We Remember The Magic Café We Remember
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » New Report on Global Warming » » TOPIC IS LOCKED (153 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3..30..57..84..111..135~136~137~138~139..157..174..191..208..224~225~226 [Next]
Gorlzax
View Profile
New user
39 Posts

Profile of Gorlzax
Quote:
On Sep 20, 2016, rockwall wrote:
Quote:
On Sep 20, 2016, Gorlzax wrote:
....

I think this is constructive comment from Dannydoyle about reframing the debate to moving forward. So, question to all: what are the best ways that, we as humans can take care of this earth and help it to feel better? Because, if I understand you all correctly, everybody here thinks that we should take as good care of this planet as we can. And when we find the best possible way to do that, we will also find out that does that have an positive impact on the climate. So, actually no need to argue about Is GW man made or not, because like Dannydoyle said, right thing is right thing and we should move forward and do the absolute best we can as humans.

So rockwall, tommy, RNK, Dannydoyle and the rest of you, if you allow, I would like to kind of quote one certain presidential candidate: how will we make this planet great again?


Here's a suggestion. Let's euthanize all of China. This will immediately decrease the worlds carbon footprint by about a third, just in regards to CO2 output, not to mention all the food available for other people on the earth. I am sure that this will help the earth to feel better and we will find that this will have a positive impact on the climate. It may sound drastic but I doubt you will find a better way to actually cut down on that much CO2 and think of the alternative where everyone on the earth dies instead of just one country of mostly very poor people. I hope you give this serious consideration and realize that this is probably the absolute best we can do as humans to make our planet happy again.


So my question got one reply. Rockwall presented his idea: lets kill all the chinese, because they are poor.

Some people here say that nobody, not even the sceptics, are disagreeing that the climate is warming and that people have some part in it, but rather that it is just made too big deal out of it.

But right after these comments RNK says

"nothing will be done about it because their is NO consensus that GW is happening and especially that man is causing it. Just silly."

So it seems to me that no, not everybody thinks that climate is warming and that peoples actions have little/some/big/enourmous (choose your preference) effect to that.

And to RNK I want to say that I do not understand at all what you mean by saying, that nothing will be done. Because huge amount of things have already been done. Check it out from google. 😊
rockwall
View Profile
Special user
762 Posts

Profile of rockwall
"No, I haven't seen the movie. I was just responding to your characterization of "expert modelling" and your implication that turning the plane around was not realistically possible/feasible. "

And my characterization was correct. Turning the plane around and landing at the airport was NOT "realistically possible".

"Do YOU agree with the consensus view of the 197 scientific organizations that I listed? "

As I've said many times, I agree that of the warming that has occurred, man has most likely caused some portion of it.


Tell you what, get me a list of scientific organizations that have stated that half of us are all gonna die in the next hundred years if nothing is done and then get back to me.
rockwall
View Profile
Special user
762 Posts

Profile of rockwall
Quote:
On Sep 21, 2016, Gorlzax wrote:
...
So my question got one reply. Rockwall presented his idea: lets kill all the chinese, because they are poor.
...


Not because they are poor Gorlzax, because it would cut C02 by over 30%.

But, give us YOUR solution and tell us how much it will cut C02 by and how happy it will make the planet.
Gorlzax
View Profile
New user
39 Posts

Profile of Gorlzax
Quote:
On Sep 21, 2016, rockwall wrote:
Quote:
On Sep 21, 2016, Gorlzax wrote:
...
So my question got one reply. Rockwall presented his idea: lets kill all the chinese, because they are poor.
...


Not because they are poor Gorlzax, because it would cut C02 by over 30%.

But, give us YOUR solution and tell us how much it will cut C02 by and how happy it will make the planet.


You explained your solution by telling that its better to kill people from one country where they also are poor than many countries or (this you didn't say, but I presume) one country where the people are rich. So that's your idea. Ok.

I actually don't have any new ideas to give that's why I asked all of you. All the things we as humans are trying to do already are good, I think - we just need to do them better and more. And many good ideas are still just ideas, because it is hard to make them reality because there are some people who seem to think that there is no problem and that we shouldnt worry about it or do anything.
So no solutions here. Just intersted to hear peoples thoughts. 😊
Dannydoyle
View Profile
Eternal Order
20662 Posts

Profile of Dannydoyle
You don't get to assume something different when he tells you the answer.

Ron your are SO interested in being "right" yoy don't put forth any solutions. We need solutions not argument. Is the solution to throw money at the problem? Is it to stall the economy? Is it to tax tax tax? Redistribute wealth? What is the solution? Why is it more important for you to argue than to fix?
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus
<BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell
rockwall
View Profile
Special user
762 Posts

Profile of rockwall
Quote:
On Sep 21, 2016, Gorlzax wrote:
...

You explained your solution by telling that its better to kill people from one country where they also are poor than many countries or (this you didn't say, but I presume) one country where the people are rich. So that's your idea. Ok.

...


No, Gorlzax, I picked China because it is the largest polluter. There are LOTS of countries where people are even poorer but they don't pollute as much so I didn't pick them. I was just stating that China had the added advantage that so many of its people are miserable anyway so, you know, no big deal.

However, I'm glad that you like my possible solution and think it is a possible way to help make the planet happy again. It's sad that you offer no solutions yourself. You would think that someone so concerned about our planets happiness would put more effort into coming up with solutions than simply, "Let's just keep up what we're doing."
Dannydoyle
View Profile
Eternal Order
20662 Posts

Profile of Dannydoyle
I think it was odd that the fact that it was poor people being killed was his objection. Not that people were being killed, but that it was poor people.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus
<BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell
rockwall
View Profile
Special user
762 Posts

Profile of rockwall
Oh, I don't think that he actually had an objection. He brought that up but it didn't seem to be a big deal to him either way.
R.S.
View Profile
Regular user
CT one day I'll have
173 Posts

Profile of R.S.
Quote:
On Sep 21, 2016, rockwall wrote:
"No, I haven't seen the movie. I was just responding to your characterization of "expert modelling" and your implication that turning the plane around was not realistically possible/feasible. "

And my characterization was correct. Turning the plane around and landing at the airport was NOT "realistically possible".


According to the article I posted, an airport landing WAS possible. Again...

Quote:
The documents, released as the National Transportation Safety Board prepared to consider safety lessons from the accident, show that if pilot Chesley "Sully" Sullenberger had immediately attempted to return to LaGuardia after ingesting geese into both engines the Airbus A320 would have made it - barely.



Quote:
"Do YOU agree with the consensus view of the 197 scientific organizations that I listed? "

As I've said many times, I agree that of the warming that has occurred, man has most likely caused some portion of it.


OK.


Quote:
Tell you what, get me a list of scientific organizations that have stated that half of us are all gonna die in the next hundred years if nothing is done and then get back to me.


That's an odd non-sequitur.

Ron
"It is error only, and not truth, that shrinks from inquiry." Thomas Paine
rockwall
View Profile
Special user
762 Posts

Profile of rockwall
Quote:
On Sep 21, 2016, R.S. wrote:
...
According to the article I posted, an airport landing WAS possible. Again...
...


Yes, it 'was' possible, just likes it's 'possible' to roll snake-eyes 100 times in a roll. Not terribly likely, but 'possible'. Would you be willing to risk your life on the chance? And no, I don't think I'm overstating the case. But you would need to either read the book or watch the movie to understand why.

"That's an odd non-sequitur. "

Not at all. I think that's the exact point of the discussion. Who cares if man has caused some of the warming to take place. Isn't it really about whether or not it's going to cause catastrophic damage or not?
R.S.
View Profile
Regular user
CT one day I'll have
173 Posts

Profile of R.S.
Quote:
On Sep 21, 2016, Dannydoyle wrote:
You don't get to assume something different when he tells you the answer.

Ron your are SO interested in being "right" yoy don't put forth any solutions. We need solutions not argument. Is the solution to throw money at the problem? Is it to stall the economy? Is it to tax tax tax? Redistribute wealth? What is the solution? Why is it more important for you to argue than to fix?


That's because YOU (and others) have already given some ideas for moving forward, and I don't disagree with them. But here's the thing... as long as there are enough people who don't even believe there is a problem, no proposals will ever matter. So job 1 is to educate people about the conclusions of the world's climate experts.

Ron
"It is error only, and not truth, that shrinks from inquiry." Thomas Paine
R.S.
View Profile
Regular user
CT one day I'll have
173 Posts

Profile of R.S.
Quote:
On Sep 21, 2016, rockwall wrote:
Quote:
On Sep 21, 2016, R.S. wrote:
...
According to the article I posted, an airport landing WAS possible. Again...
...


Yes, it 'was' possible, just likes it's 'possible' to roll snake-eyes 100 times in a roll. Not terribly likely, but 'possible'. Would you be willing to risk your life on the chance? And no, I don't think I'm overstating the case. But you would need to either read the book or watch the movie to understand why.

"That's an odd non-sequitur. "

Not at all. I think that's the exact point of the discussion. Who cares if man has caused some of the warming to take place. Isn't it really about whether or not it's going to cause catastrophic damage or not?


Yes, I would be willing to risk my life on the odds of rolling snake eyes 100 times in a row if the only other option available to me also carried the odds of rolling snake eyes 100 times in a row.

Anyway, as I said, I haven't seen the movie, so I can only post based on your comments here, which seemed to disparage the consensus view of climate "experts".


Ron
"It is error only, and not truth, that shrinks from inquiry." Thomas Paine
tommy
View Profile
Eternal Order
Devil’s Island
16276 Posts

Profile of tommy
We can say this much for the true believers; it is not their fault that they all stink, because they have all been taught to believe uncritically, that they must never wash in order to conserve water.
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.

Tommy
Pop Haydn
View Profile
Inner circle
Los Angeles
3549 Posts

Profile of Pop Haydn
The evidence for rapid climate change is compelling:

Sea level rise

Global sea level rose about 17 centimeters (6.7 inches) in the last century. The rate in the last decade, however, is nearly double that of the last century


Global temperature rise

All three major global surface temperature reconstructions show that Earth has warmed since 1880. Most of this warming has occurred since the 1970s, with the 20 warmest years having occurred since 1981 and with all 10 of the warmest years occurring in the past 12 years. Even though the 2000s witnessed a solar output decline resulting in an unusually deep solar minimum in 2007-2009, surface temperatures continue to increase.


Warming oceans

The oceans have absorbed much of this increased heat, with the top 700 meters (about 2,300 feet) of ocean showing warming of 0.302 degrees Fahrenheit since 1969


Shrinking ice sheets

The Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets have decreased in mass. Data from NASA's Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment show Greenland lost 150 to 250 cubic kilometers (36 to 60 cubic miles) of ice per year between 2002 and 2006, while Antarctica lost about 152 cubic kilometers (36 cubic miles) of ice between 2002 and 2005.


Declining Arctic sea ice

Both the extent and thickness of Arctic sea ice has declined rapidly over the last several decades


Glacial retreat

Glaciers are retreating almost everywhere around the world — including in the Alps, Himalayas, Andes, Rockies, Alaska and Africa.


Extreme events

The number of record high temperature events in the United States has been increasing, while the number of record low temperature events has been decreasing, since 1950. The U.S. has also witnessed increasing numbers of intense rainfall events.


Ocean acidification

Since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, the acidity of surface ocean waters has increased by about 30 percent.12,13 This increase is the result of humans emitting more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere and hence more being absorbed into the oceans. The amount of carbon dioxide absorbed by the upper layer of the oceans is increasing by about 2 billion tons per year.14,15


Decreased snow cover

Satellite observations reveal that the amount of spring snow cover in the Northern Hemisphere has decreased over the past five decades and that the snow is melting earlier


http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/
Pop Haydn
View Profile
Inner circle
Los Angeles
3549 Posts

Profile of Pop Haydn
Scientific societies and scientists have released statements and studies showing the growing consensus on climate change science. A common objection to taking action to reduce our heat-trapping emissions has been uncertainty within the scientific community on whether or not global warming is happening and if it is caused by humans. However, there is now an overwhelming scientific consensus that global warming is indeed happening and humans are contributing to it.

Scientific Societies


American Meteorological Society: Climate Change: An Information Statement of the American Meteorological Society

"Indeed, strong observational evidence and results from modeling studies indicate that, at least over the last 50 years, human activities are a major contributor to climate change." (February 2007)


American Physical Society: Statement on Climate Change

"The evidence is incontrovertible: Global warming is occurring. If no mitigating actions are taken, significant disruptions in the Earth’s physical and ecological systems, social systems, security and human health are likely to occur. We must reduce emissions of greenhouse gases beginning now." (November 2007)


American Geophysical Union: Human Impacts on Climate

"The Earth's climate is now clearly out of balance and is warming. Many components of the climate system—including the temperatures of the atmosphere, land and ocean, the extent of sea ice and mountain glaciers, the sea level, the distribution of precipitation, and the length of seasons—are now changing at rates and in patterns that are not natural and are best explained by the increased atmospheric abundances of greenhouse gases and aerosols generated by human activity during the 20th century." (Adopted December 2003, Revised and Reaffirmed December 2007)


American Association for the Advancement of Science: AAAS Board Statement on Climate Change

"The scientific evidence is clear: global climate change caused by human activities is occurring now, and it is a growing threat to society." (December 2006)


Geological Society of America: Global Climate Change

"The Geological Society of America (GSA) supports the scientific conclusions that Earth’s climate is changing; the climate changes are due in part to human activities; and the probable consequences of the climate changes will be significant and blind to geopolitical boundaries." (October 2006)


American Chemical Society: Statement on Global Climate Change

"There is now general agreement among scientific experts that the recent warming trend is real (and particularly strong within the past 20 years), that most of the observed warming is likely due to increased atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations, and that climate change could have serious adverse effects by the end of this century." (July 2004)
National Science Academies


U.S. National Academy of Sciences: Understanding and Responding to Climate Change

"The scientific understanding of climate change is now sufficiently clear to justify taking steps to reduce the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere." (2005)


International academies: Joint science academies’ statement: Global response to climate change

"Climate change is real. There will always be uncertainty in understanding a system as complex as the world’s climate. However there is now strong evidence that significant global warming is occurring." (2005, 11 national academies of science)


International academies The Science of Climate Change

"Despite increasing consensus on the science underpinning predictions of global climate change, doubts have been expressed recently about the need to mitigate the risks posed by global climate change. We do not consider such doubts justified." (2001, 16 national academies of science)

Http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/sci......eX_ArI-U
Slim King
View Profile
Eternal Order
Orlando
17687 Posts

Profile of Slim King
The majority of your links are about 10 years old or so.....
THE MAN THE SKEPTICS REFUSE TO TEST FOR ONE MILLION DOLLARS.. The Worlds Foremost Authority on Houdini's Life after Death.....
Gorlzax
View Profile
New user
39 Posts

Profile of Gorlzax
Quote:
On Sep 21, 2016, Dannydoyle wrote:
I think it was odd that the fact that it was poor people being killed was his objection. Not that people were being killed, but that it was poor people.


Like Rockwall said I didn't object in any way. Actually I didn't comment the whole thing in any way, not with a single word. Although rockwall tried to put words into my mouth, that I liked the idea or whatever he might type - I commented in no way. A very conscious desicion from my part.

Just mirroring what is being said to me. So your idea rockwall is: killing all the chinese people to cut back the CO2 and you give also the added explanation that it is a good idea also because they are poor and miserable anyway, so that's why, in your opinion, it wouldnt be a big deal to kill 1 billion chinese people. Did I now understand correctly what your suggestion and idea was?

And Dannydoyle: "You don't get to assume something different when he tells you the answer."
If this was pointed towards me, then 😊.

And rockwall: "It's sad that you offer no solutions yourself. You would think that someone so concerned about our planets happiness would put more effort into coming up with solutions than simply, "Let's just keep up what we're doing.""
Yep, I think it is also sad that I don't have any new solutions to give, even when, like you you said, I am so concerned about our planets happiness. That would be awesome, if I had. Still I did say, we need to do what we are doing better and more, which is different than "just keep up what we are doing". But I know that of course you understood what I meant, so that's cool.

Cherio!
tommy
View Profile
Eternal Order
Devil’s Island
16276 Posts

Profile of tommy
The evidence for rapid climate change in Finland was compelling to the climate hysterics but like they have admitted they are not capable of evaluating the evidence.
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.

Tommy
rockwall
View Profile
Special user
762 Posts

Profile of rockwall
Quote:
On Sep 21, 2016, R.S. wrote:
...
Yes, I would be willing to risk my life on the odds of rolling snake eyes 100 times in a row if the only other option available to me also carried the odds of rolling snake eyes 100 times in a row.
...


I suppose if there are no other options, you'd be willing to risk your life on something with impossible odds, but fortunately, there was a solution with much better odds.

btw, in my original post, I stated that the "experts proved it was possible". I didn't say they were wrong. So, I'm not really sure what point you're trying to make.
Dannydoyle
View Profile
Eternal Order
20662 Posts

Profile of Dannydoyle
Risking your life is one thing. But forcing others to risk theirs is something else.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus
<BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » New Report on Global Warming » » TOPIC IS LOCKED (153 Likes)
 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3..30..57..84..111..135~136~137~138~139..157..174..191..208..224~225~226 [Next]
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2021 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.5 seconds requiring 5 database queries.
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café
are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic.
> Privacy Statement <

ROTFL Billions and billions served! ROTFL