue was).

 

Assuming it is not human driven but something else, then again we're screwed and need to look at preparing for it.

 

But bizarrely doing what we can to prepare for it seems to be on almost no ones agenda at the moment….. I guess there’s no economic, green or political mileage in it.

 

The Dutch seem to be getting on the case.

 

http://www.truthout.org/issues_06/020707EB.shtml

 

 

They are also experimenting with flood proof housing I think as well, although I guess they have a more pressing need to prepare for potentials than most.

 

iirc London is in danger isn't it?

[Fop 1]

I see you are all well versed in crystal ball gazing the future effects of global warming...

 

 

"Populations will just migrate"..

 

 

Yeah it will all be a piece of piss like.

 

 

No one really knows and I don't think we really want to find out either.

 

 

Tbh we will find out though.

 

Assuming it is largely human driven even if every country in the world worked together flawlessly (and many simply did not industrialise at all) we're still only talking about a reduction in increase at any time in the next 50 years (add industrialisation of India, China, Africa, Central an South America and it's even worse). So we're screwed and we need to look at preparing for changes (it's just not a problem we can really directly act upon and “fix”, like say the ozone issue was).

 

Assuming it is not human driven but something else, then again we're screwed and need to look at preparing for it.

 

But bizarrely doing what we can to prepare for it seems to be on almost no ones agenda at the moment….. I guess there’s no economic, green or political mileage in it.

 

The Dutch seem to be getting on the case.

 

http://www.truthout.org/issues_06/020707EB.shtml

 

 

They are also experimenting with flood proof housing I think as well, although I guess they have a more pressing need to prepare for potentials than most.

 

iirc London is in danger isn't it?

 

 

I think in the longer term yes, and regarding storm swells as well, but a lot of the Netherlands is already potentially in trouble being below the current water level, and due to the current and wind directions they are much more likely to get a catastrophic storm swell I think.

 

Plus I would imagine New Orleans, and even the boxing day tsunami kinda focused their minds.

[Park Life 71]

I see you are all well versed in crystal ball gazing the future effects of global warming...

 

 

"Populations will just migrate"..

 

 

Yeah it will all be a piece of piss like.

 

 

No one really knows and I don't think we really want to find out either.

 

 

Tbh we will find out though.

 

Assuming it is largely human driven even if every country in the world worked together flawlessly (and many simply did not industrialise at all) we're still only talking about a reduction in increase at any time in the next 50 years (add industrialisation of India, China, Africa, Central an South America and it's even worse). So we're screwed and we need to look at preparing for changes (it's just not a problem we can really directly act upon and “fix”, like say the ozone issue was).

 

Assuming it is not human driven but something else, then again we're screwed and need to look at preparing for it.

 

But bizarrely doing what we can to prepare for it seems to be on almost no ones agenda at the moment….. I guess there’s no economic, green or political mileage in it.

 

The Dutch seem to be getting on the case.

 

http://www.truthout.org/issues_06/020707EB.shtml

 

 

They are also experimenting with flood proof housing I think as well, although I guess they have a more pressing need to prepare for potentials than most.

 

iirc London is in danger isn't it?

 

 

I think in the longer term yes, and regarding storm swells as well, but a lot of the Netherlands is already potentially in trouble being below the current water level, and due to the current and wind directions they are much more likely to get a catastrophic storm swell I think.

 

Plus I would imagine New Orleans, and even the boxing day tsunami kinda focused their minds.

 

The oceans warming factor. Don't really fully understand what he is saying, but it don't look good boss.

 

 

http://environment.guardian.co.uk/climatec...1959556,00.html

Edited March 13, 2007 by Parky

[Super_Steve_Howey 0]

"Don't really fully understand what he is saying, but it don't look good boss."

 

This seems to be the prevailing opinion when it comes to the dangers of global warming.

 

 

From that piece:

 

"Speaking before a lecture to the Institution of Chemical Engineers, Prof Lovelock repeated the prediction, made in his recent book The Revenge of Gaia, that global warming will kill billions of people this century. He said the Earth was undergoing a rapid transition that could boost temperatures by 8C, making large parts of the surface uninhabitable and food production impossible. A hotter planet might be able to support less than a tenth of its 6bn population."

 

As far as I know, there hasn't been a climate model that has survived more than 10 years

[Park Life 71]

"Don't really fully understand what he is saying, but it don't look good boss."

 

This seems to be the prevailing opinion when it comes to the dangers of global warming.

 

 

From that piece:

 

"Speaking before a lecture to the Institution of Chemical Engineers, Prof Lovelock repeated the prediction, made in his recent book The Revenge of Gaia, that global warming will kill billions of people this century. He said the Earth was undergoing a rapid transition that could boost temperatures by 8C, making large parts of the surface uninhabitable and food production impossible. A hotter planet might be able to support less than a tenth of its 6bn population."

 

As far as I know, there hasn't been a climate model that has survived more than 10 years

 

If things really are serious we'll be the last to know that's for sure.

 

iirc the rain forest is a key area as it is a key asset to the 'health of the planet' in cooling/oxygen/scrubbing terms. IMO if we are to start anywhere this must be the first site to come under some organised multi-govt protection.

Edited March 13, 2007 by Parky

[Fop 1]

"Don't really fully understand what he is saying, but it don't look good boss."

 

This seems to be the prevailing opinion when it comes to the dangers of global warming.

 

 

From that piece:

 

"Speaking before a lecture to the Institution of Chemical Engineers, Prof Lovelock repeated the prediction, made in his recent book The Revenge of Gaia, that global warming will kill billions of people this century. He said the Earth was undergoing a rapid transition that could boost temperatures by 8C, making large parts of the surface uninhabitable and food production impossible. A hotter planet might be able to support less than a tenth of its 6bn population."

 

As far as I know, there hasn't been a climate model that has survived more than 10 years

 

 

In all honesty that's the biggest issue, you'd need at least 50-100 years to really be even vaguely certain of anything in this field, so by the time anyone is it'll be far beyond the time when it "happened" (although the thing with climate models is also that the hardware and software moves on so rapidly that something 10 years old is pretty much caveman stuff in the computer modelling world – especially in such a complex system as the entire planets future climate).

 

We can measure current temps and we have some direct measurements going back up to 300 years, but 300 year is a blink of the earths eye, we've got decent data from other non-direct sources going back maybe, 10,000 year and other sources to 100,000+ years but the further back we go the more wiggle room their is.

 

Also given that we're likely to be pushing 9-12 billion people in the next 50-100 years.... really all bets are off.

 

 

 

 

Also the whole issue is now so divorced from pure science and has become such a political football, it's becoming increasingly hard to believe anything (New Scientist got a bit of mauling last year or 18 month or so ago for publishing some stuff that went against popular belief.... which really isn't a good sign with it being a flag ship of popular science as it were).