The Great Global Warming Swindle

[melthebell 863]

If humans played it safe we would still be living in caves.

 

humans ARE the worst animals on this planet

 

greedy, selfish, self serving, ruthless, murdering

[Zaytsev 10]

humans ARE the worst animals on this planet

 

greedy, selfish, self serving, ruthless, murdering

 

Sack cloth and ashes for you then eh mel.

[JoeP 11]

If humans played it safe we would still be living in caves.

 

I agree - which is why 'educated and reasoned action' is teh order of the day.

 

It's risk balancing; there are two theories here that basically state that the World does this by istelf, always has done, and what we do doesn't affect it, OR that we are having a radical effect on the climate by our actions.

 

The impact of these climate changes is economically, socially and politically teh same whether it's Nature or Man that's driving the change.

 

We cannot stop it if it's primarily natural. If it's Man driven, we might be able to slow it down, if not reverse it.

 

And whichever the cause, we still have to deal with the consequences.

 

So, until we get actual copper-bottomed proof, the 'moderately safe call' for humanity is to assume that our 'driving' of the climate change machine is more important that the optimists believe, whilst maybe not as bad as the pessimists believe. This slows down our input to the problem, and gains time for further research. If the research shines definite proof one way or another you can then modify policy to suit.

 

But to blunder on as we currently do without knowing what we're doing and effectively hoping for the best is criminal.

[discodown 11]

humans ARE the worst animals on this planet

 

greedy, selfish, self serving, ruthless, murdering

you're being a tad harsh. we're no worse than any other virus;)

[saxon51 10]

humans ARE the worst animals on this planet

 

greedy, selfish, self serving, ruthless, murdering

Agreed !!

 

Which is why I don't undertand it when people argue that human life is more precious than other animals, and should be treat with utmost respect and favouritism. We - well most of us - are the most evil set of lifeforms on the planet.

[nexus_ 10]

humans ARE the worst animals on this planet

 

greedy, selfish, self serving, ruthless, murdering

 

Yeah, you are right. Society is judged by the way it treats its poorest, least well off? Does that sound right to you? It is a nice goal, and quite admirable?

 

But if an animal is poorly or unable to take care of itself, how many packs try and take care of it? It is survival of the fittest in nature, yet humans don't prescribe to that. We have a bizarre sense of morals, yet we're the worst? I think this all depends on what you are arguing about, what is the basis of the judgement.

 

And by the way, I recycle everything I can. I try and live as 'carbon neutral' life as possible. I walk / get public transport to work every day. I rarely use my car and my heating is pretty low!! So I try and live a sensible, moderated life, but I think we (humans) might have got our priorities wrong at the moment.

[*_ash_* 88]

It was certainly interesting to see another point of view.

 

The first 20 minutes gave facts and figures which seem to be the complete opposite of what people are told in the media, the rest seemed to be based on what they considered to be political interference.

 

 

p.s Thanks to Olliekitten for correcting my typo in the title

[Greybeard 10]

If humans played it safe we would still be living in caves.

 

That seems to be the object. 'First world' environmentalists have decided that the peoples of the 'third world' will have to continue living their stone-age life-style.

 

Wonder where I can find a report of all the dissent the IPCC deleted from their final report ?

[Greybeard 10]

 

So, until we get actual copper-bottomed proof, the 'moderately safe call' for humanity is to assume that our 'driving' of the climate change machine is more important that the optimists believe, whilst maybe not as bad as the pessimists believe. This slows down our input to the problem, and gains time for further research. If the research shines definite proof one way or another you can then modify policy to suit.

 

But to blunder on as we currently do without knowing what we're doing and effectively hoping for the best is criminal.

 

Can you imagine a body like the Natural Environment Research Council funding projects to disprove the assumption that GW is driven by CO2 ?

 

As the programme suggested, man-made GW is now a religion

[angle20 10]

A very interesting programme. It suggested that: upper atmosphere levels are not warming in the way we might expect if warming - as experienced at the earth's surface - is a result of man-made factors; and from looking at historical data increased carbon dioxide levels appear to follow trends in increased warming (ie are an effect, not a cause). It attributes warming and cooling phases to sunspot activity on the sun.

 

It identified Margaret Thatcher as an early supporter of the theory of man-made global warming as it was another reason to promote nuclear energy. Then after the fall of communism a lot of anti-capitalist activists moved over to the environmental movement. Academics have got a lot of funding on the basis of investigating the threat of global warming. So today there's a vast industry of people with a vested interest in promoting the notion of the man-made factors. Energy conservation measures do, on the other hand, present a threat to development and alleviating poverty in developing countries.

[discodown 11]

why am i not shocked that none of the people who are certain GW is man made haven't commented on it?

[Crayfish 10]

I'm not sure anyone is 100% certain. Very complex system, the data are not definitive so it's not something one should rationally be certain about (unless they have an understanding of it that I lack, including definitive data).

 

The data taken as a whole do seem to me to point to a very strong probability that anthropogenic carbon (etc) emissions are influencing global climate towards a long-term warming trend. A lot of people now think this way. Look at the data and make up your own mind, is the best bet!

 

Even if we're not pushing the warming as such, the world is warming up and that's an eventuality that will need to be planned for - most global warming research actually goes into monitoring the warming and trying to predict future warming rather than necessarily apportioning blame to humanity or elsewhere.

 

It's fairly widely agreed that climate change isn't an altogether good thing and whether you believe as strongly as I do (about 90% convinced) that humans are having a strong influence on global climate or not, while there's any chance that we could be a primary driver it's surely better to take moderate steps to cut down on emissions while these steps are relatively easily attainable.

 

I would hope that as a byproduct of lowering CO2 emissions, other gas emissions might also drop and thus improve air quality also.