If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Guardian)   Some scientist you never heard of has figured out why there's a surge in shark attacks this year: Global warming   (guardian.co.uk) divider line 226
    More: Florida  
•       •       •

3547 clicks; posted to Main » on 04 May 2008 at 2:02 AM (6 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



226 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
TBC
2008-05-04 07:50:47 AM  
Swede: So, do the sharks eat these people because they're hungry?

Or sweaty?


Because they're hungry. And because we look like tasty, delicious seals.

/mmmmmmm...sealy
//Tasty-pedic!
///New flotation device?
 
2008-05-04 07:55:00 AM  
Aaaannd, why not.
 
2008-05-04 07:56:17 AM  
Honestly, as a questioner, I think the deniers have this one won. The deniers are the ones that are willing to say if I am wrong it is worth changing. True believers in global warming say, it doesn't matter if I am wrong. That is a scary attitude.
 
2008-05-04 07:59:33 AM  
Republicans don't like when they are wrong. And they don't like when things alter their habits.

Are you typing all of this from your treehouse on your magic computer that's running off of solar power all after a long commute by bicycle to and fro from your organic farm where you get all of you sustenance from Gaia's warm nipple?

Or do you drive a car to and from your Mcjob, leaving a carbon footprint roughly equal to Karl Rove's and Dick Cheney's magnified x2 by that cloud of smug you're under?
 
2008-05-04 08:11:46 AM  
A long time ago, in a little villiage in the shadow of an active volcano a preist told the blacksmith in order that the volcano wouldn't destroy the villiage they needed to sacrifise his virgin daughter.
Now the blacksmith didn't want to do this, but addmittinly he knew nothing about volcanos. The neighbors who had nothing to lose and were sacrofising nothing also said the blacksmith should chuck his girl in. The blacksmith turned to the preist, it should be noted that 20 years of working metal turned him to the kind of guy that could mess most people up, and said.
"Ok preist, we will throw my daughter in, instead of moving, but if this volcano even makes a noise after we do this, you will be skinned alive, slowly from the feet up -than you will follow her into the volcano." The preist changed his mind and decided they should move, accountability after all is no fun at all when your whole game plan is based on belief.
And now.... The preists say we should sacrifise our lifestyles or the world will end. There was never any bad weather before the industrial revolution apparantly. Many want to make the sacrifises, many more want everybody else to make them.
I don't know anything about the weather. But if I make sacrifises and they don't pan out someone needs to be skinned.
 
2008-05-04 08:32:41 AM  
globalwarmingpraiser:

Honestly, as a questioner, I think the deniers have this one won.

You're one of those people who think placing 10th out of 10 deserves a ribbon just for the effort, aren't you? That's the only possible way that you could justify calling being wrong on every level in regards to the scientific evidence while still claiming that you have achieved some sort of victory.
 
2008-05-04 08:36:11 AM  
alaric89: I don't know anything about the weather. But if I make sacrifises and they don't pan out someone needs to be skinned.

I'd hardly call using low energy-long lasting bulbs instead of the standard incandescents, not driving your car down the street to check the mail box, and flicking off/unplugging the things you aren't using a sacrifice even in the most broad possible use for the word.
 
2008-05-04 08:37:44 AM  
content.ytmnd.com
 
2008-05-04 08:55:42 AM  
Murkanen :I'd hardly call using low energy-long lasting bulbs instead of the standard incandescents, not driving your car down the street to check the mail box, and flicking off/unplugging the things you aren't using a sacrifice even in the most broad possible use for the word.
I don't miss smog. I personally pick up other peoples messes all the time.
I of course mean the idiots that close businesses for envirmental reasons and cretons who stiffel creativety.
If you are going to fix the world it is hard discusting work beginning with yourself, not forcing others to sacrifise for you. (and being self-rightious about it.)
I had two niegbors and we were looking at a board with nails sticking out of it.
The Teacher: "the community should take this away!"
The reporter: "I will write about this!"
The Sheet metal worker (me): Loads it into his pickup and takes it to the dump with some of his own winter garbage the next day.
The Teacher: "God I hate people who have to own those big pickups."
 
2008-05-04 09:14:46 AM  
Why doesn't anyone ever talk about the positive affects of soc alled global warming? You know how much new croplands would appear? You know that life would flourish more then ever in human history?
 
2008-05-04 09:19:03 AM  
The hallmark of a pseudoscience: post-hoc deductive explanations without any predictive empirical data.
 
2008-05-04 09:30:03 AM  
Murkanen: globalwarmingpraiser:

Honestly, as a questioner, I think the deniers have this one won.

You're one of those people who think placing 10th out of 10 deserves a ribbon just for the effort, aren't you? That's the only possible way that you could justify calling being wrong on every level in regards to the scientific evidence while still claiming that you have achieved some sort of victory.


You missed the point but its early so I might have been unclear. The point is that when you refuse to accept you might have the wrong ideas when there are contradicting ideas, you are losing a debate. The best evidence the True Believers have are the models. Predictions aren't proof. This being said there are alot of people like me who want lots of study on this. We also want to start weaning ourselves of foreign oil. We are the people the true believers need to work with.
Instead they try and make us feel bad because we don't believe. The truth is there is evidence both ways. The truth also is that we need to break the back of the middle east. This is where we all can get along and agree.
 
2008-05-04 09:33:07 AM  
I see nothing in the article about this scientist publishing his idea in a peer-reviewed journal. Indeed this crap is very unlikely to pass peer-review. Gee on average we have one at this time a year but this year we have four is hardly evidence of anything ... other than the scientist in question does not understand statistics or probability.

The science deniers naturally will equate one scientist with a hypothesis who has never published with the mainstream scientific consensus developed by many thousands of appropriate field publishing thousands of peer-reviewed research papers. This is one of the tried and true tactics of evolution deniers and HIV deniers as well.
 
2008-05-04 09:39:21 AM  
I have a theory:

Shark attacks are up due to sharks having an increasingly difficult time distinguishing between beach goers and elephant seals.

homepage.smc.edu
 
2008-05-04 09:43:07 AM  
TheMysteriousStranger :The science deniers naturally will equate one scientist with a hypothesis who has never published with the mainstream scientific consensus developed by many thousands of appropriate field publishing thousands of peer-reviewed research papers. This is one of the tried and true tactics of evolution deniers and HIV deniers as well.
What the Frak is a HIV denier?
Global warming true beleivers sound more like evolution deniers than the commen sense based people on the other side of the argument.
 
2008-05-04 10:10:08 AM  
It's a hoax! Global warming is just the latest in a long list of fake crises that have been pawned off on the people. They wanted to ban DDT since the scientists had proven that it thinned the shells of eggs, and all the birds were going to die. So they banned DDT and what happened? Millions of people in 3rd world countries have died from malaria, and also the scientists looked into the question further and found the shells of eggs started thinning 100 years before DDT was even invented, but the so called textbooks still print the lies about DDT killing birds off, even though it has been proven conclusively that DDT had nothing to do with it.

Fluorocarbons are destroying the ozone layer, the scientists found a hole in the ozone layer over Chile, everyone was going to die from skin cancer due to depletion of the ozone layer. They told us freon went up into the high atmosphere and destroyed ozone, but anyone that has really worked with freon knows that its heavier than air and can't go up into the atmosphere, so they changed their story and told us it was the chlorine atoms that rose up in the atmosphere and killed the ozone, but chlorine atoms are also heavier than air, its impossible for them to rise up in the atmosphere! So what happened? They banned fluorocarbons, the ozone layer still has a hole in it over Chile, the increases in skin cancer have been traced to overexposure to the sun, not ozone holes, and it's been found that ozone is both created and destroyed by the sun, and it is constantly depleting and renewing itself, no matter what we do.

Now those same doom sayers, the ones that have been completely wrong in their other crusades, are telling us that the globe is warming, and humans are at fault, 20 years ago they predicted the average daytime temperature by the year 2000 would be over 100 degrees! Didn't happen. They predicted that New York and Miami would be underwater by now, didn't happen. As a matter of fact, not one single prediction they have made has come true! AlGore a few years ago said it was the hottest year in 1,000 years, but some asked exactly how the temperatures were taken before the invention of the thermometer, and exactly how the Native Americans who didn't have a written language had recorded those measurements. Then they said the last 10 years were the hottest in the last 100 years, but then NASA found a computer glitch that showed the info they were using was faulty, and when corrected their conclusion was invalid, but they ignore that and continue to say otherwise. The latest scientific studies show record amounts of ice at both the North and South poles, but the warming wienies ignore that and say they are melting, when it has been conclusively proven they are wrong! The latest scientific information shows that 2007 was the coolest year in the last 100 years, which we do have accurate measurements for, and the winter we just came though was the coldest on record...ever!

Since Katrina the global warming promoters have said that global warming caused Katrina, in direct opposition to the hurricane specialist who said global warming had nothing to do with it, they predicted record hurricanes becoming more numerous and more severe every year, but the amount and severity of hurricanes has actually gone down, not up, which was what a lot of the hurricane specialists had predicted..
 
2008-05-04 10:14:21 AM  
Midget,

nice post. Remember though, hippies need a cause, they need something to biatch about and cry about, even if it does not impact them at all. Free Tibet and all that silly stuff.
 
2008-05-04 10:36:21 AM  
Isn't it a given that EVERYTHING is caused by "Global Warming"???
 
2008-05-04 10:44:29 AM  
Hey, farkers, what's it like to not be smart enough to see through the politics?

It's even a UK report since anything disproving "global warming" from an American can''t possibly be true. (pops)
 
2008-05-04 11:10:10 AM  
I would put it down to overfishing more than anything. If you remove the shark's foodstock, they tend to have to investigate closer to the shores and see what those strange things are and if they are edible. It is just the strange thing is sometimes a human.
 
2008-05-04 11:14:31 AM  
This is such a joke.

Every scientist in the world knows that introducing hot gases on a massive scale into a closed system over the course of a century will have NO effect. They just go along with it to be cool and look older.

Seriously, consider the source when talking global warming. Those who poo poo the notion are mostly those aligned with people who think the earth is 5000 years old, that Terry Schiavo was a vibrant young tennis player murdered by liberal doctors and that there were WMDs in the Iraq. Not exactly the brightest bulbs on the tree.

And remember, they were calling global warming BS long before they had any of the recently made up "science" they refer to now. They found data to fit a conclusion - very scientific.
 
2008-05-04 12:05:34 PM  
http://environment.newscientist.com/channel/earth/dn11462

climate change for the perplexed

/weak html-fu
 
2008-05-04 12:13:57 PM  
worlds tallest midget: It's a hoax! Global warming is just the latest in a long list of fake crises that have been pawned off on the people. They wanted to ban DDT since the scientists had proven that it thinned the shells of eggs, and all the birds were going to die. So they banned DDT and what happened? Millions of people in 3rd world countries have died from malaria, and also the scientists looked into the question further and found the shells of eggs started thinning 100 years before DDT was even invented, but the so called textbooks still print the lies about DDT killing birds off, even though it has been proven conclusively that DDT had nothing to do with it.

Fluorocarbons are destroying the ozone layer, the scientists found a hole in the ozone layer over Chile, everyone was going to die from skin cancer due to depletion of the ozone layer. They told us freon went up into the high atmosphere and destroyed ozone, but anyone that has really worked with freon knows that its heavier than air and can't go up into the atmosphere, so they changed their story and told us it was the chlorine atoms that rose up in the atmosphere and killed the ozone, but chlorine atoms are also heavier than air, its impossible for them to rise up in the atmosphere! So what happened? They banned fluorocarbons, the ozone layer still has a hole in it over Chile, the increases in skin cancer have been traced to overexposure to the sun, not ozone holes, and it's been found that ozone is both created and destroyed by the sun, and it is constantly depleting and renewing itself, no matter what we do.

Now those same doom sayers, the ones that have been completely wrong in their other crusades, are telling us that the globe is warming, and humans are at fault, 20 years ago they predicted the average daytime temperature by the year 2000 would be over 100 degrees! Didn't happen. They predicted that New York and Miami would be underwater by now, didn't happen. As a matter of fact, not one single prediction they have made has come true! AlGore a few years ago said it was the hottest year in 1,000 years, but some asked exactly how the temperatures were taken before the invention of the thermometer, and exactly how the Native Americans who didn't have a written language had recorded those measurements. Then they said the last 10 years were the hottest in the last 100 years, but then NASA found a computer glitch that showed the info they were using was faulty, and when corrected their conclusion was invalid, but they ignore that and continue to say otherwise. The latest scientific studies show record amounts of ice at both the North and South poles, but the warming wienies ignore that and say they are melting, when it has been conclusively proven they are wrong! The latest scientific information shows that 2007 was the coolest year in the last 100 years, which we do have accurate measurements for, and the winter we just came though was the coldest on record...ever!

Since Katrina the global warming promoters have said that global warming caused Katrina, in direct opposition to the hurricane specialist who said global warming had nothing to do with it, they predicted record hurricanes becoming more numerous and more severe every year, but the amount and severity of hurricanes has actually gone down, not up, which was what a lot of the hurricane specialists had predicted..


DDT is being used is Africa today. Scientific opinion is the environmnetal impact is a lesser consideration than malaria. DDT is essentially a poison. That is how it kills insects. It concentrates up the food chain. Do you have a credible source that indicates that DDT does not have a serious impact on ecosystems.

Regarding CFC and ozone, you obviously never took basic chemistry. Gases can also form solutions, just like liquids. Our atmosphere is formed mostly of Nitrogen (78%) and Oxygen (21%). Atomic weight oxygen is 16 whereas Nitrgen is 14. By your non-logic, we would all die within a couple of hours of oxygen poisoning. Look up gaseous solutions in a chemistry book and it will explain why some heavier gases can permeate the entire atmospere despite its weight.

Please cite sources for claims that you have made about past Global Warming predictions. Temperatures can be derived from from other sources (e.g., tree rings, Glacier samples).
 
2008-05-04 12:18:40 PM  
Apik0r0s:
Seriously, consider the source when talking global warming. Those who poo poo the notion are mostly those aligned with people who think the earth is 5000 years old, that Terry Schiavo was a vibrant young tennis player murdered by liberal doctors and that there were WMDs in the Iraq. Not exactly the brightest bulbs on the tree.


And you chose a thread about shark attacks being attributed to global warming to make this statement.

Stay classy!
 
2008-05-04 12:45:51 PM  
RamblingKey: A complete list of things caused by global warming (new window)

Acne, agricultural land increase, Afghan poppies destroyed, Africa devastated, African aid threatened, Africa in conflict, aggressive weeds, air pressure changes, Alaska reshaped, allergies increase, Alps melting, Amazon a desert, American dream end, amphibians breeding earlier (or not), anaphylactic reactions to bee stings, ancient forests dramatically changed, animals head for the hills, Antarctic grass flourishes, Antarctic ice grows, Antarctic ice shrinks, Antarctic sea life at risk, anxiety treatment, algal blooms, archaeological sites threatened, Arctic bogs melt, Arctic in bloom, Arctic ice free, Arctic lakes disappear, Arctic tundra to burn, Atlantic less salty, Atlantic more salty, atmospheric circulation modified, attack of the killer jellyfish, avalanches reduced, avalanches increased, Baghdad snow, Bahrain under water, bananas grow, beer shortage, beetle infestation, bet for $10,000, better beer, big melt faster, billion dollar research projects, billion homeless, billions face risk, billions of deaths, bird distributions change, bird visitors drop, birds confused, birds return early, birds driven north, bittern boom ends, blackbirds stop singing, blizzards, blue mussels return, bluetongue, brains shrink, bridge collapse (Minneapolis), Britain Siberian, British gardens change, brothels struggle, brown Ireland, bubonic plague, budget increases, Buddhist temple threatened, building collapse, building season extension, bushfires, business opportunities, business risks, butterflies move north, camel deaths, cancer deaths in England, cannibalism, cataracts, caterpillar biomass shift, cave paintings threatened, childhood insomnia, Cholera, circumcision in decline, cirrus disappearance, civil unrest, cloud increase, cloud stripping, cockroach migration, coffee threatened, cold climate creatures survive, cold spells (Australia), cold wave (India), computer models, conferences, conflict, conflict with Russia, consumers foot the bill, coral bleaching, coral reefs dying, coral reefs grow, coral reefs shrink , cost of trillions, cougar attacks, cradle of civilisation threatened, crime increase, crocodile sex, crops devastated, crumbling roads, buildings and sewage systems, curriculum change, cyclones (Australia), danger to kid's health, Darfur, Dartford Warbler plague, death rate increase (US), Dengue hemorrhagic fever, depression, desert advance, desert retreat, destruction of the environment, disappearance of coastal cities, diseases move north, Dolomites collapse, drought, ducks and geese decline, dust bowl in the corn belt, early marriages, early spring, earlier pollen season, Earth biodiversity crisis, Earth dying, Earth even hotter, Earth light dimming, Earth lopsided, Earth melting, Earth morbid fever, Earth on fast track, Earth past point of no return, Earth slowing down, Earth spins faster, Earth to explode, earth upside down, Earth wobbling, earthquakes, El Niño intensification, end of the world as we know it, erosion, emerging infections, encephalitis, English villages lost, equality threatened, Europe simultaneously baking and freezing, eutrophication, evolution accelerating, expansion of university climate groups, extinctions (human, civilisation, logic, Inuit, smallest butterfly, cod, ladybirds, pikas, polar bears, gorillas, walrus, whales, frogs, toads, plants, salmon, trout, wild flowers, woodlice, penguins, a million species, half of all animal and plant species, mountain species, not polar bears, barrier reef, leaches), experts muzzled, extreme changes to California, fading fall foliage, fainting, famine, farmers go under, fashion disaster, fever,figurehead sacked, fir cone bonanza, fish catches drop, fish downsize, fish catches rise, fish deaf, fish get lost, fish stocks at risk, fish stocks decline, five million illnesses, flesh eating disease, flood patterns change, floods, floods of beaches and cities, flood of migrants, flood preparation for crisis, Florida economic decline, flowers in pe ...


premature balding has to be caused by global warming
 
2008-05-04 01:03:22 PM  
Subby, name a scientist you've heard of.
 
2008-05-04 01:08:49 PM  
mrshowrules: Please cite sources for claims that you have made about past Global Warming predictions.

Why, so you can discount the sources as mouth-breather propaganda and claim victory for yourself? Not-so-fast. Here is a question for you, Mr. Smarty Pants: Where do they get the freon that allegedly depletes the ozone layer?
 
2008-05-04 01:45:23 PM  
Failing_Junk: The world you live in must be fascinating.

It is. Perhaps you should begin reading up on food sovereignty. That's where the action is.

Nobody seems to actually think that global warming is an apocalyptic end to the world. Warming will intensify exploitation of the developing world. A lot of the world's food production will have to shift geographically, but the poorest populations around coasts or in arid regions won't be able to import food, produce food, or move. That's the actual problem with global warming. North America and Europe have perfectly viable ways of dealing with it using trade. We'll simply assert our ownership over food and land resources, while the local populations suffer more than they do now.

Since we already have northern rich countries asserting ownership over crops and the food produced in the developing world, the apparatus is already in place to command the world's food supply however we want. Too bad that the monoculture farming is a big source of economic and cultural exploitation.

I guess mass extinction is also a problem but we've been seeing that for about a decade now. No large, concerned mass of people has got together to care about that yet.
 
2008-05-04 02:03:23 PM  
People near the coast cannot move? Do they not have legs? People on the coasts cannot produce food? The oceans are bereft of life? Man, this global warming thing is scary. Sterile oceans, mass amputations on coastal populations. They should make a movie.

Mass extinctions within the past decade? Oh no!!. Safe the Bison, oh wait, we did. Save the wolf! Oh wait, we did. Save the Tasmanian Tiger! Crap, we missed that one.
 
2008-05-04 02:23:02 PM  
hyperspacemonkey: Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc: Scientist we've never heard of? How many scientists on average would you say most people have heard of? Stephen Hawking? Most people I know couldn't name more than five.

1. Albert Einstein
2. Batman
3. Spock
4. A computer
5. Et al.

This so-called Dr George Burgess of Florida University doesn't even make the list. He's a fraud.


Dr. Burgess is the director of the International Shark Attack File. Then again, anyone who names fictional characters (Batman and Spock) to a list of scientists is made of FAIL.
 
2008-05-04 03:03:02 PM  
Galileo's Daughter: Then again, anyone who names fictional characters (Batman and Spock) to a list of scientists is made of FAIL.

I rather enjoyed that list.
 
2008-05-04 03:36:41 PM  
Global warming...is there nothing it can't do?
 
2008-05-04 03:57:15 PM  
worlds tallest midget: mrshowrules: Please cite sources for claims that you have made about past Global Warming predictions.

Why, so you can discount the sources as mouth-breather propaganda and claim victory for yourself? Not-so-fast. Here is a question for you, Mr. Smarty Pants: Where do they get the freon that allegedly depletes the ozone layer?


Actually, I suspect those predictions are BS, so I was just calling you on it. If you can cite any university or peer reviewed papers with these types of predictions, I would concede your point about previously lame predictions.

I think freon is manufactured from base chemicals, chlorine, fluorine and carbon. Neither fluorine or chlorine occur as an isolated element. Fluorine is seperted out from flourspar minerrals and chlorine from salt. Carbon can come from coal.
 
2008-05-04 03:59:03 PM  
A bumper crop of nonsense in the thread today. This is one of those cases where the editor who wrote the headline chooses a popular and eye-grabbing topic that is only slightly and tangentally developed in the article. Don't blame global warming--or the scientist.
 
2008-05-04 04:00:42 PM  
Shark attacks are infrequent. Even ten times as many shark attacks in a given year is not statistically significant. Ten times one is ten. Fah! Who cares? Personally I would welcome a link between global warming and shark attacks if it meant MORE SHARKS. But it would likely mean sharks following their prey closer to shore in areas heavily populated with seals and local news teams.
 
2008-05-04 04:02:38 PM  
I've read several articles this year on changes in currents, changes in the number of seals, etc., which suggest ONE of the OTHER possible explanations--namely sharks following seals to beaches in this area--is the best fit. I'll go with more seals although that doesn't mean that other factors, even global warming, aren't changing the numbers of shark attacks along this coast.
 
2008-05-04 04:06:55 PM  
One piece of magical mumbo-jumbo that caught my eye--other than that stupid list (I think the "list" is a new candidate to replace the "anecdote" as the weakest form of evidence--especially when it is a list of the failings of reporters who don't understand science being mangled by editors who do understand how to grab a reader's attention). This magical number ONLY 0.006 degrees a year.
 
2008-05-04 04:08:50 PM  
0.006 degrees a year.

False assumption 1: linearity of the phenomenon.

False assumption 2: Small numbers are unimportant.

False assumption 3: This figure means anything at all.

False assumption 4: There's a connection between "the list" and this random factoid.
 
2008-05-04 04:13:10 PM  
0.006 x 1000 equals 6. Six degrees of increase in the global mean temperature is far more significant than six degrees in today's temperature here. Here, we can expect to see days where the temperature changes by much more than that--even twenty degrees--CELSIUS. Six degrees is the title of a very good book by Mark Lynas. Read it and find out what 16,000 articles and books on climate change tells us about what 1,2,3,4,5, or 6 degrees would mean.
 
2008-05-04 04:14:58 PM  
I can not understand why losing all of your great-great-great-great-great-great grandchildren would make you any less extinct that losing all of your children. Maybe it's an economist thing. Sir Nicholas Stern's calculations of what it would cost to prevent climate change harm is criticized by economists for not discounting the value of the lives of our descendants, for assuming their lives are worth as much as our own.
 
2008-05-04 04:17:19 PM  
Half of the CO2 we have put into the atmosphere is still there. The other half has gone into plants, animals, soils, the oceans, etc. We are many thousands of years from reaching equilibrium. Six degrees in one thousand years--even if it were linear--would turn this world into a very different place. A very hostile place. And the IPCC is predicted 2-6 degrees by 2100. They are very likely being over cautious rather than fear-mongering as the rhetoric of denial would have it.
 
2008-05-04 04:21:56 PM  
Feedback loops: the melting, drying, outgasing and burning of frozen tundra (and permafrost--the peat can be 100 metres thick); deforestation; albedo; methane hydrates; ice and snow cover; the drying out of land (formerly) watered by glaciers during the dry season...these can turn a small increase by forced warming into catastrophic self-fuelled positive feedback loop that runs to the bitter end--no ice on the Arctic, the rainforest turned into desert steppe, the soils and forests that absorbed CO2 into net emitters.
 
2008-05-04 04:22:06 PM  
Seigneur: Isn't it a given that EVERYTHING is caused by "Global Warming"???

Don't be ridiculous. Global warming only causes bad things to happen!
 
2008-05-04 04:25:40 PM  
One example: the mountain pine beetle in British Columbia (and now in Alberta) is destroying millions of hectares of forest. It would have been killed and thus controlled by cold winters if it had arrived in the 1970s, but it is devastating forests because it can over-winter. This is one of the largest contributions to Canada's CO2 emissions. The mean temperature of Alberta (and Canada) over the year is minus 1.5 degrees (I read somewhere). Tipping points can be quite small numbers.
 
2008-05-04 04:29:23 PM  
Personally I hope the sharks are beneficiaries of global warming. They are likely to go extinct otherwise with or without climate change. I'd like them to be around for another few hundred million years. I like to think of them as Nature's lifeguards. They keep the stupid out of the water. If you believe in Providence, you now have a good teleological reason why P made the little sharkies to nibble on your toes.
 
2008-05-04 04:33:41 PM  
Power Skeptic: Global warming...is there nothing it can't do?

Get through to the Faith-Based Denial Community. ExxonMobil, GM, the coal industry--behind the cloud of FUD they've produced to turn this into a partisan political debate rather than a pragmatic evidence-based debate, they are feverishly working on business plans, technology and lobbying to save their sorry backsides. But the masses will carry their stupid slogans to the grave.
 
2008-05-04 04:36:35 PM  
brantgoose: Feedback loops: the melting, drying, outgasing and burning of frozen tundra (and permafrost--the peat can be 100 metres thick); deforestation; albedo; methane hydrates; ice and snow cover; the drying out of land (formerly) watered by glaciers during the dry season...these can turn a small increase by forced warming into catastrophic self-fuelled positive feedback loop that runs to the bitter end--no ice on the Arctic, the rainforest turned into desert steppe, the soils and forests that absorbed CO2 into net emitters.

First, thank you for bringing this up. I've actually searched for "positive feedback" in numerous other global warming threads on FARK, and haven't found any.

Among natural processes, positive feedback loops are highly unusual (Nuclear fission being a rare example of a natural positive feedback loop). What empirical evidence is there that positive feedbacks dominates negative feedbacks in the climate?

If you suggest to any scientist studying nature, suggesting that stable natural processes are dominated by positive feedback loops will, at the very least, raise an eyebrow. The long-term temperature record itself shows that positive feedback loops can't dominate, otherwise past increases in temperature and CO2 would have run away.
 
2008-05-04 04:38:36 PM  
They've got very experienced PR flacks, who've done it all before defending tobacco, fighting the Montreal Protocol against ozone depletion, airbags in cars, etc. THERE'S NO SCIENCE. WE NEED MORE STUDIES. OUR STUDIES SHOW IT AIN'T SO. TEACH TO THE CONTROVERSY! IT'S TOO EXPENSIVE TO FIX. And finally: WE HAVE THE SOLUTIONS! WHO BETTER TO FIX THE PROBLEM THAN THE PEOPLE WHO CREATED IT? GIVE US BUCKETS OF MONEY AND WE'LL FIX THIS OUR WAY! PAY NO ATTENTION TO THE MEN BEHIND THE CURTAIN!
 
2008-05-04 04:39:31 PM  
brantgoose Quote 2008-05-04 04:17:19 PM


Six degrees in one thousand years--even if it were linear--would turn this world into a very different place. A very hostile place.


Dude, you need to stop hitting "add comment", put the bong down, collect your thoughts, and post a synopsis of them. I'll check in later.
 
2008-05-04 04:40:49 PM  
Have you noticed that the Rockefellers have risen up against the ExxonMobil Corporation? They are demanding a split between the positions of Chairman and CEO. They are alarmed at the way the corporation is going. Global warming is one, not the whole story behind this, but Jay Rockerfeller has spoken publically about the need for the corporation to adapt (least it perish).
 
Displayed 50 of 226 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report