A non-political thread on the warming of the planet

[Old Rocks]

It would be a question of migration. People would have to move to where the land becomes more arable from where the land becomes less arable.

As for rising sea levels, if they are truly occurring and at a level that can threaten some cities, then they will have to either build sea walls or again, re-locate the lower affected neighborhoods.

Thanks. I have to admit I was thinking/assuming that people would remain where they are and would have to find ways to deal with it.

I can see migration and technology playing a huge role.
.

migration will be key, i think. I think its also possible we could do this without losing knowledge. There is no telling what we have lost when our ancestors had to do things like this and similar..
This could possibly open an entire new continent to search, learn from and thrive on. There is no telling what is under all that ice.

What is interesting is they are finding stuff, like bodies, that was lost under the ice centuries ago. That to means that the Earth was this warm then or at least the ice sheets were not as large.

There is no telling the history of our unsearched lands. Hek, look at TN. We used to be under an ocean. Now look.

We'd have to look at the various options for the easiest migration possible, i.e., planning ahead for people to go to the nearest appropriate area rather than letting it happen and later regretting it.

That's a mind-blower. This would involve cooperation (uh oh) between governments.
.

And India or China is just going to take in all the Bangladeshies that will be flooded out by sea level rise?

 

[Old Rocks]

migration will be key, i think. I think its also possible we could do this without losing knowledge. There is no telling what we have lost when our ancestors had to do things like this and similar..
This could possibly open an entire new continent to search, learn from and thrive on. There is no telling what is under all that ice.

What is interesting is they are finding stuff, like bodies, that was lost under the ice centuries ago. That to means that the Earth was this warm then or at least the ice sheets were not as large.

There is no telling the history of our unsearched lands. Hek, look at TN. We used to be under an ocean. Now look.

We'd have to look at the various options for the easiest migration possible, i.e., planning ahead for people to go to the nearest appropriate area rather than letting it happen and later regretting it.

That's a mind-blower. This would involve cooperation (uh oh) between governments.
.

If we started now, we could possibly come up with a plan. But that would involve dropping partisan nonsense. Which, i doubt would happen until its too late.

Yeah. Imagine such a conversation between states, between governments. It could even ultimately involve re-drawing maps.

We would be our own undoing, and that wouldn't exactly be a shock.
.

We started that conversation in Paris. Unfortunately, our present government has decided against continuing those talks. However, our states, cities, and businesses are continuing it on their own. A very good idea.

 

[Old Rocks]

I just dont understand how not having as many children, turning to vegans and walking will stop natural earth evolution. I mean, our species is only so old...

I'm getting the feeling there's a lot of things you don't understand.

Okay- less children. Less people using less resources. The industrialized world has already figured this out.

Turning into vegans- um, yeah. that would use less carbon.

not having a society built around cars... yes, that would reduce the amount of carbon released into the atmosphere.

No, you dont get it. You are arguing AGW, I am arguing the facts. How can AGW "solutions" stop natural earth evolution?

The present warming is not natural. Were we following natural patterns, we would slowly, as in thousands of years, be cooling toward a new ice age. Instead, we are very rapidly warming. This is not ' natural evolution' of the climate.

 

[Old Rocks]

Let's (try to) have a discussion that avoids the standard partisan finger-pointing that always pollutes (no pun intended) this topic and instead focuses on the logistics & realities we'll deal with if the planet is actually warming.

So, for the purposes of this thread, let's stipulate to the following:

• The planet is warming, for whatever reason.
• Given the scope and momentum of the warming, it's going to continue warming, as we squabble, and we need to look at how that affects our lives
• We need to look ahead at how the changes can either be mitigated OR how to take advantage of them

So my first question is this: What positives could come from this change? I'm wondering about areas of the planet that might un-freeze and allow for more crops, for example.

Any constructive questions or ideas on how we could deal with this in a positive way?
.

It would be a question of migration. People would have to move to where the land becomes more arable from where the land becomes less arable.

As for rising sea levels, if they are truly occurring and at a level that can threaten some cities, then they will have to either build sea walls or again, re-locate the lower affected neighborhoods.

Thanks. I have to admit I was thinking/assuming that people would remain where they are and would have to find ways to deal with it.

I can see migration and technology playing a huge role.
.

It would be a very gradual change, despite the doom and gloom predictions ones sees. Changes on a planetary scale don't happen rapidly, unless you are talking about impact events or massive volcanic activity.

Wrong in so many ways. It is not gradual. The combination of industrial, agricultural, and household pollution is having a major effect on our environment already. The warming due to the GHGs in the atmosphere is warming the planet at a rate only seen in the major extinction events from the geological record.

 

[Old Rocks]

The truth is that we are living in the end on the Age, just prior to the TRIBULATION Period. It would be a total waste of money to try to stop the inevitable. What is needed is prayer.. .

OK, how much did prayer help in the concentration camps in Germany? A lazy excuse for not thinking or doing anything.

 

[Old Rocks]

The truth is that we are living in the end on the Age, just prior to the TRIBULATION Period. It would be a total waste of money to try to stop the inevitable. What is needed is prayer.. .

What would you be praying for?

GOD's help, guidance and direction!

Good answer. What kind of help do you think God would offer?

Eternal.

 

[Freewill]

Let's (try to) have a discussion that avoids the standard partisan finger-pointing that always pollutes (no pun intended) this topic and instead focuses on the logistics & realities we'll deal with if the planet is actually warming.

So, for the purposes of this thread, let's stipulate to the following:

• The planet is warming, for whatever reason.
• Given the scope and momentum of the warming, it's going to continue warming, as we squabble, and we need to look at how that affects our lives
• We need to look ahead at how the changes can either be mitigated OR how to take advantage of them

So my first question is this: What positives could come from this change? I'm wondering about areas of the planet that might un-freeze and allow for more crops, for example.

Any constructive questions or ideas on how we could deal with this in a positive way?
.

It would be a question of migration. People would have to move to where the land becomes more arable from where the land becomes less arable.

As for rising sea levels, if they are truly occurring and at a level that can threaten some cities, then they will have to either build sea walls or again, re-locate the lower affected neighborhoods.

Thanks. I have to admit I was thinking/assuming that people would remain where they are and would have to find ways to deal with it.

I can see migration and technology playing a huge role.
.

It would be a very gradual change, despite the doom and gloom predictions ones sees. Changes on a planetary scale don't happen rapidly, unless you are talking about impact events or massive volcanic activity.

Wrong in so many ways. It is not gradual. The combination of industrial, agricultural, and household pollution is having a major effect on our environment already. The warming due to the GHGs in the atmosphere is warming the planet at a rate only seen in the major extinction events from the geological record.

Could you site the times that there was mass extinctions due to warming temperatures? Please. Are you sure you didn't mean cooling temperatures, you know like when the meteorite hit the Yucatan.

 

[Old Rocks]

Many scientists point to another ice age coming.

The main problem is that we cannot predict what will happen with even a moderate degree of certainty.

BS. A few try to say that the present lull in sunspots will turn us cold. But even a full Maunder Minimum would not overcome the effects of the GHGs we have put into the atmosphere.

 

[Freewill]

I just dont understand how not having as many children, turning to vegans and walking will stop natural earth evolution. I mean, our species is only so old...

I'm getting the feeling there's a lot of things you don't understand.

Okay- less children. Less people using less resources. The industrialized world has already figured this out.

Turning into vegans- um, yeah. that would use less carbon.

not having a society built around cars... yes, that would reduce the amount of carbon released into the atmosphere.

No, you dont get it. You are arguing AGW, I am arguing the facts. How can AGW "solutions" stop natural earth evolution?

The present warming is not natural. Were we following natural patterns, we would slowly, as in thousands of years, be cooling toward a new ice age. Instead, we are very rapidly warming. This is not ' natural evolution' of the climate.

What is your definition of "very rapidly?"

 

[Freewill]

Many scientists point to another ice age coming.

The main problem is that we cannot predict what will happen with even a moderate degree of certainty.

BS. A few try to say that the present lull in sunspots will turn us cold. But even a full Maunder Minimum would not overcome the effects of the GHGs we have put into the atmosphere.

That would be a good thing, wouldn't it?

 

[Old Rocks]

Let's (try to) have a discussion that avoids the standard partisan finger-pointing that always pollutes (no pun intended) this topic and instead focuses on the logistics & realities we'll deal with if the planet is actually warming.

So, for the purposes of this thread, let's stipulate to the following:

• The planet is warming, for whatever reason.
• Given the scope and momentum of the warming, it's going to continue warming, as we squabble, and we need to look at how that affects our lives
• We need to look ahead at how the changes can either be mitigated OR how to take advantage of them

So my first question is this: What positives could come from this change? I'm wondering about areas of the planet that might un-freeze and allow for more crops, for example.

Any constructive questions or ideas on how we could deal with this in a positive way?
.

It would be a question of migration. People would have to move to where the land becomes more arable from where the land becomes less arable.

As for rising sea levels, if they are truly occurring and at a level that can threaten some cities, then they will have to either build sea walls or again, re-locate the lower affected neighborhoods.

Thanks. I have to admit I was thinking/assuming that people would remain where they are and would have to find ways to deal with it.

I can see migration and technology playing a huge role.
.

It would be a very gradual change, despite the doom and gloom predictions ones sees. Changes on a planetary scale don't happen rapidly, unless you are talking about impact events or massive volcanic activity.

Wrong in so many ways. It is not gradual. The combination of industrial, agricultural, and household pollution is having a major effect on our environment already. The warming due to the GHGs in the atmosphere is warming the planet at a rate only seen in the major extinction events from the geological record.

Could you site the times that there was mass extinctions due to warming temperatures? Please. Are you sure you didn't mean cooling temperatures, you know like when the meteorite hit the Yucatan.

Timeline of a mass extinction

New evidence points to rapid collapse of Earth’s species 252 million years ago.

Jennifer Chu, MIT News Office
November 18, 2011


While the causes of this global catastrophe are unknown, an MIT-led team of researchers has now established that the end-Permian extinction was extremely rapid, triggering massive die-outs both in the oceans and on land in less than 20,000 years — the blink of an eye in geologic time. The researchers also found that this time period coincides with a massive buildup of atmospheric carbon dioxide, which likely triggered the simultaneous collapse of species in the oceans and on land.

With further calculations, the group found that the average rate at which carbon dioxide entered the atmosphere during the end-Permian extinction was slightly below today’s rate of carbon dioxide release into the atmosphere due to fossil fuel emissions. Over tens of thousands of years, increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide during the Permian period likely triggered severe global warming, accelerating species extinctions.

The researchers also discovered evidence of simultaneous and widespread wildfires that may have added to end-Permian global warming, triggering what they deem “catastrophic” soil erosion and making environments extremely arid and inhospitable.

The researchers present their findings this week in Science, and say the new timescale may help scientists home in on the end-Permian extinction’s likely causes.

Timeline of a mass extinction

Since this was written, much more has been discovered. And there was a very rapid warming with a vast methane addition at that time.

 

[Marion Morrison]

Let's (try to) have a discussion that avoids the standard partisan finger-pointing that always pollutes (no pun intended) this topic and instead focuses on the logistics & realities we'll deal with if the planet is actually warming.

So, for the purposes of this thread, let's stipulate to the following:

• The planet is warming, for whatever reason.
• Given the scope and momentum of the warming, it's going to continue warming, as we squabble, and we need to look at how that affects our lives
• We need to look ahead at how the changes can either be mitigated OR how to take advantage of them

So my first question is this: What positives could come from this change? I'm wondering about areas of the planet that might un-freeze and allow for more crops, for example.

Any constructive questions or ideas on how we could deal with this in a positive way?
.

Well, we could depopulate Earth down to about 500 million controllable people.

What? Too Agenda 21-ish for you? Ah well.

 

[Freewill]

It would be a question of migration. People would have to move to where the land becomes more arable from where the land becomes less arable.

As for rising sea levels, if they are truly occurring and at a level that can threaten some cities, then they will have to either build sea walls or again, re-locate the lower affected neighborhoods.

Thanks. I have to admit I was thinking/assuming that people would remain where they are and would have to find ways to deal with it.

I can see migration and technology playing a huge role.
.

It would be a very gradual change, despite the doom and gloom predictions ones sees. Changes on a planetary scale don't happen rapidly, unless you are talking about impact events or massive volcanic activity.

Wrong in so many ways. It is not gradual. The combination of industrial, agricultural, and household pollution is having a major effect on our environment already. The warming due to the GHGs in the atmosphere is warming the planet at a rate only seen in the major extinction events from the geological record.

Could you site the times that there was mass extinctions due to warming temperatures? Please. Are you sure you didn't mean cooling temperatures, you know like when the meteorite hit the Yucatan.

Timeline of a mass extinction

New evidence points to rapid collapse of Earth’s species 252 million years ago.

Jennifer Chu, MIT News Office
November 18, 2011


While the causes of this global catastrophe are unknown, an MIT-led team of researchers has now established that the end-Permian extinction was extremely rapid, triggering massive die-outs both in the oceans and on land in less than 20,000 years — the blink of an eye in geologic time. The researchers also found that this time period coincides with a massive buildup of atmospheric carbon dioxide, which likely triggered the simultaneous collapse of species in the oceans and on land.

With further calculations, the group found that the average rate at which carbon dioxide entered the atmosphere during the end-Permian extinction was slightly below today’s rate of carbon dioxide release into the atmosphere due to fossil fuel emissions. Over tens of thousands of years, increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide during the Permian period likely triggered severe global warming, accelerating species extinctions.

The researchers also discovered evidence of simultaneous and widespread wildfires that may have added to end-Permian global warming, triggering what they deem “catastrophic” soil erosion and making environments extremely arid and inhospitable.

The researchers present their findings this week in Science, and say the new timescale may help scientists home in on the end-Permian extinction’s likely causes.

Timeline of a mass extinction

Since this was written, much more has been discovered. And there was a very rapid warming with a vast methane addition at that time.

Quote: "While the causes are UNKNOWN..." Very first sentence.

Unknown yet they go on to tell you what did happen.

Quote2: "Over tens of thousands of years, increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide during the Permian period likely triggered severe global warming, accelerating species extinctions." Last sentence in red.

Is LIKELY a scientific term that actually means it did? Obviously that is how they are playing the game.

Truth is, they think they might know a likely cause.

Here are two articles on mass extinction which I think you will find interesting:

Information and Facts About Mass Extinctions

New Theory for What Caused Earth's Second-Largest Mass Extinction

 

[sealybobo]

Let's (try to) have a discussion that avoids the standard partisan finger-pointing that always pollutes (no pun intended) this topic and instead focuses on the logistics & realities we'll deal with if the planet is actually warming.

So, for the purposes of this thread, let's stipulate to the following:

• The planet is warming, for whatever reason.
• Given the scope and momentum of the warming, it's going to continue warming, as we squabble, and we need to look at how that affects our lives
• We need to look ahead at how the changes can either be mitigated OR how to take advantage of them

So my first question is this: What positives could come from this change? I'm wondering about areas of the planet that might un-freeze and allow for more crops, for example.

Any constructive questions or ideas on how we could deal with this in a positive way?
.

Ask texas

 

[Mac1958]

Thanks. I have to admit I was thinking/assuming that people would remain where they are and would have to find ways to deal with it.

I can see migration and technology playing a huge role.
.

migration will be key, i think. I think its also possible we could do this without losing knowledge. There is no telling what we have lost when our ancestors had to do things like this and similar..
This could possibly open an entire new continent to search, learn from and thrive on. There is no telling what is under all that ice.

What is interesting is they are finding stuff, like bodies, that was lost under the ice centuries ago. That to means that the Earth was this warm then or at least the ice sheets were not as large.

There is no telling the history of our unsearched lands. Hek, look at TN. We used to be under an ocean. Now look.

We'd have to look at the various options for the easiest migration possible, i.e., planning ahead for people to go to the nearest appropriate area rather than letting it happen and later regretting it.

That's a mind-blower. This would involve cooperation (uh oh) between governments.
.

And India or China is just going to take in all the Bangladeshies that will be flooded out by sea level rise?

Hard to imagine it, but we'd better start imagining it.
.

 

[Mac1958]

Let's (try to) have a discussion that avoids the standard partisan finger-pointing that always pollutes (no pun intended) this topic and instead focuses on the logistics & realities we'll deal with if the planet is actually warming.

So, for the purposes of this thread, let's stipulate to the following:

• The planet is warming, for whatever reason.
• Given the scope and momentum of the warming, it's going to continue warming, as we squabble, and we need to look at how that affects our lives
• We need to look ahead at how the changes can either be mitigated OR how to take advantage of them

So my first question is this: What positives could come from this change? I'm wondering about areas of the planet that might un-freeze and allow for more crops, for example.

Any constructive questions or ideas on how we could deal with this in a positive way?
.

Ask texas

Helpful, thanks.
.

 

[Old Rocks]

Thanks. I have to admit I was thinking/assuming that people would remain where they are and would have to find ways to deal with it.

I can see migration and technology playing a huge role.
.

It would be a very gradual change, despite the doom and gloom predictions ones sees. Changes on a planetary scale don't happen rapidly, unless you are talking about impact events or massive volcanic activity.

Wrong in so many ways. It is not gradual. The combination of industrial, agricultural, and household pollution is having a major effect on our environment already. The warming due to the GHGs in the atmosphere is warming the planet at a rate only seen in the major extinction events from the geological record.

Could you site the times that there was mass extinctions due to warming temperatures? Please. Are you sure you didn't mean cooling temperatures, you know like when the meteorite hit the Yucatan.

Timeline of a mass extinction

New evidence points to rapid collapse of Earth’s species 252 million years ago.

Jennifer Chu, MIT News Office
November 18, 2011


While the causes of this global catastrophe are unknown, an MIT-led team of researchers has now established that the end-Permian extinction was extremely rapid, triggering massive die-outs both in the oceans and on land in less than 20,000 years — the blink of an eye in geologic time. The researchers also found that this time period coincides with a massive buildup of atmospheric carbon dioxide, which likely triggered the simultaneous collapse of species in the oceans and on land.

With further calculations, the group found that the average rate at which carbon dioxide entered the atmosphere during the end-Permian extinction was slightly below today’s rate of carbon dioxide release into the atmosphere due to fossil fuel emissions. Over tens of thousands of years, increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide during the Permian period likely triggered severe global warming, accelerating species extinctions.

The researchers also discovered evidence of simultaneous and widespread wildfires that may have added to end-Permian global warming, triggering what they deem “catastrophic” soil erosion and making environments extremely arid and inhospitable.

The researchers present their findings this week in Science, and say the new timescale may help scientists home in on the end-Permian extinction’s likely causes.

Timeline of a mass extinction

Since this was written, much more has been discovered. And there was a very rapid warming with a vast methane addition at that time.

Quote: "While the causes are UNKNOWN..." Very first sentence.

Unknown yet they go on to tell you what did happen.

Quote2: "Over tens of thousands of years, increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide during the Permian period likely triggered severe global warming, accelerating species extinctions." Last sentence in red.

Is LIKELY a scientific term that actually means it did? Obviously that is how they are playing the game.

Truth is, they think they might know a likely cause.

Here are two articles on mass extinction which I think you will find interesting:

Information and Facts About Mass Extinctions

New Theory for What Caused Earth's Second-Largest Mass Extinction

Thank you for the articles. The one concerning the Ordovician extinction was new to me. Interesting. The P-T had a lot of causes, stacked up like stair steps according to the articles I have read. First, the Siberian Trapps, the largest flood volcanic province known, may have initially cooled the climate, from aerosols, then warmed it from CO2. Also, the Trapp cooked massive coal deposits and created a lot of CH4. Then the oceans warmed enough to cook off the methane clathrates. Game over, at that point. Many other subsidiary effects left out, such as the production of hydrogen sulfide by the oceans.

That we cannot say with absolute certainty that each of these things occurred as the proxies indicate is simply an indication of the present lack of data. But we are now getting data daily, and, because of the net, it is available to other scientists in the same discipline immediatly. Wonderful, but does make it hard for the interested amateur to keep up.

 

[JoeB131]

Sorry, but I cannot compete with your scientific terminology. However, scientists are not really positive they fully understand gravity. A planet spinning at thousands of miles an hour, whizzing about the Sun, and yet here we are not flying off into space --- a miracle.

No, dude, it's science. Now go ahead and cower under your bed during a thunder storm, God is angry.

 

[martybegan]

Let's (try to) have a discussion that avoids the standard partisan finger-pointing that always pollutes (no pun intended) this topic and instead focuses on the logistics & realities we'll deal with if the planet is actually warming.

So, for the purposes of this thread, let's stipulate to the following:

• The planet is warming, for whatever reason.
• Given the scope and momentum of the warming, it's going to continue warming, as we squabble, and we need to look at how that affects our lives
• We need to look ahead at how the changes can either be mitigated OR how to take advantage of them

So my first question is this: What positives could come from this change? I'm wondering about areas of the planet that might un-freeze and allow for more crops, for example.

Any constructive questions or ideas on how we could deal with this in a positive way?
.

It would be a question of migration. People would have to move to where the land becomes more arable from where the land becomes less arable.

As for rising sea levels, if they are truly occurring and at a level that can threaten some cities, then they will have to either build sea walls or again, re-locate the lower affected neighborhoods.

Thanks. I have to admit I was thinking/assuming that people would remain where they are and would have to find ways to deal with it.

I can see migration and technology playing a huge role.
.

It would be a very gradual change, despite the doom and gloom predictions ones sees. Changes on a planetary scale don't happen rapidly, unless you are talking about impact events or massive volcanic activity.

Wrong in so many ways. It is not gradual. The combination of industrial, agricultural, and household pollution is having a major effect on our environment already. The warming due to the GHGs in the atmosphere is warming the planet at a rate only seen in the major extinction events from the geological record.

You are confusing pollution due to toxicity and AGW concepts.

So far the "rapid" changes we are supposed to be seeing are only in the mucked up models and the "everything is related to AGW" screeds your side goes on every time the weather gets funky.

 

[PredFan]

Many scientists point to another ice age coming.

The main problem is that we cannot predict what will happen with even a moderate degree of certainty.

BS. A few try to say that the present lull in sunspots will turn us cold. But even a full Maunder Minimum would not overcome the effects of the GHGs we have put into the atmosphere.

BS. The GHGs have near to nothing effect in climate. There has never ever been a shred of proof to the contrary. Only computers models. GIGO.