Page 1 of 36 1 2 3 11 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 710

Thread: Everything Climate Change

  1. #1
    Administrator Apollo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    20,318
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Everything Climate Change

    The following is a letter to the American Physical Society released to the public by Professor Emiritus of physics Hal Lewis of the University of California at Santa Barbara.

    Sent: Friday, 08 October 2010 17:19 Hal Lewis
    From: Hal Lewis, University of California, Santa Barbara
    To: Curtis G. Callan, Jr., Princeton University, President of the American Physical Society
    6 October 2010
    Dear Curt:
    When I first joined the American Physical Society sixty-seven years ago it was much smaller, much gentler, and as yet uncorrupted by the money flood (a threat against which Dwight Eisenhower warned a half-century ago).
    Indeed, the choice of physics as a profession was then a guarantor of a life of poverty and abstinenceóit was World War II that changed all that. The prospect of worldly gain drove few physicists. As recently as thirty-five years ago, when I chaired the first APS study of a contentious social/scientific issue, The Reactor Safety Study, though there were zealots aplenty on the outside there was no hint of inordinate pressure on us as physicists. We were therefore able to produce what I believe was and is an honest appraisal of the situation at that time. We were further enabled by the presence of an oversight committee consisting of Pief Panofsky, Vicki Weisskopf, and Hans Bethe, all towering physicists beyond reproach. I was proud of what we did in a charged atmosphere. In the end the oversight committee, in its report to the APS President, noted the complete independence in which we did the job, and predicted that the report would be attacked from both sides. What greater tribute could there be?
    How different it is now. The giants no longer walk the earth, and the money flood has become the raison díÍtre of much physics research, the vital sustenance of much more, and it provides the support for untold numbers of professional jobs. For reasons that will soon become clear my former pride at being an APS Fellow all these years has been turned into shame, and I am forced, with no pleasure at all, to offer you my resignation from the Society.
    It is of course, the global warming scam, with the (literally) trillions of dollars driving it, that has corrupted so many scientists, and has carried APS before it like a rogue wave. It is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist. Anyone who has the faintest doubt that this is so should force himself to read the ClimateGate documents, which lay it bare. (Montfordís book organizes the facts very well.) I donít believe that any real physicist, nay scientist, can read that stuff without revulsion. I would almost make that revulsion a definition of the word scientist.
    So what has the APS, as an organization, done in the face of this challenge? It has accepted the corruption as the norm, and gone along with it. For example:
    1. About a year ago a few of us sent an e-mail on the subject to a fraction of the membership. APS ignored the issues, but the then President immediately launched a hostile investigation of where we got the e-mail addresses. In its better days, APS used to encourage discussion of important issues, and indeed the Constitution cites that as its principal purpose. No more. Everything that has been done in the last year has been designed to silence debate
    2. The appallingly tendentious APS statement on Climate Change was apparently written in a hurry by a few people over lunch, and is certainly not representative of the talents of APS members as I have long known them. So a few of us petitioned the Council to reconsider it. One of the outstanding marks of (in)distinction in the Statement was the poison word incontrovertible, which describes few items in physics, certainly not this one. In response APS appointed a secret committee that never met, never troubled to speak to any skeptics, yet endorsed the Statement in its entirety. (They did admit that the tone was a bit strong, but amazingly kept the poison word incontrovertible to describe the evidence, a position supported by no one.) In the end, the Council kept the original statement, word for word, but approved a far longer ďexplanatoryĒ screed, admitting that there were uncertainties, but brushing them aside to give blanket approval to the original. The original Statement, which still stands as the APS position, also contains what I consider pompous and asinine advice to all world governments, as if the APS were master of the universe. It is not, and I am embarrassed that our leaders seem to think it is. This is not fun and games, these are serious matters involving vast fractions of our national substance, and the reputation of the Society as a scientific society is at stake.
    3. In the interim the ClimateGate scandal broke into the news, and the machinations of the principal alarmists were revealed to the world. It was a fraud on a scale I have never seen, and I lack the words to describe its enormity. Effect on the APS position: none. None at all. This is not science; other forces are at work.
    4. So a few of us tried to bring science into the act (that is, after all, the alleged and historic purpose of APS), and collected the necessary 200+ signatures to bring to the Council a proposal for a Topical Group on Climate Science, thinking that open discussion of the scientific issues, in the best tradition of physics, would be beneficial to all, and also a contribution to the nation. I might note that it was not easy to collect the signatures, since you denied us the use of the APS membership list. We conformed in every way with the requirements of the APS Constitution, and described in great detail what we had in mindósimply to bring the subject into the open.
    5. To our amazement, Constitution be damned, you declined to accept our petition, but instead used your own control of the mailing list to run a poll on the membersí interest in a TG on Climate and the Environment. You did ask the members if they would sign a petition to form a TG on your yet-to-be-defined subject, but provided no petition, and got lots of affirmative responses. (If you had asked about sex you would have gotten more expressions of interest.) There was of course no such petition or proposal, and you have now dropped the Environment part, so the whole matter is moot. (Any lawyer will tell you that you cannot collect signatures on a vague petition, and then fill in whatever you like.) The entire purpose of this exercise was to avoid your constitutional responsibility to take our petition to the Council.
    6. As of now you have formed still another secret and stacked committee to organize your own TG, simply ignoring our lawful petition.
    APS management has gamed the problem from the beginning, to suppress serious conversation about the merits of the climate change claims. Do you wonder that I have lost confidence in the organization?
    I do feel the need to add one note, and this is conjecture, since it is always risky to discuss other peopleís motives. This scheming at APS HQ is so bizarre that there cannot be a simple explanation for it. Some have held that the physicists of today are not as smart as they used to be, but I donít think that is an issue. I think it is the money, exactly what Eisenhower warned about a half-century ago. There are indeed trillions of dollars involved, to say nothing of the fame and glory (and frequent trips to exotic islands) that go with being a member of the club. Your own Physics Department (of which you are chairman) would lose millions a year if the global warming bubble burst. When Penn State absolved Mike Mann of wrongdoing, and the University of East Anglia did the same for Phil Jones, they cannot have been unaware of the financial penalty for doing otherwise. As the old saying goes, you donít have to be a weatherman to know which way the wind is blowing. Since I am no philosopher, Iím not going to explore at just which point enlightened self-interest crosses the line into corruption, but a careful reading of the ClimateGate releases makes it clear that this is not an academic question.
    I want no part of it, so please accept my resignation. APS no longer represents me, but I hope we are still friends.
    Hal

    Harold Lewis is Emeritus Professor of Physics, University of California, Santa Barbara, former Chairman; Former member Defense Science Board, chmn of Technology panel; Chairman DSB study on Nuclear Winter; Former member Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards; Former member, Presidentís Nuclear Safety Oversight Committee; Chairman APS study on Nuclear Reactor Safety Chairman Risk Assessment Review Group; Co-founder and former Chairman of JASON; Former member USAF Scientific Advisory Board; Served in US Navy in WW II; books: Technological Risk (about, surprise, technological risk) and Why Flip a Coin (about decision making)
    http://my.telegraph.co.uk/reasonmclu...sical-society/

  2. #2
    Raptors Republic Veteran JimiCliff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    5,050
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    He's a physicist, angry that the American Physics Society (whose mission is "to advance and diffuse the knowledge of physics") didn't want to get involved in climate change...which is, of course, in no way related to the advancing nor diffusion of the knowledge of physics.

  3. #3
    Raptors Republic Superstar Superjudge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Niagara
    Posts
    4,729
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    yes, thousands of scientists united....cept this guy.

    cuz its far easier to corrupt thousands...than one.


  4. Like Nilanka, SkywalkerAC liked this post
  5. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    26,652
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Do enough digging into the research into global warming and it is obvious there is an agenda.

    Fudged data, manipulated models, lack of consistency.

    The sun operates in cycles - the cycle has turned and it is emitting less energy which is why there has been no global warming for 19 years and ice continues to build in the arctic (even though Al Gore said in 2007 it would be gone by 2014).

    It is a great story that always has the same answer: more money to government to solve the supposed problem.


    Pollution and altering the earth's climate are two vastly different things.

  6. #5
    Raptors Republic Veteran Miekenstien's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    7,307
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    i am not a believer of "man-made" global warming. for the amount of data collected to come up with the conclusion is a fraction. in every other science correlation doesn't equal causation except for this. throughout the history of earth it has been proven that there are hot and cold periods. this doesn't mean i don't think that using green products and being good to the environment is not needed, that is just common sense but about 93 000 000 miles away is the cause of the problem.

    everything that we as people do is almost insignificant, 15 container ships pollute more than every car in the world per year.
    http://www.gizmag.com/shipping-pollution/11526/

    i don't think climate change is a hoax, just the cause. even if they are for good reason

  7. #6
    Administrator Apollo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    20,318
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Climate change is no doubt real. 'Global warming' is questionable. The impact of man's activity on the climate is uncertain and the whole climategate fiasco sheds some light on why people should question the narrative.

    Quote Superjudge wrote: View Post
    yes, thousands of scientists united....cept this guy.

    cuz its far easier to corrupt thousands...than one.

    I don't see anywhere in that letter where he suggests everyone but him is corrupted. Unless I missed it and if so please point it out.

    The climategate documents illustrated doctored data to arrive at an objective. Doctored data supports the position; the science is backed up by the data. There is no giant conspiracy of scientist everywhere pulling the wool over our eyes.

    The minute we see people fabricating data to prove a stance is the minute we should all pause and revisit the whole thing. The truth shouldn't need lies to support its validity, right?

    Quote JimiCliff wrote: View Post
    He's a physicist, angry that the American Physics Society (whose mission is "to advance and diffuse the knowledge of physics") didn't want to get involved in climate change...which is, of course, in no way related to the advancing nor diffusion of the knowledge of physics.
    "Climategate" (that which goes on in the shadows as per the document leak) is counter to that mission, no? To me it sounds like he arrived at a point where he felt he had to decide either he has integrity or he had integrity. He decided he has integrity and the rest fell into place due to that decision based on what he believes to be true.

  8. #7
    Raptors Republic Superstar Superjudge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Niagara
    Posts
    4,729
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Ok, you guys are right.

    There is no issue.

    Its all fine here.

  9. #8
    Raptors Republic Superstar Machine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    4,741
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    For a scientist he didn't really back up his argument at all. All he did was say "they're wrong and I'm right" which has me interested in what he's going to say and then he didn't say anything. He just bashed other scientests. He sounds like a news anchor on Fox.

  10. Like SkywalkerAC liked this post
  11. #9
    Administrator Apollo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    20,318
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    He used the climategate scandal and personal experience. Have you dug into climategate? There is a lot of troubling stuff to take a look at there. That scandal was a big blow to some of those pushing man made climate change theory.

    Truth need not be supported with lies. The truth is bullet proof yet some of these people aren't using the truth as per the scandal. He's right, some clearly are corrupted and it's probably money because I don't know why else one would be motivated to do that. If a scientist knows something to be true it's because he proved it as fact. If it cannot be proven then move along, right? That's how science is supposed to work, that's what were taught. What's happening here almost appears to be a man made climate change religion and if you dare question the dogma you should be shamed and your credibility destroyed. In America some scientists are pushing for the feds to use RICO on those who question the man made theory. That is troubling if it were to become popular.

    Trenberth, in other words, deliberately misrepresented the science in order to advance his political agenda. We know what that political agenda was – and is – because he revealed it in that “travesty” email. Having made up his mind about the existence of what we now call Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming – even to the point of expressing irritation when the observed data refused to conform with the theoretical models he so worshipped – he chose cynically and dishonestly to ramp up public hysteria by lying at a press conference about a connection between global warming and hurricanes which he knew was not true.

    Let us savour, for a moment, the sheer gall of this puffed up, vindictive, self-righteous, grandstanding, mendacious bully whose influential position in the US scientific establishment is generously funded by the American taxpayer.

    Trenberth is a liar, a proven liar, who has now written a letter to the president full of still more lies urging the use of racketeering laws to harrass and pursue scientists for the crime of being more rigorous and questioning about science than Kevin Trenberth.

    There’s a word for this kind of preposterous inversion of the natural order. I think it begins with a “T”.
    http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...jail-skeptics/

  12. #10
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    26,652
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Apollo wrote: View Post
    He used the climategate scandal and personal experience. Have you dug into climategate? There is a lot of troubling stuff to take a look at there. That scandal was a big blow to some of those pushing man made climate change theory.

    Truth need not be supported with lies. The truth is bullet proof yet some of these people aren't using the truth as per the scandal. He's right, some clearly are corrupted and it's probably money because I don't know why else one would be motivated to do that. If a scientist knows something to be true it's because he proved it as fact. If it cannot be proven then move along, right? That's how science is supposed to work, that's what were taught. What's happening here almost appears to be a man made climate change religion and if you dare question the dogma you should be shamed and your credibility destroyed. In America some scientists are pushing for the fedsto use RICO on those who question the man made theory. That is troubling if it were to become popular.


    http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...jail-skeptics/
    There was this thread from a little more than a year ago:

    http://www.raptorsrepublic.com/forum...l=1#post365706



    I am still not converted and am much more prepared for the ridicule this year.

    Man can cause pollution but there is zero evidence that man has changed climate that doesn't rely on man made models with man altered inputs to reach man desired outcome.

  13. #11
    Administrator Apollo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    20,318
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Oh yeah I forgot about that. You have to admit that was a pretty damn fine September snowman I made last year. I since move out of Calgary but I hear they got dumped on twice in August if you can believe that.

  14. #12
    Raptors Republic Superstar slaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    4,738
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    I look at this issue this way: when the people who keep telling me it's a crisis start acting like it's a crisis, then I'm in. So, for example, when David Suzuki sells his 4 or 5 houses and stops commuting anywhere at all and the UN guys stop flying thousands of people in private jets all over the world to meetings about climate change and the celebrities sell their 5 million homes and private jets and Maui winter homes, then I'll start paying attention. Until then, all these guys living like modern royalty while telling us we all have to do with less can fuck off.

  15. Like Apollo liked this post
  16. #13
    Administrator Apollo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    20,318
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Slaw, such thoughtcrimes...

  17. #14
    Super Moderator Joey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    16,974
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote slaw wrote: View Post
    I look at this issue this way: when the people who keep telling me it's a crisis start acting like it's a crisis, then I'm in. So, for example, when David Suzuki sells his 4 or 5 houses and stops commuting anywhere at all and the UN guys stop flying thousands of people in private jets all over the world to meetings about climate change and the celebrities sell their 5 million homes and private jets and Maui winter homes, then I'll start paying attention. Until then, all these guys living like modern royalty while telling us we all have to do with less can fuck off.
    Ugh, I very cautiously wade into the Climate debate ... I'm not sure the argument has ever been "the individual consumer needs to cut his or her greenhouse footprint in order to save the planet"; the average person, commute and all, is probably 0.05% of the problem. The issue at hand is Governments not acting on promises that were made LONG ago to cut emmissions to reasonable levels. The only thing stopping this from happening is corporations not wanting to hurt the bottom line; which again, is where the Government should be stepping in to curb such careless actions, while offering up incentives to do so.

    The issue shouldn't be whether or not our actions are having a negative impact in environment - why does the Earth need to be visibly dying in order for us to wake up and realize the way we treat our planet is NOT sustainable?

  18. #15
    Administrator Apollo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    20,318
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Being someone who worked in the utilities industry in western Canada for seven years I can honestly tell you with great certainty there is a sound, structured plan to take all coal offline in the not too distant future and replace it with alternative sources; those sources in some cases are already real projects ongoing.

    Of course, when you look at how much emissions Canada puts into the air in comparison to China and India for example, its like removing a grain of sand from a beach. Only in this case Canadians will have to foot the bill because the citizen always pays one way or another.

    Meanwhile the rest of the beach is going nowhere, if anything there is a fleet of trucks carrying more and more sand to smother us all... If man made climate change is real that is.

    Any efforts made by Canada to greatly reduce emissions is in vain without the real producers stepping up to the plate but you'll never see that happen; you won't see the likes of China, India or Russia de-industrialize. You won't see poor countries dieing to be like us de-industrialize either.


    Quote Joey wrote: View Post
    The issue at hand is Governments not acting on promises that were made LONG ago to cut emmissions to reasonable levels.
    I'd also ask you what is reasonable? Who determined what is reasonable? How do they know it is reasonable? What is their basis for everything?

    There are studies out there which indicate that perhaps the solar system may go through warming and cooling cycles due to the Sun and all the planets may be heating up due to these cycles. Of course, these are theories without doctored data slam dunking them through the truth bucket.

    I agree that man made pollutants are a real problem though. I agree that emissions should be lowered substantially in particular places around the world without a doubt as well. I'm not sold on the man made climate change though. Not after climategate.
    Last edited by Apollo; Wed Oct 7th, 2015 at 02:11 PM. Reason: More to add.

  19. Like hateslosing liked this post
  20. #16
    Super Moderator Joey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    16,974
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Apollo wrote: View Post
    Any efforts made by Canada to greatly reduce emissions is in vain without the real producers stepping up to the plate but you'll never see that happen; you won't see the likes of China, India or Russia de-industrialize. You won't see poor countries dieing to be like us de-industrialize either.
    Has Canada really stooped to the point where we are looking to CHINA for our ethical cues? Damn. I hope not.
    Canada is in the Top 5% of Modernized Socities in terms of access to alternative Technologies, and yet right up there in terms of polluting as well. "Be the Change you Want to see in the World".
    It's absolutely silly, in my opinion, to say "China and Russia aren't doing anything, so why should we?"


    Quote Apollo wrote: View Post
    I'd also ask you what is reasonable? Who determined what is reasonable? How do they know it is reasonable? What is their basis for everything?
    Well there's the Kyoto Protocol, which has all but been ignored, but was agreed to be "reasonable" at its outset; and there's The Copenhagen Accord, which was drafted by the US and China and many of the Worlds top Emmissions contributors as well. If Canada didn't feel the requirements were reasonable, they shouldn't have signed it. Buut they did. And then backed out.

    Quote Apollo wrote:
    There are studies out there which indicate that perhaps the solar system may goes through warming and cooling cycles due to the Sun and all the planets may be heating up due to these cycles. Of course, these are theories without doctored data slam dunking them through the truth bucket.
    I'm well aware of these theories, and to a degree, I don't disagree. But again, I pose the question why does the Earth need to be visibly dying in order for us to wake up and realize the way we treat our planet is NOT sustainable? So regardless of whats causing Climate Change, can we all not agree that taking better care of our Planet will do nothing but make things better for everyone? We have rivers completely saturated in Toxic Sludge. We have an island of garbage in the middle of the ocean the size of Manhattan. We have a frigging hole in our stratosphere that has been linked to Human activities, and yet people are concerned about is some physicist who never even had a history of Climate Research, making claims that go against 99% of the Scientific community?
    Last edited by Joey; Wed Oct 7th, 2015 at 02:38 PM.

  21. Like Bendit liked this post
  22. #17
    Super Moderator Joey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    16,974
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    It should also be noted that the APS responded to his Letter, and refuted every single one of his claims ...
    http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/...ge-accusations

  23. Like SkywalkerAC liked this post
  24. #18
    Administrator Apollo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    20,318
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Joey wrote: View Post
    Has Canada really stooped to the point where we are looking to CHINA for our ethical cues? Damn. I hope not.
    Canada is in the Top 5% of Modernized Socities in terms of access to alternative Technologies, and yet right up there in terms of polluting as well. "Be the Change you Want to see in the World".
    It's absolutely silly, in my opinion, to say "China and Russia aren't doing anything, so why should we?"
    This isn't a matter of taking the higher ground, I told you a reality. Canada's carbon footprint on the world is dwarfed and all the work and all the expense will be irrelevant without the top dogs doing something. I'm not telling you what Canada should or shouldn't do but the reality of it all is that it's futile without the top dogs getting on board and I think we all know China doesn't care about Canada's initiatives. They sure do care about developing Canada's resources though.

    Another idea is for us all to self police our homes: turn down the heat and put on a sweater. Unplug all your electronics when not in use. Boycott all products which hurt the environment during production. Start a garden in your back yard. Sell your car, buy a bicycle. I can go on and on but most people won't do this, even those who want Canada to lead the charge in shutting down plants.

    Quote Joey wrote: View Post
    I'm well aware of these theories, and to a degree, I don't disagree. But again, I pose the question why does the Earth need to be visibly dying in order for us to wake up and realize the way we treat our planet is NOT sustainable?
    If you don't disagree to a degree then why take the time to frame leading questions?

    Quote Joey wrote: View Post
    So regardless of whats causing Climate Change, can we all not agree that taking better care of our Planet will do nothing but make things better for everyone?
    Clearly in my posts I put it to bed stating I have the belief that certain areas can do more for the health of the planet but to elaborate, that doesn't mean all areas are equal. In Japan for example, they should be taking nuclear offline because they reside on fault lines, are high risk to tidal waves, have all their plants precariously located on the coast and currently are still battling one of the worse environmental disasters the planet has ever seen which is still dumping 100's of tonnes of nuclear waste into the ocean per day. Another example is the great pacific garbage patch, all those countries feeding that and all those company's of vessels traversing through should take ownership and implement a plan to remove it and proactively prevent it in the future. There are many issues, no doubt. Too many to address in a quick forum post. Everyone can do more, everyone has their own problems and at varied degrees. There is no cookie cutter answer to this all.

    yet people are concerned about is some physicist who never even had a history of Climate Research, making claims that go against 99% of the Scientific community?
    No, people are concerned about an agenda being force fed to the people which is backed by doctored data. We're not talking about one disgruntled employee rocking the boat here. These people got caught with their pants down and it calls the whole thing into question. This scientist's letter is merely a tidbit which started the conversation.

    Quote Joey wrote: View Post
    It should also be noted that the APS responded to his Letter, and refuted every single one of his claims ...
    http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/...ge-accusations
    It's unfortunate all those emails leaked however, huh? It hurt the cause slightly.

  25. #19
    Raptors Republic Superstar enlightenment's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    3,977
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Apollo, do you think that the global community has any responsibility to ensuring the earth can sustain future generations?

    I don't think it is arguable that the earth functions on the balanced flows of finite resources.
    I don't think it is arguable that humans have the largest, most condensed impact on these flows.
    Therefor, human activity can be considered a disturbance to the functioning of the earth, which we fundamentally rely on for our existence.

    You can argue that Canadas role in this is small in comparison to China or India, however, by becoming sustainable ourselves we force the improvement of technologies and organizational systems which can then be exported at larger scales to those countries.
    We can either yell at China to quit emitting, or show China how it's done.

    You may want to argue against Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW), and the specific system of models used to predict the future outcome of the earth, thats fine. Models are simplifications of realities that attempt to give us quantified ways of expressing what we know of a system. Our knowledge is not perfect, but it is only rational to behave based on our current knowledge. The thing with Carbon emissions, is that AGW is not the only concern.

    Acidification of the Ocean is one of my greatest concerns when I think of Carbon emissions. Most of the worlds population survives by relying on Ocean resources. Many physiological studies on fish, shellfish, etc, populations show that subtle increases in Ocean pH will diminish their stocks. It is a fact that the Ocean sequesters a lot of the Carbon from the atmosphere, and it is also a fact that Carbonic acid results from this sequestration, and it is also a fact that Carbonic acid increases the pH of the Ocean, and it is also a fact that increases in pH affect the growth and sustainability of the entire Ocean ecosystem.

    If we recognize the existence of this chain of phenomenon; what then is our political role on the global stage? What do you suggest we do, if anything, about the risks inherent in unregulated Carbon emissions?

    [BTW; Scepticism is always healthy. No one should be punished for voicing their doubt. Scientists are constantly doubting and then improving climate models. However one must delimit a standard for their scepticism when it comes to making political decisions. We never have 100% truth, so how then do we decide our next steps? We have to be pragmatic and work with the best available knowledge, which should constantly be questioned.]
    Last edited by enlightenment; Wed Oct 7th, 2015 at 03:39 PM.
    The Baltic Beast is unstoppable!

  26. Like Bendit, Joey liked this post
  27. #20
    Administrator Apollo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    20,318
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    First question: yes. Read what I said.

Page 1 of 36 1 2 3 11 ... LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •