homepage
  roll on christmas  
click here to find out more about ship of fools click here to sign up for the ship of fools newsletter click here to support ship of fools
community the mystery worshipper gadgets for god caption competition foolishness features ship stuff
discussion boards live chat cafe avatars frequently-asked questions the ten commandments gallery private boards register for the boards
 
Ship of Fools
Thread closed  Thread closed


Post new thread  
Thread closed  Thread closed
My profile login | | Directory | Search | FAQs | Board home
   - Printer-friendly view Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
» Ship of Fools   »   » Oblivion   » Climate Change: Fact or Fantasy

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.    
Source: (consider it) Thread: Climate Change: Fact or Fantasy
shamwari
Shipmate
# 15556

 - Posted      Profile for shamwari   Email shamwari   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
What do Sipmates make of climate change?

David Attenborough, in his wonderful TV series on Africa, claimed the climate had changed + 3.5%

The Guardian newspaper, a bastion of climate change support, has queried this.

Everyone bandies about figures from their favoured source to support their predelictions.

My own view is that climate change is inevitable. It has always been in process of change and always will be.

Humans may hasten / delay the process. But you can't stop its inevitability. Therefore I suggest its better to spend money trying to adjust to it rather than trying to stop it.

The King Canute effect.

Posts: 1914 | From: from the abyss of misunderstanding | Registered: Mar 2010  |  IP: Logged
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333

 - Posted      Profile for lilBuddha     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by shamwari:
Therefore I suggest its better to spend money trying to adjust to it rather than trying to stop it.

Exactly how are these functionally different?

--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou

Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740

 - Posted      Profile for quetzalcoatl   Email quetzalcoatl   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
You left out the word 'anthropogenic', which is the crucial bit. If there is anthropogenic climate change, then it may be possible to row back on certain things which increase global warming. Hint: greenhouse gases.

--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.

Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011  |  IP: Logged
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047

 - Posted      Profile for Arethosemyfeet   Email Arethosemyfeet   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
The figure from the documentary was poorly sourced, not necessarily incorrect.

More generally, in order to dismiss the evidence in support of the significant effect of human activities, particularly the release of carbon dioxide, you need to rewrite the laws of physics or find a causal mechanism (that prevents the CO2 having the warming effect described AND accounts for the oberserved warming) that has remained unknown until this point, despite the efforts of a quarter century of denialist attempts.

The science underpinning this is a century old, the warming effect of CO2 in the atmosphere is indisputable. The fact that human beings are causing massive amounts of CO2 to be released into the atmosphere is indisputable. The fact that temperatures have increased substantially in the last half century is indisputable. Even before we get into the detail, any hypothesis that avoids the links between those three facts starts to look pretty iffy from an Occam's Razor point of view and would need to be extremely convincing.

Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012  |  IP: Logged
rolyn
Shipmate
# 16840

 - Posted      Profile for rolyn         Edit/delete post 
The evidence of my own eyes tells me that weather patterns , and the strength of the sun, are both different than they were 30 years ago.

Not that I putting forward a reason as why this should be so . Human activity has be up there with other factors.

--------------------
Change is the only certainty of existence

Posts: 3206 | From: U.K. | Registered: Dec 2011  |  IP: Logged
anteater

Ship's pest-controller
# 11435

 - Posted      Profile for anteater   Email anteater   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
This is surely going to be a DH before long.

There are many questions and the OP seems over-simplified, so:

1. Is the climate changing? Yes, it does so all the time.

2. Is the change largely man-made, by which I mean such that it could be halted if we changed our behaviour? I'm less sure on this. No doubt there are man made causes. Do they predominate?

3. Are the proposed actions realistic in terms both of really over-coming the problem and being such that it is reasonable to expect countries to join in? Not sure.

4. Has the science become contaminated by commercial and political issues (as I believe dietary science has)? I suspect so, but then I do have a tendency to conspiracy theories, so I need to correct for that.

5. Is it possible to have a sensible discussion without being accused and name-called? Well it's difficult. The main problem for me is that I am not an expert on the subject, but don't like being bullied into accepting the consensus.

--------------------
Schnuffle schnuffle.

Posts: 2538 | From: UK | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged
Schroedinger's cat

Ship's cool cat
# 64

 - Posted      Profile for Schroedinger's cat   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
You left out the word 'anthropogenic', which is the crucial bit. If there is anthropogenic climate change, then it may be possible to row back on certain things which increase global warming. Hint: greenhouse gases.

This is critical. There are very very few people who disagree that climate change is happening. There are relatively few who would disagree that this change is increasing.

There are many who argue about the cause. That is so crucial - if it is our activity, then we need to consider whether we should change our activity to reduce the change. If it is not primarily our activity, then we need to instead try to understand what the likely cycles of change are, and prepare for these changes.

What is more, if it is just the natural cycles of the planet, then we have to accept that the global cycles may work against us, may, in fact, wipe us out. We are powerless against the forces of the planet, but not against our own choices, entirely.

--------------------
Blog
Music for your enjoyment
Lord may all my hard times be healing times
take out this broken heart and renew my mind.

Posts: 18859 | From: At the bottom of a deep dark well. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333

 - Posted      Profile for lilBuddha     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by anteater:

4. Has the science become contaminated by commercial and political issues

The vast commercial gain, and therefore political gain, is for those who would deny.

quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:

There are many who argue about the cause. That is so crucial - if it is our activity, then we need to consider whether we should change our activity to reduce the change. If it is not primarily our activity, then we need to instead try to understand what the likely cycles of change are, and prepare for these changes.

I've argued before, and will likely need do again, the consequences of not cleaning up our act are there regardless.
Whether or not we are accelerating global warming, we are stripping the planet's resources faster than they can be regenerated. We are polluting faster than the planet can eliminate those pollutants.
What is there to lose by reducing our impact on our only home?

--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou

Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged
Chorister

Completely Frocked
# 473

 - Posted      Profile for Chorister   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
I think humans are having some effect. But not as much as some people would have us believe. Climate changes have happened since the dawn of time, and humans have only been here for a relatively short period.

Where we need to be careful about is the attitude of arrogance. Arrogance that we are so important that we are the cause of everything, but also arrogance that what we do (and in the developed world, that is a lot of large-scale 'doing') doesn't really matter.

Now, who can get that balance right?!

--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.

Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047

 - Posted      Profile for Arethosemyfeet   Email Arethosemyfeet   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
I think humans are having some effect. But not as much as some people would have us believe.

Given that the observed warming is consistent with what would be expected based on the CO2 we are emitting, do you have a basis for this thought or are you simply relying on the fallacy of the excluded middle?
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012  |  IP: Logged
Anyuta
Shipmate
# 14692

 - Posted      Profile for Anyuta   Email Anyuta   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
Imagine you are in a canoe. You are paddling in a river. You hear a noise up ahead. Oh no! It's a big waterfall! What do you do? Do you say to yourself, "oh, we'll, it's natural. The river has always gone over the falls. It levels out eventually, and there will be smooth paddling after that. I didn't make the waterfall, I can't stop it, so I should just learn to live with it".

Or do you start paddling back upstream with all your strength?

While I think the evidence for anthropogenic causes for climate change are quite incontrovertible, it doesn't really matter. The change is happening, and while I preparing for it is wise, I don't see why that would negate efforts to minimize the problem. It's not either/or. We can do both.

Posts: 764 | From: USA | Registered: Mar 2009  |  IP: Logged
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713

 - Posted      Profile for Sioni Sais   Email Sioni Sais   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Anyuta:
Imagine you are in a canoe. You are paddling in a river. You hear a noise up ahead. Oh no! It's a big waterfall! What do you do? Do you say to yourself, "oh, we'll, it's natural. The river has always gone over the falls. It levels out eventually, and there will be smooth paddling after that. I didn't make the waterfall, I can't stop it, so I should just learn to live with it".

Or do you start paddling back upstream with all your strength?

While I think the evidence for anthropogenic causes for climate change are quite incontrovertible, it doesn't really matter. The change is happening, and while I preparing for it is wise, I don't see why that would negate efforts to minimize the problem. It's not either/or. We can do both.

You disregard the warning sounds like the roaring rapids, and the spray, but when you see the Big Drop with your own eyes, you start rowing like hell.

Of course, by then it'll be too late.

--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"

(Paul Sinha, BBC)

Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338

 - Posted      Profile for cliffdweller     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
You left out the word 'anthropogenic', which is the crucial bit. If there is anthropogenic climate change, then it may be possible to row back on certain things which increase global warming. Hint: greenhouse gases.

This is critical. There are very very few people who disagree that climate change is happening. There are relatively few who would disagree that this change is increasing.

There are many who argue about the cause. That is so crucial - if it is our activity, then we need to consider whether we should change our activity to reduce the change. If it is not primarily our activity, then we need to instead try to understand what the likely cycles of change are, and prepare for these changes.

What is more, if it is just the natural cycles of the planet, then we have to accept that the global cycles may work against us, may, in fact, wipe us out. We are powerless against the forces of the planet, but not against our own choices, entirely.

You have lined out well the issues, but I believe you have misrepresented the diversity of opinion.

The number and nature of the people who do not believe that human activity is a factor in the rate at which our climate is changing is just not comparable to those who say it is. It's just not. It's not like you have this expert here who says "yes" and this expert there who says "no". When you talk to the experts in the field, there is very little disagreement on the broad strokes.

Human activity does not, btw, need to be the "predominate" cause for us to be moved to act. The nonhuman causes are most likely unchangeable. Human causes/factors most likely are changeable, and those interventions can reasonably be assumed will slow the rapidly increasing rate of climate change.

[ 10. February 2013, 21:50: Message edited by: cliffdweller ]

--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner

Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
blackbeard
Ship's Pirate
# 10848

 - Posted      Profile for blackbeard   Email blackbeard   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
Of course, there's the theory that we are living in an Interglacial period and are due another Ice Age sometime soon.

Or we could look at more recent history. In the fourteenth century, NW Europe was hit by a period of cold wet weather; crops rotted in the fields before they were ready for harvesting. The Viking colony in Greenland was wiped out. About a quarter of the English population died.
We don't know the reason for the change, nor why the climate changed back, nor (as far as I am aware) do we really know the reason for the Ice Ages. Nor do we have a clue as to whether global warming would help, should either of these events recur, or make things worse.

It would be good to know more about how climate "works".

Meanwhile, I am pessimistic about rising CO2 levels. I can't see that developing countries are going to be very keen to cut down on the CO2 emissions which are going to be part of their increasing prosperity; and, though oil is getting harder to find, there's still plenty of coal and lignite (some of which contains sulphur so we will get SO2 as well as CO2, I'm not aware that SO2 is a greenhouse gas but it's still nasty), and oil shale.

I will try to think about something more cheerful.

Blackbeard, gloomy

Posts: 823 | From: Hampshire, UK | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
orfeo

Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878

 - Posted      Profile for orfeo   Author's homepage   Email orfeo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
My response to the recurring suggestion that climate change is natural is to respond "yes, but at much slower rates".

The problem isn't merely that the climate is changing, the problem is that if it changes rapidly there's no capacity for life to adapt. Most species can't just magically transport themselves a few hundred or thousand kilometres into a new location that now fits their environmental needs.

Nor can they all rapidly adjust their biological clock to the new seasons. The knock-on effects of things like plants flowering and fruiting at different times to their usual pattern could be enormous.

--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.

Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008  |  IP: Logged
Palimpsest
Shipmate
# 16772

 - Posted      Profile for Palimpsest   Email Palimpsest   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
For those who doubt climate change is happening, I reccommend the documentary Chasing Ice which shows what's been happening in the Artic for the last decade.

There's been a consistent group who have opposed recognizing climate change. The book The Merchants of Doubt dives into the people behind denial of climate change.

As someone whose family home on a sandbar was destroyed by floods during the recent storm last year, I have no doubt that we're seeing the consequences of changes. Oddly enough, the denial people have been very quiet in the region since the storm.

Posts: 2990 | From: Seattle WA. US | Registered: Nov 2011  |  IP: Logged
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338

 - Posted      Profile for cliffdweller     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Palimpsest:

There's been a consistent group who have opposed recognizing climate change. The book The Merchants of Doubt dives into the people behind denial of climate change.

Fascinating connection between tobacco interests and climate change deniers. Interesting stuff.

--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner

Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
Latchkey Kid
Shipmate
# 12444

 - Posted      Profile for Latchkey Kid   Author's homepage   Email Latchkey Kid   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
I think that population is the major driver of anthropogenic climate change (which is seriously high according to thhe IPCC, the only credible authority), but we aren't prepared to confront that.

--------------------
'You must never give way for an answer. An answer is always the stretch of road that's behind you. Only a question can point the way forward.'
Mika; in Hello? Is Anybody There?, Jostein Gaardner

Posts: 2592 | From: The wizardest little town in Oz | Registered: Mar 2007  |  IP: Logged
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333

 - Posted      Profile for lilBuddha     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
Population is a factor, certainly. But, industrialized nations consume a disproportionate amount of resources, per capita.

--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou

Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged
Palimpsest
Shipmate
# 16772

 - Posted      Profile for Palimpsest   Email Palimpsest   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
Population is a factor, certainly. But, industrialized nations consume a disproportionate amount of resources, per capita.

Unfortunately, the less industrialized nations have been catchinig up with the advanced ones for generating carbon.
Posts: 2990 | From: Seattle WA. US | Registered: Nov 2011  |  IP: Logged
Traveller
Shipmate
# 1943

 - Posted      Profile for Traveller     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Latchkey Kid:
I think that population is the major driver of anthropogenic climate change (which is seriously high according to thhe IPCC, the only credible authority), but we aren't prepared to confront that.

IPCC have no shred of credibility, whatsoever.

--------------------
I will sing unto the Lord as long as I live:
I will praise my God while I have my being.
Psalm 104 v.33

Posts: 1037 | From: Wherever the car has stopped at the moment! | Registered: Dec 2001  |  IP: Logged
Chorister

Completely Frocked
# 473

 - Posted      Profile for Chorister   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
I think humans are having some effect. But not as much as some people would have us believe.

Given that the observed warming is consistent with what would be expected based on the CO2 we are emitting, do you have a basis for this thought or are you simply relying on the fallacy of the excluded middle?
Stop eating beans?

--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.

Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76

 - Posted      Profile for Karl: Liberal Backslider   Author's homepage   Email Karl: Liberal Backslider   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Traveller:
quote:
Originally posted by Latchkey Kid:
I think that population is the major driver of anthropogenic climate change (which is seriously high according to thhe IPCC, the only credible authority), but we aren't prepared to confront that.

IPCC have no shred of credibility, whatsoever.
Do I believe you and a few right-wing cranks in the media, or the vast, vast majority of scientists in the field of climate science?

Bit of a no-brainer, really.

--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.

Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110

 - Posted      Profile for Barnabas62   Email Barnabas62   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
I think Smudgie and Co in the Circus should have some time to **** a discussion which goes round in ever increasing circles. At least for a couple of days.

Traveller and Co, you're travelling to a revolving institution. Enjoy the change of climate.

B62
Purg ****

--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?

Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Imaginary Friend

Real to you
# 186

 - Posted      Profile for Imaginary Friend   Email Imaginary Friend   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
You know, Barney's right. This discussion will go round-and-round in endless circles.

So I fancy making some money out of it. Let's open a book: Post your prediction for what the eventual global average temperature gain will be 50 years hence, and the closest person gets a free sandbag to help stop their home from being flooded.

My prediction: +1.2°C

--------------------
"We had a good team on paper. Unfortunately, the game was played on grass."
Brian Clough

Posts: 9455 | From: Left a bit... Right a bit... | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Traveller
Shipmate
# 1943

 - Posted      Profile for Traveller     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
quote:
Originally posted by Traveller:
quote:
Originally posted by Latchkey Kid:
I think that population is the major driver of anthropogenic climate change (which is seriously high according to thhe IPCC, the only credible authority), but we aren't prepared to confront that.

IPCC have no shred of credibility, whatsoever.
Do I believe you and a few right-wing cranks in the media, or the vast, vast majority of scientists in the field of climate science?

Bit of a no-brainer, really.

The people making predictions which don't come anywhere near reality have a bit more explaining to do before I become convinced. I spent many years of my life learning about scientific method in the physical sciences, and on that I question the "science" of climate prediction.

This topic really is a Dead Horse, debate in this forum is not going to change anyone's mind.

--------------------
I will sing unto the Lord as long as I live:
I will praise my God while I have my being.
Psalm 104 v.33

Posts: 1037 | From: Wherever the car has stopped at the moment! | Registered: Dec 2001  |  IP: Logged
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76

 - Posted      Profile for Karl: Liberal Backslider   Author's homepage   Email Karl: Liberal Backslider   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
Bollocks

--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.

Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Imaginary Friend

Real to you
# 186

 - Posted      Profile for Imaginary Friend   Email Imaginary Friend   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
Traveller, such conversation has no place in the Circus. If you can't play by the rules then I'll be forced to dust off Chorister's squirty flower. You have been warned.

iF

--------------------
"We had a good team on paper. Unfortunately, the game was played on grass."
Brian Clough

Posts: 9455 | From: Left a bit... Right a bit... | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Imaginary Friend

Real to you
# 186

 - Posted      Profile for Imaginary Friend   Email Imaginary Friend   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
Karl, that goes for you too. Behave.

iF

--------------------
"We had a good team on paper. Unfortunately, the game was played on grass."
Brian Clough

Posts: 9455 | From: Left a bit... Right a bit... | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged


 
Post new thread  
Thread closed  Thread closed
Open thread   Feature thread   Move thread   Delete thread Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
 - Printer-friendly view
Go to:

Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement

© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0

 
follow ship of fools on twitter
buy your ship of fools postcards
sip of fools mugs from your favourite nautical website
 
 
  ship of fools