Interesting beginning to the global warming farce

[dieseltaylor]

abneo3sierra I am surprised you should post such a lightweight link if you are seriously disbelieve in climate change. It is faintly interesting as a history of the greens.

The question that I find most avoided by the anti- movement is the discussion about how recently has man been on the world and at what density was it ever populated. It is only around 8000 years ago that the UK became islands and at that stage the population was thousands.

So what the hell has mass glaciation, mass tropicalisation over the last 4.5 billion years got to do with the survival chances of an animal that has been around for an tiny fragment of time. That there have been extreme winters and summers in the past thousands of years does not mean that the global warming is not a growing problem which will bring even more frequent extreme weather.

The current climate just about supports the current population. Mankind changing climate in a way that increases the chances of more extreme weather is not a good idea.

I am a great fan of being conservative and taking insuarance at bad things possibly happening. When it comes to millions of human lives then we should be very careful to reduce what are considered bad effects and to make sure there are many alternative technologies to help ride out any disasters. For disasters there will be.

Unfortunately in this world there is little incentive, in fact every disincentive, to plan long term. Governments/politicians and corporations/executives all look to 4 years or slightly more as long term planning.

There are exceptions such as China, Singapore, Japan and France where governments have planned long term. But what is saddening is that there are so few. The Anglo-Saxon capitalist model based so heavily on pay-back in short term time spans is a totally busted model.

[Affentitten]

Climate change is not the same thing as global warming. Nor do single points describe a trend.

The thing is, if I'm even agreeing with people from The Land That Time Forgot, it shows that they are on the right track.

(PS: met quite a hotty from Massey University at a conference yesterday....)

[Wicky]

Quote:

there is proof that dinosaurs walked the the area that is now frozen tundra.. There is also scientific proof that once, long ago before CO2 emissions, the central USA was under water.

Are you familiar with the concept of continental drift, and the difference in time ascales between geological epochs and ice ages?

If you are a creationist then I can at least understand where you are coming from, although I think that is fruit-loopery too. but if you are not then your presentation of these "facts" is irrelevancy....at best.

I scratched my head when I first saw that and thought possibly he meant mammoths. But he's right:

Polar Dinosaurs

Seventy million years ago, near the end of the Cretaceous period, Alaska’s North Slope was closer to the North Pole than it is today. This means that it experienced nearly four months of darkness every year instead of the six weeks of night of today. The climate was much more temperate then, however, as indicated by the plants that lived at the time. It would not be an unfamiliar setting if we saw it today. The dinosaurs would have lived in a temperate forest like those seen in southern Alaska today, with ferns covering the ground and tall conifers stretching into the air

http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/dinosaur/2008/11/chilled-out-dinosaurs-in-the-alaskan-tundra/

There have also been found fossils from Antarctica

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/03/0309_040309_polardinos.html

Antarctica has sat at much the same latitude for the last hundred million years. But during the Cretaceous it enjoyed a warmer, lusher climate, similar to that of the U.S. Pacific Northwest today. (The Cretaceous period started 144 million years ago and ended 65 million years ago.)

Map http://forum.celestialmatters.org/userpix/5_065Ma1k_1.jpg

[JonS]

(PS: met quite a hotty from Massey University at a conference yesterday....)

My alma mater

[Kanonier Reichmann]

I just love how the linked article in abno3siera's initial post tries to strongly imply that if you're a believer in global warming or climate change then you're associated with this now dead nutbag Nazi and therefore, probably a closet Nazi.

BTW, great link Jon to that website debunking all the sceptics arguments using scientific arguments, graphs and statistics.... GASP! How dare they use such an underhanded way to win people over.

Regards

KR

[abneo3sierra]

Actually the original post was a reply to someone who inferred that if you believe the OTHER way, you must be a right wing nazi...I suppose in the scheme of things, it is "ok" to make invalid,insulting assumptions about the other side, just kind of bristle when it is done back towards yours.