Climate change not as threatening to planet as previously thought

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by jkcerda, Sep 18, 2017.

  1. jkcerda macrumors 6502a

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #1
    https://www.yahoo.com/news/immediacy-threat-climate-change-exaggerated-175817468.html
    guess someone bought carbon credits :p
     
  2. Mac'nCheese Suspended

    Mac'nCheese

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2010
    #2
  3. TheHateMachine macrumors 6502a

    TheHateMachine

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2012
    Location:
    Santa Fe, TX
    #3
    Naw, we are just going to gloss over that so we can score political points for our team.

    Headlines are the only important thing about articles.
     
  4. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #4
    This is exactly the outcome I warned about years back. We are polluting more than ever, but some will say we solved it by putting up some solar panels.
     
  5. hulugu macrumors 68000

    hulugu

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2003
    Location:
    quae tangit perit Trump
    #5
    This article is a mess, but its central thesis is that research by Professor Michael Grubb shows that "the climate outlook is less bleak than previously thought" because of "stabilising emissions, particularly in China."

    So, action by China and others has meant a decline in the rate of pollution. In a dynamic system, this could be good news, but only if such actions continue and are reinforced.
     
  6. Raid macrumors 68020

    Raid

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    Toronto
    #6
    Yeah the problem is not solved... it's like neglecting your dirty laundry and then saying you still don't have to do it cause you bought new underwear.

    Now if we can only get the worlds second largest polluter to do the same... Looking at you Trump!

    So how much extra time did we get? a decade?
     
  7. VulchR macrumors 68020

    VulchR

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2009
    Location:
    Scotland
    #7
    Good news, but I'd rather we invest in renewables and not perform the uncontrolled planet-wide experiment of continuing to pump CO2 into the atmosphere.
     
  8. RootBeerMan macrumors 65816

    RootBeerMan

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    #8
    I'll hold off till the peer reviews are in. If it cannot be replicated, as current models have been, then it's just more noise.
     
  9. krause734 macrumors 6502a

    krause734

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2010
    #9
    Humans are a cancer. The earth is just receiving radiation treatment!
     
  10. GermanSuplex macrumors 6502a

    GermanSuplex

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2009
    #10
    History will be our greatest judge, not the fat-cats lining their pockets because hey, when the coastlines flood and polar bears go the way of the dodo, they won't be here.

    Facts never were totally bi-partisan, I guess.
     
  11. HEK macrumors 68040

    HEK

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2013
    Location:
    US Eastern time zone
    #11
    You do realize the planet is in no way threatened by climate change. Climate has change hundreds if not thousands of times in last 5 billion years, will do so in next 5 billion as well. Only change planet won't survive is when sun expands to red giant phase and consumes planet earth.

    It's the current biological infestations on its' surface that are in imminent danger due to climate change.
     
  12. GermanSuplex macrumors 6502a

    GermanSuplex

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2009
    #12
    Are you a climate-change scientist? Because people who literally get paid to do that have said it exists, except for the fifteen paid by the oil execs who say it doesn't. I just want to know if this is your field of study or if you read Breitbart.
     
  13. jkcerda thread starter macrumors 6502a

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #13
    Let's trim the population :eek:
     
  14. Peace macrumors Core

    Peace

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2005
    Location:
    Space--The ONLY Frontier
    #14
    "They also condemned the “overreaction” to the US’s withdrawal from the Paris Climate Accord, announced by Donald Trump in June, saying it is unlikely to make a significant difference."

    I now know which scientist did this.
    :rolleyes:
     
  15. jkcerda thread starter macrumors 6502a

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #15
    Smart one who saw the scam in it :D
     
  16. HEK macrumors 68040

    HEK

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2013
    Location:
    US Eastern time zone
    #16
    If you actually read and comprehend what I stated, you will note I did not deny climate change is occurring.

    Wouldn’t read breitbart. I read a lot of other things, scientific, factual things. Of course climate change exists and this time is induced by man and is affecting the climate , it will raise sea level, and most likely plunge the world into a new ice age when the saline content falls enough such that the Gulf Stream current will stop flowing as it has in the past.

    My point was people keep mistaking that it will effect, harm, hurt the earth in some way. It will not. It will harm, hurt, and cause extinction to species inhabiting the planet currently. When the last mini ice age occurrered it cause the 500 year long dark ages. Famine went rampant when grain crops could no longer be grown in north European countries due to a few degree drop in temperatures. The population which had rapidly expanded before plunged.

    99.9 percent of all species that ever lived are extinct. The earth goes on. New life, new species arise. Will we have the political will to address the situation before severe conditions effect our offspring? Based on history, I doubt it. The biggest problem we have is greed. Even as we see ourselves making mistakes, we repeat them if money and power of a few would be affected.

    No i’m not a climate scientist.but I do read a lot, just not breitbart.
     
  17. GermanSuplex macrumors 6502a

    GermanSuplex

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2009
    #17
    I gotcha. Carlin did a bit on this in 1992 I think. "The planet is fine... the people are f*****."
     
  18. jerwin macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    #18
    it's been published

    http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ngeo3031.html

    the abstract:

    I read that as "technically, if we work together, we may not be doomed".
     
  19. Gutwrench Contributor

    Gutwrench

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2011
    #19
    Not as threatening? Really? If the Mexico earthquake doesn't convince you nothing will.
     
  20. Falhófnir macrumors 68040

    Falhófnir

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2017
    #20
    Climate change is gonna happen anyway, all the talk of ‘limiting it to x degrees’ is the wrong discussion; we need to be talking about what we’re going to do when the climate does get that warm. And no, it doesn’t take millions of years to happen naturally, when it gets going you can go from ice age to no ice age in a few decades. See younger dryas for an example.

    Having said that, there’s no excuse not to move away from fossil fuels anyway, it’s not like it’s not linked to a million and one other problems, such as ocean acidification and deoxygenation, acid rain, and direct deaths from air pollution to name a few.
     
  21. RootBeerMan macrumors 65816

    RootBeerMan

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    #21
    Published is not peer reviewed. Many people mistakenly think that the two are the same, when they are totally different. I'll wait till the science is in on this paper. Right now it's one scientists supposition.
     
  22. jerwin macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    #22
  23. RootBeerMan macrumors 65816

    RootBeerMan

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    #23
    Yes, practically all journals use the same method, but it is not peer review, (even though the people reviewing the paper are scientific "peers" or even, in some cases, former coloboraters. It is simply a review process for publication to make sure the science is sound and to ferret out mistakes. Peer review involves replicating the entire process to see if the science is repeatable and takes place outside of the journals auspices. My wife has been through this process many times. It only takes a few weeks and only results in the approval of the paper for publication. Replicating (peer reviewing) the works takes a good deal more time and effort.
     
  24. obeygiant macrumors 68040

    obeygiant

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Location:
    totally cool
  25. pdqgp macrumors 68020

    pdqgp

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2010

Share This Page

49 September 18, 2017