^ i actually agree that asking a firefighter about climate change based on his firefighting experiences is a meaningless question. I would prefer to ask the firefighter what he thinks about prescribed burns and the overgrowth of underbrush in residential neighborhoods. The firefighter is in no position to determine if a 0.2C increase in global temperature or whatever has anything to do with him spending 120 days a year fighting fires instead of 100.

1/29/2008 11:51:34 AM

why does everyone speak of global warming as such a BAD thing. Would we rather have global cooling???

Warmer climate means

- less heating costs
- longer growing season
- more comfortable weather in places with brutal winters
- opening of the NorthWest passage during summer time for shipping
- Increased value of beach front property at northern latitudes.
- Potentially more rainfall since warmer air can hold more moisture.
- Less probability of economic damaging wintry weather in the mid-latitudes

[Edited on January 29, 2008 at 12:14 PM. Reason : a]

[Edited on January 29, 2008 at 12:17 PM. Reason : a]

1/29/2008 12:13:38 PM

Not to mention, the beach comes to Raleigh.

Lets not forget how awesome thats going to be.

1/29/2008 12:14:44 PM

yeah right. classic example of global warming fear mongers.

[Edited on January 29, 2008 at 12:15 PM. Reason : a]

1/29/2008 12:15:02 PM

Oh wait yea my mistake.

God will make sure that all the melted freshwater will dissipate.

1/29/2008 12:22:57 PM

well a lot of it will evaporate since vapor pressure increases exponentially with temperature.



and you also must take into consideration that the amount of water held in ice caps is minute compared to the shear size and volume of the oceans which make up 98% of total water in the world

[Edited on January 29, 2008 at 12:25 PM. Reason : a]

1/29/2008 12:24:29 PM

its a FACT that all the icecaps will melt in the next 5 years

don't even ask me to explain myself cause that just means you're a fucking bible thumper

1/29/2008 12:26:09 PM

it pisses me off that my sister has that stupid "I Am Green" application installed on facebook where you list everything you do to be green. How fucking retarded is that. Global warming may be real but I don't give a shit. I am still gonna buy a gasoline car not a pussyfied Prius, leave my lights on when i want, not inconvenience myself by walking 50 ft to my apartment complexes recycle station, and not ride the busses

1/29/2008 12:32:22 PM

Quote :

"That's really more of a philosophical question, but I think that once you introduce conscious thought into a process, it starts to separate from "nature". That's not to say humans aren't natural or don't belong in nature, but the simple fact that we are conscious being, conscious of our own existence and of our surroundings/environment, gives us the unique distinction of now being able to purposefully alter our habitat."

I think this is good point worthy of re-posting. I didnt think about it like that

1/29/2008 1:07:12 PM

Actually

Its a fact that the global temperature has been rising as the number of pirates sailing the seven seas has declined.

1/29/2008 1:35:20 PM

Quote :

"what empirical data? The stuff that doesn't exist?"

So you're saying that the 2 geological groups are pulling those decisions out of their ass?

Why don't you send them an email to that effect, and see what they say.

1/29/2008 2:32:00 PM

HUR, you do realize the economic damage that will come about by global warming along with your increased property values, right? New Orleans, New York City, San Francisco, Miami, tons of other cities will lose trillions of dollars in damages. The smart economic move long term is to limit the effect we're having and try to restore the systems we have disrupted.

Also, that graph you posted is entirely irrelevant. Even 50 C is like 110 F which is far too hot for the Earth to sustain long term. The curve on that graph doesn't begin sloping upwards sharply until about right there.

1/29/2008 4:55:32 PM

strip mining has no effect on Earth's geology. Just ask Aaronburro.

1/29/2008 5:37:16 PM

Quote :

"Also, that graph you posted is entirely irrelevant. Even 50 C is like 110 F which is far too hot for the Earth to sustain long term. The curve on that graph doesn't begin sloping upwards sharply until about right there."

you obviously failed math class and have no comprehension of exponentials

1/29/2008 5:41:18 PM

Quote :

"New Orleans, New York City, San Francisco, Miami, tons of other cities will lose trillions of dollars in damages."

Trillions, huh?

I don't think you understand how much money that is.

Or maybe you are just posting for shock value.

Either way, stupid post.

1/29/2008 6:05:50 PM

probably be around 10s of trillions of dollars lost.

1/29/2008 6:07:47 PM

Quote :

"Trillions, huh? I don't think you understand how much money that is. Or maybe you are just posting for shock value. Either way, stupid post."

Do you have an idea how money works? Or how much land is worth? Lets take one example, Central Park. According to a recent appraisal, that land is worth about 500 BILLION dollars, so yeah, trillions isn't that bad of a guess.

1/29/2008 6:33:13 PM

Quote :

"and you also must take into consideration that the amount of water held in ice caps is minute compared to the shear size and volume of the oceans which make up 98% of total water in the world"

that's why thermal expansion is the largest contributor to sea level rise

1/29/2008 6:56:38 PM

i wish people had a better grasp of geologic timescale...ie that in the big scheme of things, 100 years, or even a 1000 years is NOTHING

1/29/2008 7:12:50 PM

^ yeah, but if there's a certain pattern in nature that carries on for 10s of thousands of years, and then suddenly that pattern changes, in accordance with what you'd expect from certain new events, then it's not ridiculous to think the 2 things might be related.

1/29/2008 7:16:57 PM

i wish people had a better grasp of common sense...ie that in the big scheme of things, 100 years, or even a 1000 years is SOMETHING

1/29/2008 7:18:52 PM

Quote :

"ie that in the big scheme of things, 100 years, or even a 1000 years is NOTHING"

Because of rapid technological progress, we might easily be able to completely disperse the planet's mass in a thousand years. Possibly in a hundred years. Some Dyson sphere plans involve scrapping Earth for raw material.

1/29/2008 7:21:03 PM

so, moron, if it's a pattern that has been going on for 10s of thousands of years, then why do all of the scare-charts for GW just show 500 years?

1/29/2008 7:55:48 PM

You obviously haven't been paying attention. The paleoclimate section of the IPCC report goes back 2000 years, there is new research that goes back 20,000 years, and there is some research that goes back 450,000 years.

1/29/2008 8:01:32 PM

right

I'll bet it is more of their "hey, let's find data that only supports our conclusion and ignore the rest" type stuff.

1/29/2008 8:04:28 PM

As opposed to the data show how human development isn't changing the planet?

1/29/2008 8:14:31 PM

parkay?

1/29/2008 8:21:57 PM

Quote :

"i wish people had a better grasp of geologic timescale...ie that in the big scheme of things, 100 years, or even a 1000 years is NOTHING"

I wish those geologist had a better grasp of the geologic timescale like you do.

1/29/2008 8:23:21 PM

Quote :

"i wish people had a better grasp of geologic timescale...ie that in the big scheme of things, 100 years, or even a 1000 years is NOTHING"

while the earth will or may recover from anything we throw at after a certain amount of time, you do realize that we live now, and our children and grandchildren, if by some tragedy you happen to procreate, will be the ones living with what happens in the next 100 years. 100,000 years from now? Sure, the Earth might be fine. But our direct ancestors are living in the next 150 years

1/29/2008 8:26:18 PM

Quote :

"Or how much land is worth? Lets take one example, Central Park. According to a recent appraisal, that land is worth about 500 BILLION dollars, so yeah, trillions isn't that bad of a guess. "

Global Warming hippies bitching is like George W fear mongering about terrorism. While both are true to a point; both exaggerate the threat and extent of the issue. Special interests groups earn money and politicians use these issues to gain power. This is just politics. The oceans jacking up to swallow New Orleans in 10 years has about the same odds as Al Qaeda blowing up the RBC center during the next hurricanes game.

1/29/2008 8:27:19 PM

Quote :

"i wish people had a better grasp of geologic timescale...ie that in the big scheme of things, 100 years, or even a 1000 years is NOTHING"

There are definitely scenarios where 99.9% of the diversity on Earth can be wiped out in a year, minute, or even a second.

You won't be in the same geologic time scale after that.

1/29/2008 9:15:51 PM

Quote :

"Global Warming hippies bitching is like George W fear mongering about terrorism. While both are true to a point; both exaggerate the threat and extent of the issue. Special interests groups earn money and politicians use these issues to gain power. This is just politics. The oceans jacking up to swallow New Orleans in 10 years has about the same odds as Al Qaeda blowing up the RBC center during the next hurricanes game."

Many would argue that because of our aggressive anti-terrorism policy, the US has not seen a terrorist attack that may have otherwise happened. The same cannot be argued for global warming policy. There is almost nothing enacted. If nothing is getting done then how do people make money?

What evidence do you people actually want to show you that there is something wrong? I don't understand.

[Edited on January 29, 2008 at 10:12 PM. Reason : ]

1/29/2008 10:11:09 PM

Quote :

"If nothing is getting done then how do people make money?"

Ask Al Gore. He's got a thriving "carbon credit" scheme going on right now.

1/29/2008 10:17:37 PM

Who is making more money? Al Gore from this carbon credit scheme, or the oil companies from keeping people hooked on oil. Honestly, someone is going to make that money. Al Gore making money is the lamest excuse ever.

[Edited on January 29, 2008 at 10:20 PM. Reason : ]

1/29/2008 10:20:28 PM

More like, "lamest analogy ever".

So the oil companies are keeping people "hooked on oil", huh? What are they doing, putting extra nicotine in that shit to make it more addictive?


And before you put words into my mouth, I don't think that global warming scientists are wrong or confused about the risks. My problem is when a politician like Gore comes out with these doomsday scenarios and fearmongering. Sure, it calls attention to an issue, but it polarizes the issue and misinforms the public.

Just look at this stupid thread. Ever since "An Inconvenient Truth" came out with those pictures of Manhattan submerged, thousands of people have been harping on about rising sea levels, like that is a major problem. The IPCC itself predicted that over the next century, sea levels would rise less than 2 feet. Their actual prediction was a rise of .6 to 1.9 feet, not the bullshit 80 feet or whatever the hell Al Gore said in his fearmongering documentary. And yet people continue to repeat Gore and other alarmists because they shout the loudest and make the scariest predictions.

Have you heard of those fools who spray white paint on coastal cities to show how high the water level would be if it rose x number of feet? Fools, all of them. And they are being misled by bigger fools like Al Gore who think it is in the interest of the public to exaggerate potential problems associated with global warming.


[Edited on January 29, 2008 at 11:23 PM. Reason : 2]

1/29/2008 11:19:17 PM

Quote :

"What evidence do you people actually want to show you that there is something wrong? I don't understand."

I dunno, actual evidence. with error percentages that aren't in the millions.

1/29/2008 11:26:42 PM

Quote :

"The IPCC itself predicted that over the next century, sea levels would rise less than 2 feet over the next hundred years."

Unfortunately, this is likely an underestimate. For example:

http://climateprogress.org/2007/08/22/are-scientists-overestimating-or-underestimating-climate-change-part-ii/

1/29/2008 11:34:02 PM

You know

It honestly doesn't matter.

We're past the point of actually being able to do anything about it.

1/29/2008 11:36:08 PM

Quote :

"What evidence do you people actually want to show you that there is something wrong? I don't understand"

I never argued against global warming. I just argue that the "consequences" are grossly exaggerated fear-mongering.

1/30/2008 12:00:45 AM

Quote :

"And before you put words into my mouth, I don't think that global warming scientists are wrong or confused about the risks. My problem is when a politician like Gore comes out with these doomsday scenarios and fearmongering. Sure, it calls attention to an issue, but it polarizes the issue and misinforms the public."

That's funny, because oil companies have been misinforming the public since the late 80s. Newsweek did a good article on it over the summer. The headline was "Global Warming Is A Hoax."

1/30/2008 4:56:30 AM

Quote :

"At what point do you declare it happened then? They claim that it's been going on for 2 centuries."

What in the world are you talking about? That completely contradicts the "little ice age" that we were in for the earlier part of the 20th century.

1/30/2008 1:49:47 PM

WTF is a "little ice age?"

1/30/2008 1:57:09 PM

^^We haven't had a Little Ice Age since 1850 and it is debated on whether or not 1800-1850 was actually a little ice age.

1/30/2008 2:00:51 PM

Quote :

"The smart economic move long term is to limit the effect we're having and try to restore the systems we have disrupted. "

"If humanity were in fact facing imminent environmental doom, it would be wise to prepare for it. However, far worse than mere inaction would be to cripple industry and technological progress, which is our only means of dealing with a constantly changing environment. "

1/30/2008 9:04:14 PM

^ To what are you referring that would cripple industry or thwart technology?

1/30/2008 9:08:42 PM

Quote :

"That's funny, because oil companies have been misinforming the public since the late 80s. Newsweek did a good article on it over the summer. The headline was "Global Warming Is A Hoax.""

So, the best way to combat lies and misinformation is to introduce more lies and misinformation? Got it.

1/30/2008 10:18:03 PM

nothing on this cover is factually incorrect

1/30/2008 10:33:10 PM

I'm going to go ahead and disregard the research of Nobel-prize winning scientists because people on a message board used a . Thanks for changing my life, TWW.

1/30/2008 10:33:37 PM

i wonder if you'll disregard the work of people who proved, without a doubt, that the research of those prize-winning scientists was shady, incorrect, and rigged.

1/30/2008 10:42:27 PM

mostly I just disregard you.

1/30/2008 10:54:14 PM