Amazon River Disaster & Global Warming Facts

platytudes said:
You have no human feelings! :crazy:
Just kidding ;)

Ok, but seriously, how can we really adapt to icecaps melting and flooding our most populated cities?

Perhaps delaying the inevitable is not the best thing we can do, in theory, but what if it's the only thing we can do, in practice?
Click to expand...
I have plenty of human feelings by the way. I just don't let them enter into scientific debates. As far as how to cope withclimate change it's simple if not easy. Move.
 
LOL! Thanks, we needed that ;) Here is my contribution:

global-warming-unbeliever-fail.jpg
 
SubRosa said:
Travis this post shows a complete lack of integrity. Although judging from the uncharateristically bad typing and spelling he was not in top form when he posted it, the last post by Inka on this subject has alot of merit to it. If I was as concerned as you claim to be about the damage caused by man, and had the evidence that you accept as proof I'd kill as many people as I could to help the world. If you accept the standard that man is destroying the planet then the more people you destroy the more you're helping the planet. I guess Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Idi Ami, and Slobodan Milosevic were just misunderstood defenders of nature. If you accept something as fact be prepared to see it through to its logical conclusion.
Click to expand...

well, it seems you misunderstood me. Humans aren't going anywhere, but we can try to repair the damage we have done. Make our farms smaller, make our cities smaller and more dense (like just building up, not out to the side) set up cleaning stations for water, create specific paths for animals to migrate though our territories with. Stuff like that. Killing humans will help, but thats both unrealistic and immoral. IMO, we just need to do a better job of living WITH the environment, instead of pushing it aside to make room for ourselves.
 
I have been out of town for a few days and I realize this posting is now so far back that it's probably not relevant any longer but to CaptainCaveman--How on earth do you see my remarks about Antarctica as helping prove your point?

You obviously do not seem to understand that there is a huge difference between the movement of tectonic plates and global climate change. Antarctica was a temperate rainforest because it was closer to the equator at one time and recieved more sunshine. Now it is at the pole and receives less sunshine which is why it is ice covered now. It has nothing to do with climate change. There have been dozens if not hundreds of global warming and cooling periods that have occurred since Antarctica began it's migration.
What my problem is, is that global warming deniers attempt to use the Antarctica example as evidence that this is all normal. It has nothing to do with climate change!

All of the science we have points to the same result. Since the Industrial revolution the climate has been warming at a rate faster than any other time in geological history. The results of this change and how bad it gets may be entirely determined by what we as a species do to mitigate and possibly reverse our effects.

Andy
 
Fishfriend1 said:
well, it seems you misunderstood me. Humans aren't going anywhere, but we can try to repair the damage we have done. Make our farms smaller, make our cities smaller and more dense (like just building up, not out to the side) set up cleaning stations for water, create specific paths for animals to migrate though our territories with. Stuff like that. Killing humans will help, but thats both unrealistic and immoral. IMO, we just need to do a better job of living WITH the environment, instead of pushing it aside to make room for ourselves.
Click to expand...
Well I'm glad to have misunderstood you in this particular case!
 
Post all the political and business arguments you want. Blame man, blame the planet do whatever you want. But ignore the facts at your own peril. NASA among other agencies has a wealth of hard data and fact backed up by many space based photographs. I suggest you all take a look and then some of you can come back to this thread and say NASA is lying or being paid to subvert the truth or has a secret agenda. Since the pictures speak a lot more clearly than any number of words here.

http://climate.nasa.gov/stateOfFlux/index.cfm

Here is just one fact:
Ice cores drawn from Greenland, Antarctica, and tropical mountain glaciers show that the Earth’s climate responds to changes in solar output, in the Earth’s orbit, and in greenhouse gas levels. They also show that in the past, large changes in climate have happened very quickly, geologically-speaking: in tens of years, not in millions or even thousands.3

3 In the 1860s, physicist John Tyndall recognized the Earth's natural greenhouse effect and suggested that slight changes in the atmospheric composition could bring about climatic variations. In 1896, a seminal paper by Swedish scientist Svante Arrhenius first speculated that changes in the levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere could substantially alter the surface temperature through the greenhouse effect.
Click to expand...
 
Those are fascinating images.
However, you're mistaken if you claim that "blame" doesn't matter.
If this is climate change related to geological shifts, as in what your quote mentions in the first paragraph, wouldn't our reaction to it need to be quite different than if the changes are due to human interaction with the atmosphere?

I'm not saying it isn't due to humans; I think it is.
However, the cause of the situation IS relevant because depending on the cause, the reaction/solution is different.
 
happypoet said:
Those are fascinating images.
However, you're mistaken if you claim that "blame" doesn't matter.
If this is climate change related to geological shifts, as in what your quote mentions in the first paragraph, wouldn't our reaction to it need to be quite different than if the changes are due to human interaction with the atmosphere?

I'm not saying it isn't due to humans; I think it is.
However, the cause of the situation IS relevant because depending on the cause, the reaction/solution is different.
Click to expand...

Cause is irrelevant. Solution is what we need. Blame is unnecessary, what we need is a solution to the problem.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
AquariaCentral.com
Top Bottom