Leo's latest missive - Silicon Chip editorial

[Mr.T]

My point being, hypothetically, if you were to remove ALL sources of animal,
human warming, and basically everything you have control over, then the earth
would STILL warm up. Surely not as quickly, but it would still warm

anyway.

That's hard to say. In the seventies Scientific American ran an article
stating the earth was moving towards another ice age (albeit very slowly of
course), which is a natural cycle independant of human interference.
The current global warming is a natural consequence of overpopulation, which
probably goes too far in the other direction. No-one wants to tackle the
population problem however, so the rest is just empty rhetoric, vested
interests and loonies.
Hard to say whether humans will adapt better to global warming or global
cooling however, and how many of the 7+ billion people the earth can really
support in either case.

MrT.

 

[Mr.T]

It would seem prudent to act early, before any possible thermal
runaway effects take hold. No?

*IF* we could actually change anything sufficiently to have any noticeable
benefit. No plans whatsoever to do that at the moment.

However, this is the only planet we have. We should look after
it. We should act conservatively to the only (known) home we have in this
universe.

Why? It is unimaginable that we are the only planet in the universe with
life forms of any kind, just because you don't know of any others.
We may well do the rest of the universe a favour and save many other planets
by our becoming extinct.

MrT.

 

[Trevor Wilson]

anyway.

That's hard to say. In the seventies Scientific American ran an article
stating the earth was moving towards another ice age (albeit very slowly
of
course), which is a natural cycle independant of human interference.

**Sciam probably ran an article on 'Cold Fusion' too. Sciam does run
articles of a highly speculative nature from time to time. That does not
suggest that the majority of scientists feel there is (or was) any credence
to the issue. Personally, I am doubtful of your claim, but I am certainly
prepared to concede that Sciam did run such an article, after you provide
some proof. In the meantime, I suggest you read this:

http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/shortsharpscience/2008/10/global-cooling-was-a-myth.html

And this:

http://ams.confex.com/ams/pdfpapers/131047.pdf

It puts paid to the myth that the scientific community gave any real
credence to the notion of global cooling. It was mostly in the realm of
popular press.

 

[Trevor Wilson]

*IF* we could actually change anything sufficiently to have any noticeable
benefit. No plans whatsoever to do that at the moment.


Why?

**Er, so we can perpetuate our species.

It is unimaginable that we are the only planet in the universe with

life forms of any kind, just because you don't know of any others.
We may well do the rest of the universe a favour and save many other
planets
by our becoming extinct.

**That would be the pessimistic view. It is possible that humans are the
only intelligent species in the universe. Even if we are not, it is possible
that we may have something of worth to offer the universe.

 

[terryc]

The current global warming is a natural consequence of overpopulation,

you do realise that "global warming" does not mean that temperatures
every where are going to rise, but that the "weather" will have more
energy driving it with more extreme (both ends) weather events?

and how many of the 7+ billion people the earth can
really support in either case.

That depends on the life style you want them to have.

 

[Keithr]

hi, did you know there is NO proof of global warming.

There is absolute proof of global warming, the only argument is whether
it is the result of man's activities or a purely natural phenomonom.

 

[Keithr]

There is, it's just a question of WHO (or what) is causing it, and by
how much.

Current consensus is the earth is in a phase where it's warming up
anyway, though it would be a reasonable guess that humans factor in
somewhat too.

The question is HOW much are the humans actually effecting it. Blaming
it entirely on humans is incorrect, likewise, it would be a good guess
that blaming it on the earth doing it behind our backs entirely isn't
quite right either.

Cow flatulence factors significantly in some circles, but if you've
ever met my brother in law, his flatulence would probably account for a
fair proportion too.

My point being, hypothetically, if you were to remove ALL sources of
animal, human warming, and basically everything you have control over,
then the earth would STILL warm up. Surely not as quickly, but it would
still warm anyway.

Personally, I think a diet change for my BIL would be a good start.

What it comes down to with regard to pollution or global warming is that
it ain't what you do, it's the scale on which you do it. Unfortunately,
with the exponential growth of population, the effect on the planet goes
up similarly.

 

[terryc]

**Can be. Unfortunately, the evidence is clear.

no it isn't Every day I come across information that suggest flaws have
been found in certain core data sets on which these projections have been
made.

there is also the issue that some data sets are really local weather data
and not global climate data.

**Strawman noted.

the fact that we do not really know enough about the factors influencing
Australian weather casts doubt on whether we really under global weather
and climate.

 

[dmm]

the fact that we do not really know enough about the factors influencing
Australian weather casts doubt on whether we really under global weather
and climate.

Catalyst last night had a program which showed that climate scientists are only now thinking
that the Indian Ocean may be responsible for the drought in SE Australia.

http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/2583329.htm

If it's taken local climate scientists this long for them to realise this, then what else are the IPCC
scientists missing regarding the much larger problem of global weather?

 

[dmm]

**Nor do I. However, this is the only planet we have. We should look after
it. We should act conservatively to the only (known) home we have in this
universe.

Of course we should look after it, but to indicate that it's the only home we have
ignores the potential of 7 other planets (sorry Pluto), moons, and uncounted number
of asteroids, comets and assorted detritus.

 

[Phil Allison]

"dmm"
"Trevor Wilson"

Of course we should look after it, but to indicate that it's the only home
we have
ignores the potential of 7 other planets (sorry Pluto), moons, and
uncounted number
of asteroids, comets and assorted detritus.

** Which one are you living on now ??

Mr pointy headed, space alien fuckwit .



..... Phil

 

[Alan Rutlidge]

nope, you could offer to reduce your cnsumptive living to a more simple,
less resource consuming lifestyle. i.e sharing, rather than greed.

And share the love our Philthy does. Here and elsewhere on UseNet on a
fairly regular basis.
Just read a few of his recent posts here.
Can't you "feel" the love he shares with us all?

 

[The Real Andy]

nope, you could offer to reduce your cnsumptive living to a more simple,
less resource consuming lifestyle. i.e sharing, rather than greed.

For once, I actually agree with phil on this one.

 

[Phil Allison]

"The Real Andy"
terryc

For once, I actually agree with phil on this one.

** Shame there is nothing from me here.

Do read the whole thread before sticking your smelly feet in your mouth.



..... Phil

 

[atec 7 7]

"The Real Andy"
terryc


** Shame there is nothing from me here.

Do read the whole thread before sticking your smelly feet in your mouth.



.... Phil

Feet are still preferable to other peoples "things" that you
compulsively insert into your body cavities philthy

 

[terryc]

If it's taken local climate scientists this long for them to realise
this, then what else are the IPCC scientists missing regarding the much
larger problem of global weather?

That is my point. we still don't have any real idea of how Australian
weather works, but experts can predict global climate.

 

[Mr.T]

you do realise that "global warming" does not mean that temperatures
every where are going to rise, but that the "weather" will have more
energy driving it with more extreme (both ends) weather events?

Sure, but it does mean an average increase in temperature rather than a
decrease. And thus consequences such as polar caps reducing rather than
increasing.

That depends on the life style you want them to have.

I'd rather not swap for one worse than a homeless Biafran, and I don't know
anyone else who is.
But you're welcome to it.

MrT.

 

[Mr.T]

**That would be the pessimistic view. It is possible that humans are the
only intelligent species in the universe.

Anything is possible, but only completely self obsessed idiot would think it
remotely likely.

Even if we are not, it is possible
that we may have something of worth to offer the universe.

No evidence of that so far unfortunately.
But survival of the fittest still applies in any case.

MrT.

 

[Mr.T]

Anyway, there's only one strategy that's likely to have any significant
effect, and only then if it's applied suitably - ie very - aggressively,
and that's (wait for it) population reduction.

As I said, and no one is admitting any plans for that. And of course no one
is volunteering. They want (and get) baby bonuses to increase the problem
instead!

It looks highly likely that that will be looked after for us by mother nature.
No need for us to do anything.

Exactly. Some people will survive and adapt. The problem eventually takes
care of itself.

MrT.

 

[Phil Allison]

"Mr.Turd"
"Trevor Wilson"

Anything is possible, but only completely self obsessed idiot would think
it
remotely likely.

** Got any actual evidence of intelligent life originating beyond the earth
??

Chatted with any space aliens lately ??

Very likely a complete wack-job like Mr Turd has been prodded and poked by
some slimy space thing - in his dreams.

No evidence of that so far unfortunately.

** Scumbags like Mr Turd have nothing to offer the human race, let alone
any extra-terrestrial culture.




....... Phil