Off topic a bit: Climate Change

[Scanner]

I was wondering what the forum thinks about climate change (sort of related to my topic in investing).

I am more concerned about economic vs. ecological consequences of oil but I do think global warming/climate change isn't a conspiracy.

I don't think it's a "slam dunk" scientfic conclusion by any means but I think the evidence pretty much supports it.

What does the forum say?

[sweeps]

I believe we have caused irreversible change in the environment. How that affects life 50 years for now, I have no idea.

[texastek76]

I believe that science has yet to prove anything. Supporters and detractors all say what they want you to hear.

The global warming side really needs to pick a game plan and stick to it or they will never gain any credibility with those that straddle the fence. When this issue first arose (and it was called warming) the science put out by "independant" institutions just did not support the claims of warming. Then you have a couple of seasons of particularly cold winters and all of a sudden they say they are not worried about "global warming", instead now calling it "global climate change" and blaming anything from blizzards to hurricanes to tornados to excess snakes! (see USAToday today).

If I don't agree with someone on an issue but they are passionate about it I cannot fault that person. But what the media does with this issue is nothing less than fear mongering in my opinion.

[FrugalFish]

The climate is changing, there is no question about that. It's been changing as long as the earth has been and something would be wrong if it did not continue to evolve and change.

Are human beings responsible for the current changes? I suspect we are not helping, but at the same time am not sure we are as high at fault as all the environmental nuts want us to believe.

There's evidence that we came out of a short ice age not all that long ago (within the last few hundred years), and that we may still be on the tail end of that. That ice age is why Leif Ericson was able to cross the Atlantic back when- it probably wasn't as long and treacherous a journey as we believed when we were in elementary school.

My FIL is a weather buff who points out what a short time we've actually been accurately tracking the climate. He's also pointed out that the hottest temperature ever recorded in North America was back in 1913- shouldn't we have exceeded that long before now if global warming is happening at such an alarming rate? It's been almost 100 years since that occurred.

I think we need to be cautious, but we need not go to the other extreme just yet- we need more facts. Not propaganda, but cold, hard facts.

[sweeps]

FF, I agree with the gist of your post, but I have a few quibbles. First, regarding the hottest temperature being recorded in 1913. I don't know if that's true, but if it is, that's just a blip. The data in the last 50 years shows a pretty clear trend. Also regarding coming out of an ice age. That certainly could be true, but the amount of change we've had in such a short period of time is probably not natural.

Again, what are the consequences of these changes, who knows. Maybe catastrophe, maybe nothing, maybe even an improvement in human life. But the data seems to be pretty unmistakable that something is happening.

[cschin4]

I believe it is a giant hoax and straw man. However, I also believe that people really buy into it. So, you either need to cash in and buy into the "green hysteria" and realize that you are going to be taxed and forced into a "green" lifestyle whether you want to be or not.

[cschin4]

I also think we are on the verge of destroying our entire economy and way of life over pure nonsense. Too bad.

[sweeps]

That's funny... I consider the imminent collapse of our economy a hoax.

[gackle]

I too think global warming is a hoax. I believe climate change is occurring as it always has, but not global warming. I don't have time to find documentation, but I hear repeatedly about the facts in Al Gore's movie being either flat out wrong or twisted ala Michael Moore style.

What's hilarious is the Al Gore Effect where record cold temperatures occur where he goes sometimes.

Seriously though, people need to follow the money trail.

But how Gore buys his "carbon offsets," as revealed by The Tennessean raises serious questions. According to the newspaper's report, Gore's spokesperson said Gore buys his carbon offsets through Generation Investment Management:

Gore is chairman of the firm and, presumably, draws an income or will make money as its investments prosper. In other words, he "buys" his "carbon offsets" from himself, through a transaction designed to boost his own investments and return a profit to himself. To be blunt, Gore doesn't buy "carbon offsets" through Generation Investment Management - he buys stocks.

The man is scamming us all and we're taking it hook, line, and sinker.

[Scanner]

So. . .okay, it's a big liberal conspiracy/hoax. . .what do people think happens to all the CO2 that gets pumped into the atmosphere? Just "blows away?" Gets absorbed by oceanic algae?

Or just sits in our atmosphere in higher PPM w/ no consequence?

I can't figure out if the psychology of the "it's a big liberal conspiracy" is an anger that we have to change our ways.

Is it like taking candy from a kid and saying, "No. . .it's probably not good for you."

Yes, and as far as destroying our economy. . .I don't get that either. . .I am not sure how ever maintaining a just, equitable and sustainable society (sustainable would be related to the environment) is an economically unsound goal.

If my state of NJ dumps our chemical waste in your backyard and we say, "Yeah, but our economy is humming along." in the end, is it really a good thing?

We won't have anybody to sell any chemicals to if keep policies like that up.

Luckily, IMO, easy oil supplies will run out soon and economics will solve the problem before environmental consciousness seeps in. . .I just want to delve into why people like cschin want to hang desperately onto oil and our old ways and are scared of progress and change.

I suppose people just beleive the party line. If had been the Conservatives who picked up and ran with the global warming/climate change issue, then Conservatives would beleive it, I suppose.

Liberals would think it's a big Conservative conspiracy.

[gackle]

That's another question I had about global warming, Scanner. Just what is so bad about CO2? The last time I heard, plants use CO2 in photosynthesis and produce oxygen which is beneficial to us all. It doesn't add up to me. I'm not pretending to be an expert in global warming, but am just using my common sense. Now based on that, my common sense tells me we shouldn't be cutting down every tree on a lot when new development comes in and shouldn't be clearing the rain forests either.

I don't think that being anti-global warming theory is necessarily equivalent to trashing the environment either. I think anybody would agree that dumping chemical waste in NJ's backyard is not a good thing for the environment or society.

Change is part of society and economics. If people can't adopt to change then they'll be left in the dust. But just because some national leader (Al Gore) spouts drabble long enough and the media takes the bait doesn't mean that we need to follow as well. As rational people, we need to examine with reason what is being shoveled to us and ask if it makes sense. With all the inconsistencies I've heard about global warming and the money trail I talked about above, global warming just doesn't pass my smell test.

[PrincessPerky]

I agree with Frugal Fish that the world is and has most likely always been changing..as to our immediate effect..I always wonder if the Dinosaurs ruined their world with toxic emissions...Somehow the idea of 'liberal' dinos running around telling the dino population to stop 'passing gas' is a hilarious comparison of many 'tree huggers' to me. Not PC, but sure does make me smile on a cold morning when yes I would like to turn up the heat and make a bit more CO2.

Of course I wont, I am A. to cheap, and B. a bit of a tree hugger.

Toxic waste is bad. Pollution without trees to help clean it is bad...(some pollution is too bad for the trees to fix) Wanton waste is bad...BUT telling me the world is getting warmer is really not a motivator...Sorry it was once super hot, prolly will be again, so far as best science can tell the world runs is a bit of a cyclical nature..super hot down to frigid cold..humans have the wonderful ability to adapt..I do not think we have the ability to totally change the course of the world climate.

As to the 'other weather'...eh.. I think half the problem (from tree hugger reading..so not sure is 100% accurate, but makes sense) is that the problems of hurricanes and such are increased by the way we design cities...removing sand dunes to make beach front houses paves the way for all that terror to come fully inland..the sand dunes are natures 'road block'. Many other disasters, that will happen till we get some sci-fi weather control, can be abated (is that the right word, I mean made easier) by leaving natures protections in place.

[maat55]

The earth goes through warmings and coolings on it's own. Global warming nuts are only playing money games.

[Aleta]

Some years ago, I remember hearing that we were in the ice-age. I wonder if they know what they are really talking about. I have read that the planet has gone through cycles of global warming before we ever started adding to it. That's not to say that we shouldn't try to protect our environment.

[markio26]

time will tell us for sure about this one......i think the earth is always changing for sure... i had someone from fla tell me the other day, that in late feb... every fifiteen minutes the warm air starts heading north and that is how we get our spring and eventually our summer... i don't know if he was serious... just thought i would tell the forum.....

[gackle]

Temperature Monitors Report Worldwide Global Cooling

[JBinKC]

I think the global warming charade and the current strong move to alternative energies is a convenient way to not alarm the public of the dire economic impact of peak oil (which is likely to be upon us anytime between now and the next 10 years).

[GrimJack]

Originally Posted by cschin4

I believe it is a giant hoax and straw man. However, I also believe that people really buy into it. So, you either need to cash in and buy into the "green hysteria" and realize that you are going to be taxed and forced into a "green" lifestyle whether you want to be or not.

I also think we are on the verge of destroying our entire economy and way of life over pure nonsense. Too bad.

Belief is all well and good but you might try and look at the science. The science is there that says the pollutants we are putting into the atmosphere are modifying the climate. Core samples from glaciers (although glaciers are rapidly retreating) capture the atmosphere as it was when the snow fell; this can be compared to core samples from trees. The 2 together produces both a climate and atmospheric record that can be tied together. There is more but I don't want to make this post too long.

As to the 'destroying our entire economy' whinge - nah, all that will happen is that the greening of the economy will just be another tech adjustment like the switch from whale oil, candles, etc to petrol. The old story of buggy whip manufacturors whining about being put out of business by the auto will play out in new ways.

The economy is stronger and more adaptable than you might think.

[GrimJack]

Originally Posted by gackle

That's another question I had about global warming, Scanner. Just what is so bad about CO2? The last time I heard, plants use CO2 in photosynthesis and produce oxygen which is beneficial to us all. It doesn't add up to me. I'm not pretending to be an expert in global warming, but am just using my common sense.

er, this line is neither common nor sense - photosynthesis and plant life is a little more complex than that - in the first place, plants do reverse the process, using oxy and producing co2; in the 2nd place just because necessary does not mean that more of it is better (ie glass of water vs 2 gallons of water - if you drink enough water you will die). The problem with excess co2 (without going into the quantum mechanics of the interactions between molecules and radiation) is that co2 (along with water vapor and ozone) absorbs infra-red (heat) energy that normally would radiate out into space. Oops, back step - we receive energy from the sun in the form of radiation, which is absorbed and re-radiated back out into space in a balance. The less energy re-radiated back out into space, the warmer the system becomes.

Change is part of society and economics. If people can't adopt to change then they'll be left in the dust. But just because some national leader (Al Gore) spouts drabble long enough and the media takes the bait doesn't mean that we need to follow as well. As rational people, we need to examine with reason what is being shoveled to us and ask if it makes sense. With all the inconsistencies I've heard about global warming and the money trail I talked about above, global warming just doesn't pass my smell test.

Al Gore did not spout drabble - his movie contained some minor errors but then Al Gore is not a scientist - he is a concerned citizen reporting a problem. Show us some the your 'examine with reason' and tell us what does not make sense. What are the particular inconsistancies you have heard about global warming? What is the science that you have looked at? What is the money trail you are talking about? The money trail from the global warming deniers is far more interesting - what few scientists that are on that side of the discussion are usually in the pay of the petroleum, mining, interests -- doesn't that fail your sniff test?

I could go on but will wait to see if you are interested in discussing this in more detail.

[GrimJack]

Originally Posted by gackle

Temperature Monitors Report Worldwide Global Cooling

So a one year change in temp is what you consider disproof of global warming. Hmmm, take a look here 140 year temp graph. One of the important things to keep in mind is that gases dissolve in cold water -- the colder the water, the more gas that can be dissolved into it - your carbonated beverages are the perfect example of this. So as the percentage of co2 in the atmosphere increases, due to the nature of co2 less infra-red ratiation (heat) is re-radiated back into space. as the atmosphere warms up and, through convection, the oceans warm up - the oceans will begins to stop absorbing co2 and begin releasing it which will add to amount of co2 into the atmosphere which captures more heat which warms the oceans etc.

The down-side of global warming is manifold and includes the Greenland glaciers melting which could raise the ocean level by aboutr 11 feet. There is way more glaciation on Antarctica. Parasites from the equatorial regions could make thier way to us - tsetse flies, malaria, there are about 8 really nasty parasites you don't want in your neighborhood.

Enough - if you are interested further conversation on this topic let me know.