|
 | | 
10-10-2006, 02:31 PM
| | New Member | | Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 11
| |  Global Warming Mad
Does anyone agree with me that the country has gone global warming mad. And that anything that happens (i.e freak weather fornomenoms) are always put down to global warming. What about the great flood we had where canvey island was drowned, they never said that was global warming but they would now.
I think we have gone completely bonkers
And personally i think we are still coming out of the ice age. 
James!
Visit The place for the weather and lightning data for Suffolk in the UK! |
10-10-2006, 02:45 PM
|  | Officer of the Wild Empire | | Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Mendip Dist. Somerset
Posts: 734
| | | Re: Global Warming Mad
Quote: |
Originally Posted by suffolkw Does anyone agree with me that the country has gone global warming mad. And that anything that happens (i.e freak weather fornomenoms) are always put down to global warming. What about the great flood we had where canvey island was drowned, they never said that was global warming but they would now.
I think we have gone completely bonkers
And personally i think we are still coming out of the ice age.
James! | We are in what is called an inter-glacial period but because of what we are chucking out into the atmosphere we are speeding up the process of warming.
The thing to remember James, is that in the '50s no one knew about GW & CC. It wasn't until the early '70s that people started asking questions about such things as CO2 emissions, CFCs & the like.
As for being GW mad, I don't know. It depends on whether we act on what we know about the problem. If we don't act, then YES, WE ARE MAD.
__________________
"He who could do little did nothing."
Eugene Odum, when asked what is the worst case scenario when it came to the Environment. |
10-10-2006, 02:47 PM
|  | Officer of the Wild Empire | | Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Gloucestershire
Posts: 687
| | | Re: Global Warming Mad
Hi James
In answer to your question I offer a little yes and a great big NO!
Like anything the press can get their teeth into the shock/hoprror aspects are a great seller with the masses. A rational determined response is the the way to go, not the sensationalist driven responses that derive from the mass media and which are all forgotten when the press reports the next MP's indescretion.
Global warming is no joke and its getting to a stage where the process is slipping beyond our ability to halt or reverse it. The action we're taking in the West is too little and too slow, even though it is regularly in the news these days. Worse is the impact of up and coming countries like China. As they continue to develop I dread to think of the environmental concequences, your children will have to deal with.
We're in trouble mate not two ways about that. As EH says doing nothing about it is the real madness. |
10-10-2006, 02:49 PM
|  | Commander of the Wild Empire | | Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Leicestershire
Posts: 4,279
| | | Re: Global Warming Mad
you have to remove the media hype, but global warming is a very worrying problem. You can never claim an individual event is a result of warming but have to look at long term trends. At the long term trends all suggest one thing....
Matt |
10-10-2006, 03:55 PM
|  | Knight Commander of the Wild Empire | | Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Sheffield, FPRSY
Posts: 5,087
| | | Re: Global Warming Mad
I think the original question was about the tendency of the press and 'people on the street' to put *every* weather event down to 'global warming'. There are no events that happen now that didn't happen 100 or 500 years ago, so they are *not* due to climate change. What *is* related to climate change is the increased frequency of storms, droughts &c. and their changed distribution.
I don't mind everything being attributed to climate change since it means that most people will take no notice of climate-change deniers ..... for the wrong reasons but what the heck! |
10-10-2006, 04:36 PM
|  | Commander of the Wild Empire | | Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Peoples Democratic Republic of South Cheshire
Posts: 1,248
| | | Re: Global Warming Mad
The problem with global warming is that even if it is a "don't know" as long as it remains a "don't know" we cannot and should not be taking the chance. In a perfect world without CO2 emmissions and effects there is still the factor that we are using (and worse still wasting) fossil fuels like there is no tommorrow when they are a finite resource. It we all used this finate resource responsibly, drove sensible cars, walked or used pushbikes for short most journeys. were more frugal with heating, used power saving lighting ect then the problem would be further away into the future and we would have more time to resolve potential problems.
Many real problems are here already, landfills sites filled with pointless waste, people still refusing to recycle (often for reasons little more than percieved "civil rights issues"), swathes of countryside destroyed to provide bypasses that are often out of scale (a look at the dual carriageway section of the A500 in South Cheshire will show you a road for which a single carraige way would have been more than adequate).
The danger with the global warming "panic" is that of "crying wolf", the danger might be real but become buried under the hype, and when the real danger is found ignored because of so called "scare-mongering.  |
10-10-2006, 04:53 PM
| | Knight Commander of the Wild Empire | | Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Sheffield, FPRSY
Posts: 5,087
| | | Re: Global Warming Mad
I agree. On one point, landfill is not a climate problem directly *except* that it is filled with things that should not have been manufactured in the first place! However, people see landfill as a problem per se therefore if they object to landfill ultimately we will have to stop manufacturing stuff **before** it becomes waste ...
Cheers, Paul Quote: |
Originally Posted by speckled wood The problem with global warming is that even if it is a "don't know" as long as it remains a "don't know" we cannot and should not be taking the chance. In a perfect world without CO2 emmissions and effects there is still the factor that we are using (and worse still wasting) fossil fuels like there is no tommorrow when they are a finite resource. It we all used this finate resource responsibly, drove sensible cars, walked or used pushbikes for short most journeys. were more frugal with heating, used power saving lighting ect then the problem would be further away into the future and we would have more time to resolve potential problems.
Many real problems are here already, landfills sites filled with pointless waste, people still refusing to recycle (often for reasons little more than percieved "civil rights issues"), swathes of countryside destroyed to provide bypasses that are often out of scale (a look at the dual carriageway section of the A500 in South Cheshire will show you a road for which a single carraige way would have been more than adequate).
The danger with the global warming "panic" is that of "crying wolf", the danger might be real but become buried under the hype, and when the real danger is found ignored because of so called "scare-mongering. | |
11-10-2006, 11:41 AM
| | Officer of the Wild Empire | | Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Gloucestershire
Posts: 687
| | | Re: Global Warming Mad
The causes of anything in life can rarely be pinned down to just one thing in isolation. Everything is part of a long chain of events and influences that combine in various proportions to create an event in any moment in time. That too leads on to something else. There is always a knock on effect if you like.
The human species has had a significant influence on climate change since the early days of deforestation of the Wildwood, but until now the planet has been able to rebalance itself. The Gaia hypothesis is an interesting take on the process. There are so very many of us now and we're consuming everything at such speed and in such quantities that natural balancing systems can no longe keep up. Unless... the cause of the distruction itself is dealt with and that means the human species doesn't it? |
11-10-2006, 12:07 PM
| | Officer of the Wild Empire | | Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Mendip Dist. Somerset
Posts: 734
| | | Re: Global Warming Mad
Quote: |
Originally Posted by Sheryl LaBouchardiere The causes of anything in life can rarely be pinned down to just one thing in isolation. Everything is part of a long chain of events and influences that combine in various proportions to create an event in any moment in time. That too leads on to something else. There is always a knock on effect if you like.
The human species has had a significant influence on climate change since the early days of deforestation of the Wildwood, but until now the planet has been able to rebalance itself. The Gaia hypothesis is an interesting take on the process. There are so very many of us now and we're consuming everything at such speed and in such quantities that natural balancing systems can no longe keep up. Unless... the cause of the distruction itself is dealt with and that means the human species doesn't it? | Glad you've come across Jim Lovelock, you should read his new book "The Revenge of Gaia". It puts things into perscective. Then again, you should read his earier works to bring you up to speed.
__________________
"He who could do little did nothing."
Eugene Odum, when asked what is the worst case scenario when it came to the Environment. |
11-10-2006, 12:13 PM
| | Commander of the Wild Empire | | Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Peoples Democratic Republic of South Cheshire
Posts: 1,248
| | | Re: Global Warming Mad
The moral is that the Earth can give us an awful lot, but we are expecting and taking too much.  |
11-10-2006, 12:37 PM
|  | Commander of the Wild Empire | | Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Little village called Chedworth
Posts: 4,820
| | | Re: Global Warming Mad
I was a solid believer and worrier to the global warming cause until I read State of Fear by Micheal Crichton which although is fiction is incredibly well researched a very interesting take, questions about how evidence of global warming is based on long term changes exactly how reliable is early data, where is it from etc.... I came to the conclusion that I personally just don't know enough to be certain, I tentatively trust the scientists and feel that it is probably happening though the exact causes I'm not convinced on, I also bear in mind that at numerous times in history both ancient and modern the best scientists and the best knowledge of the day have turned out to be horribly wrong.
I sometimes think that if we continue to mess up the planet at the rate that we seem to be - regardless of global warming, purely in terms of resource consumption, close concentrations of people (which encourages disease), it won't be a geological timescale until we've wiped out most of our own species and solved the problem! |
11-10-2006, 12:45 PM
| | Officer of the Wild Empire | | Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Gloucestershire
Posts: 687
| | | Re: Global Warming Mad
Quote: |
Originally Posted by speckled wood The moral is that the Earth can give us an awful lot, but we are expecting and taking too much. | Yeah, we're taking far more than we need and returning little or nothing. Our ancestors had a respect and a reverence for nature, when they took what they really needed they always gave something back. If they cut down a tree they'd press a few seeds into the ground next to where it stood and so on...
Nowadays, what we do take, is processed into things that become a burden to us anyway. Very often we work more hours than we need to just to be able to consume things we don't need. Think of all the foot spas and sandwich toasters in the back of the cupboard. We allow our free time to be swallowed up and in desperatipon, feeling trapped, seek solace in more stuff. Stuff, which of course we have to sell more of our time to pay for, insure and are bound by. Throw away stuff, not even things made with real craftsmanship to treasure or hand down to the next generation.
If you really look at it you don't own posessions, posessions own you. What we're doing in our modern society doesn't make a lot of sense. The answer is to live light and tread softly. So simple really but enmeshed as we are in the enconomic infrasturucture we now rely on, it can be flippin' difficult to pull free.
Then you find a moment to go out into the wild and see a bird with nothing but the feathers it stands up in singing its heart out in a tree. A tough life maybe but a free one. What happened to us eh?
Wo! I've gone off on one haven't I?  I do that, sorry.  |
11-10-2006, 12:51 PM
| | Commander of the Wild Empire | | Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Little village called Chedworth
Posts: 4,820
| | | Re: Global Warming Mad
Quote: |
Originally Posted by Sheryl LaBouchardiere Yeah, we're taking far more than we need and returning little or nothing. Our ancestors had a respect and a reverence for nature, when they took what they really needed they always gave something back. If they cut down a tree they'd press a few seeds into the ground next to where it stood and so on... |
I agree with much of what you say but how do you know this is true? |
11-10-2006, 01:10 PM
| | Officer of the Wild Empire | | Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Mendip Dist. Somerset
Posts: 734
| | | Re: Global Warming Mad
Quote: |
Originally Posted by Gill Catton I was a solid believer and worrier to the global warming cause until I read State of Fear by Micheal Crichton which although is fiction is incredibly well researched a very interesting take, questions about how evidence of global warming is based on long term changes exactly how reliable is early data, where is it from etc.... | Crichton has been linked to The Climate Coallition in the US. They are a lobby group of Utillity Companies & Oil, Gas & Coal producers. So I wouldn't bother with what he has to say.
Just look around you & you'll see it happening before your very eyes.
The overall scientific consensus is that GW & CC is being effected by Man's hand.
Visit Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change for info on Climate Change
__________________
"He who could do little did nothing."
Eugene Odum, when asked what is the worst case scenario when it came to the Environment. |
11-10-2006, 01:17 PM
| | Officer of the Wild Empire | | Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Gloucestershire
Posts: 687
| | | Re: Global Warming Mad
Quote: |
Originally Posted by Gill Catton I agree with much of what you say but how do you know this is true? | A good question and one I think EH has responded to well, while I ws typing up a long long response. One which I'm now deleting coz it went off the main point, I think  |
11-10-2006, 01:29 PM
|  | Commander of the Wild Empire | | Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Gloucestershire
Posts: 1,371
| | | Re: Global Warming Mad
Quote: |
Originally Posted by Earth Hart Glad you've come across Jim Lovelock, you should read his new book "The Revenge of Gaia". It puts things into perscective. Then again, you should read his earier works to bring you up to speed. |
My dad used to look after his son at the star centre Sheryl.
Doesn't he now deny the effects of climate change?...
I don't really care if everything is blamed on climate change because it may make people wake up to the truth that we are destroying the planet, it's only a good thing if we try to stop polluting it. |
11-10-2006, 01:34 PM
| | Commander of the Wild Empire | | Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Little village called Chedworth
Posts: 4,820
| | | Re: Global Warming Mad
Quote: |
Originally Posted by Earth Hart Crichton has been linked to The Climate Coallition in the US. They are a lobby group of Utillity Companies & Oil, Gas & Coal producers. So I wouldn't bother with what he has to say.
Just look around you & you'll see it happening before your very eyes.
The overall scientific consensus is that GW & CC is being effected by Man's hand. | Seriously - I'd truly recommend the book it's a good read and very clever, he doesn't say it's not happening just makes you stop and think about why you think what you do, my shift in opinion wasn't just based on his text but also his research which is detailed in the back and it also highlighted the fact that I realised that all i know about it has come from school, and the media, how do I know if it's right? I haven't read all the journal articles, and only the ones that are pro global warming are shouted about in the media, consequently I have only seen this through other people's eyes.....
Also just because a person is liked to something like the CC doesn't mean they are biased to it. I suffer such perceptions all the time being an ecologist payed by developers but I'm far from biased or corrupt.
Plus overall scientific consensus doesn't make it real. Just currently thought to be so, this sort of things changes all the time, the world is flat, people with flatter heads are less intelligent, butter's better than margerine - actually no margerine is better than butter - oh no actually butter is better than margerine etc etc. I know this is a larger scale a bigger more important event of course I do, everyone's so swept up in the belief in the evidence and the causes, anyone who questions it or publically wonders how accurate it is is shouted down - linked to the fossil fuel industry or discredited there doesn't seem to be much open debate so like I said although I still believe in the warming evidence I'm not totally convinced and slightly less convinced on the causes - I'm really glad I read the book because I realised I was believing what was put under my nose rather than researching it for myself.
plus you say I can see this through my own eyes, but is it really that large scale earthquakes and floods are more frequent rather than just reported more in the media? I don't know. How many such floods can be attributed to deforrestation of uplands rather than GW?
Could big earthquakes have happened in fairly recent history but before mass media?
see I just don't feel I know enough to be able to know with much certainty just yet..... |
11-10-2006, 01:39 PM
| | Commander of the Wild Empire | | Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Little village called Chedworth
Posts: 4,820
| | | Re: Global Warming Mad
Quote: |
Originally Posted by Sheryl LaBouchardiere A good question and one I think EH has responded to well, while I ws typing up a long long response. One which I'm now deleting coz it went off the main point, I think |
I'm not sure that he did, how do you know that our ancestors conducted themselves as you describe?
Could it not be that there were just greater levels of resources ? and that natural population controls such as high mortality and a significantly smaller life expectancy were still in place? Meaning that consumption was smaller and less obvious rather than more ethically obtained?
Primitive cultures still live in slash and burn lifestyles where they just consume and move on
Or stay put and clear natural habitats for crops and livestock, an impact that increases a s a population does? |
11-10-2006, 01:41 PM
| | Officer of the Wild Empire | | Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Gloucestershire
Posts: 687
| | | Re: Global Warming Mad
Quote: |
Originally Posted by honeybee My dad used to look after his son at the star centre Sheryl.
Doesn't he now deny the effects of climate change?...
I don't really care if everything is blamed on climate change because it may make people wake up to the truth that we are destroying the planet, it's only a good thing if we try to stop polluting it. | I'm not an expert on Lovelock, to be honest but I don't see how anyone can deny the effects of climate change these days.
An overview of his Gaia hypothosis is very interesting though. Did try to read the first couple of books but was at Uni at the time and never really got into them properly. I'll try again at some point.
I take your point though. It doesn't matter how we look at it, the results of what we're doing and/or not doing is gonna end in tears if we don't wake up. |
11-10-2006, 01:41 PM
| | Knight Commander of the Wild Empire | | Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Sheffield, FPRSY
Posts: 5,087
| | | Re: Global Warming Mad
The evidence is to the contrary - our ancestors took what they wanted - often by mass slaughter of animals or slash and burn of woodland. True they didn't produce much waste ...
The critical element that early humans were relatively few in number, and they had short life-spans. They didn't destroy the woodland (which probably regenerated more by suckering rather than seed germination) because they were very temporary residents in any part of it.
Now human reproduction (along with intensive agriculture and industry) has far outpaced the ability of the rest of nature to recuperate.
Yes, we must do all the things mentioned (and more) but it won't make a bit of difference in the long run unless human population growth is stopped or reversed. Quote: |
Originally Posted by Sheryl LaBouchardiere Yeah, we're taking far more than we need and returning little or nothing. Our ancestors had a respect and a reverence for nature, when they took what they really needed they always gave something back. If they cut down a tree they'd press a few seeds into the ground next to where it stood and so on... | |
11-10-2006, 01:52 PM
| | Knight Commander of the Wild Empire | | Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Sheffield, FPRSY
Posts: 5,087
| | | Re: Global Warming Mad
Scientific consensus is the nearest we have to 'truth', if there is any such thing. There is a vast amount of evidence and theory to substantiate the dangers of accelerated climate change. There is no evidence in the opposite direction ..... just lies and distortions from people with a financial investments in the oil and other industries.
Yes floods have much to do with deforestation as well as increasingly irregular rainfall patterns: these are all aspects of human destruction of natural systems. Problems may be alleviated in some ways bu reforestation, by not building or farming on flood plains but even these attempts to return to nature will be impossible while the human population keeps growing ....
I don't see where earthquakes come into this discussion .... Quote: |
Originally Posted by Gill Catton Seriously - I'd truly recommend the book it's a good read and very clever, he doesn't say it's not happening just makes you stop and think about why you think what you do, my shift in opinion wasn't just based on his text but also his research which is detailed in the back and it also highlighted the fact that I realised that all i know about it has come from school, and the media, how do I know if it's right? I haven't read all the journal articles, and only the ones that are pro global warming are shouted about in the media, consequently I have only seen this through other people's eyes.....
Also just because a person is liked to something like the CC doesn't mean they are biased to it. I suffer such perceptions all the time being an ecologist payed by developers but I'm far from biased or corrupt.
Plus overall scientific consensus doesn't make it real. Just currently thought to be so, this sort of things changes all the time, the world is flat, people with flatter heads are less intelligent, butter's better than margerine - actually no margerine is better than butter - oh no actually butter is better than margerine etc etc. I know this is a larger scale a bigger more important event of course I do, everyone's so swept up in the belief in the evidence and the causes, anyone who questions it or publically wonders how accurate it is is shouted down - linked to the fossil fuel industry or discredited there doesn't seem to be much open debate so like I said although I still believe in the warming evidence I'm not totally convinced and slightly less convinced on the causes - I'm really glad I read the book because I realised I was believing what was put under my nose rather than researching it for myself.
plus you say I can see this through my own eyes, but is it really that large scale earthquakes and floods are more frequent rather than just reported more in the media? I don't know. How many such floods can be attributed to deforrestation of uplands rather than GW?
Could big earthquakes have happened in fairly recent history but before mass media? | |
11-10-2006, 01:58 PM
| | Commander of the Wild Empire | | Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Gloucestershire
Posts: 1,371
| | | Re: Global Warming Mad
Quote: |
Originally Posted by Paul mabbott The evidence is to the contrary - our ancestors took what they wanted - often by mass slaughter of animals or slash and burn of woodland. True they didn't produce much waste ...
The critical element that early humans were relatively few in number, and they had short life-spans. They didn't destroy the woodland (which probably regenerated more by suckering rather than seed germination) because they were very temporary residents in any part of it.
Now human reproduction (along with intensive agriculture and industry) has far outpaced the ability of the rest of nature to recuperate.
Yes, we must do all the things mentioned (and more) but it won't make a bit of difference in the long run unless human population growth is stopped or reversed. |
Do agree with sheryl though that there must have been an element of respect, just look at cave paintings and so on, don't see kids painting murals of their macdonalds
but yes, there were a lot less darn people about | |
