The rate of change at least as important as the magnitude

Frum: When the climate changed astonishingly fast - CNN.com

How many times have I pointed out (without response) that both the rate of GHG rise and the rate of warming are unprecedented in millions of years. Here, someone else finds that significant.

Some very good, very pertinent observations in the book discussed in the article, IMO.

Particularly this part regarding the dangers of very rapid climate changes.

"Parker hammers home the lesson again and again: What matters most about climate change is not how it is caused, but how fast it takes place. Our contemporary debates over climate all seem to take for granted that change will unfold gradually over the next century, granting us all plenty of warning and time to react. In the 17th century, the catastrophe arrived astonishingly fast -- in one human lifetime -- and human beings adapted by dying in droves.

There is in Parker's telling only one exception to the unhappy story: the Japan of the shoguns, where effective leaders found ways to manage and mitigate disasters they could not understand. If preparedness for the worst was possible for some human beings in those prescientific days, surely it is possible for more of us in our advanced age?"


The deniers, at least the ones who aren't in total idiotic denial about the scientific reality of global warming, claim that people will just "adapt" to the warming, so "no problem". There are over seven billion humans currently living on the Earth, many with very limited resources and food supplies. As AGW driven global warming accelerates over the coming decades along with the consequent climate changes, it is all too likely that, as happened in the 17th century, human beings will 'adapt' to the sudden changes "by dying in droves". Perhaps these denier cult trolls somehow imagine that that would be a small price to pay for ensuring the continued profits of EXXON, the Koch brothers and the rest of the fossil fuel industry.
 
In terms of the survival of the planet (as opposed to we petty humans) what we're hand-wringing over amounts not to a pimple on the ass of progress.

As one of those "petty humans", I would have to say that you seem very, very insane (the "ass of progress"???). Who is going to care about the "survival of the planet" (whatever that means) if we're dead.

You seem to somewhat lower than a pimple on a toad's butthole, BTW.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #5
You don't care if humans die as long as the planet is safe? Hmm...
 
Aw shucks.....I could tolerate the alarmists were they to honestly admit they're concerned ONLY with saving their own sorry asses. But, no, they claim to want to SAVE THE PLANET. As tho the planet cared a rat's ass about them.
 
Aw shucks.....I could tolerate the alarmists were they to honestly admit they're concerned ONLY with saving their own sorry asses. But, no, they claim to want to SAVE THE PLANET. As tho the planet cared a rat's ass about them.

OK, I see now. You're just too frigging stupid to understand anything about this matter, or even comprehend the meaning of the words being used. Got it!
 
Liberal hubris.

As though the human era will represent less than a few seconds on the cosmic clock (timeline).

Al well, pride goes before a fall and the best the fanatics are going to achieve is to buy themselves a few more seconds.

But keep on believing - cling to the little things as there really are no big ones.
 
Liberal hubris.
As though the human era will represent less than a few seconds on the cosmic clock (timeline).
Al well, pride goes before a fall and the best the fanatics are going to achieve is to buy themselves a few more seconds.
But keep on believing - cling to the little things as there really are no big ones.

LOLOLOL......so, insane retard, if you think that the survival of the human race and the rest of the Earth's biosphere over the next few centuries is a "little thing" that is only of any concern to liberals, what are the "big ones", in your twisted little private universe?
 
Here's some more research indicating just how extremely fast our planet is heating up in response to the heavy forcing of the excess carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

Parts of Pacific Warming 15 Times Faster Than in Past 10,000 Years
ScienceDaily
Oct. 31, 2013
(excerpts)
In a reconstruction of Pacific Ocean temperatures in the last 10,000 years, researchers have found that its middle depths have warmed 15 times faster in the last 60 years than they did during apparent natural warming cycles in the previous 10,000. "We're experimenting by putting all this heat in the ocean without quite knowing how it's going to come back out and affect climate," said study coauthor Braddock Linsley, a climate scientist at Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory. "It's not so much the magnitude of the change, but the rate of change."
 
Liberal hubris.

As though the human era will represent less than a few seconds on the cosmic clock (timeline).

Al well, pride goes before a fall and the best the fanatics are going to achieve is to buy themselves a few more seconds.

But keep on believing - cling to the little things as there really are no big ones.

Why do you think it not possible to be concerned about all of them?
 

Forum List

Back
Top