[Golfingnut]

Originally Posted by Arctic Fox

I'm sure they will.

The problem is that climate change is picking up momentum. It will be far easier and cheaper to slow or reverse it if we start now rather than waiting another ten years.

Even if we start today, the weather will continue becoming more extreme, and sea levels will continue rising, until the middle of the century.

We've left future generations enough of our problems to clear up (including a national debt currently over $17,000,000,000,000) without neglecting our duty on this one too.

I agree 100%; however, with a portion of our population that are more concerned with their portfolio than the next generation having a healthy planet refuse to see the obvious and research the facts.

[Bucco]

Last evening EWEISSENBACH posted a great link to STANFORD SOLAR CENTER, which because of the conversation that was taking place at the time, the first thing I did was check on WHO, WHAT, WHY, etc emphazing the financial support and they get their support from NASA and government grants. One of my concerns was the politicizing of this subject and there certainly does not appear to be any chance of that.

The site has a number of great and certainly top flight links which will direct you to many worthwhile studies.

I thank EWEISSENBACH for such a link and recommend anyone who truely cares to investigate it.

As of now, for me, climate change does exist....HAS existed forever basically and will continue to exist. Our growth, not the USA..the world...is about the largest contributor at present. The consequences, many of which we have already felt and dealt with, can be quantified for the future...again, we have been dealing with these changes for a time, but with technological advance, we can better determine the future. They could be serious, and probably can be dealt with by the world population now.

You notice words like COULD, PROBABLY are words that you find quite a bit in many of the studies I looked at...they are not me trying to be coy. The seriousness, and timing of the consequences are not a finite thing, but are real.

I still want to continue reading especially the possible timing and consequences and what can be done to slow, alter or whatever word may apply.

At this point, this issue moves up in MY priorities but not one that LEADS my list. We have a number of issues that will destroy us well before climate change that we need to address. That does not mean to ignore, but move forward recognizing our financial restraints. I do not know of UN moves in this regard, but perhaps showing some leadership there may help.

I notice the conversation here has taken a turn, and since it does apply somewhat to what I am posting now......one thing that I think will destroy us quicker than climate change is our societal changes which someone alluded to in an earlier post. NOT, in my opinion, in any way related to rich versus poor, but the breakdown of our entire moral compass. The rich versus poor by the way is not new...I am presently reading "THE BULLY PULPIT" which is the actual history of T. Roosevelt and WH Taft, and the same exact conversation about rich versus poor taking place now but set in 1900 era..great book to get serious depth, background, and context for what is happening today.

[Golfingnut]

Well, one more on the side of reason. Welcome.

[Villages PL]

It's a metaphor for the tendency to reject new evidence or knowledge as it contradicts established norms.

Dr. Semmelweis was a hungarian doctor who discovered the importance of hand washing in obstetrical clinics in 1847. He tried to spread the word to other doctors but was largely ridiculed and harassed by the medical community. Finally, after he faught this battle for many years, they thought he was going crazy and committed him to an asylum. He died 14 days later; it was 1865. 18 years had passed with little to show for his effort to bring about change.

Wouldn't you think the medical community would try washing their hands to see if it improved the survival rates in their clinics? In his clinic, he reduced fatalities, from puerperal fevor, from 10% down to 1-2%.

He was right but he was only one doctor against many. The other doctors could have discredited him by saying: "99.9% of the scientific community does not believe that hand washing is of any importance."

So it seems that it doesn't always matter how many scientists you have on one side or the other.

[BS Beef]

I had to chime back in for a couple of reasons. 1st, Oldcoach Ed posted an excellent article already mentioned few times. But I mostly just wanted to say how heartening it has been to see the discourse so respectful with such a contentious topic. Well done TOTV'ers

[Polar Bear]

The only thing that is certain about the earth's climate is that it has always been changing. It's never been constant and almost certainly never will. I believe man has some impact on the earth and its environment, but not one that changes the overall direction of the earth's cycles of change.

As others have said, it's important that we always take steps to minimize any negative impacts of societal development on the environment. But I also agree with others that to think man can totally control earth's environment and eliminate cycles of heating and cooling is unrealistic to put it mildly.

[LndLocked]

Survey finds 97% climate science papers agree warming is man-made | Dana Nuccitelli | Environment | theguardian.com

[DougB]

According to a news story, if global warming continues, in 20 years the only chance we’ll have to see a polar bear is in a zoo. So in other words, nothing is going to change.

[buzzy]

If the information is available to the public, it's intended to mislead them.

[Polar Bear]

http://icecap.us/images/uploads/Nint...ink1.28.12.pdf

http://www.petitionproject.org/

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestay...arming-crisis/

[gamby]

Just in today NBC news;


Scientists More Certain Than Ever on Climate Change, Report Says


Clear evidence and uncertainty

Concentrations of carbon dioxide, the document notes, increased by 40 percent between 1880 and 2012 and are now higher than at any time in at least 800,000 years. As a result, global temperatures are 1.4 degrees Fahrenheit warmer than in 1900, Arctic sea ice is shrinking, sea levels are 8 inches higher, ocean acidity is on the rise, and the geographical ranges of many plants and animals are shifting.

"The evidence is clear," reads the report.

[CMANN]

Originally Posted by Golfingnut

Junk science REALLY.
97% of the scientific community KNOW global warming is happening and WHY.
the consensus project

consensus is not science

[CMANN]

Originally Posted by LndLocked

Survey finds 97% climate science papers agree warming is man-made | Dana Nuccitelli | Environment | theguardian.com

I think that it is very doubtful that anyone who writes a paper denying climate change will be able to get any funding.

[Monkei]

Man never walked on the moon, he did however walk on a fake moon in a production set somewhere.

[graciegirl]

Bill? We are nearly out of popcorn here and you haven't supplied us in AGES. Don't you love us anymore????