Global warming... sick of hearing about it, but how about a non BS version?

[Super Turbo Deluxe Custom]

Something I've contemplated.  How old is the ice at the poles?  How long has it been there?  It hasn't always been there.  Wouldn't it make sense it had to melt sometime, then comeback again?  That ice couldn't and can't be there forever.

 

[Kadmium]

Something that occurs to me is, why is anyone asking us? We're a bunch of guitarists, and I highly doubt any of is a climate scientist. Asking us about climate science is like asking a bassoon player whether stainless steel frets are a good idea or not. Their opinion is simply not relevant, and nor is ours on this issue. We are not in possession of the facts. Most of us are in possession of the second-hand opinions of ignorant journalists who misunderstand (and sometimes outright distort) the opinions of legitimate scientists who are in possession of the facts.

If you're getting your information from Lord Monckton, or Bill Nye, or Fox News, or MSNBC, or New Scientist, or a media outlet of any kind, then you (and I) are not capable of rendering an opinion on the subject, any more than your cat can tell you how to use the Dorian scale. Don't be an armchair climatologist.

 

[Jusatele]

Kadmium
you are correct, so everyone needs to listen to me and we will get past this thing.

 

[Kadmium]

Kadmium
you are correct, so everyone needs to listen to me and we will get past this thing.

Could you perhaps link us to some papers you've had published (in peer-reviewed journals, obviously) on the topic?

 

[hannaugh]

I generally base my opinion on what my Earth's Atmosphere professor in college (who has a PhD in paleo-climatology) told me directly, which was "I think it has much more to do with solar activity than anything else, but none of us knows for sure what is causing our current trends because there simply is not enough reliable data.  A scientist who claims to know for certain one way or the other is either hiding some very compelling data that the rest of us haven't seen, or is being paid by the green industry or the fossil fuel industry. "  I'm paraphrasing, but that is what he told me. 

When I think of how much "data" there is out there that is the complete opposite of "data" I saw in another article, I start to wonder how much of it was simply made up on the spot, especially after the Climategate thing.  The only thing I know for sure is that there is a HUGE amount of money to be made if you are a scientist and are willing to support either the green side or the oil industry side, and there is a HUGE amount of power to be gained if you are a politician and you use climate change to your advantage in an election.  With that kind of temptation, I don't really feel like I can trust anything I hear on the topic. 

At least I know that my professor was telling me what he really thought (after class because he was afraid of upsetting people in class... how sad is that?), and since he has actually studied ice cores and done tons of field work, and doesn't really stand to gain anything from what he told me, I put a little more stock into his opinion than what some blogger or magazine said. 

It's the same with the question of if corn syrup is worse for you than cane sugar.  For every article I've seen about it being bad for you, I've seen one that says it's exactly the same as sugar.  Who do I believe?  There's no way I can know.  I don't know the people who wrote the articles or provided the "data" for them.  They could be talking out of their asses, but how do I know unless I'm doing the research myself? 

 

[OzziePete]

super, the problem with letting science cure this is science is what got us into it, every form of fuel they have developed, has had a bad effect, and that is proven over time, so now we want them to supply us with a quick fix when their track record is Opps, we discovered it is bad after 50 years?
Like I said, off 3/4s of the population and there would be no problem.

You keep coming back to the population thing.  I submit, there is not, and will not be a population problem for sometime.  What's the manageable number?  The Coast to Caost AM types that beileve the Illuminati is controlling wars and disease to get the numbers down, thinks it's 300,000.  The starving and over populating in other parts of the world has little to do with lack of resources.  It's the management and exploitation of those resources that's the issue, which you have already pointed out.  We've been pretty industrious when we have to be, crossing bridges when we come to them.  If fossil fuels are finite and what's causing global warming, the fix is pretty obvious to me.  We'll use them all up then there's no way we could polute, lol.

I forget the numbers, but the birth rate while still greater than a 1:1 ratio is going down, and has consistently for a few decades.

This is certainly so in Australia, we have had a negative birth rate for years. There is a generation (of which I am a part) of Baby Boomers (1946-1965) who have and will cause all sorts of strain on the public infrastructure and of course a bubble in consumables as they go along in life. After that there is quite a more stable generational change from one to the next. Govts. have resisted some major expenditure in hospitals, schools and now aged care because they know much of the facilities will be white elephants after this generation has used them.

The effect of the one child policy in China has slowed the rise in births there. The modernisation of places like India, China and much of Asia has seen an increase in birth control use. There has also been an adaption to modern western liftestyle which in turn has made women become keen to have careers other than as wives and mothers as their societies liberalise. So yes, birth rates will slow down.

Something that occurs to me is, why is anyone asking us? We're a bunch of guitarists, and I highly doubt any of is a climate scientist. Asking us about climate science is like asking a bassoon player whether stainless steel frets are a good idea or not. Their opinion is simply not relevant, and nor is ours on this issue. We are not in possession of the facts. Most of us are in possession of the second-hand opinions of ignorant journalists who misunderstand (and sometimes outright distort) the opinions of legitimate scientists who are in possession of the facts.

If you're getting your information from Lord Monckton, or Bill Nye, or Fox News, or MSNBC, or New Scientist, or a media outlet of any kind, then you (and I) are not capable of rendering an opinion on the subject, any more than your cat can tell you how to use the Dorian scale. Don't be an armchair climatologist.

Ordinarily I would agree with that summation, Kadmium, however, in many countries the issue of environmental control has become Election Issues and even proposals for taxes. As a voter you really have to know something about the issue or you will end up a lemming like most and just speak and quote what you read in the paper or hear on TV/Radio. It's better to know at least a little about the issues or you'll be damned to parroting some spokes person's blurb about the proposals.

 

[Jusatele]

Kadmium
you are correct, so everyone needs to listen to me and we will get past this thing.

Could you perhaps link us to some papers you've had published (in peer-reviewed journals, obviously) on the topic?

LOL
ever listen to Coast to coast at night, we call it conspirator theory radio around here, it comes on about 10 at night PST and runs till 5 am, they talk about this kind of stuff all the time and everyone has a website where he list his credentials and you can send money
NO I have never writen anything about this because I really do not give a rats ass. Like I ask so many times, How are you going to stop it? Do you think you can get the entire world to reduce fuel consumption?
Can you get the USA to stop burning coal when it is the largest source of fuel we use to make electricity? And if so what do we replace it with? Dams that destroy our rivers and wildlife? Or are you going to convince people to do without, yea right, like that will happen.
Are you going to convince China to stop developing? Or any other nation for that matter?
The entire world wants to come here and live like us.
So now that we realize we are the problem, and we cannot stop others from becoming like us, How do we stop the fossil fuel consumption?

 

[Super Turbo Deluxe Custom]

Something that occurs to me is, why is anyone asking us? We're a bunch of guitarists, and I highly doubt any of is a climate scientist.

I could make a laundry list of things I have opinions on and am not an expert on.  LOL.  I'm not an expert and still can be right, or wrong.  The experts don't even agree, and everything said so far, and expert somewhere made the point too.  I'm not an expert on politics, but I still vote.  Actually, the thing I (maybe we) comment on most is guitars.  Something I am nowhere near an expert on.  Technically, it is in the "Off Topic" section of the forum.  When we post pics of are cats or cars, no one cries foul, "This is a guitar forum."  It is about the planet I live on.  I can't have an opinion - in the "Off Topic" subject?

 

 

[Superlizard]

Something that occurs to me is, why is anyone asking us? We're a bunch of guitarists, and I highly doubt any of is a climate scientist. Asking us about climate science is like asking a bassoon player whether stainless steel frets are a good idea or not. Their opinion is simply not relevant, and nor is ours on this issue. We are not in possession of the facts. Most of us are in possession of the second-hand opinions of ignorant journalists who misunderstand (and sometimes outright distort) the opinions of legitimate scientists who are in possession of the facts.

If you're getting your information from Lord Monckton, or Bill Nye, or Fox News, or MSNBC, or New Scientist, or a media outlet of any kind, then you (and I) are not capable of rendering an opinion on the subject, any more than your cat can tell you how to use the Dorian scale. Don't be an armchair climatologist.

I think the person who would most benefit from this advice would be Al Gore.  :icon_biggrin:

 

[Superlizard]

...and why not an Oxygen Tax?  Surely the world's oxygen will run out sooner or later.

Make sure your Oxygen Footprint (TM) is small, people.

Those who fart shall be penalized, as well.  Pollution, you know.

 

[Super Turbo Deluxe Custom]

Speaking of which, about 15 years ago, wasn't methane from cow emissions the biggest greenhouse gas?  And when is Al Gore going to post pics of Tele build already?

 

[Jusatele]

Serious question
Now that we have settled it

Does anyone think Al Gore, one of the leaders of Green Politics, Is willing to live a green lifestyle? Or dies he want us to so he does not have too?

 

[Kadmium]

When we post pics of are cats or cars, no one cries foul, "This is a guitar forum."  It is about the planet I live on.  I can't have an opinion - in the "Off Topic" subject?

I don't mind that at all, it's just that the original poster was seeking a summary of a lot of technical information on an ongoing research topic. I don't mind us giving opinions on topics like, "Do you think my cat is adorable?" but I wonder if we're the right people for questions like, "Do you think my cat has fibromyalgea?"

Ordinarily I would agree with that summation, Kadmium, however, in many countries the issue of environmental control has become Election Issues and even proposals for taxes. As a voter you really have to know something about the issue or you will end up a lemming like most and just speak and quote what you read in the paper or hear on TV/Radio. It's better to know at least a little about the issues or you'll be damned to parroting some spokes person's blurb about the proposals.

That's a good point, and I'd like to be clear that I'm 100% in favour of people seeking information. I think the search for knowledge is one of the most amazing and respectable qualities of people, I just question the wisdom of looking for knowledge about climate science here. Maybe it would be better to ask at The Science Forum, or somewhere like that? This site is possibly a good indicator of what guitarists think in regards to climate change, but should NOT be used as a real source of information on the topic.

The experts don't even agree

This is a common misconception, which I suspect is caused by the media's willingness to be neutral. Because most media organisations give equal time to the 95% of climate scientists who say that the earth is warming and it's because of people, as they do to the 5% out outliers who say it's warming because of a giant magical cauldron fuelled by unicorns (for example). There is a very strong consensus on anthropocentric climate change, and it's not the hotly contested or debated topic that it may appear to be in the American media. The fantastic Dara O'Briain says it better than I do.
[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LbY7GODI5Dw[/youtube]

Does anyone think Al Gore, one of the leaders of Green Politics, Is willing to live a green lifestyle? Or dies he want us to so he does not have too?

I'd suggest that Al Gore is doing more than most of us who, I'd wager, would be totally happy to use green sources of energy as long as it doesn't cost them any convenience or money. According to the Snopes.com article on the topic, he's paying a $400 premium every month to get his electricity from green sources (solar, etc). To compare, I had the opportunity to offset my carbon emissions for $15 the last time I flew to see my Granddad, but I didn't.

 

[Jusatele]

400 dollars is cheap, considering the house he bought this year is Huge. He screams and yells to make money, and ignores what he preaches, How in the world do you get them to just deliver green electricity off a grid?
Al Gore, pulling the wool over your eyes for years now. If he was truly green conscious why does he not buy a small house and do all the stuff ED does on his TV show, instead of buying a mansion and claiming an extra 400 a month makes it alright. To him 400 dollars is pocket money.

Los Angeles Times:

    Former Vice President Al Gore and his wife, Tipper, have added a Montecito-area property to their real estate holdings, reports the Montecito Journal.

    The couple spent $8,875,000 on an ocean-view villa on 1.5 acres with a swimming pool, spa and fountains, a real estate source familiar with the deal confirms. The Italian-style house has six fireplaces, five bedrooms and nine bathrooms

 

[Kadmium]

How in the world do you get them to just deliver green electricity off a grid?

Gore's home is in Nashville, Tennessee. A Google search suggests (though please correct me if I'm wrong) that electricity in Nashville is supplied by the Nashville Electric Service. NES (and many other energy providers) offer a program called the Green Switch, which allows you to pay extra to offset your energy consumption with renewable sources.

Al Gore, pulling the wool over your eyes for years now. If he was truly green conscious why does he not buy a small house and do all the stuff ED does on his TV show, instead of buying a mansion and claiming an extra 400 a month makes it alright. To him 400 dollars is pocket money.

Los Angeles Times:

    Former Vice President Al Gore and his wife, Tipper, have added a Montecito-area property to their real estate holdings, reports the Montecito Journal.

    The couple spent $8,875,000 on an ocean-view villa on 1.5 acres with a swimming pool, spa and fountains, a real estate source familiar with the deal confirms. The Italian-style house has six fireplaces, five bedrooms and nine bathrooms

The place is LEED certified, which is certainly more than you can say for my house. There are a lot of reasons to dislike Al Gore. His smugness alone makes me want to punch his fat head with every word that comes out of his irritating mouth, but it's hard to fault him on his environmental record.

 

[Jusatele]

Al gore owns multiple properties, and the one in Medicinto county does not have a green switch
once again, let the wool be pulled, he is just making himself more rich making you do what he will not.

I am so green it hurts, tankless water heaters, solar, no yard just desert landscape, energy efficient appliances and on and on, I work in a industry that goes into businesses and retrofits them for energy reductions that most guys only wish they can receive. I do not buy 8.8 million dollar mansions that use more water in a day that I do in a month, or go about saying I pay extra so I can do.

The very fact that Al Gore toots his own horn telling you how much extra he pays so that he does not have to conserve is telling you that if you are rich enough you do not have to comply.