A lot of discussion always about what WE can do to save the planet.
WE represent what percent of the population that contributes to the problem?

There have been some few posts regarding other countries that are worse than the USA....collectively they overwhelm the USA population.

What ever we can do is all well and good. However those who are doing the preaching here at home need to turn their amplifiers external to the non USA contributors.......that is if they are really...REALLY... serious about making a difference.
It must be obvious the USA is merely a part of the issue.
And it must also be obvious that the USA will not/can not compensate for the other countries.

The strategy of continuously beating the drum here at home just isn't going to make it happen.

If we take China for example, in my opinion, they need help rather than judgement. Someone mentioned number of people relate to amount of pollution. China tried the one child policy, but because of misogyny etc most people had boy children. Then they found there is gender imbalance, not enough girls for wives and families. China needs to feed their people, their manufacturing industry is developing well, but with lots of pollution. The West could offer help with how to have cleaner and cheaper production methods. Educational exchange has already started that. I believe there is hope.

Oh yes.....let's consult and pay Al Gore for the only correct answer to this question......as he hops around the world on his private jet.

I am not offering an opinion. I am offering to link you to evidence. Archeology is not climate science nor even earth science. Plate tectonics is a very interesting field of geology, but not climate science. Read the links I provided, use google to search for any evidence from any scientific source to support your statement that volcanoes produce more greenhouse gases than humans each year and report back.
I did not insult you. I called out a lie which you repeated. And I presented contemporary sources including the US government disproving your claim. You returned with the names of people none of whom have any expertise in climate science and in fact are geologists and archeologists. Again, find me a study supporting your "fact" None of these should be a paper showing that one eruption X years ago cause a temporary change in the weather. Yes that happens, but ongoing discharge from volcanoes is not a significant factor in the continuing rise of CO2 and the continuing rise in mean global temperature. Human activity is responsible for this, not volcanoes, not sunspots. And there are many many proposals as to what can be done to slow or hopefully reverse this trend. But until everyone is on board that this is real and it is humans, things will get worse.

For those who argue it is just cycles, no. Cycles are very slow over thousands of years. NASA has reported on this in a clear concise way. This change is rapid and not due to natural slow cycles. And for those who say, so what it is only 2 degrees centigrade. That is 4 degrees Fahrenheit. In a living system that is huge. If your temperature goes up 4 degrees something is very wrong. And 4 degrees from a base of 99 is a much smaller disruption than 4 degrees from a base of 57.

Is there a way of making the avatar a bit bigger? I can’t do much on my iPad. The graph can’t be read.

I understand the concern about the rate of change. There are so many values that are involved with climate change. Even if the facts are clear, there are people who hold different values.

A person's values doesn't change the facts. We all have a human tendency to allow our biases to influence how we interpret those facts. The difference between science and faith is that science is fact based, can be tested, and changes with new evidence. Religion is none of those things. Including my own faith.

I agree. What I was referring to was that the same fact may be welcomed by one person and opposed by another. There seems to be an assumption by some people that everyone is opposed to climate change and it’s consequences. In my experience, that is not always true.

I wasn’t thinking about religion, but that would bring in a new dimension.

Excellent!

For those of you claiming solar activity is causing global climate change. From NASA a graph showing solar activity for the last 140 years and global temperature [air temperature not water] averaged to 11 year trend. As you will see there is NO correlation. In fact since 1960 there has been a lessening of solar activity while temperatures have risen

Click on thumbnail to enlarge, or click on link to go to source.

The reason why some people may be opposed to helping with climate change can be the costs associated with it. I am in a position where I can afford it, but I know many people who can’t.

Anyways, I can see the good will and certainly appreciate it.

Traditionally in most Asian cultures the eldest male child inherits the property of the parents and also has the obligation of taking care of the parents until they die. I guess if you want to call that misogyny go for it.
The Chinese government doesn't need anyone to help them to clean up their environment, that information is readily available. The government doesn't care about pollution or their people, they only care about the revenue the government receives from industry. The leaders of china aren't backwoods aborigines that need the guidance of "enlightened" American environmentalists, for the most part they are well educated people.
Back to the one child rule in China. I worked with a Chinese intern who was the second child in her family. I asked how that was possible due to the one child rule and she stated that there were exceptions for certain people. Translated meaning is that in China and like here and everywhere else rich and powerful people do as they like.

If the eldest culturally has to be a boy then yes, it is misogyny. My understanding was you could have more than one child, it would not be taken away from you, but you would be penalized strongly for it.
China has “twin” cities; where a city from China is paired with a city from the West where technical and other academics are exchanged for the benefit of both.

Not in their historical and in many cases centuries of cultural tradition.

Because it was done in the past, does not make it acceptable not then nor now. We also used to have human sacrifices.

How did the eldest become a male? Through female infanticide. I won’t go into the details of how these young children were killed. But, if that was your grand daughter, under what conditions would it be acceptable?

If a woman becomes pregnant with a second child and the government finds out she is forced to have an abortion. The penalties are severe enough that most couples don't have that second child.

This is getting off track. I suggested one of the biggest impacts that humans could make against the war on climate change is zero population growth. Zero population growth can be achieved if each couple limit offspring to two children. I also want to recognize and support the idea that none of these efforts will amount to anything unless it is a worldwide initiative.

I agree with the soldier that China doesn't need "enlightened environmentalists" to educate them.

I think misogyny is not an accurate description as to why people would choose males if they could have one child. It is for the very reason that Number 10 G.I. said.

I have my opinions, you have yours. I really like the G.I. Joe's way of thinking.

A disparaging remark was made about my quote: "education" Not appreciated. Also, My comment on Volcanoes said pollutants, not greenhouse gases. Spell check did me a disfavor, Dr. Holman was a Paleontologist. Both Paleontology and Archaeology can teach us about the past climate of the planet. How else do you think we've learned about the FACT that the Sahara was a verdant grassland 4,000 years ago and not a desert? Or that Greenland was just that 1,000 years ago? Or perhaps, as far as science has been able to determine, the warmest period in the recent past was approximately 50 million years ago with average temps almost 8 degrees F higher than today. This pre dates humans. Perhaps you should review an article from 49 NASA scientists calling out NASA for it's rush to judgement on human caused climate change. You may be unaware that the norm for this planet over the eons has been to be ice free. No ice caps, no glaciers. CO2 is only one part of this whole debate. As far as cycles, the Maunder Minimum solar cycle is a well known factor in climate on this planet and it does not happen over thousands of years. Finally, recall that I never said climate change was not real. On that we can agree if nothing else.

That would interfere with the whole freedom of religion thing, where in some religions, birth control of any kind is taboo. If you're married, it's because you're a man and woman who plan on reproducing. You do so as long as both parties remain fertile.

I can't imagine living like that, but apparently there are entire sects in the USA built around the concept.

I dunno. I do know this

Most Catholics disagree with the prohibition of birth control; in fact, surveys find that approximately 90 percent of sexually active Catholic women of childbearing age use a birth control method forbidden by the church.


I also don't think many kill fatted calves and almost everyone eats bacon.

We will find out eventually....

or not.

Getting back to the original question: am I worried about climate change? Check back with me in about 300 years.

...

"We decided to move to The Villages, because of its height above sea level. "

Our former President just bought a place on the beach up north. Apparently, he's not too worried about rising sea levels?

If there is no willingness by governments, only lip service to tackle the problem of pollution, all the drum banging and protest marches will acomplish nothing.
The world is ruled by major industries, oil, automotive, chemical, arms manufacturers etc.
Those companies are ruled by the share/stock holders, which are the major banks and financial houses.
Cleaning enviromental pollution will cost an almost immeasurable amount of money to those companies, which will decimate returns and profit.
Good luck with that then!!!

The earth has been warming from the end of the iceage.
And that is a “fact”

Man can slow the warming of the earth with responsible energy policies for the sake of our grandchildren, OR, we can ignore the issue so we can witness the destruction during our lifetime.

I challenge you on that. We can't get enough of "man" to agree to do all that is necessary to slow the process.

At this time.

Are you willing to give up your engines?

I drive an electric golf cart because, yes I will give up my engine rather than throw up my hands in hopeless defeat without trying. I guess I have more faith in my fellow man than you do.
:pray:

Do you also drive an electric automobile? Do you realize that the electricity for your golf cart is generated with fossil fuels and the manufacturing and recycling of your old-technology lead-acid batteries also consume fossil fuel generated energy? Just to put things in perspective, about 400 millions gallons of gasoline are consumed daily in just the US alone.

What energy policies are you referring to?

Sir, my auto of choice is the PRIUS. We have solar panels on the roof of our house. I don’t know if I am right, but I know I am trying to help. :)

Attachment 81301Very complicated subject. Sometimes when you think your sacrificing for the better good you are actually doing more harm. As in an earlier post I wrote it is important to realize how much energy is consumed in producing a product. The greater the population the more demand to produce products

That is not the point. Most people do believe in global warming. Most people would like to help stop it. Most people care very much that they do not destroy the environment and the planet...….

However, industrialization has halved poverty and hunger since 1990. (Please Google) For us to stop or slow down the amounts of bad stuff we as human beings produce as we live our lives and remain alive, we would need the combined efforts of more than a third of the world. That will NOT happen.

I am realistic.

The difference between some of us and others of us is that we know that there are some problems that do not have a valid solution. At this time.

Throwing money at them may make us feel better.

I'll save my money throwing toward a realistic answer to this huge problem.

What you may be helping is your own financial situation. Those technologies, hybrid car and PV panels, may save you money if you keep them long enough.

What I have found interesting in this thread, and in the broader discussion of climate change is the new position taken by the faction that used to be called deniers. Five to ten years ago it was the claim that there was no global warming. There were vehement diatribes that the temperature data being produced by the US and the UN and multiple other sources were made up, what is now called "fake news" and that there in fact was no warming at all.

There was a huge attempt to falsely claim that some emails proved it was all cooked up data. This was labelled "Climategate" by the deniers. Click on the link to see what leading US legislators jumped on this as proving that global warming was a "hoax".

Now it seems everyone sees that the temperature data is real, both for the atmosphere and the oceans. And so the argument shifted to, yes it is getting warmer but it has nothing to do with human activity. It was all natural cycles and the ever changing climate alterations, and when was the last ice age. Some few here are still denying humanity's role or minimizing it.

But most of the posters are admitting that the climate is being impacted in a significant way by man. Some say, well we shouldn't do anything until China does something big, and India does something big. But at least therein is an acceptance that it is human action using fossil fuels that is causing this change. So that's progress.

I'd only add that if you believe in leadership and stewardship by our country in the world, that is a specious argument. China's economy is booming but very young and that nation is still climbing out of third world status. And they in fact have made major efforts to improve their environmental impacts. Sadly those changes are coming too slowly. Our nation has gone backwards in the last 3 years having abandoned goals and abrogated international agreements.

As to the initial question, and I worried about climate change? Not for myself or my children or grandchildren. We are secure here and will not be significantly impacted. But my view is broader than that. I am concerned for the devastation that a foot of ocean rise will cause to arable land in the third world. I am concerned about the loss of coral reefs and alterations in the phytoplankton which may destroy the fish life in our oceans causing starvation, but not here. Some experts have predicted that resulting famines will spark major international and regional wars. And I understand that what we do now will effect the world for decades. And what we fail to do will also have consequences.

So I am heartened that at least most of us are finally on board that warming is real and needs to be addressed. Overton's window has shifted.

I agree with the ideas, opinion, and sentiment you present in this post, 100% Just a little factual disagreement. The underlined section. Human action with regards to fossil fuels isn't "causing" the change. It is one major contributing factor to the speed of the change. Industry as a whole has a huge impact on climate change. It would be insane to expect our species to halt industry.

But it is not insane, and in fact, it is probably the ONLY sane consideration, to try and change our approach to industry.

Yes producing windmills and solar panels and electric or hybrid cars uses up a lot of fossil fuels and produces pollution.

But once these products have been made, they cease to continue using those fossil fuels, and they cease to produce pollution. Electricity -can- be generated without fossil fuels. And you can use that non-fossil fuel to charge batteries. I feel this is key to a new industrial revolution, which I also feel must occur if we want our planet to support our species in the next thousand years.

No, I won't be here to see it. Neither will your kids, or their kids, or their kids. But I personally don't want to spend the rest of my life with the attitude that "who cares, I won't have to deal with it, not my problem." That's not how I was raised.

If I can do even just one LITTLE thing to change how I approach waste, pollution, and the climate, then I'll do it. I don't feel I need to live in a cave off the grid and only eat what I can catch, in order to take personal responsibility for my part of this worldwide project. I can push for recycling legislation. I can join a club that re-uses, re-purposes things that might otherwise be thrown in a trash heap somewhere. I can get a couple of small rain barrels and use those to water my inside plants instead of tap water. I can buy my spring water by the gallon and just pour what I need into a re-useable smaller bottle to carry around with me. Or better yet, buy a filter for the faucet.

I can drive less, walk more. I can use my gas golf cart instead of the gas-powered car for short drives, since I use less with the cart.

I can buy more natural fiber clothing and fewer synthetics.

I can plant oxygen-producing plants. I can buy only trigger-spray household products instead of aerosols. Or I could even make my own, it's not especially difficult.

Big things, little things. If you can't afford or don't like the looks of solar panels, that's okay. Recycle more, that can be your part.

If EVERYONE did SOMETHING to help, we would see a shift in perception and approach to the situation. It would inspire more preservation, and less waste. The little thing you do, can inspire your neighbor to do more, which would inspire his neighbor to do more, and soon you have the entire neighborhood producing significantly less waste and contributing more to a healthy environment.

And then the next neighborhood notices how awesome it is, and they start taking steps. and so on and so forth.

It's only when people say "screw this, I won't be alive to see a change so why should I even try?" that everything comes to a stop and any attempt becomes futile.

Many of those who believe that climate change is an extreme, immediate threat to the world and is almost entirely due to human activity group all those who don't agree with those views into the category "deniers". That may the single biggest thing I disagree with when I hear those folks espouse their beliefs.

Many people don't deny that the climate is changing. They also don't deny that human activity contributes to climate change. The points of disagreement relate to several things...the magnitude of mankind's contribution, the fact that climate has always changed and always will with or without mankind's contribution, the uncertainty of proposed "solutions" and their unintended consequences, and the feeling that if you don't absolutely agree with the extreme views of the climate change extremists, you are a "denier".

There are many folks who know that the climate is changing and know that mankind makes a contribution to that change. These same folks are determined to treat the environment with care and respect. That does not mean these folks believe humankind is single-handedly destroying the earth by living a typical 21st century life.

You are wrong on a number of issues. I am not aware of a single person who does not think the climate has/is/and will continue to change. You only need to look as far back as the most recent ice age to know this. The only issue is how much of the recent changes are anthropogenic and how much will the climate change in the future. These are both unknown and the subject of continued research. Predictions in the past have not been accurate. The climate models, upon which the dire forecasts are based, have been shown to be oversensitive to CO2 and have troubles simulating important circulations such as the ENSO. And for the record, is you actually look at the details of the Paris Accords you would realize that it is nothing more than a list of things that various countries may do, including increasing their CO2 emissions for the next couple of decades.

Wonderfully said. I hope everyone will read your post. I understand that some will get confused because it is a complicated issue. Also, we actually have those that don’t care what happens to future generations. Third world nations cause a lot of the problem because they are trying to survive. Americans cause a lot of the problem because of selfish greed. Many drive gas hog cars and just don’t care. Many of us consume enormous amounts of food just because it’s there. Many of us have homes far bigger than we need and have the air conditioning running day and night, just because we feel privileged. Point is, it seems to be easier to overuse in all aspects of our life rather than at least TRY TO HELP.

I found this statement in your post, so very, very true!

Since two of my posts have been removed from this thread I will try to carefully avoid having that happen again.

The point of both of the removed post and this one is this. Some people believe that only they have the right answers. And doing things the way they are doing things will contribute to save the planet. There are many ways to save the planet and cut down on waste.

Actually, using rags instead of paper towels, and rewearing clothes that are not the latest style and saving your money and not buying things you don't need and taking good care of what you own are all ways of saving money, and energy and supplies. Like Polar Bear, many of us dislike being looked on by others who feel superior.

I will make the point again. Even doing all virtuous things is not going to reverse climate change and global warming. That is the argument. At this time we can frown at plastic straws, while we continue to pick up the paper in it's plastic slip. We can smugly drive our electric carts and continue to hire someone to cut our grass with gas engines. We can blame others and pontificate about doing our little bit. We can do our little bits, all of us, should do our little bits, all of us and it won't change anything about global warming. Mankind is not going to shut off it's gas engines. We may very well perish, or we may likely find another planet to live on in the future, to save, or ruin.