http://petrolog.typepad.com/photos/blog_illustrations/cumulative_carbon_emissions_since_1850b.gif

http://www.thegwpf.com/images/stories/CO2Best.jpg



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 08/23/2016 02:00PM by anybody.

In what way will climate change impact us Southern dwellers first?

Are we talking about Anthropogenic climate change, or the regular old climate change that happens with or without humans?

Edit: A few years ago we were threatened with an increase in hurricanes as a consequence of our love of SUVs and Pick-ups. But since then the hurricane numbers are down, and no hurricanes have entered or developed in the Gulf of Mexico since September 2013, a stretch of well over 1,000 days. This streak is now the longest on record, dating to the late 1800s.

Apparently we are safer down here because of climate change ;)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/23/2016 01:57PM by Darren Steers.

And I'm talking about decades and centuries of pumping carbon, methane and other gases and compounds into the atmosphere -- not automotive emissions of the last twenty years.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/23/2016 02:19PM by anybody.

It's weird how the problems we have been facing down here in the South are just your typical problems from over population and building homes in places that are prone to flooding, or because there are now homes in one place, the flood waters are pushed to another area that didn't used to flood.

Nothing to do with climate change at all. Heavy rains are not unusual down here. Messing with the natural drainage, that isn't a good idea.

"And I'm talking about decades and centuries of pumping carbon, methane and other gases and compounds into the atmosphere -- not automotive emissions of the last twenty years."

You mean kinda like this?

http://inhabitat.com/dinosaur-farts-may-have-caused-the-last-global-warming/

Darn those environmentally unconscious dinosaurs!

Oh, to return to the Medieval Warm Period; which, I believe, preceded the Little Ice Age; from which we are currently warming.

Edit: Scientists have determined that there have been at least five major ice ages, or glacial periods. Between each of those glacial periods is an interglacial period. You can tell the difference between the two by simply noting that the ice that covers the earth during the glacial period invariably melts and recedes during the interglacial periods; i.e., it gets warmer. What caused it to get warmer during each of those interglacial periods? It's a safe bet it wasn't those pesky humans.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/23/2016 03:38PM by surprenant.

And if some have their way, such suggestions will be criminalized and prosecuted under the RICO act.

As best as we can figure, Previous periods of warming were entirely natural due to no anthropomorphic influences available to link for causation. In the modern era, we thankfully have significant international bodies with powers of taxation that have found the ultimate cause of AGW is insufficient taxation and unequal international wealth distribution.

I have, and have been since climate scientists (maybe even some of the same scientists warning us now of AGW) were warning us of an imminent ice age in the 70s; I don't agree with your conclusions.

Tell that to the people of Louisiana.

I didn't realise Louisiana had just had a hurricane?

I thought they have been having a very wet summer (as have we in Houston), and so the rivers were already high when a bigger thunderstorm came rolling through.

No hurricane. But more rain than Katrina. And it IS from anthropogenic climate change.

It IS?

How would we go about proving that?

A certain percentage of the storm that flooded Louisiana can be probably be blamed on global warming. The linked article below shows that, as global temperatures have increased in the past several decades, there has been about a .7% increase per decade in "annual-maximum daily precipitation" amounts in the wet areas of the world, of which Louisiana is one. So, if a similar storm to that which occurred recently in Louisiana had occurred in 1950 it would have dropped maybe 19 inches of rain in one day in some areas, instead of 20 inches in 2016. (Of course, scientists work with averages and probabilities, not certainties. And then there's paving over previously rural areas and other types of deforestation which increase runoff and can escalate damage from flooding.)

http://www.nature.com/articles/nclimate2941.epdf?referrer_access_token=ZsrCbJXyanSTSFa49Lzk-tRgN0jAjWel9jnR3ZoTv0PZC5hqJK1prEQsfQ6a915B_FJysLTDggO4TylZqdj2yNMZZwEcNiJCfjygnajAzUF-GNN4e4dUXvOCuiCVk0zHWQq_B6XWkO8T_dVCRAjaxDQBM7j1zHayh5oJkzf4KxdjDPA-4Ui-zJdp-kv8Z1ZPEbrpKrAmwNwoZu2uJGS14wt-eVvQkzqXDXjSTcAk-mjqufa1CqyfLUJVzsr-33H4PxCqDl9k2UtAB7XkOSB2Uw%3D%3D&tracking_referrer=www.nature.com


[Edited for content and clarity]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/23/2016 04:50PM by lurking in.

Too bad this site is all about leftist politics these days.

You have illustrated my point exactly. Religious conservatives have created a climate (pun intended) wherein scientific fact is is only "fact" if it supports their pre-conceived ideas. If it doesn't the facts are ignored.

There's nothing left or right or religious or non-religious about gay or trans people. They are because mother nature made them that way.


There's nothing left or right or religious or non-religious about evolution. That's just how life has existed on this planet for countless millennia.

There's nothing left or right or religious or non-religious about science. It's just a rational way to try and figure out the world we live in.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/23/2016 02:39PM by anybody.

usedtolovethissite Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Too bad this site is all about leftist politics
> these days.

As EricK just said.....please avoid politics :)

usedtolovethissite Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Too bad this site is all about leftist politics
> these days.

It seems this forum is hit on consistently by trolls who love to parrot themes and memes cooked up by the ubiquitous MSM.

Thus, even here (on a board ostensibly dedicated to recovery from a cult), we have to wallow through threads filled with endless left-wing crap.

As the writer Boris Pasternak lamented:

"We now drown in the stench of the pharisee."

I think they'll deny and deny until the day they die.

All christians no matter where they live will be waiting

for Jeebus to come and solve all these pesky weather

problems and make the world a better place again.

Hurricanes, floods, etc., aren't anything new to Louisiana. There have towns that have been completely wiped out and never rebuilt by these storms.

http://www.thecajuns.com/lahurricanes.htm

Major damage is now caused by humans trying to control nature like diking the Mississippi, where the river's water level is higher that New Orleans.

Dams are built that prevent flood water finding it's own path along the Atchafalaya River. If the Mississippi was allowed to follow this path, it would decimate the shipping and commerce in the New Orleans area.

But humans knows what's best for nature.

Tumwater, you're ruining this thread by being logical and using facts.

Sorry, just trying to add my two cents to the discussion.

A lot of my friends tell me, "There you go again, talking like an engineer."

I R 1

P/S during a major ice age, the Asians came down the land bridge. All the evidence of their journey, trail camps, are where the shore line was, i.e., now under a couple hundred feet of water. We adapted, rather our ancestors, to rising sea levels.

"Hurricanes, floods, etc., aren't anything new to Louisiana. There have been towns that have been completely wiped out and never rebuilt by these storms."

Yep, and people need to keep in mind that technologically advanced humans have only lived in these hurricane/flood areas (from Texas to Florida) for about 400 years. We've only been building modern cities with their infrastructure in those areas for about 250 years. Thus, it's not that floods or hurricanes are any worse than they were 1000 years ago; the problem is that there are more humans who live in those areas and are affected by the events. Louisiana puts up with the occasional hurricanes and floods because of the billions of dollars of income generated by river traffic and the port of New Orleans.

As for the earth warming: when the ancient Siberians came to America 12k+ years ago, there's a reason why very few of them stayed in the Arctic, and most of them kept emigrating south, where they grew to number in the millions and built great cultures. That reason is WARMTH. Millions of Americans (and some Canadians) are moving to the southern USA nowadays. They don't care if the temperature is half a degree higher or if they get a few more inches of rain than usual. They come where there are jobs and a better life, and a lot of them are escaping the cold weather up north.

In 1927 Ford released its iconic "Model A"
That same year saw 680,000 people uprooted as 27,000 square miles of Arkansas, Mississippi and Louisiana were inundated with up to 30 feet of water in the Great Mississippi Flood.

Coincidence? I think not.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Model_A_(1927%E2%80%9331)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Mississippi_Flood_of_1927

and they wouldn't listen.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PsNjYQMPA1o

Krypton might be fiction but the clear and present danger that global warming and climate change present to human civilisation is the greatest threat to mankind since the Ice Age.

This is real, people. Your grandchildren and great grandchildren will look back and wonder how you could see the danger staring you in the face and do nothing.

"Krypton might be fiction but the clear and present danger that global warming and climate change present to human civilisation is the greatest threat to mankind since the Ice Age."

So, you're saying that too-cold temperatures are detrimental to humans too?

"This is real, people. Your grandchildren and great grandchildren will look back and wonder how you could see the danger staring you in the face and do nothing."

Wow, you sound like Samuel the Lamanite there. Why are you worried about future humans? The earth is an estimated 4.5 billion years old. Dinosaurs went extinct 65 million years ago and humans had nothing to do with it. Humans have only been around about 200k years. We are relative newcomers to life on earth. Humans might go extinct for some reason 5,000 years from now, and it might not have anything to do with the earth's temperature, pollution, or the amount of rainfall. Whatever species rises up after humans are gone might like the temperature and the rainfall just fine.

My feelings about "climate change" run along these lines:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8eWQSpO2eF0

Who'd a thunk there were so many flat partners here. Wow. Boggles the mind. The scientific consensus is in. But we can still be dumb about it.

Flat earthers. Autocorrect sucks.

and receptive to new ideas and new ways of thinking.

The atmosphere is finite. It cannot possibly be "okay" to keep pumping bad things into it, while polluting the "washtub" oceans.

The worst "messages" I see are the coastal dead zones.

Science and politics and big money can battle all they want.

The way I understand global warming is not that the planet hasn't cooled and warmed before, but that the changes, when compared to earlier changes, are happening at a greatly accelerated rate. Because that is still "slow" in human time, does not mean that it is "slow" in geological time.

I guess it depends on which bag of money I ask, but the cores from under Antartica were of interest. No simple task, that.



*apolitical

If Mormonism were true, why would the Mormons have to lie about it? If man-made climate change is true, why do the alarmists have to lie about it?

I'm not suggesting that we shouldn't be trying to clean up our act and make things better. We most definitely should be finding ways to produce cleaner energy and minimizing our impact on the planet. But the sky-is-falling crowd really isn't helping their own cause when they are clearly cherry picking the data or just flat out lying.

It is affecting the Arctic first, along with Alaska, northern Canada and Siberia.

People can ignore politicians, and they can ignore scientists, but when insurance companies start charging sky high rates, or refuse to insure certain areas at all, people are going to take notice. Watching your property value drop to near zero because it is uninsurable and therefore unbuildable is not a pleasant experience.

Mormonism is a fraudulent cult-like religion that uses guilt, shame, and authority to control people.

Many ex-Mormons who have escaped the cult have feelings of alienation and betrayal.

It might seem to some of you that some scientific authority figures are making up a story about doomsday via climate change but this isn't so.


There's nothing to gain. No one is saying "climate change is coming so give me all of your cash." The data are available for all the world to see.


It will take decades if not hundreds of years for the effects to come. Imagine a situation a'la "No Blade Of Grass" or "Earth Abides" taking place over the next hundred or hundred and fifty or two hundred years.


More and more extreme weather events will become commonplace. Winters will be harsher and summers longer and hotter. Access to fresh water and arable land to grow food will decline. Populations will be displaced. That causes war and social upheaval which creates even more problems. As things get worse famine, disease and war will reduce the global population. Industry will collapse. Technology will be increasingly non-understandable. Some humans will survive -- Man survived the last Ice Age -- but our civilisation will die.


If we do nothing.

But your response sounds exactly like doomsday via climate change. Just what you said wasn't being claimed?

I'm interested in how religion or religious views or lack thereof influence how people interpret scientific evidence



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/24/2016 12:26PM by anybody.

The truth of the matter is climate change has nothing to do with Mormonism aside from the perceived group think that supposedly causes all Mormons to be skeptical of the scientific community. Which in and of itself is also not unique to Mormonism. It isn't about censorship it is about focus. Widen the focus to much and you will invariably muddy the waters so much that the purpose of the board is rendered useless.

Also remember that those who own and run this board, own and run it. Nothing is stopping you from creating a board that does what you want it to do.

The arctic is taking a major hit as well:

http://polarfield.com/blog/endangered-archaeology-climate-change-threatens-to-swallow-paleo-inuit-sites-from-alaska-to-greenland/

The Louisiana coast is melting into the gulf right now. The sea surge is rising while the land is sinking.

There have been three periods of warming during the past 210 years. The earth warmed from about 1810 to 1840 as we came out of the little ice age. We warmed again from about 1900 to 1940 and again from about 1970 to 2000. All three periods experienced the same amount of warming at the same rate for about the same length of time however the first two periods could have had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with man produced green house gasses.

Now the alarmists want us to believe that the third warming period could only have been caused by burning fossil fuels. To make matters worse for the alarmists there has been NO WARMING for the past 18 years yet the CO2 levels in the atmosphere continue to rise.

Are some glaciers melting? Absolutely, we continue to thaw from the little ice age. Does CO2 contribute to warming? Absolutely however not nearly to the level claimed by Alarmists and the people creating the temperature models. Have the last 15 years been the warmest on record? Probably not, the raw data (ignore the manipulated data) still shows that 1934 and 1936 were warmer than any years in the past 20 years and therefore warmer than any years since the midieval warm period approximately 700 years ago.