Why is global warming a bad thing?

[fastd]

By the way, I just read in the Wall Street Journal today: even if they get everything they want at the Copenhagen conference including the US reducing its greenhouse emissions by 80%, total emissions is still projected to increase by 2.6x (I think it was) because China and emerging countries aren't participating...

[Excaliber]

China and emerging countries aren't participating...

Uh, neither is America at this point! Negotiations continue of course, but it's pretty clear NOBODY is anywhere NEAR the goals that were established early on.

China and the US are the largest "polluters", the pressure is on for both countries to do more. Won't be easy getting concessions from either country.

[joyridin']

Originally Posted by mdmull

OK, I'll let the "experts" decide which species get saved. I just wanted to know who are the experts? Are they the same experts that can't forecast the weather next week? Have they recieved some special powers that enable them to look back on the past 30 years with pretty good accuracy, the past 100 years with some accuracy, and the past hundreds/thousands/ millions years with little or no accuracy, then accurately predict what the next 100 years will bring? I am humbled by the overarching breadth of the grand understanding of the future that the climate nazis and their minions possess, and will meekly submit to whatever they tell me I have to do. What in the he** ever made me think that I could make my own decisions.
I'd still like to know who the experts are so I don't stupidly follow the wrong ones.

I wondered about this myself. I visit The Weather Channel's web site daily and I can't even get an accurate forecast for the day. I can't tell you how many times I have been caught in the rain where there was ZERO percent chance of rain that day, or worse yet, not driven the car because there was a 90% chance of rain...of course the skies were totally blue the whole weekend.

[427sharpe]

In all the debate, recall that history has seen all of this before. In a 'mini-ice age' in the middle ages the Thames was frozen solid, and a warmer period led Europe out of the Dark Ages. Much as Jamo posted, humankind has done well because we can adapt over a wide range of climates. Our time (and money) would be much better spent learning how to adapt to the inevitable natural cycle than funding more 'research' that only seems to conclude that we don't spend enough money on research! And now the lumps in the UN want $60 billion? I don't think so!

[SwiftDB4]

Short answer is water and ice. There is no dispute that the polar icecaps and virtually all glaciers in the world are shrinking at a fast rate. Many areas of the world depend on snowpack for water supplies, agricultural irrigation, and hydropower. Does California and low reservoirs come to mind? Bottom line is we have too many people on the planet. Anyone ever talk about birth control as a solution?

[Ron61]

Not in this country but China had a one baby per family law for a long time. I think they have now repealed it as they were starting to run out of young people to fill certain positions It did slow their population growth but hurt in other ways. Not sure which it was but say they had 10,000 baby girls and 4,000 baby boys. When they grew up, that left them with a real problem about having new people for training. And an even bigger problem for the distant future.

Ron

[joyridin']

Originally Posted by Ron61

Not in this country but China had a one baby per family law for a long time. I think they have now repealed it as they were starting to run out of young people to fill certain positions It did slow their population growth but hurt in other ways. Not sure which it was but say they had 10,000 baby girls and 4,000 baby boys. When they grew up, that left them with a real problem about having new people for training. And an even bigger problem for the distant future.

Ron

They still have the policy enacted. In the city, you are allowed 1 child. You can have another one, but you have to pay through your nose. In rural areas, they are allowed 2 children. Right now, the birthrate in China is roughly 119 boys for every 100 girls, but in rural areas, the number of boys increase considerably. This isn't so apparent in the city as it is in rural farm country where there are very few women. When China adopted this law, girl babies seemed to disappear as they could not do as much work on the farm as a boy could. This was when the 1 child policy was enforced everywhere. The men in rural China are trying to bring the women from the city to the country, but somehow, the women just don't want to live a life of dirt floors, no windows or doors, and lots of physical work.

[Ron61]

Lazy women. Sounds like a lot of candidates for welfare.

Ron

[Bill Bess]

Dirt floors are great if you don't wear shoes, and windows just require cleaning..sounds like the country life is good.

[Tommy]

I have one more thought on this topic. I recently heard a radio interveiw with a controversial Danish economist named Bjorn Lomborg. He attended the UN climate conference to espouse his view that climate change is not the most pressing international challenge facing the world. In his view, if you rank ordered all the challenges to human life (e.g., malaria, AIDS, malnutrition, etc.) the effects of global warming would fall way down at the bottom of the list. So, if the world wants to address its most pressing problems, it should spend its money first on those challenges at the top of its list. He suggested world governments spend the relatively small amount of $100 billion per year on R&D in an effort to find a technological break through that would replace the use of fossil fuel. Interestingly enough, that's the exact same amount being proposed by US Secretary of State Clinton.

[Ron61]

Tommy,

That is logical and therefore not going to happen. The first thing they consider is what will get all of them the most votes or make the most money for them. Right now the climate change is the big thing and therefore worth more than trying to cure illnesses and other things. The world food supply is going to be short in a matter of time and they aren't worrying about that either.

Ron

[Ron61]

Latest report from the World Climate meetings. Doesn't sound as if they can agree on much of anything.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p....wegLncA&pos=9

Ron

[Bobcat]

Ron .... have to disagree . They all agree they hate the US , but want our money !!

Bob

[Ron61]

Bob,

In that respect you are correct. North Korea wants more money to continue their nuclear program and if we do as usual, they will get it.

Ron

[Wayne Maybury]

Sooner or later the human race is going to have to understand that our numbers cannot continue to multiply for ever. There are probably already too many people on this planet for long term (really long term) survival. Historically the population was controlled by famine, war, and/or disease. Now no one is supposed to starve, no one is supposed to die in a war, and medical science is continually making sure that the average life span increases.

The countries that can best afford to have more babies have the lowest birth rates while the countries that cannot support the existing population continue to crank them out. We see poor starving people on TV and we are supposed to feed them but if they all live, they will each also have 15 more babies so in one generation there will be many, many more mouths to feed. This cannot go on forever but it is politically incorrect to even hint that there must be some sort of world wide population control. Of course most religious leaders still preach that their flock must continue to multiply like mice which certainly doesn't help.

Wayne

[lnfletcher]

Things change and man adapts. The world is a much different place now than when I was younger, and I have only been alive an extremely small percentage of the time in the scheme of things! We do not have the ability to control any other country much less the environment. Those that believe we do are naive! Over population is self correcting. If there is not a real solution, there is no problem, so as an example I don't worry about the sun going out because there is absolutely nothing I or anyone else can do about it. I recycle because I can, I don't have a windmill or solar panels because they don't work in a real way to solve a problem. Certain people want to do away with oil, coal and even natural gas to produce energy, but if they do not produce energy, what are they good for? They want to use our food supply to burn for energy and leave the "old" fuels in the ground.
We could always go back in time and burn dung for warmth! Man can do what he can in his own little sphere but beyond that, it is not within man to direct his steps!


Boy, now I need to go out for a Cobra run to calm down but it's too freekin cold!

[Tommy]

Amen Wayne. Another issue is the tendency of political leaders of slow growing nations to open their borders to people of other cultures so they can keep government pyramid schemes like social security funded without raising taxes. It keeps the government spending tap open at the expense of changing the predominant culture of the country. ... Can anyone else remember the old movie Soylent Green?

[Ron61]

Tommy,

I remember that movie and they had a rerun of it on TV here about a year ago.

Ron

[Wayne Maybury]

[quote=Tommy;1010627]Another issue is the tendency of political leaders of slow growing nations to open their borders to people of other cultures so they can keep government pyramid schemes like social security funded without raising taxes. It keeps the government spending tap open QUOTE]

Yes and no. Many countries are now closing their borders and some countries are kicking people out that are already there. Australia, Spain, and Japan reportedly are heading the list.

Canada meanwhile has a fairly generous welfare system and a fairly open border to people claiming refugee status. So what's going to happen? More people are going to end up coming here, not becuase we need them but because they can get in and then they will immediately begin claiming benefits. Most Canadians are against these policies but we are powerless to do anything about it. Of course you have ~13 million illegals so you are probably worse off than we are.

Wayne

[PDUB]

Originally Posted by SP01715

We have actually been in a cooling trend for the past decade.

How did this get overlooked in all of the follow-on posts? I am wondering why it hasn't it been addressed, i.e. quantified or qualified? Experts, please step up...