No it wouldn't. We are not going extinct.
-
Hello, please take a minute to check out our awesome content, contributed by the wonderful members of our community. We hope you'll add your own thoughts and opinions by making a free account!
Learning Global Warming facts and fiction
- Thread starter Stormlover
- Start date
- Status
BHS1975
Member
Maybe not but a lot of the life on the planet will. Birds should do fine as they are dinosaurs which handle heat pretty well.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
NoSnowATL
Member
Life isn’t supposed to stay on this planet forever. Including mammals.
BHS1975
Member
Yeah but the Earth has easily another 1 billion years of habitability if we can keep GHGs low enough.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
VegasEagle
Member
You must be young?! Wisdom would make clear this is not going to happen. Imo
mydoortotheworld
Member
Are you trolling?? This will never happen and you will never ever convince not even 5% of the population of Earth to have ONE world government lol. AGW is real and requires cooperation, yes, but one world government? Slow down there buckaroo
BHS1975
Member
I don't think we can make the necessary changes fast enough.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Iceagewhereartthou
Member
If that's true then I want no part of it. Technology is already dehumanizing us and a handful of people deciding things for the whole planet? No thanks. In the words of Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death." Anyway, in my worldview, humans don't have the power to "save us." There is a much better way.
Brent
Member
MichaelJ
Member
Ronad Reagan once said, " the scariest words in the English language are, I am from the government and I am here to help" and he was just talking about the US government. We are NOT facing an existential threat no matter what President Dementia says, so why change everything that has existed for thousands of years on a computer modeled theory??? BTW BHS, I have some good prime ocean side property in Kansas for sale so that when the areas south of there are flooded it will become available. Imagine Topeka Beach, what a lovely name
Wow, just skimming the last two pages in this forum is rather deflating, a microcosm of why real solutions aren’t going to happen. Panic driven scare tactics along with one world governments at one extreme, and then complete denial and heads buried in the sand on the other extreme. Both our politics and our approach to solving problems are just too polarized. It’s like people cannot even discuss tough issues without insults being flung at each other with very little dialogue for reasonable solutions or ideas. Thx GaWx, for injecting some real science and more moderate views into the mix.
BHS1975
Member
You got any better ideas? Let's hear it. There's nothing more I can do but just watch this grand experiment unfold. It sure makes for some good news stories.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
MichaelJ
Member
I have never said the planet is not warming the last 150 years or so as the data shows it. If you have to label me, label me as a lukewarmer who believes man is playing a role in the rising temperature but mostly due to UHI and land use changes. I do NOT believe however that we are facing the "biggest crisis facing man" as a few in the Elite class believe. The atmosphere is a Stochastic system which is always changing and not something that modelers can pin down enough to make accurate predctions about much of anything. As we learn new things about our atmospheric dynamics, they will improve the models somewhat but will never be able to account for all the natural variables inherent in the system and will prove to be inaccurate in the long term.
BHS1975
Member
I'm going to listen to the experts who actually study climate for a living like Dr Mann for example. He has written some interesting papers lately. He's done WAY more research than you and anyone else for that matter as to the cause of the warming and where it's headed.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I don't know why you put so much faith in the "experts" when these experts have been saying that we would all be flooded by the year 2007, 2010, 2014, Wait they mean 2016, 2020, now it's 2032. Besides it sounds like a great move to tax carbon, especially when China and Middle Eastern countries are not going to be taxed.
Yeah, pretty much. Whenever the "experts" all get together and make proclamations, claim "the science is settled" (which is nearly one of the dumbest things a person who stakes his claim in science could say), move the goalposts multiple times, change the terminology, disobey a logical operating premise, and engage in shaming campaigns for dissenting points of view, I tend to take the dire predictions with a grain of salt. So far that approach has worked at a 100% success rate. And there's really no big mystery to why that is the case, either.
How about a functional government ourselves for one, and that is not totally split and unable to barely function in the past 4 years? Then certainly better relations and working with other countries to actually make some progress here. And actually improving our educational system enough that our populace can make good informed decisions.
What experts are you talking about? The climate experts I read about are not making definite proclamations that such and such disaster is going to happen by a certain time. Certainly the media may hone in on a “worst case scenario”. But I think the scientists are simply presenting what may or could happen if CO2 levels continue to rise.
Well, the ones that are frequently quoted, talking about the oceans rising by this or that date or the ice caps melting by this or that date or the end of the four seasons or the biggest threat to our existence or....
Those people. And there are many.
Ok so if they are not right then we just ignore it? That is not good science either. There has to be a happy medium here.
- Status