Where's Global Warming When We Need It?

• tk421

  

  Ghmothwdwhso wrote: I'll try one more time. I've asked this question before on one these "Climate change"/"Global warming" threads and haven't received an intelligent answer.
  
  What did humans do to end the last ice age?

  Also, why is the temperature on Mars increasing? Global warming?
• believer

  

  Ghmothwdwhso wrote: I'll try one more time. I've asked this question before on one of these "Climate change"/"Global warming" threads and haven't received an intelligent answer.
  
  What did humans do to end the last ice age?

  Campfires?
• fan_from_texas

  Ghmothwdwhso wrote: I'll try one more time. I've asked this question before on one of these "Climate change"/"Global warming" threads and haven't received an intelligent answer.
  
  What did humans do to end the last ice age?

  You haven't received an intelligent answer because you haven't asked an intelligent question. There are lots of morons on both sides who make dumb arguments. Refuting dumb arguments (or pointing out that they're stupid) is fun, but it doesn't really address the issues at hand. It's important to address the good arguments if you want to convince other people. Undoubtedly, natural forces play the largest role in climate change. No one seriously debates that. The real question is whether the limited role played by humans is exacerbating the natural process and making things worse for us.
  
  To steal an analogy from another thread--
  

  I haven't yet heard anyone suggest that humans make more of a warming impact than nature, but that doesn't seem to be a reason not to do anything. Noting that one variable isn't the primary variable doesn't mean you should ignore it. For example, intelligence matters more than studying for SAT performance. But if someone is stupid, that doesn't mean they shouldn't study--on the contrary, because they can only control that variable, they should do everything they can to increase their chances there, even if the larger variables are out of their control.
  
  Undoubtedly the vast majority of climate change is driven by natural cycles. I haven't heard anyone deny that. But it does appear likely that our actions play at least some role in what's going on. Inasmuch as we can minimize that impact (while balancing it out against affecting the economy today), I think it's irresponsible not to have the discussion and figure out if there's something we can do now not to screw over our kids' generation. Screwing the future to make the present easier is a baby-boomer sort of thing (thanks, mom and dad, for all the taxes and entitlement spending!)--I don't like it when previous generations have done it to us, and it's irresponsible for us to do it to the future.

  And then, assuming that's true, the tough question becomes determining how much of a trade off to make in the near future to reduce a slight chance of a potentially massive problem in the longterm. We're not very good at discounting the present to adjust for the future, and this is essentially a policy decision--how many people do we believe we need to lock into poverty now to avoid more in the future? How many people do we need to starve to death now to prevent more in the future? Let's not make any bones about it--significantly expensive carbon abatement strategies that negatively affect GDP today have a real, meaningful impact on the world's poor and directly result in increasing their suffering. But how much of that are we willing to do to prevent a chance of more suffering in the future?
• ts1227

  

  I'm resurrecting this for no other reason than to prove a point, knowing threads already exist on the topic so why start a new one...
  
  (I will once again state up front that I do not have a preference either way on the topic, as someone with an atmospheric science background I feel that nothing can be proven or disproven at this point.. this post is meant to poke fun at the arguments made on this site, not take a side)
  
  Temperatures are going to hit 100 this week in places... when the temperature drops below 0, we get the "Where's your global warming now?" comments all over the place. Yet, no one is saying "OMG HERE IT IS!" coming into this week.
  
  Why do short term anomalous weather patterns in January prove your point, and short term anomalous weather patterns in July mean nothing?
• Belly35

  

  Global Warming
  Global Peace
  Global Financing
  Global Economics
  Global Hunger
  Global another Liberal word for fraud
• sleeper

  

  Honestly, Barack Obama has done nothing to combat global warming.
  
  He is ruining this country one bill at a time, and its only a matter of time before the United States collapses on itself, and people are still expecting Obama to be our savior?
  
  LOL
• Mr. 300

  

  Global fraud!!!
• Glory Days

  

  ts1227;411091 wrote: Temperatures are going to hit 100 this week in places... when the temperature drops below 0, we get the "Where's your global warming now?" comments all over the place. Yet, no one is saying "OMG HERE IT IS!" coming into this week.
  
  Why do short term anomalous weather patterns in January prove your point, and short term anomalous weather patterns in July mean nothing?

  haha cause we are mocking global warming when its 0 degrees out and say "where is it". look at the record temps for july, 26 of the 31 days are 60-90 years old. wouldnt we be setting records a lot more often if there really was global warming?
• ts1227

  

  Glory Days;411163 wrote:haha cause we are mocking global warming when its 0 degrees out and say "where is it". look at the record temps for july, 26 of the 31 days are 60-90 years old. wouldnt we be setting records a lot more often if there really was global warming?

  
  It is still well above the climatological averages (and at least in the ballpark with the records, we may break a record midweek in Athens).
  
  The situations in January are similar to the July ones you mention... this January wasn't the coldest ever, but it was below the climatological average, and it was enough to spew out bullshit on a message board
  
  I understand it's mocking it. I am just pointing out the fallacy in the mocking, as it is designed to push an agenda when truthfully neither situation actually proves anything at all. I'm mocking the mocking!
• I Wear Pants

  Ghmothwdwhso;141442 wrote:I'll try one more time. I've asked this question before on one of these "Climate change"/"Global warming" threads and haven't received an intelligent answer.
  
  What did humans do to end the last ice age?

  
  The ice age technically isn't over.
• I Wear Pants

  Belly35;411106 wrote:Global Warming
  Global Peace
  Global Financing
  Global Economics
  Global Hunger
  Global another Liberal word for fraud

  So basically
  
  "They are no one
  They are nowhere
  They are not our problem
  Not worth saving"
  
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MOLxfDeBMZo&feature=PlayList&p=80B64CE6F9457614&playnext_from=PL&playnext=1&index=30
  
  Fraud, another conservative word for apathy.