Global warming?

[Banditbandit]

The last thing we need is a knee-jerk reaction. The consequences of a shattered economy will be just as bad if not worse to the environment - people living from hand to mouth don't have the energy to care about long term environmental affects.

Yeah maybe. The way we are polluting our planet now is pretty bad - even without global warming we have massive air pollution, especially in industrial countries like China, Russia ... pollution enough to kill people through long term illnesses .. as well as the other life forms we are killing off.

The same measures to curb pollution will also slow up global warming if we are causing it .. I'll take the first reason for now ...

As well, we are going to run out of oil - which will be disastrous in itself UNLESS we develop new technologies (but we will still have issues with all the things that come from oil beside petroleum) So why not develop the technologies now so that we are no longer so reliant on oil and we stop a lot of the current pollution as well .. those new technologies will also slow down whatever contribution humans make to global warming ...

It's not a knee-jerk reaction to global warming - it's a positive step to stop pollution ... slowing global warming may (or may not be) a beneficial side effect ...

And yet without general agreement on what the science says how are we to know where best to channel our efforts? The argument is not the problem, the problem is that there is money to be made by jumping on the band wagon.

ANYTHING in a capitalist European-derived culture is a money-making opportunity (even the act of pro-creation is for sale) .. is that a reason to continue to pollute our planet? To stop people making money?

In fact, I'd go further and say that nothing happens in our European-derived capitalist-focused cultures UNLESS someone has an opportunity to make money ..

And this sculpture is in Berlin .. it's called 'Politicians discussing global warming" .. it's what could happen if we procrastinate ...

[Tazz]

Yep, clean green NZ.

Show that to a few KLR riders and they'd at go clean up those crates

Where is that out of interest? We are doing fuck all on the conservation front and there is a general lack of interest in changing that, especially if it means coughing up a bit of money. Reseeding in the Paua industry is a great example. The big boys don't give a fuck but the smaller quota holders are doing the best they can.

We could, but from what I have seen on my travels around our country, kiwis are just as bad as the rest of the world. Just take a walk down any highway in NZ and you will see enough to make you think. Well it does me anyway.

Last truckie I hitched a ride with threw all his cans out the window and laughed saying he was giving someone a job. Fat fucking lazy cunting prick that guy was.
Rest stops are pretty bad for campers emptying their shit out too. Campers are pretty popular for NZers to own too though, not just for tourists to hire...

[SPman]

And yet without general agreement on what the science says how are we to know where best to channel our efforts? The argument is not the problem, the problem is that there is money to be made by jumping on the band wagon.

The only people who aren't in general agreement about the science are those who've deluded themselves it's all a money making scam. The science is settled, (as much as science can ever be settled)and the observations are backing up the theories, faster than many people are willing to admit.

The big brains & big money should be focused on how humanity can adapt & continue to thrive regardless of the weather. IMHO. Just sayin.

Trouble is, once temperatures start to average over 38C, human beans just can't take it. 'Taint that hot atm, but even where we are we now have 2 months at 35C + average and median...

[swbarnett]

Yeah maybe. The way we are polluting our planet now is pretty bad - even without global warming we have massive air pollution,

Put the bulk of the world into poverty and the situation will only get worse.

As well, we are going to run out of oil - which will be disastrous in itself UNLESS we develop new technologies (but we will still have issues with all the things that come from oil beside petroleum) So why not develop the technologies now so that we are no longer so reliant on oil and we stop a lot of the current pollution as well .. those new technologies will also slow down whatever contribution humans make to global warming ...

No argument there.

It's not a knee-jerk reaction to global warming - it's a positive step to stop pollution ... slowing global warming may (or may not be) a beneficial side effect ...

That's certainly not how it's being touted.

ANYTHING in a capitalist European-derived culture is a money-making opportunity (even the act of pro-creation is for sale) ..

What I'm saying is that if you say you want to do some research and you aim to prove GW is happening and we're causing it then you'll have great wads of money thrown at you. If you say you aim to prove the opposite you won't get funded. This situation hardly makes for a balanced result. Any findings must be treated with extreme suspicion.

Have you heard of pure research? Research with no aim in mind. IBM for one are great believers in this.

is that a reason to continue to pollute our planet? To stop people making money?

I never said that. Bad science is no reason to ruin an economy for dubious gain.

In fact, I'd go further and say that nothing happens in our European-derived capitalist-focused cultures UNLESS someone has an opportunity to make money ..

Shit that's cynical. While on the most part that may be true, if it were absolutely true there would be no charities for a start.

And this sculpture is in Berlin .. it's called 'Politicians discussing global warming" .. it's what could happen if we procrastinate ...

Apart from the fact that so-called "sea-level rise" has nothing to do with global warming. It's due to the fact that the tectonic plates are tilting (one side rise while the other sinks). Sweden, among others is still rebounding after the last ice-age.

[swbarnett]

The only people who aren't in general agreement about the science are those who've deluded themselves it's all a money making scam.

Boy is that ever a statement from a closed mind. For that to be true every person on the planet would have to have an intimate knowledge of climate science.

I know of at least one scientist (almost first hand) that was denied funding because his preliminary findings didn't support GW.

[Banditbandit]

Put the bulk of the world into poverty and the situation will only get worse.

If climate change is occurring then the situation will be much worse than economic collapse ...

What I'm saying is that if you say you want to do some research and you aim to prove GW is happening and we're causing it then you'll have great wads of money thrown at you. If you say you aim to prove the opposite you won't get funded. This situation hardly makes for a balanced result. Any findings must be treated with extreme suspicion.

That is probably quite accurate ... but not how I read your comment. I can't disagree.

Have you heard of pure research? Research with no aim in mind. IBM for one are great believers in this.

Yes, I support pure research ... it's hugely productive . there is also focused research as well ...

I never said that. Bad science is no reason to ruin an economy for dubious gain.

Looking at epistemologies .. I wonder what "good science" looks like ... they are all just structured attempts to explain the world .. but fail because the connections to reality can never be proven ..

And I wonder just how much responses to climate change will damage the economy. New Zealand turning into a desert or a swamp will certainly be disastrous for our economy.

Shit that's cynical. While on the most part that may be true, if it were absolutely true there would be no charities for a start.

Maybe it is a bit cynical - I regard it more as a Marxist-based analysis of Capitalist societies .. and I was not thinking of charities when I wrote it ... only in terms of technological change.

Apart from the fact that so-called "sea-level rise" has nothing to do with global warming. It's due to the fact that the tectonic plates are tilting (one side rise while the other sinks). Sweden, among others is still rebounding after the last ice-age.

Tectonic plate movements will not affect all the sea level, only the comparative level of the sea on either side of a plate. Place a tray in your bath water and tip it to one side. One side will go under water the other side will rise up .. but overall the level of water in the bath will not change.

The sea level rises as more water enters the sea, from melting ice at the poles, etc. This is a result of the average surface temperature rising. Even those who suggest that humans are not responsible for global warming accept that the average temperature is rising.

This is a map of the Nelson region showing what will be under water (in yellow) if the sea level rises by One metre.



That's completely disastrous for Nelson .. economically, socially etc etc ...

Have a look here at what could happen to Wellington ...

http://www.stuff.co.nz/science/31293...Venice-by-2100

assets worth billions of dollars which could be affected, including roads, railway lines and the city centre.

Do you really think that billions of dollars of asests affected by global warming will NOT be disatrous for the economy?

As well, a 1 degree rise in water temperature in the oceans means there is more energy in the system, and adds 5 miles an hour to wind speeds across that ocean. This is why the hurricane crossing the Atlantic to hit the USA are becoming stringer and creating more damage. That is very bad for the US economy as the costs of clean ups after these hurricanes is increased ...

Climate change involving warmer temperatures also means more evaporation of water, more clouds in the air, more rain .. look at the increasing floods across the globe.

You think it is just going to be warmer . and we can sit on the beach in the sun for longer ... Wrong wrong wrong .. climate change will be completely disastrous for future generations ...

[oldrider]

Pictures and story for individual reference and interest only!: http://drsircus.com/world-news/febru...eid=783acdf144 Make up your own mind!

[swbarnett]

If climate change is occurring then the situation will be much worse than economic collapse ...

You may well be right now that I think about it a bit more. Economic collapse would see a massive population drop very quickly as people starve in the cities and wars break out over very limited resources. This would actually be a good thing for the environment.

Looking at epistemologies .. I wonder what "good science" looks like ... they are all just structured attempts to explain the world .. but fail because the connections to reality can never be proven ..

Good science is that practiced by scientists that are interested in the truth no matter which side of the argument that lies on (usually it's somewhere in the middle) and can be recognised by the repeated experiments that all show outcomes predicted by the theory being tested. This is where climate science (among others) often falls down. You can't experiment with a planetary weather system.

Tectonic plate movements will not affect all the sea level, only the comparative level of the sea on either side of a plate. Place a tray in your bath water and tip it to one side. One side will go under water the other side will rise up .. but overall the level of water in the bath will not change.

Which is exactly my point. Sea level appears to rise on one side but in actual fact it's not. It's the land that's dropping.

Really all I'm saying with all this is that I think the jury is still well and truly out on the subject. Come back in a hundred years and look at the historical data. Then we just might be able to figure out what happened.

[ellipsis]

...we can't stop whatever is going to happen...doesn't matter what, who, when, why. We adapt or die...I would probably die...being a ginga, 'n all that...or drown 'cos I'm not really a water baby...I'm glad I got volunteered upon to be a swinger on a chair that is being built...it would be a real cunt to shrivel up or drown before I could make people realise how silly I really am...and fearlessly stupid...

[Banditbandit]

Good science is that practiced by scientists that are interested in the truth no matter which side of the argument that lies on (usually it's somewhere in the middle) and can be recognised by the repeated experiments that all show outcomes predicted by the theory being tested. This is where climate science (among others) often falls down. You can't experiment with a planetary weather system.

Umm ... yeah .. your position is extremely Karl Popper ... scientists claim that is what they do, but in reality that is not what they do. Einstein (Albert) and Mach (Ernst) both wrote about the foundations of science - and both placed 'intuition' as an important part of their work ... have you looked at the more contemporary work of Paul Feyerabend ????

Even Kuhn and Lakatos accepted that science was based in the discourse - or Feyerabend's suggestion that whoever has the best argument wins ... i.e. if you can convince enough scientists that you are right, then what you say is accepted ...

This has little to do with "truth" content ... which philosophy shows is impossible to achieve.

Really all I'm saying with all this is that I think the jury is still well and truly out on the subject. Come back in a hundred years and look at the historical data. Then we just might be able to figure out what happened.

Yes - I accept that .. and in 100 years we will certainly know what happened .. I'm saying the risk is too high to wait ...

[oldrider]

Not even one comment on the frozen waves? - Shit you guys must live extremely exciting lives if that doesn't even phase you! (post above)

I have sailed through the Southern Ocean but never seen cold like that FFS!

[Banditbandit]

Not even one comment on the frozen waves? - Shit you guys must live extremely exciting lives if that doesn't even phase you! (post above)

I have sailed through the Southern Ocean but never seen cold like that FFS!

Yeah .. that does make me wonder ... I'm not a climate scientist ...

So - the world is not warming up - climate change promoted by human actions is not occurring ... we can go on happily polluting our planet without guilt .. EXCELLENT !!!

[swbarnett]

Umm ... yeah .. your position is extremely Karl Popper ... scientists claim that is what they do, but in reality that is not what they do. Einstein (Albert) and Mach (Ernst) both wrote about the foundations of science - and both placed 'intuition' as an important part of their work ...

I've not studied the workings of science at all - except for having a wife with a masters in Physics that lectured and Auckland University for a few years and has read writings by the likes of Richard Feynman. Yes, intuition is very important. So is the willingness to be wrong. It's no good starting off with a hypothesis if you can't let it go when the evidence is against said hypothesis.

i.e. if you can convince enough scientists that you are right, then what you say is accepted ...

Indeed this is often the case. And exactly why I don't believe what's being touted as fact when it comes to GW.

This has little to do with "truth" content ... which philosophy shows is impossible to achieve.

Science is never about truth. It's about "fact". Or more accurately, "what we currently think is going on".

and in 100 years we will certainly know what happened ..

Yes, we'll know what happened to the weather. Will we know whether we caused it? That's debateable.

I'm saying the risk is too high to wait ...

And I'm saying that the risk of doing the wrong thing is at least as great. We don't even know if we CAN fix it. Better not to twiddle with the knobs until we know how the system works. Of course I'm only talking about GW here. Other environmental issues are far better understood.

[swbarnett]

Not even one comment on the frozen waves? - Shit you guys must live extremely exciting lives if that doesn't even phase you! (post above)

I have sailed through the Southern Ocean but never seen cold like that FFS!

That didn't surprise me because it's in the Northern hemisphere. One of the predictions of GW is that the jet stream will be disrupted and northern parts will freeze since the jet stream carries warm air north.

So even if this GW is a temporary things some parts of the planet will get cooler - that's why they stopped calling it GW and went with "Climate Change".

[Banditbandit]

. It's no good starting off with a hypothesis if you can't let it go when the evidence is against said hypothesis.

And neither is the reverse - not accepting what the evidence is telling us ... unfortunately, neither of us is going to be around to see who is right ..

That didn't surprise me because it's in the Northern hemisphere. One of the predictions of GW is that the jet stream will be disrupted and northern parts will freeze since the jet stream carries warm air north.

So even if this GW is a temporary things some parts of the planet will get cooler - that's why they stopped calling it GW and went with "Climate Change".

Hang on .. nek minute your explaining the impacts of Climate Change ... but you don't accept the science ... something is not right here ..