Religion, Politics and World Events They make great dinner conversation, don't you think? plus Political Film

The One and Only Global Warming Thread

Old 11-03-06, 10:51 AM
  #276  
DVD Talk God
 
kvrdave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Pacific NW
Posts: 86,201
Originally Posted by OldDude
Tidal forces are THE force in the moon's orbit getting larger (moving further away from earth.) The math is exceedingly complex and I can'r claim I could duplicate or follow it all, but the derivations I have seen appear to check out.

The effect of tidal friction slightly changes the force vector between earth and moon so it does not pass through center of earth. This difference has the effect of slowing the earth's rotation, and increasing the diameter of the moon's orbit. The energy of earth's angular momentum is slowly "pumped" into the moon's orbit. Otherwise it's orbit would stay put.
I realize this. Basically he just took the average rate of decay and worked it backwards. Probably because laypeople won't know the difference. But that wasn't the point. It was just the type of thing that got me thinking about particulate release and whether or not it would have a cooling effect that would counter balance of the warming done by the release of greenhouse gases.
kvrdave is offline  
Old 11-03-06, 11:27 AM
  #277  
DVD Talk Hero
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Madison, WI ("77 square miles surrounded by reality")
Posts: 29,984
Originally Posted by kvrdave
I realize this. Basically he just took the average rate of decay and worked it backwards. Probably because laypeople won't know the difference. But that wasn't the point. It was just the type of thing that got me thinking about particulate release and whether or not it would have a cooling effect that would counter balance of the warming done by the release of greenhouse gases.
AFAIK the particulates are taken into account. I think they're quite trivial, not in and of themselves enough to counterbalance the CO2. But would that the alarmists gave as fair a reading to the CO2 as they do to the particulates.
movielib is online now  
Old 11-06-06, 06:53 AM
  #278  
DVD Talk Hero
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Madison, WI ("77 square miles surrounded by reality")
Posts: 29,984
The hits just keep on coming for the Stern report. So many hits, so little cyberspace, I'll just reference them this time:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...it/nwarm05.xml

http://www.thebusinessonline.com/Doc...B-2F666535DFCD

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15563663/site/newsweek/

http://washingtontimes.com/commentar...3214-4305r.htm

http://www.thebusinessonline.com/Doc...1-687746BE6F0A

The good news is that a few of these were published in more or less mainstream media outlets. But they are isolated and almost never picked up and spread around the world like all the good scare stories (such as the Stern Report itself).

Indeed, the Stern report is an example of bad science generating even worse economics. It would be tragic to follow Stern's recommendations because they would slow down the world's economic growth and technological advancement and undermine the very wealth we need to fight any real problems that could possibly arise from climate change (and such problems will almost certainly be far less than any of the alarmists' predictions), not to mention all the other ills of the world.
movielib is online now  
Old 11-06-06, 09:10 AM
  #279  
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Sunny Cornwall in the UK
Posts: 64
Just thought I would contribute two reports saying the ice caps are not melting.
The first from "The British Antarctic Survey" by Dr David Vaughan and the second from the Nansen Environmental and Remote Sensing Center in Norway by Professor Ola Johannessen

Antarctic (90% of the worlds ice)
Scientists divide the Antarctic into three zones: the east and west Antarctic ice sheets; and the Peninsula, the tongue of land which points up towards the southern tip of South America.

1) Temperatures in the Peninsula appear to be increasing at around twice the global average - about 2C over the last 50 years. Those figures are based on measurements made by instruments at scientific stations. The ice dumped into the ocean as the glaciers retreat should not make much difference to global sea levels - perhaps a few cm.

2) "About one-third of the West Antarctic ice sheet is thinning," says Dr Vaughan, "on average by about 10cm per year, but in the worst places by 3-4m per year." "It may be that the ocean is warming and that's causing the ice to melt, but there may be other reasons as well; for example, there's lots of volcanism in that area and so that could change how much heat is delivered to the underside of the ice sheet."

3) And what of the big monster, the much larger east Antarctic sheet? A recent study using altimeter data suggested it is getting thicker, by about 1.8cm/yr; another, using the gravity satellite mission Grace indicates its mass remains stable. But could rising temperatures in time drain the ice away? "It is not going to happen on any realistic human timescale," says David Vaughan (principal investigator at the British Antarctic Survey in Cambridge, UK). "It's so cold that you could raise temperatures by 5-10C without having much of an impact; it's on rock above sea level, so warming in the ocean can't affect it." Largely insulated from global trends and so big as to generate its own climatic systems, most of Antarctica appears to be immune to the big melt for now, though answers to what is happening in the west are eagerly awaited.

Making temperature measurements for the continent as a whole is difficult; it is a vast place - more than 2,000km across - there are few research stations, and temperatures vary naturally by 2-3C from year to year. A European satellite named Cryosat was designed to provide definitive answers to some of these questions and launch date TBA.
http://www.antarctica.ac.uk/Key_Topi...heet_SeaLevel/

Arctic (10% of the worlds ice)
Greenland's ice cap has thickened slightly in recent years despite concerns that it is thawing out due to global warming, says an international team of scientists. A team led by Professor Ola Johannessen , at the Nansen Environmental and Remote Sensing Center in Norway, report their findings online ahead of print publication in the journal Science. The 3,000-metre thick Greenland icecap is a key concern in debates about climate change because a total melt would raise world sea levels by about 7 metres. And a runaway thaw might slow the Gulf Stream that keeps the North Atlantic region warm. Glaciers at sea level have been retreating fast because of a warming climate, making many other scientists believe the entire icecap is thinning. But satellite measurements showed that more snowfall is falling and thickening the icecap, especially at high altitudes, say Johannessen and team. "The overall ice thickness changes are ... approximately plus 5 centimetres a year or 54 centimetres over 11 years."
http://www.abc.net.au/science/news/stories/s1485573.htm

Last edited by sarah99; 11-06-06 at 09:13 AM.
sarah99 is offline  
Old 11-06-06, 01:25 PM
  #280  
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Hoboken, NJ
Posts: 3,068
So the start of the UN Climate Change Summit in Kenya is giving the media plenty of opportunities to print outlandish claims.

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cg...i052636S03.DTL

Apparently the 1 degree rise over the past century brings us to the highest temperature in over 12000 years. Nevermind how they actually managed to calculate that one.
Birrman54 is offline  
Old 11-06-06, 03:32 PM
  #281  
DVD Talk Hero
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Madison, WI ("77 square miles surrounded by reality")
Posts: 29,984
Originally Posted by Birrman54
So the start of the UN Climate Change Summit in Kenya is giving the media plenty of opportunities to print outlandish claims.

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cg...i052636S03.DTL

Apparently the 1 degree rise over the past century brings us to the highest temperature in over 12000 years. Nevermind how they actually managed to calculate that one.
Debunked earlier in the thread. Of course that will not stop the alarmists from repeating it from now until doomsday - which will come long, long after they predict.

Last edited by movielib; 11-06-06 at 05:33 PM.
movielib is online now  
Old 11-13-06, 10:04 PM
  #282  
DVD Talk Hero
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Madison, WI ("77 square miles surrounded by reality")
Posts: 29,984
I don't know exactly what to say about this except I laughed:

http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinio...e#contentSwap1

Global warming and obesity: the links revealed



By Jim Schembri
November 13, 2006

The day will soon come when we shall be roused from our beds, not by the ringing of the alarm clock, but by the rising sea levels slapping us on our slumbering faces. That is how serious global warming is. What makes it worse is that we shall all be so morbidly obese by then we won't be able to rise from our beds to save ourselves.

There is absolutely, positively no question whatsoever that we are in the midst of a climate change crisis. It is also categorically and undeniably beyond any dispute that it is man-made. Maybe.

It is also beyond any sensible argument that the western world is suffering from an obesity epidemic owing to all the junk food people consume. Listen closely the next time somebody takes their seat. Hear that slightly pleasant squelching sound? That's because the average western bottom is now so full of saturated fat and trans-fatty acid that people audibly slosh when they walk.

Up until now the obesity crisis and the global warming crisis have been regarded as two separate crises. However, irrefutable scientific evidence has recently emerged showing that the two crises are, in fact, inextricably linked. The devastating fallout from this shattering revelation is clear and unavoidable - we shall all have to get our tongues around the correct pronunciation of the word "crises".

The cycle begins with the excessive ingestion of fast foods such as pies, hamburgers, kebabs, chips, potato cakes, maybe a piece of fl ake, some dim sims and, sure, a couple of schnitzels and throw in a spring roll, why not? And salt on that please.

The person consumes the food and gets bigger. This has several major deleterious consequences for the environment, not the least of which will now be having to also learn how to pronounce "deleterious" properly as the "crises" worsen. Their bloated bodies accelerate the emission of gases during digestion. This, in turn, contributes to the greenhouse effect. And because it is too much effort to walk, their increased use of cars and buses and taxies to get from one fast food franchise to the next adds to the release of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. The chief repercussion of the greenhouse effect is bad weather, which means more hurricanes, which means more rain, which means more grass, which is what cows like to eat.

This results in the well-documented growth of both the size and population of cows, which leads to lower beef prices, which allows the manufacturers of fast food to buy more cattle to make more hamburgers, which naturally brings the price down, which allows people to buy more hamburgers and thus eat more hamburgers, and thus produce more greenhouses gases, and so on and so forth.

The predictable response to all this, of course, has been "how can these crises be reversed? What measures can we take to cut back our carbon emissions, minimise our reliance on greenhouse gas-producing energy sources and also cut down on those happy-meal deals and latenight burger binges?"

With the growing awareness of global warming has come a growing obsession for each and every one of us to reduce our "environmental footprint" by taking all possible measures to minimise our deleterious effect on the fragile atmosphere on which we all rely on to survive. However, an emerging body of scientific opinion holds that we should, instead, think about going the other way. That is, rather than trying to combat the effects of global warming, why not put the pedal to the metal, push this baby as far as it can go and just see where it takes us?

There has, of course, been strident opposition to this proposal from the usual gaggle of nay-sayers who always get more media exposure than they deserve. "What of the eco-system?," they cry. "What of future generations? What of the survival of our planet?" These questions avoid the central issue. The question they should be asking themselves is: "where is our sense of adventure?" The "go for broke" approach to climate change had already received major support, chiefly from senior government officials and large corporations, who stand to save on a lot of paperwork.

But we all stand to gain. Rising sea levels mean those with houses in the inner suburbs would suddenly find themselves the owners of lucrative beachfront property, while the extinction of all those penguins in the south pole would mean we'd never have to sit through another documentary about them, which could only be considered a good thing.
movielib is online now  
Old 11-14-06, 10:40 PM
  #283  
bhk
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Right of Atilla The Hun
Posts: 19,749
I don't know exactly what to say about this except I laughed
The answer, obviously, is to start killing fat people. That is if we want to save the world.

http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwash...//16012061.htm
Historian says peak oil production is still a quarter-century away
By Kevin G. Hall
McClatchy Newspapers

Oil Study at www.cera.com
Rand's Infrastructure, Safety and Environment

WASHINGTON - Far from being a nearly exhausted resource, the world's oil reserves are three times bigger than what some popular estimates state, and peak global oil production is still about a quarter-century away, according to a new study by Pulitzer Prize-winning oil historian Daniel Yergin.

The remaining oil resource base is about 3.74 trillion barrels, according to a report released Tuesday by Cambridge Energy Research Associates, which Yergin runs. That's more than three times the 1.2 trillion barrels that "peak-oil" theorists suggest.
CERA's report, titled "Why the Peak Oil Theory Falls Down," challenges an increasingly popular view that the world is about to run out of oil. On the contrary, CERA argues that the world is likely to begin running out of oil between 2030 and the middle of the century. Even so, CERA says, efforts are needed now to push that date back, such as new oil field discoveries, new technologies, energy conservation and alternative energy sources.

Peak-oil theorists warn that the world is on the cusp of a disastrous and rapid decline in oil production. A leading proponent of the theory is oil banker Matthew Simmons, who in the popular book "Twilight in the Desert" suggested that the world's top producer, Saudi Arabia, has entered an oil-production decline and will take the world down with it. Last month, Simmons told a forum that the world might have reached peak oil production last December.


The peak-oil theory has gained supporters since late 2004, when surging global demand for oil began tightening up available supplies and driving up world oil prices. The price hit $78.40 a barrel in July, but has fallen to less than $60 a barrel in recent months.
The CERA study debunks the so-called Hubbert Peak Oil Theory, first espoused in 1956 by geologist M. King Hubbert. Working at the time for Shell Oil Co., he predicted that world oil production would follow a bell-shaped curve in which production grows steadily until it peaks, followed by a rapid decline.

Hubbert was pretty accurate on the timing of U.S. peak oil production, coming within two years of 1970, the year experts now recognize as the peak of continental U.S. production.

But his theory failed to recognize that new technologies enabled reserves to grow over time. His theory preceded the exploitation of massive oil reserves in Alaska and the Gulf of Mexico.
That's why Yergin dismisses talk of peak oil.
"This is really the fifth time we've `run out of oil,'" Yergin said in a teleconference with journalists on Tuesday. He recalled past predictions dating back to 1880 of an end to oil or gasoline production.


Yergin's views carry weight because he won the Pulitzer for his 1991 book "The Prize," an exhaustive history of oil economics.

He and colleagues believe that the decline in oil availability will play out as an "undulating plateau," in which annual production produces a series of ups and downs, eventually peaks and then declines slowly.

"We see the undulating plateau existing one or two decades, rather than a sharp decline," said Peter Jackson, CERA's director of oil industry activity. He sees outright decline beginning no earlier than 2030 and perhaps after 2050.

Future oil supplies, said CERA, will be accessible by new technologies that permit drilling more than 7,000 feet below the ocean's surface or extracting oil from tar-like deposits in sandy soil found in western Canada.

"Ours is not a view of endless abundance of resources," said Jackson, cautioning that he doesn't want CERA's findings to "distract us from addressing real issues."
Another source of optimism for this energy-hungry world emerged from another report this week, this one a technical paper from the Los Angeles-based think tank Rand Corp. It ran 1,500 simulations of varied energy prices and technology costs to estimate future supplies of both renewable and nonrenewable fuels.

It concluded that up to one-quarter of the electricity and motor fuels consumed in the United States in 2025 could be produced from renewable sources, up from only 6 percent today. For that to happen, the price of fossil fuels must remain high and the costs of producing alternative energy must keep falling.

"The renewables case could displace about 2.5 million barrels a day of petroleum products in the United States in 2025, or 20 percent of total consumption," the Rand report said.
Together, the two reports give hope that energy will be plentiful for another generation or more.
"I've never seen so much activity in terms of energy technology all along the spectrum," Yergin said. "I think the system is responding."
Bad news for the watermelons(green on outside, red on inside). Fire up those drills.
bhk is offline  
Old 11-15-06, 11:56 AM
  #284  
bhk
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Right of Atilla The Hun
Posts: 19,749
http://www.usatoday.com/printedition...line15.art.htm
Making movies fills L.A. with pollution

Special effects explosions, idling vehicles, teams of workers building monumental sets and other aspects of the Hollywood movie business contribute to Los Angeles' poor air quality, a university study finds. The film and television industry and associated activities make a larger contribution to air pollution in the five-county Los Angeles region than almost all five other sectors researched, according to the study by the University of California at Los Angeles. The industry topped aerospace manufacturing, apparel, hotels and semiconductor manufacturing. Only petroleum manufacturing produced more emissions. The study does note environmentally responsible efforts within the industry. For example, production teams for The Matrix Reloaded and The Matrix Revolutions arranged for 97.5% of set materials to be recycled, including some 11,000 tons of concrete, steel and lumber. All the steel was recycled and 37 truckloads of lumber were reused in housing for low-income families in Mexico.
Here all along, I thought it was just the content that was causing the pollution.
bhk is offline  
Old 11-15-06, 12:07 PM
  #285  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Working for Gizmonic Institute
Posts: 10,430
37 truckloads of lumber were reused in housing for low-income families in Mexico.
I'm sure it was all hauled by hydrogen powered trucks, too.
crazyronin is offline  
Old 11-16-06, 04:54 PM
  #286  
bhk
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Right of Atilla The Hun
Posts: 19,749
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061116/.../saved_by_haze
Scientists say pollution may be helpful
By CHARLES J. HANLEY, AP Special Correspondent
Thu Nov 16, 2:29 PM ET

NAIROBI, Kenya - If the sun warms the Earth too dangerously, the time may come to draw the shade. The "shade" would be a layer of pollution deliberately spewed into the atmosphere to help cool the planet. This over-the-top idea comes from prominent scientists, among them a Nobel laureate. The reaction here at the U.N. conference on climate change is a mix of caution, curiosity and some resignation to such "massive and drastic" operations, as the chief U.N. climatologist describes them.

The Nobel Prize-winning scientist who first made the proposal is himself "not enthusiastic about it."

"It was meant to startle the policy makers," said Paul J. Crutzen, of Germany's Max Planck Institute for Chemistry. "If they don't take action much more strongly than they have in the past, then in the end we have to do experiments like this."

Serious people are taking Crutzen's idea seriously. This weekend, NASA's Ames Research Center in Moffett Field, Calif., hosts a closed-door, high-level workshop on the global haze proposal and other "geoengineering" ideas for fending off climate change.

In Nairobi, meanwhile, hundreds of delegates were wrapping up a two-week conference expected to only slowly advance efforts to rein in greenhouse gases blamed for much of the 1-degree rise in global temperatures in the past century.

The 1997 Kyoto Protocol requires modest emission cutbacks by industrial countries — but not the United States, the biggest emitter of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases, because it rejected the deal. Talks on what to do after Kyoto expires in 2012 are all but bogged down.

When he published his proposal in the journal Climatic Change in August, Crutzen cited a "grossly disappointing international political response" to warming.

The Dutch climatologist, awarded a 1995 Nobel in chemistry for his work uncovering the threat to Earth's atmospheric ozone layer, suggested that balloons bearing heavy guns be used to carry sulfates high aloft and fire them into the stratosphere.

While carbon dioxide keeps heat from escaping Earth, substances such as sulfur dioxide, a common air pollutant, reflect solar radiation, helping cool the planet.

Tom Wigley, a senior U.S. government climatologist, followed Crutzen's article with a paper of his own on Oct. 20 in the leading U.S. journal Science. Like Crutzen, Wigley cited the precedent of the huge volcanic eruption of Mount Pinatubo in the Philippines in 1991.

Pinatubo shot so much sulfurous debris into the stratosphere that it is believed it cooled the Earth by .9 degrees for about a year.

Wigley ran scenarios of stratospheric sulfate injection — on the scale of Pinatubo's estimated 10 million tons of sulfur — through supercomputer models of the climate, and reported that Crutzen's idea would, indeed, seem to work. Even half that amount per year would help, he wrote.

A massive dissemination of pollutants would be needed every year or two, as the sulfates precipitate from the atmosphere in acid rain.

Wigley said a temporary shield would give political leaders more time to reduce human dependence on fossil fuels — the main source of greenhouse gases. He said experts must more closely study the feasibility of the idea and its possible effects on stratospheric chemistry.

Nairobi conference participants agreed.

"Yes, by all means, do all the research," Indian climatologist Rajendra K. Pachauri, chairman of the 2,000-scientist U.N. network on climate change, told The Associated Press.

But "if human beings take it upon themselves to carry out something as massive and drastic as this, we need to be absolutely sure there are no side effects," Pachauri said.

Philip Clapp, a veteran campaigner for emissions controls to curb warming, also sounded a nervous note, saying, "We are already engaged in an uncontrolled experiment by injecting greenhouse gases into the atmosphere."

But Clapp, president of the U.S. group National Environmental Trust, said, "I certainly don't disagree with the urgency."

In past years scientists have scoffed at the idea of air pollution as a solution for global warming, saying that the kind of sulfate haze that would be needed is deadly to people. Last month, the World Heath Organization said air pollution kills about 2 million people worldwide each year and that reducing large soot-like particles from sulfates in cities could save 300,000 lives annually.

American geophysicist Jonathan Pershing, of Washington's World Resources Institute, is among those wary of unforeseen consequences, but said the idea might be worth considering "if down the road 25 years, it becomes more and more severe because we didn't deal with the problem."

By telephone from Germany, Crutzen said that's what he envisioned: global haze as a component for long-range planning. "The reception on the whole is more positive than I thought," he said.

Pershing added, however, that reaction may hinge on who pushes the idea. "If it's the U.S., it might be perceived as an effort to avoid the problem," he said.

NASA said this weekend's conference will examine "methods to ameliorate the likelihood of progressively rising temperatures over the next decades." Other such U.S. government-sponsored events are scheduled to follow.
bhk is offline  
Old 11-19-06, 08:12 PM
  #287  
Political Exile
 
grundle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,104
6,000 environmentalists burn huge amounts of jet fuel in attempt to stop global warming.



http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/17/sc...ce&oref=slogin

Big Conference on Warming Ends, Achieving Modest Results

By JEFFREY GETTLEMAN and ANDREW C. REVKIN

Published: November 17, 2006

NAIROBI, Kenya, Nov. 17 — The yearly United Nations conference on climate change ended Friday with only modest results after delegates failed to establish a timetable for future cuts on pollution linked to global warming.

Despite nearly two weeks of meetings, which drew 6,000 participants to Nairobi from around the world, the delegates could not agree on a number of issues, especially how to move beyond the Kyoto Protocol, which requires cuts in emissions by most industrialized countries but expires in 2012.

Two persistent problems were American reluctance to agree to any mandatory emissions limits and increased stubbornness by China and India, two of the world’s fastest-growing polluters, which face no penalties under the Kyoto agreement for all the heat-trapping gases they pump into the atmosphere.

Even under conservative projections, scientists predict several degrees of warming this century, and possibly much more, which could shift precipitation patterns, disrupt agriculture and wildlife and eventually melt ice sheets, raising the level of the oceans and submerging low-lying coasts. Delegates from outside the United States expressed growing frustration with the Bush administration’s environmental policy, saying that without clear signals from the world’s largest source of air pollution, other countries would hesitate to move ahead. The United States is one of the few countries that has not ratified the Kyoto Protocol.

But Paula J. Dobriansky, the top American official at the conference, stood firm, saying that the best way to battle global warming was a mix of voluntary partnerships between developing and wealthy countries that foster economic growth while limiting pollution.

“The most effective strategies on climate change are those that are integrated with economic growth, with energy security, and reducing air pollution,” said Ms. Dobriansky, under secretary of state for global affairs and democracy.

Jennifer Morgan, who directs energy and climate programs for E3G, a London-based environmental group, said that a letter sent to President Bush from three influential Democratic senators on Wednesday — and widely distributed in the conference halls — provided at least a hint that a shift might be possible in Washington.

The letter, from Barbara Boxer of California, Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico and Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut, said Democrats would push to pass binding restrictions on greenhouse gases, starting in January when they take control of Congress. “If we are to leave our children a world that resembles the earth we inherited, we must act now,” they wrote.

“The senators’ letter was very influential and welcome here,” Ms. Morgan said.

Another central theme at the conference, reflecting its African site, was the importance of increasing aid to the world’s poorest countries to help them adapt to climate changes.

Many African communities are already feeling the effects of a shifting climate, from increased droughts to more desertification to spreading malaria, one of the continent’s biggest killers. The irony is that these countries most vulnerable to climate change are the least responsible for it, because they have little industry and produce a relatively small amount of pollution.

Though delegates began to discuss the ins and outs of an adaptation fund to aid developing nations, key decisions for the fund were postponed until next year. World Bank economists estimate that it will cost billions of dollars to help the developing world deal with climate change, but right now the adaptation fund stands at only $3 million.

“The conference has let Africa and the rest of the developing world down,” said a statement from Oxfam, a large aid and advocacy group.

In a sign of how incremental the progress was, conference organizers said one of the biggest achievements this year was agreeing to review the Kyoto Protocol next year.

Jeffrey Gettleman reported from Nairobi, Kenya, and Andrew Revkin from Columbus, Ohio.
grundle is offline  
Old 11-20-06, 12:47 AM
  #288  
DVD Talk Hero
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Madison, WI ("77 square miles surrounded by reality")
Posts: 29,984
Originally Posted by grundle
6,000 environmentalists burn huge amounts of jet fuel in attempt to stop global warming.
But the food and parties suck at energy saving, carbon cutting teleconferences.

Did anyone else notice that the Nairobi conference seemed to produce only a small percentage of the publicity generated at the Cirque de Montreal last year? Last year there seemed to be multiple stories every day and this year just a few for the entire conference. Did anyone else notice they even had a global warming conference in Nairobi? This was despite the fact that a rash of evil-human-caused-global-warming-is-killing-us reports (such as the fatally flawed Stern Report), studies and articles were released in the lead up time to the conference just as was done last year, undoubtedly in an attempt to stir up interest and coverage. A lot less of the bait was taken this year.
movielib is online now  
Old 11-29-06, 10:29 AM
  #289  
Political Exile
 
grundle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,104
http://today.reuters.com/news/articl...src=rss&rpc=22

Gaia scientist Lovelock predicts planetary wipeout

Nov 28, 2006

By Jeremy Lovell

LONDON (Reuters) - The earth has a fever that could boost temperatures by 8 degrees Celsius making large parts of the surface uninhabitable and threatening billions of peoples' lives, a controversial climate scientist said on Tuesday.

James Lovelock, who angered climate scientists with his Gaia theory of a living planet and then alienated environmentalists by backing nuclear power, said a traumatized earth might only be able to support less than a tenth of it's 6 billion people.

"We are not all doomed. An awful lot of people will die, but I don't see the species dying out," he told a news conference. "A hot earth couldn't support much over 500 million."


"Almost all of the systems that have been looked at are in positive feedback ... and soon those effects will be larger than any of the effects of carbon dioxide emissions from industry and so on around the world," he added.

Scientists say that global warming due to carbon emissions from burning fossil fuels for power and transport could boost average temperatures by up to 6C by the end of the century causing floods, famines and violent storms.

But they also say that tough action now to cut carbon emissions could stop atmospheric concentrations of CO2 hitting 450 parts per million -- equivalent to a temperature rise of 2C from pre-industrial levels -- and save the planet.

Lovelock said temperature rises of up to 8C were already built in and while efforts to curb it were morally commendable, they were wasted.

"It is a bit like if your kidneys fail you can go on dialysis -- and who would refuse dialysis if death is the alternative. We should think of it in that context," he said.

"But remember that all they are doing is buying us time, no more. The problems go on," he added.

REFUGE

Lovelock adopted the name Gaia, the Greek mother earth goddess, in the 1960s to apply to his then revolutionary theory that the earth functions as a single, self-sustaining organism. His theory is now widely accepted.

In London to give a lecture on the environment to the Institution of Chemical Engineers, he said the planet had survived dramatic climate change at least seven times.

"In the change from the last Ice Age to now we lost land equivalent to the continent of Africa beneath the sea," he said. "We are facing things just as bad or worse than that during this century."

"There are refuges, plenty of them. 55 million years ago ... life moved up to the Arctic, stayed there during the course of it and then moved back again as things improved. I fear that this is what we may have to do," he added.

Lovelock said the United States, which has rejected the Kyoto Protocol on cutting carbon emissions, wrongly believed there was a technological solution, while booming economies China and India were out of control.

China is building a coal-fired power station a week to feed rampant demand, and India's economy is likewise surging.

If either suddenly decided to stop their carbon-fuelled development to lift their billions of people out of poverty they would face a revolution, yet if they continued, rising CO2 and temperatures would kill off plants and produce famine, he said.

"If climate change goes on course ... I can't see China being able to produce enough food by the middle of the century to support its people. They will have to move somewhere and Siberia is empty and it will be warmer then," he said.
grundle is offline  
Old 11-29-06, 11:19 AM
  #290  
Political Exile
 
grundle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,104
Originally Posted by grundle
http://today.reuters.com/news/articl...src=rss&rpc=22

Gaia scientist Lovelock predicts planetary wipeout

Nov 28, 2006

By Jeremy Lovell

LONDON (Reuters) - The earth has a fever that could boost temperatures by 8 degrees Celsius making large parts of the surface uninhabitable and threatening billions of peoples' lives, a controversial climate scientist said on Tuesday.

James Lovelock, who angered climate scientists with his Gaia theory of a living planet and then alienated environmentalists by backing nuclear power, said a traumatized earth might only be able to support less than a tenth of it's 6 billion people.

"We are not all doomed. An awful lot of people will die, but I don't see the species dying out," he told a news conference. "A hot earth couldn't support much over 500 million."


Reuters is a mainstream news source. They never talk about how the past predictions of the doomsayers failed to come true. And they give lots of attention to ridiculous doomsayer predictions like this. On the issue of environmental doomsaying, Reuters is more interested in telling lies than in telling the truth.
grundle is offline  
Old 11-29-06, 11:30 AM
  #291  
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Hoboken, NJ
Posts: 3,068
Since when is the "Earth as an organism" theory widely accepted? At best it's a nice little metaphor, but scientifically it falls quite short.
Birrman54 is offline  
Old 11-29-06, 01:05 PM
  #292  
DVD Talk Hero
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Madison, WI ("77 square miles surrounded by reality")
Posts: 29,984
Originally Posted by Birrman54
Since when is the "Earth as an organism" theory widely accepted?
It's not. Reuters should look into hiring a science reporter who knows something about science. I think there are quite a few seventh graders who would qualify more than Jeremy Lovell.

At best it's a nice little metaphor, but scientifically it falls quite short.
I don't mind seeing it in poetry but it certainly has no place in science.
movielib is online now  
Old 11-29-06, 01:43 PM
  #293  
DVD Talk Hero
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Madison, WI ("77 square miles surrounded by reality")
Posts: 29,984
http://www.forbes.com/business/servi...ap3212872.html

High Court Takes Up Global Warming Case
By MARK SHERMAN 11.29.06, 10:56 AM ET

Associated Press

The Supreme Court stepped carefully into the national debate over global warming on Wednesday, asking how much harm would occur if the Environmental Protection Agency continues its refusal to regulate greenhouse gases from new vehicles.

In the first case about global warming to reach the high court, a lawyer for 12 states and 13 environmental groups pressed the justices to make the government act, saying the country faces grave environmental harm.

Inaction is like lighting "a fuse on a bomb," said James Milkey, an assistant attorney general for the state of Massachusetts.

Opening up an hour of arguments, Justice Antonin Scalia asked, "When is the predicted cataclysm?"

It's not cataclysmic, but rather "ongoing harm," Milkey replied.

Several justices questioned whether the states and environmental groups have met their legal burden to show they will be harmed by continued EPA inaction. Petitioners to courts must meet that threshold before the merits of a case may be addressed.

The Bush administration argued in court papers that the EPA lacks the power to regulate carbon dioxide as a pollutant under the Clean Air Act. Even if it had such authority, the EPA still would not use it at this point because of uncertainty surrounding the issue of global warming, the administration said.

Global climate change is "a controversial phenomenon that is far from fully understood or defined," trade associations for car and truck makers and automobile dealers said in a court filing signed by former Solicitors General Theodore Olson and Kenneth Starr that backs the administration position.

Twelve states, mainly along the nation's Atlantic and Pacific coasts, three cities, a U.S. territory and 13 environmental groups are arguing that the EPA ignored the clear language of the Clean Air Act. Under the 1970 law, carbon dioxide is an air pollutant that threatens public health and the EPA must regulate it, they said.

Carbon dioxide is produced when fossil fuels such as oil and natural gas are burned. It is the principal "greenhouse" gas that many scientists believe is flowing into the atmosphere at an unprecedented rate, leading to a warming of the Earth and widespread ecological changes. One way to reduce those emissions is to have cleaner-burning cars.

"There are compelling reasons for the court to join the issue now," Massachusetts Attorney General Thomas Reilly said in a brief on behalf of the states, cities and environmental groups.

A federal appeals court in Washington, in a fractured decision in 2005, upheld the administration's position. The Supreme Court decided to take the case in June and is expected to rule before July 2007.

The court's decision could have far-reaching effects. A separate case involving the EPA's claim that the Clean Air Act similarly does not give it authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from power plants also is making its way through the federal courts.

Together, U.S. power plants and vehicles account for 15 percent of the world output of greenhouse gases, said David Doniger, counsel for the Natural Resources Defense Council, an environmental group involved in the Supreme Court case.

An association of electric utilities, the Utility Air Regulatory Group, opposes greenhouse gas regulation. But two individual power companies, Calpine Corp. and Entergy Corp. (nyse: ETR - news - people ), are on the other side.

"This case makes for strange bedfellows," Entergy said in its brief. The company said it has to be able to make plans 25 years in advance and that the EPA's current rules will not "stand the test of time."

Michigan, home of the U.S. auto industry, and eight other states are backing the EPA.

The case is Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency, 05-1120.
movielib is online now  
Old 11-29-06, 03:13 PM
  #294  
DVD Talk God
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Directionally Challenged (for DirecTV)
Posts: 122,654
I most interested in seeing how they resolve the standing issue. I just don't see how the plaintiffs can prevail on that question: there is no imminent or concrete injury here.

From what I've heard about the arguments today, it sounds like Justice Kennedy will provide (no suprise) the deciding 5th vote.
Red Dog is offline  
Old 11-29-06, 03:31 PM
  #295  
bhk
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Right of Atilla The Hun
Posts: 19,749
Excellent. Another whack on the head of the enviro whack a mole game.
bhk is offline  
Old 12-12-06, 04:02 PM
  #296  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: MI
Posts: 25,046
Yet another tragic consequence of global warming: collapsing gingerbread houses.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20061211...e_061211200951
Gingerbread houses latest victim of global warming Mon Dec 11, 3:09 PM ET



STOCKHOLM (AFP) - Sweet-toothed Swedes who have spent hours constructing edible Christmas gingerbread houses are seeing their creations collapse in the Scandinavian country's unusually damp winter, suppliers said.

"The damp weather spells immediate devastation for gingerbread houses. The problem is the mild winter," spokesman at Sweden's leading gingerbread wholesaler Anna's, Aake Mattsson, told Swedish news agency TT.

Gingerbread houses are a popular Christmas tradition in Sweden and across the Nordic countries, with many people buying slabs of pre-baked gingerbread from stores which they decorate and stick together using icing sugar and brightly coloured confectionery.

While much of Sweden is usually gripped by freezing temperatures and heavy snow in December, southern parts of the country have recorded their mildest start to the month for decades.

In recent days Anna's has received some 40 complaints from angry customers whose carefully crafted gingerbread houses have collapsed.

As a seasoned gingerbread expert with 41 years in the business, Mattsson urged hopeful gingerbread architects to heat the ready-baked slabs in the oven briefly prior to assembly to remove any remaining moisture.

The risk of subsidence was also reduced if builders overcame the temptation to smother their cookie houses in excessive amounts of icing sugar.

"Too much (icing sugar) can result in dampness ... . It's a common problem," Mattsson told TT.
OldDude is offline  
Old 12-12-06, 04:13 PM
  #297  
bhk
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Right of Atilla The Hun
Posts: 19,749


The maurauders who brought terror to most of the known world are turning over in their graves that their decendants turned out to be such wusses.
bhk is offline  
Old 12-12-06, 04:35 PM
  #298  
DVD Talk Hero
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Madison, WI ("77 square miles surrounded by reality")
Posts: 29,984
Originally Posted by OldDude
Yet another tragic consequence of global warming: collapsing gingerbread houses.
Yeah, I saw that one. Since the Earth has warmed only .6C in 100 years perhaps it's a totally natural heatwave? Naah, couldn't be that.

But there are far more sinister things going on. Farmers in India are actually killing themselves because of global warming!

http://www.dailyindia.com/show/92133...rming:-Scindia

Farmer suicides linked to global warming: Scindia

By Indo Asian News Service

New Delhi, Dec 12 (IANS) Farmer suicides in India are linked to climate change as farmers are unable to adapt to changing weather patterns caused by global warming, Congress MP Jyotiraditya Scindia said in the Lok Sabha Tuesday.

'The World Bank study has found a very high degree of correlation between farmers' suicides and climate change. Poor farmers who are unable to adapt to changing climate caused by global warming fall into a debt trap and later into a death trap,' Scindia said in the Lok Sabha.

The Gwalior MP asked the government to respond to the advice, proposals and warnings given by the World Bank in order to 'mitigate the imminent results of global warming for the farmers in the country'.

Scindia's submission impressed the entire house and Speaker Somnath Chatterjee said the Lok Sabha should have a discussion on the effects of global warming.

'I think this matter should be properly discussed. This is an important issue. Let the parliament of India discuss such matters. I will allow a discussion over this,' Chatterjee told Scindia.

Raising the issue during zero hour, Scindia pointed out that there had been 'alarming signals and warnings cautioning us about the imminent disastrous effects of global warming on India'.

'NASA has reported that 2005 was the warmest year on record. The experts from the University of Reading have warned that summer rainfall in India is going to increase by 10 percent causing swollen rivers and devastation across agricultural landscape.'

Quoting former World Bank chief Nicholas Stern, Scindia said regional surface temperature would be 2.5 degrees to five degrees Celsius higher and northern India would be hotter too.

'The temperature rise will result in losses to the tune of 0.67 percent in our GDP. Further, the sea level will rise by 100 cm, which can lead to welfare loss of $1.3 billion. This will also lead to malaria increasing in a number of states,' he warned.
As well as being patently absurd (an undescribed, unquantified "correlation" with not one iota of evidence presented), the story quotes from the already discredited Stern Report and flies in the face of the revised sea level rise prediction from the IPCC (43 cm. is now the maximum they believe possible by 2100; I'd be shocked if it is anywhere near that). No basis for the malaria claim either. And it is highly debatable that 2005 was warmer than 1998.
movielib is online now  
Old 12-12-06, 04:39 PM
  #299  
DVD Talk Hero
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Madison, WI ("77 square miles surrounded by reality")
Posts: 29,984
Hmmm, perhaps the World Bank is trying to take the heat off criticisms of their own policies and allegations that those policies are what have led to suicides:

http://www.zeenews.com/znnew/article...337371&sid=NAT

Left to demonstrate against UPA govt`s policies in Delhi

Jaipur, Nov 23

The All-India Trade Union Congress (AITUC) will organise a demonstration outside Parliament on Thursday against the UPA government's economic policies.

The trade union body would also hold a nation-wide strike on December 14 on the same issue, CPI Parliamentary party leader Gurudas Dasgupta told a press conference here yesterday.

Accusing the Congress-led Central government of pursuing pro-rich, anti-labourer and the World Bank-directed policies, Dasgupta alleged that at least 1000 farmers have committed suicide in recent years due to agricultural policies and multinational companies have captured Indian markets giving jolt to labourers and indirectly to the trade unions.

Wheat was being imported and the concept of self-reliance in food grain production and food security buried under the MNCs and the World Bank's guidelines, party's national general secretary alleged.


"CPI does not want that BJP should come to power or manoeuvre the coalition government in the middle of the term, that is why we are with the UPA government as a partner," he replied when asked about his party's continued support to the Central government.

As long as the party was with the UPA government, "we will fight for the poor, labourers and farmers inside Parliament and on streets," Dasgupta added.
Now that's probably bullshit too but if you are under the gun what better scapegoat is there than global warming? Everyone loves a good global warming horror story.

Last edited by movielib; 12-12-06 at 04:44 PM.
movielib is online now  
Old 12-13-06, 07:22 AM
  #300  
DVD Talk Hero
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Madison, WI ("77 square miles surrounded by reality")
Posts: 29,984
The United Nations World Meteorological Organization (WMO) has found no firm link between global warming and an increase in the frequency or intensity of tropical storms. Apparently this is nonNews because it isn't the "correct" alarmist type news. I can find no links aside from this one released by the UN:

http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.as...r=weather&Cr1=

No firm link yet between human-caused global warming and intensity of cyclones – UN

12 December 2006 – Despite a recent increase in dangerous typhoons and hurricanes, no firm link can yet be drawn between human-induced climate change and variations in intensity and frequency of tropical cyclones, the United Nations World Meteorological Organization (WMO) has reported, citing a consensus of 125 leading researchers and forecasters.

The recent increase in loss of life and damages from tropical cyclones has largely been caused by rising concentrations of population and infrastructure in coastal regions, WMO said in a news release summarizing the results of its 6th international workshop on tropical cyclones held in Costa Rica last month.

Although the accuracy of tropical cyclone monitoring has improved considerably over the last few decades, large regional variations exist in methods used to monitor tropical cyclones, and several regions have no measurements by specialized aircraft. These factors continue to make detection of trends difficult, it added.

In 2008, WMO will launch over the Pacific Ocean, the international THORPEX Pacific Asia Regional Campaign (TPARC) in cooperation with the tropical cyclone research and forecasting community in a bid to accelerate improvements in the accuracy of numerical weather prediction, probabilistic forecasting and the understanding of tropical cyclones.

WMO noted that as indicated in the third Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Assessment Report sea levels are predicted to rise by between 9 and 88 centimetres by the end of the 21st Century in connection with global warming and such an increase would heighten coastal vulnerability to flooding from tropical cyclone storm surges.

A number of recent high-impact tropical cyclone events around the globe have occurred in recent years, including 10 typhoons that made landfall in Japan in 2004; five affecting the Cook Islands in a five-week period in 2005; Cyclone Larry in Australia, Typhoons Saomai and Durian in China and the Philippines respectively this year; and the extremely active 2004 and 2005 Atlantic hurricane seasons.
(Note that they haven't yet picked up on the other nonNews, that the IPCC will halve its prediction on sea level rise in its next Assessment Report.)
movielib is online now  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.