Climate change or global warming and who did it?

[Edbear]

Then we are not meant to be here.
Any species that shits in their own nest is obviously too stupid to deserve to survive.

Well put! Unfortunately, the human species as a species, is that stupid which defys the fact that most individuals recognise that that is what we are doing and want it to stop.

Too long to read the whole thread, but I will say this much:

If one doesn't believe in Global warming is attributed to greenhouse gases etc.... fine.

However, would you agree that we need to control global pollution and population increase, because (and I do think one would agree) we can't keep it going at the rate it is now!!!

I took a plane ride a couple of years ago from Toronto to Charlotte, NC. It was a clear day.....well sort of .... I saw SMOG THE ENTIRE TRIP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Now that can't be good for humans or the planet regardless of whether it is causing global warming.

One thing the wife and I really enjoyed about NZ was how your colours were so BRIGHT... the sky was blue and the trees in the distance were vibrant green and everything looked clear! In many parts of the world, things just look hazy.

Global warming or no.... that's just not right!

Again, you'll see in most industrialised cities a pollution level way higher than it should be with some cities classified as toxic! Even the Astronaughts are mentioning how dirty the Earth is looking from space now by comparison to the first space flights when it was described as breathtakingly beautiful and pristine.

Considering that the entire world's population could fit in the state of Texas with room to swing a cat, it is more the population/agriculture distribution on the planet that is the real issue. Coupled with the rampant greed of people who want it all and want it now and hang the consequences as long as I'm all right, Jack.

I for one don't believe all the hype around global warming. I'm still skeptical, sitting on the fence if you prefer, as there has been too much bullshit.
I do agree the pollution must be reduced and this is one of my issues with global warming. By focusing on carbons and greenhouse gases which somehow all come back to carbons, the believers are willing to increase other pollutants, like mercury and lead. So instead of contributing possibly 1% to the planets carbon emissions we are meant to accept directly poisoning the planet with non-greenhouse pollutants.

Much is beyond question, I've been doing a lot of research on it. If you stick to studies of scientists without the spin polliticians and vested interests are putting on them the situation is dire for the human race and most air-breathing life. While global warming on its own may not be enough to threaten our survival as a species, it's the combination of warming with rampant pollution that is too much for the planet to cope with.

The atmosphere could cope with vehicle pollution, but not combined with airplanes and industry. Add in a few volacanoes which would on their own be no issue and again, it's the overloading that causes the damage.

[shrub]

Considering that the entire world's population could fit in the state of Texas with room to swing a cat, it is more the population/agriculture distribution on the planet that is the real issue. Coupled with the rampant greed of people who want it all and want it now and hang the consequences as long as I'm all right, Jack.

There was a study done about 5 years ago and the current population of the planet could all enjoy a lifestyle comparable to an average Western European of the early 1990s and I read another that had it as a late 80s lifestyle - either are pretty good.

Much is beyond question, I've been doing a lot of research on it. If you stick to studies of scientists without the spin polliticians and vested interests are putting on them the situation is dire for the human race and most air-breathing life. While global warming on its own may not be enough to threaten our survival as a species, it's the combination of warming with rampant pollution that is too much for the planet to cope with.

Well said. When you talk to scientists involved in anything to do with the environment they are almost without exception quietly shitting themselves because they look at the cold hard data before it gets spun, diluted or challenged with spurious arguments. They don't have an agenda beyond finding out what is going on and if they are worried then maybe we need to be too.

As for who is to blame, I like Ockham's razor. My back lawn has dog shit on it - now that could be caused by my neighbour's dog getting through the fence, it could be birdshit that just looks like dogshit or it could be me not using the chemical toilet. Or it could be caused by my dog.

[avgas]

Then we are not meant to be here.
Any species that shits in their own nest is obviously too stupid to deserve to survive.

Actually originally we didn't. It was only through "convenience" we started to do so.

Also we can't run on the principal of consumption - as many creatures on earth consume more than us (on a scale).

Problems with humans is intelligence. We found interesting ways to fuck up the world. Making us the most damaging due to our creativity.
We are the opening of pandora's box so to speak.

[shrub]

Also we can't run on the principal of consumption - as many creatures on earth consume more than us (on a scale).

Actually that's not true. No other species consumes fossil fuels, mined minerals etc, no other species consumes more food than they need for survival and no other species produces nearly as much waste as we do in total or on a scale.

[avgas]

No other species consumes fossil fuels, mined minerals etc

Last time I checked cave men did not require these.....reread my post

[shrub]

Last time I checked cave men did not require these.....reread my post

And what relevance does that have? We are not 'cave men' and they don't exist any more, so what they did or didn't do bears no relevance to the current unsustainable levels of human consumption.

[avgas]

And what relevance does that have? We are not 'cave men' and they don't exist any more, so what they did or didn't do bears no relevance to the current unsustainable levels of human consumption.

Why do we consume?

Do we all consume the same?

Its very easy to say "Humans are evil because they consume", but its very hard to say "I consume too much due to what decisions I make and how I think".

Humans are not the problem here - there are still humans on earth whom consume and waste very little. The problem therefore is not the fact we are human, or human nature. But something else. no?

[shrub]

Why do we consume.... The problem therefore is not the fact we are human, or human nature. But something else. no?

I agree entirely, many individuals and businesses choose not to consume unsustainably and many more are unable to do so.

If you're looking for a cause, the problem is ultimately following the western/capitalist/libertarian business model, especially as defined by people like Milton Friedman - reading his work with a 21st century lens is interesting to say the least. From Milton's original ideas we have developed a business environment where growth and profit have become the sole reasons for businesses to exist, and the way to achieve that has been to maximise consumption and minimise production costs.

Common business sense you say, but the level of consumption is unsustainable because not only are we running out of resources, but we're running out of people able to afford to buy new and shiny shit. Therefore manufacturing costs need to come down, so we can't afford to manufacture anything in the west any more because paying the kind of wages needed to buy flash TVs means they would cost about a brazillian dollars each. And nobody could afford them, let alone several of them which is what we all need - ask any advertising agency.

As well as labour costs, there are costs of energy to manufacture said lovely stuff, and the cheapest energy going is from fossil fuels, especially coal. Only problem is that results in greenhouse gas emissions, so the best solution is to make sure that the countries where our stuff is made don't have to take responsibility for said GHGs. Then it's proven really successful to dull and confuse the populace with a brilliant PR campaign that casts doubt on the very existence of climate change by telling them scientists are confused (they're not) and are solely motivated by money (again, they're not) and that it's all a scam by evil governments to get you and I to pay more tax which will mean we can't afford that lovely new LED Tv to replace the horrible old LCD we bought last year.

And we've been told that we are solely responsible for ourselves and no other. We must not consider the needs of others if that gets in the way of us getting what we want NOW (or have been told we want), and that includes the needs of people living tomorrow. It's a concept known as rational egoism and has worked spectacularly well. So far.

[avgas]

And we've been told that we are solely responsible for ourselves and no other. We must not consider the needs of others if that gets in the way of us getting what we want NOW (or have been told we want), and that includes the needs of people living tomorrow. It's a concept known as rational egoism and has worked spectacularly well. So far.

heh yep - which is my point. To paint all with the "damn dirty human" brush is a bit, errr simple.
We need to change ideas. Unfortunately if you follow any of the change theories out there - a change this big requires a big freezing then big changes, then a big unfreezing.

In the real world, I can't think of anything affecting human consumption/waste on that sort of scale. That isn't Armageddon.
I mean how would you change the ideas of billions of people overnight that : technology, eat more than you grow, power systems etc are bad ideas.
We would have to lose it all first. Have it taken from us.
We won't give it up willingly - otherwise we would have done it already.

[mashman]

Unfortunately, the human species as a species, is that stupid which defys the fact that most individuals recognise that that is what we are doing and want it to stop.

Yeeeah, Nah, that's only the parasites and not the symbionts. There's only one thing to do with parasites.........

[mashman]

It's already starting to happen - or more to the point the world's business leaders are all taking climate change very, very seriously because they're smart enough to recognise that if they don't they won't be business leaders for too much longer. In a recent opinion survey of the world's leading CEOs, 93% said climate change was the biggest challenge to the long term viability of their businesses and needed immediate attention. Unlike people on internet message boards these guys are smart enough not to listen to spin doctors and to listen to the people who have done the research.

According to this, NZ Business has fallen way behind (or is "leading" the charge... depending on your view point ) and doesn't really rate its affect on the planet as much of an area for concern (in light of not having the other questions that is)



and it would seem that we're going to bail some areas out ... @restoration

[Edbear]

Some good points made here. It's not all human's spoiling it, many native populations in so-called third-world countries are living well with nature and living sustainably. The problem is mainly a "Western" issue with people consuming more than they need without regard for waste and pollution and sustainability. The most urgent problem is pollution, as science highlights - we're polluting the Earth far faster than it can cope with. We're destroying not only the environment by pollution, but we are destroying the Earth's resources that cope with pollution as well.

[NighthawkNZ:Me]

Some good points made here. It's not all human's spoiling it, many native populations in so-called third-world countries are living well with nature and living sustainably.

Aliems did it...

[mashman]

Some good points made here. It's not all human's spoiling it, many native populations in so-called third-world countries are living well with nature and living sustainably. The problem is mainly a "Western" issue with people consuming more than they need without regard for waste and pollution and sustainability. The most urgent problem is pollution, as science highlights - we're polluting the Earth far faster than it can cope with. We're destroying not only the environment by pollution, but we are destroying the Earth's resources that cope with pollution as well.

The big issue is how we're living, not what the side effects are (pollution, consumption etc...). Solve the how bit and the rest would take care of itself... I have a suggestion that would help to bring that about

[Edbear]

Local climates are certainly changing with records being broken around the world.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/environmen...ectid=10730494