-
ICMag with help from Phlizon, Landrace Warden and The Vault is running a NEW contest for Christmas! You can check it here. Prizes are: full spectrum led light, seeds & forum premium access. Come join in!
It's the Climate, stupid
- Thread starter Chi13
- Start date
Now try 7.5 billion peeps burning oil.
pjlive
Active member
I'm concerned about global climate changes myself. Very concerned, in fact. However, the real debate in my mind is whether or not these most recent changes are a result of human interactions with the Earth or simply an ongoing natural phenomena.
The Earth is estimated to be somewhere around 4.5 billion years old. It's been through many, many, many, natural and extreme shifts in climate since then.
So, the question is for me, why is there such a focus on Climate Change being a human impact, when we've only been recording and documenting ("officially") for less than 200 years? The planet is almost 5 Billion years old according to specialists in that field, yet the world's population is showing signs of extreme panic over changes that have only been recorded over the past 150-180 years. It seems an almost absurd focus on fractional information compared to the time the planet has actually been evolving since any form of life has been here.
It's definitely a concern -- but what is really happening?
The earth has been keeping its own records safely locked away in the polar caps. We only fairly recently learned to read them though. It's not so much the effects of what we have done, it's the affect we've had over the last 200 years that's concerning.
The earth may have been around a long time, but as a species, we haven't. Since 99% of everything that ever lived is now extinct, it would be nice to be in the 1% for some time to come.
The earth will out survive us, we probably won't be the last species alive, life will carry on, but will it ever be intelligent again after us?
The earth may have been around a long time, but as a species, we haven't. Since 99% of everything that ever lived is now extinct, it would be nice to be in the 1% for some time to come.
The earth will out survive us, we probably won't be the last species alive, life will carry on, but will it ever be intelligent again after us?
Think about all the carbon (in the form of coal, oil, gas) that, slowly, over those 4.5 billion years, has been removed from the atmosphere and sequestered in the earth's crust. Then a couple of hundred years ago humans with the onset of the industrial revolution started digging up all that carbon pretty quickly and returning it back to the atmosphere along with many other pollutants and greenhouse gasses. That is the problem, that humans have done this so quickly and started to raise the temperatures experienced on Earth.
The 'natural extreme shifts' that you refer to have also happened, but these happen over thousands of years, even millions... which is still pretty fast in geological terms.but slow in human terms.
VG
Ipotato
Active member
Milankovitch (Orbital) Cycles and Their Role in Earth's Climate - NASA Science
Small cyclical variations in the shape of Earth's orbit, its wobble and the angle its axis is tilted play key roles in influencing Earth's climate over timespans of tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of years.
climate.nasa.gov
Ipotato
Active member
Green Sahara: African Humid Periods Paced by Earth's Orbital Changes
Paleoclimate and archaeological evidence tells us that, 11,000-5,000 years ago, the Earth's slow orbital 'wobble' transformed today's Sahara desert to a land covered with vegetation and lakes.
www.nature.com
pjlive
Active member
Well, yes and no. A single volcano is capable of emitting and spewing a colossal amount of detrimental ejectile gasses directly into the atmosphere in almost an instant. That's just one. There have been many active at any one time in both ancient and recent history.
There's a lot to think about when it comes to climate change, and a lot more room for reality, too. That's my basic point. I'm not trying at all to dismiss the possibility of anything current being at least in part due to human interactions. But I don't really feel it's a big player in what we're experiencing now.
There's a lot more to learn before we know for sure what's really going on. So, I remain calm about it.
For all intents and purposes, this is just my take on a heavily debated topic that involves all of us in any form of life.
A single volcano doesn't change the global climate.. like i say, recent change in climate is being observed in years and decades.. whereas 'rapid' 'natural' historical climate change in our geological record has still taken thousands of years.
The carbon cycle is important to life on earth and is fragile.
The Carbon Cycle
Carbon flows between the atmosphere, land, and ocean in a cycle that encompasses nearly all life and sets the thermostat for Earth's climate. By burning fossil fuels, people are changing the carbon cycle with far-reaching consequences.
pjlive
Active member
I'm sorry, but that's not what I'm saying at all. You've read me wrong.A single volcano doesn't change the global climate.. like i say, recent change in climate is being observed in years and decades.. whereas 'rapid' historical climate change in our geological record has still taken thousands of years.
The carbon cycle is important to life on earth and is fragile.
The Carbon Cycle
Carbon flows between the atmosphere, land, and ocean in a cycle that encompasses nearly all life and sets the thermostat for Earth's climate. By burning fossil fuels, people are changing the carbon cycle with far-reaching consequences.earthobservatory.nasa.gov
In any case, climate changes are a lot more complex than what appear on the surface.
Thanks for keeping this discussion alive! We all need to continue thinking and talking about it.
No problem, i'm trying to show that 'rapid' in geological terms is still many generations in human terms. So trying to use the fact that our climate has changed in geological terms over billions of years to disprove the very real phenomena man-made climate change is unconvincing due to the completely different time-scales. I
I have a degree in geology and it gives you a different perspective on time. Humans are still just a blink of the eye in terms of geological time. Sorry if i misunderstood your arguments.
VG
I have a degree in geology and it gives you a different perspective on time. Humans are still just a blink of the eye in terms of geological time. Sorry if i misunderstood your arguments.
VG
The only debates still going are those involving just how fucked the future is. There is no debate about whether or not mankind's activity is harming the future of mankind. Not unless you call those who profit from it claiming it's not real, don't look over here, it wasn't me, a debate. As I said, it's not about what we have measured at the moment, it's about what we can see happening. We look at the elements in a process and project forward. You don't jump off a cliff shouting, "it's safe, it's safe, see I'm not dead". Only a fool thinks that's proof that it's a safe thing to do. When you hit the ground, it's too late to decide not to jump.
Ipotato
Active member
Problem is people are pretending that the climate is something static and only humans can have affected any changes that happen not the giant ball of fire in the sky
Winter is coming: Researchers uncover the surprising cause of the little ice age
New research provides a novel answer to one of the persistent questions in historical climatology, environmental history and the earth sciences: what caused the Little Ice Age? The answer, we now know, is a paradox: warming.
www.sciencedaily.com
I don't think anyone is pretending that, but thinking humans will be ok in any climate is a bit short sighted. There are plenty of periods in the past that would cause billions of deaths if they occurred in the near future.
I'm stepping out of this thread though, logic will only open so many eyes.
I'm stepping out of this thread though, logic will only open so many eyes.
What I see as the biggest mistake/problem in the debate on Climate Change is that too many focus on just the climate change as if the problem is as simple as, cut CO2 emissions and we're all good. When you factor in that there are natural changes in climate that we are aware of historically it's not really all that surprising that people have issues with seeing mankind as being responsible. The reality though is that it's not just about climate change. It's also about environment change. Let's set aside the temperature issue for the moment. There is still all the other damage that our current practices have on the world. Not only is there the effect of the CO2 levels changing planetary temperatures that lead to changes in weather patterns, extreme weather, sea level rise, etc. There is also the impact of all the pollutants being put into the air, land and water that have negative impacts on human health, animal health and plant health. Someone pointed out that 99% of all life that ever existed has gone extinct. Sure some of that happened due to unavoidable natural events like asteroids that have struck the planet, or super volcanos that have occurred causing long nuclear winter type effects. Even some of that might be attributable to man caused climate change like all the life lost due to corral reefs dying from temperature changes but some of that has also been effected by all the pollution we've put in the air, land and waters. Such that even if there was no issue with Global Warming/ Climate change there is still very good reasons to change our ways. Man has dramatically improved longevity and quality of life due to medical advancements and yet at the same time we see more widespread disease and illness that were far less then it was 100 years ago. much of which is the result of things contaminating all forms of life because of what we release into the air, pour in the ground and dump into waters. 100 years ago you didn't find virtually ever living organism having traces of micro plastics in their systems or being contaminated by mercury, lead, or things like PFOA which is a by-product of Teflon.
Even if you ignore all that there is still good reasons for changing the way we produce energy to power all the things we've become accustom to in our modern lifestyles. Not the least of which is that our primary sources of coal and oil are finite and will eventually one day run out. Sure there is enough that we could continue as we are and have enough to last beyond the lifetimes of anyone using this site but is that a good enough reason to just ignore things and continue as we are leaving it as a problem for some future generation?
Even if you ignore all that there is still good reasons for changing the way we produce energy to power all the things we've become accustom to in our modern lifestyles. Not the least of which is that our primary sources of coal and oil are finite and will eventually one day run out. Sure there is enough that we could continue as we are and have enough to last beyond the lifetimes of anyone using this site but is that a good enough reason to just ignore things and continue as we are leaving it as a problem for some future generation?
I don't think they are... that is just a disingenuous argument to confuse the issue used by those who profit from the resources and activities that are causing man-made climate change.Problem is people are pretending that the climate is something static and only humans can have affected any changes that happen not the giant ball of fire in the sky
Winter is coming: Researchers uncover the surprising cause of the little ice age
New research provides a novel answer to one of the persistent questions in historical climatology, environmental history and the earth sciences: what caused the Little Ice Age? The answer, we now know, is a paradox: warming.www.sciencedaily.com
look at my posts above where i explain the difference.
That climate has become another 'culture war' subject is pretty tragic.
Think back to when the idea that smoking tobacco causes lung cancer was 'just a theory', big tobacco firms spent millions on 'research' to confuse the issue because it was very profitable for them to deny it (whilst all the time they knew the answer) - what the big oil companies etc are now doing to confuse the climate issue so as they can still make huge profits is much the same thing.
VG
RMS
Three Berries
Active member
The world has been changing for billions of years. Our guesses at what will happen is of no consequence really. Species have been going extinct since the beginning. If you buy into evolution that's the end result for most.
And temperature measurements are always suspect as getting two thermometers to read the same is not very easy to do let alone 300 years ago. Much of the temp data is the same computer generated drivel from the models they use, crap in crap out; or they can get the data they want out by manipulating the inputs gently.
And temperature measurements are always suspect as getting two thermometers to read the same is not very easy to do let alone 300 years ago. Much of the temp data is the same computer generated drivel from the models they use, crap in crap out; or they can get the data they want out by manipulating the inputs gently.
