In the Rush to Help - Global Warming

[Jacko]

Originally Posted by PlayadelSoul

Cancel your vacactions, folks. Not only will you save carbon emissions, you are also going to need the money to give your government so that they can pass it on to the "poorer ones." Kyoto lives.
And, do it quickly. We don't want you to think too much.

Speaking of not thinking too much........The last of the denialists continue to focus on the extreme reaction vs. a sensible response to compelling science.... The quicker we move forward with practical solutions that are possible today, the less extreme our reactions will have to be in the future....

Even the Administrations representatives are calling this "the scientific certainty that this is happening".... and “the issue warrants urgent action, and we need to bring forward in a more accelerated way the technologies that will make a lasting solution possible.”

Sensible and fair solutions to compelling science......

“Stabilization of emissions can be achieved by deployment of a portfolio of technologies that exist or are already under development,” said Achim Steiner, head of the United Nations Environment Program.

But he noted that developed countries would have to help poorer ones adapt to climate shifts and adopt cleaner energy choices, which are often expensive.

Mr. Steiner emphasized that the report sent a message to individuals as well as world leaders: “What we need is a new ethic in which every person changes lifestyle, attitude and behavior.”

[PlayadelSoul]

Originally Posted by Jacko

Speaking of not thinking too much........The last of the denialists continue to focus on the extreme reaction vs. a sensible response to compelling science.... The quicker we move forward with practical solutions that are possible today, the less extreme our reactions will have to be in the future....

Even the Administrations representatives are calling this "the scientific certainty that this is happening".... and “the issue warrants urgent action, and we need to bring forward in a more accelerated way the technologies that will make a lasting solution possible.”

Sensible and fair solutions to compelling science......

“Stabilization of emissions can be achieved by deployment of a portfolio of technologies that exist or are already under development,” said Achim Steiner, head of the United Nations Environment Program.

But he noted that developed countries would have to help poorer ones adapt to climate shifts and adopt cleaner energy choices, which are often expensive.

Mr. Steiner emphasized that the report sent a message to individuals as well as world leaders: “What we need is a new ethic in which every person changes lifestyle, attitude and behavior.”

You ignored that middle paragraph, again.

[Jacko]

Originally Posted by PlayadelSoul

You ignored that middle paragraph, again.

No I did not...note the word "fair" in my response....the more capable, richer nations who have been the worst polluters and burners of carbon that caused the problem while they benefited from it, should indeed help to support the identifiable impact on the less-rich nations.......cap and trade is a good start....

You've ignored the whole thrust of the article and my response to it......which is that you seem to be one of the few remaining people denying the problem and the urgency for us to do something about it?????

[PlayadelSoul]

Originally Posted by Jacko

No I did not...note the word "fair" in my response....the more capable, richer nations who have been the worst polluters and burners of carbon that caused the problem while they benefited from it, should indeed help to support the identifiable impact on the less-rich nations.......cap and trade is a good start....

You've ignored the whole thrust of the article and my response to it......which is that you seem to be one of the few remaining , people denying the problem and the urgency for us to do something about it?????

When you use the Arctic ice melting as your evidence of "urgency", of course I question it. How much ice was there in 1950? 1960? 1845? 1971? You have no clue. Well, you do have one. The fact that a wooden sailboat was able to navigate through it, in 1903.

[Jacko]

Originally Posted by PlayadelSoul

When you use the Arctic ice melting as your evidence of "urgency", of course I question it. How much ice was there in 1950? 1960? 1845? 1971? You have no clue. Well, you do have one. The fact that a wooden sailboat was able to navigate through it, in 1903.

Question it plenty if you like...but seriously and I am really sorry to say this..., your logic on this matter is really crappy! (no really..seriously....)

Are you starting to feel a little "out of touch" on this issue? Well, don't go there yet..you will soon feel even more that way....

[PlayadelSoul]

Originally Posted by Jacko

Question it plenty if you like...but seriously and I am really sorry to say this..., your logic on this matter is really crappy! (no really..seriously....)

Are you starting to feel a little "out of touch" on this issue? Well, don't go there yet..you will soon feel even more that way....

Actually, I wish more people were as "in touch" as I am. They might see some of the absurdities being offered up.



I'm melting, I'm melting!!

[Jacko]

Originally Posted by PlayadelSoul

Actually, I wish more people were as "in touch" as I am. They might see some of the absurdities being offered up.



I'm melting, I'm melting!!

Be careful what you wish for

[Seakony]

Originally Posted by Seakony

Did any of you guys happen to catch on the news about how katrina destoyed so many trees that the scientists said that the loss is adding to global warming. I guess you can also throw in the loss of trees from the tsunami and california wildfires too. Mother nature does have a big part in adding to global warming.

ABC News: Katrina: Worst Forest Slam in U.S. History

hmmm..no response.....I guess ya'll only think man is the problem.

[ElvisP]

Originally Posted by Seakony

hmmm..no response.....I guess ya'll only think man is the problem.

Maybe it's because it wasn't worth answering to. Maybe the firefighters should drop fuel to the fires instead of water and retardant.

[Seakony]

Originally Posted by ElvisP

Maybe it's because it wasn't worth answering to. Maybe the firefighters should drop fuel to the fires instead of water and retardant.

tactful aren't ya.

[Pok-a-tok]

hmmm..no response.....I guess ya'll only think man is the problem.

Scientists call this phenomenon a feedback loop; the warmer it gets, the more likely that storms could kill more forests, which would release even more greenhouse gas.

This puts IMO even a greater responsibility on humans to decrease carbon dioxide emissions/deforestation etc, because mother Earth turns it into a "feedback loop".

[Pok-a-tok]

[PlayadelSoul]

Originally Posted by Pok-a-tok

This puts IMO even a greater responsibility on humans to decrease carbon dioxide emissions/deforestation etc, because mother Earth turns it into a "feedback loop".

What do scientists say about the idea that the warmer the planet is, the more plant life there will be?

[Jacko]

Originally Posted by PlayadelSoul

What do scientists say about the idea that the warmer the planet is, the more plant life there will be?

Its not about how warm the planet is..its about the rapidity of the change in temperature, our ability to predict and manage the result and our direct involvement in something that we do not yet know how to adequately manage (the rapid change in temperature)....its the tipping point that we want to try to avoid. Cautious, but significant avoidance strategies, doing things that have ancillary benefits that we do know about, is the likely best approach.

[Pok-a-tok]

Originally Posted by PlayadelSoul

What do scientists say about the idea that the warmer the planet is, the more plant life there will be?

You mean, as an isolated phenomena or as just one in a myriad of parameters influencing each other..?