How do you explain the ice age?? The change in temperature since the day of the Dinosaur?? Climate evolves just like mammals do, no?
How do you explain the ice age?? The change in temperature since the day of the Dinosaur?? Climate evolves just like mammals do, no?
it doesn't evolve... thats an incorrect analogy. Climate is a chaotic complex system that runs in cycles based on a number of attractors including solar effects, astroids, and the amount of various greenhouse gases. It approximates stablity as a result of a number of delicately balanced negative feedback cycles (e.g., the hydrocycle, the carbon cycle, the ocean currents). Its approximate stablity is very important to life.
It changes over time depending on certain perturbations. The wooble of the earth axis apparently causes ice ages, but the level of CO2 is also a factor for ice ages which are associated with low levels of CO2 and the end of ice ages are associated with an increase in Co2.
The current perturbation (a strange and new attractor) that is driving the system is human activity. Over the grand scheme of things our contribution is small, but by pushing the atmospheric level of CO2 up rapidity and we are forcing a number of changes on the planet including increased acidity in the oceans and huge change in temperature (1 degree globally is a huge amount of energy) and the planet and life on the planet doesn't have time to adapt. The worry now is that we may be unleashing positive feedback loops instead of negative feedback loops which bring the possibility of cascading changes and ecological collapse.
If you know anything about Chaos theory you should be very troubled by what we are doing to this planet.
C
cristycurves
Guest
C
cristycurves
Guest
- Thread starter
- #25
^ I believe you are right Papa, and all while he's doing so, he's believing nothing is wrong. Sad state of affairs indeed.
Canada-Man
Reviewer
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2015
- Messages
- 2,289
Earth's sixth mass extinction event under way, scientists warn | Environment | The Guardian
There is no longer any doubt: We are entering a mass extinction that threatens humanity's existence, according to a rather ridiculous claim by doomsday prophet Professor Paul Ehrlich, the same author of the Population Bomb who has been saying this same thing since the 1960s.
Ehrlich and fellow hysterics Anthony D. Barnosky of the University of California at Berkeley, Andrés García of Universidad Autónoma de México, Robert M. Pringle of Princeton University and Todd M. Palmer of the University of Florida, say there are threatened species, too many humans, and issues with habitat.
Ehrlich claims "without any significant doubt that we are now entering the sixth great mass extinction event." After 1980, when Ehrlich was shown to be wrong on food and pro-science experts like Professor Norm Borlaug, the Father of the Green Revolution, were right when it came to using science to grow more food, he switched to new ways to scare the public. His 1981 book, "Extinction: The Causes and Consequences of the Disappearance of Species", began a string of doomsday concerns caused by coevolution, racial, gender and economic justice riots, and nuclear winter.
Now he claims a science consensus that extinction rates have reached levels unparalleled since the dinosaurs died out 66 million years ago - even though 99.9999% of all species since then have not only gone extinct, they have never even been identified. Mainstream scientists dismiss such talk as publicity stunts to sell books. Regardless, Science Advances let him pay to publish the newest paper, which claims species are disappearing up to about 100 times faster than the normal rate between mass extinctions, known as the background rate - even though no one can establish what that is.
"If it is allowed to continue, life would take many millions of years to recover, and our species itself would likely disappear early on," said lead author Gerardo Ceballos of the Universidad Autónoma de México.
Using fossil records and extinction counts from dubious estimates, they claim a background rate estimate twice as high as those widely used in the strangest analyses. Even though no credible scientists agree, they say their claims are conservative. "We emphasize that our calculations very likely underestimate the severity of the extinction crisis, because our aim was to place a realistic lower bound on humanity's impact on biodiversity," the researchers write.
They run the gamut of odd claims sure to be promoted by anti-science groups like the Natural Resource Defense Council, and other industry- and politically-funded environmental groups, such as:
Land clearing for farming, logging and settlement
Introduction of invasive species
Carbon emissions that drive climate change and ocean acidification
Toxins that alter and poison ecosystems
They list 41 percent of all amphibian species and 26 percent of all mammals, a number created vy the fringe group billing itself as the International Union for Conservation of Nature. "There are examples of species all over the world that are essentially the walking dead," Ehrlich said.
Citation: Gerardo Ceballos, Paul R. Ehrlich, Anthony D. Barnosky, Andrés García, Robert M. Pringle, Todd M. Palmer, 'Accelerated modern human–induced species losses: Entering the sixth mass extinction', Science Advances 19 Jun 2015: Vol. 1, no. 5, e1400253 DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.1400253
The Sixth Mass Extinction Is Here, Declare Hysterical Academics | Science 2.0
There is no longer any doubt: We are entering a mass extinction that threatens humanity's existence, according to a rather ridiculous claim by doomsday prophet Professor Paul Ehrlich, the same author of the Population Bomb who has been saying this same thing since the 1960s.
Ehrlich and fellow hysterics Anthony D. Barnosky of the University of California at Berkeley, Andrés García of Universidad Autónoma de México, Robert M. Pringle of Princeton University and Todd M. Palmer of the University of Florida, say there are threatened species, too many humans, and issues with habitat.
Ehrlich claims "without any significant doubt that we are now entering the sixth great mass extinction event." After 1980, when Ehrlich was shown to be wrong on food and pro-science experts like Professor Norm Borlaug, the Father of the Green Revolution, were right when it came to using science to grow more food, he switched to new ways to scare the public. His 1981 book, "Extinction: The Causes and Consequences of the Disappearance of Species", began a string of doomsday concerns caused by coevolution, racial, gender and economic justice riots, and nuclear winter.
Now he claims a science consensus that extinction rates have reached levels unparalleled since the dinosaurs died out 66 million years ago - even though 99.9999% of all species since then have not only gone extinct, they have never even been identified. Mainstream scientists dismiss such talk as publicity stunts to sell books. Regardless, Science Advances let him pay to publish the newest paper, which claims species are disappearing up to about 100 times faster than the normal rate between mass extinctions, known as the background rate - even though no one can establish what that is.
"If it is allowed to continue, life would take many millions of years to recover, and our species itself would likely disappear early on," said lead author Gerardo Ceballos of the Universidad Autónoma de México.
Using fossil records and extinction counts from dubious estimates, they claim a background rate estimate twice as high as those widely used in the strangest analyses. Even though no credible scientists agree, they say their claims are conservative. "We emphasize that our calculations very likely underestimate the severity of the extinction crisis, because our aim was to place a realistic lower bound on humanity's impact on biodiversity," the researchers write.
They run the gamut of odd claims sure to be promoted by anti-science groups like the Natural Resource Defense Council, and other industry- and politically-funded environmental groups, such as:
Land clearing for farming, logging and settlement
Introduction of invasive species
Carbon emissions that drive climate change and ocean acidification
Toxins that alter and poison ecosystems
They list 41 percent of all amphibian species and 26 percent of all mammals, a number created vy the fringe group billing itself as the International Union for Conservation of Nature. "There are examples of species all over the world that are essentially the walking dead," Ehrlich said.
Citation: Gerardo Ceballos, Paul R. Ehrlich, Anthony D. Barnosky, Andrés García, Robert M. Pringle, Todd M. Palmer, 'Accelerated modern human–induced species losses: Entering the sixth mass extinction', Science Advances 19 Jun 2015: Vol. 1, no. 5, e1400253 DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.1400253
The Sixth Mass Extinction Is Here, Declare Hysterical Academics | Science 2.0
That indeed is probably true, but at least some of us tried to get our stupid species to change and avert the problem... but then others (anti-science types) insist on pushing things all the way.
Canada-Man
Reviewer
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2015
- Messages
- 2,289
Prince Charles' Silly Doomsday Prediction | The Daily Caller Article published on July 9, 2017
Prince Charles warned in July 2009 humanity had only 96 months to save the world from “irretrievable climate and ecosystem collapse, and all that goes with it” caused by unchecked consumerism.
Saturday marked the 96-month deadline the Prince of Wales set, meaning that, according to Charles, humanity has run out of time to avert “an environmental crisis.”
“We face the dual challenges of a world view and an economic system that seem to have enormous shortcomings, together with an environmental crisis – including that of climate change – which threatens to engulf us all,” Charles said in a 2009 speech at St. James’s Palace in London.
Charles is a fervent environmentalist and critic of capitalism, which he sees as “an enormous cost to the Earth.” In his 2009 speech, Charles claimed humanity needed “coherent financial incentives and disincentives” to to avoid environmental catastrophe.
The prince has argued global warming has already impacted society, claiming man-made warming was the “root cause” of the Syrian civil war. He also backed the Paris agreement on climate change that U.S. President Donald Trump vowed to exit in the coming years.
Ironically, Charles’s calls to check consumerism have been undermined by his own lavish lifestyle. His summer residence in Scotland, for example, is the sprawling 53,000-acre estate of Birkhall where he’s attended by dozens of servants.
“Despite his attack on the materialism of the modern age, the Prince has been criticised for his own indulgences, including dozens of staff to run his homes and hundreds of thousands of pounds spent traveling around the world. While his private estates on the Duchy of Cornwall generate record profits his tax bill was lower than the year before,” the UK Independent noted in 2009.
Regardless, Charles has joined the ranks of prophets of doom who set deadlines to avert a global crisis.
“But for all its achievements, our consumerist society comes at an enormous cost to the Earth, and we must face up to the fact that the Earth cannot afford to support it,” Charles said in his 2009 speech.
“Just as our banking sector is struggling with its debts – and paradoxically also facing calls for a return to so-called ‘old-fashioned’, traditional banking – so Nature’s life-support systems are failing to cope with the debts we have built up there too,” he said.
“If we don’t face up to this, then Nature, the biggest bank of all, could go bust. And no amount of quantitative easing will revive it,” Charles said, predicting humanity only had 96 months to avert catastrophe.
Prince Charles warned in July 2009 humanity had only 96 months to save the world from “irretrievable climate and ecosystem collapse, and all that goes with it” caused by unchecked consumerism.
Saturday marked the 96-month deadline the Prince of Wales set, meaning that, according to Charles, humanity has run out of time to avert “an environmental crisis.”
“We face the dual challenges of a world view and an economic system that seem to have enormous shortcomings, together with an environmental crisis – including that of climate change – which threatens to engulf us all,” Charles said in a 2009 speech at St. James’s Palace in London.
Charles is a fervent environmentalist and critic of capitalism, which he sees as “an enormous cost to the Earth.” In his 2009 speech, Charles claimed humanity needed “coherent financial incentives and disincentives” to to avoid environmental catastrophe.
The prince has argued global warming has already impacted society, claiming man-made warming was the “root cause” of the Syrian civil war. He also backed the Paris agreement on climate change that U.S. President Donald Trump vowed to exit in the coming years.
Ironically, Charles’s calls to check consumerism have been undermined by his own lavish lifestyle. His summer residence in Scotland, for example, is the sprawling 53,000-acre estate of Birkhall where he’s attended by dozens of servants.
“Despite his attack on the materialism of the modern age, the Prince has been criticised for his own indulgences, including dozens of staff to run his homes and hundreds of thousands of pounds spent traveling around the world. While his private estates on the Duchy of Cornwall generate record profits his tax bill was lower than the year before,” the UK Independent noted in 2009.
Regardless, Charles has joined the ranks of prophets of doom who set deadlines to avert a global crisis.
“But for all its achievements, our consumerist society comes at an enormous cost to the Earth, and we must face up to the fact that the Earth cannot afford to support it,” Charles said in his 2009 speech.
“Just as our banking sector is struggling with its debts – and paradoxically also facing calls for a return to so-called ‘old-fashioned’, traditional banking – so Nature’s life-support systems are failing to cope with the debts we have built up there too,” he said.
“If we don’t face up to this, then Nature, the biggest bank of all, could go bust. And no amount of quantitative easing will revive it,” Charles said, predicting humanity only had 96 months to avert catastrophe.
Last edited:
C
cristycurves
Guest
- Thread starter
- #32
Oh Canada man, he stands for all he copies and pastes and when you disagree he'll post until a quarter to three
Oh Canada man, believes all that's on the net,
he's stubborn and forlorn, on the we sure can bet
Oh Canada man, will argue till he's blue
He ignores common sense, instead believes what's untrue
Oh Canada man.....lol,
sing along with me, Oh Canada man...........
Oh Canada man, believes all that's on the net,
he's stubborn and forlorn, on the we sure can bet
Oh Canada man, will argue till he's blue
He ignores common sense, instead believes what's untrue
Oh Canada man.....lol,
sing along with me, Oh Canada man...........
Canada-Man
Reviewer
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2015
- Messages
- 2,289
provide evidence that prove your claims instead of personal attacks and emotional ranting. you engage in copy and pasting too. don't be a hypocrite
C
cristycurves
Guest
- Thread starter
- #34
Then I guess ......you didn't like my song........:rofl!:
LMAO, you're a hoot! :kissing:
C
cristycurves
Guest
- Thread starter
- #36
^ Answer me this, are you a troll, Demien says you are.......:LMAO:
But seriously......I'd be interested in knowing nntsci response to your post. Until then , how do you know what Al gore has given up, or hasn't given up? Millions of years ago, how many human beings were living and thriving on planet earth? I believe that most of us who believe climate change is man made do live with concern of our footprints and do the most to keep them as small as possible.
But seriously......I'd be interested in knowing nntsci response to your post. Until then , how do you know what Al gore has given up, or hasn't given up? Millions of years ago, how many human beings were living and thriving on planet earth? I believe that most of us who believe climate change is man made do live with concern of our footprints and do the most to keep them as small as possible.
demien3k5
Senior Member
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2017
- Messages
- 1,239
Point of clarification: I did not call you a troll. I said that other members have on a number of occasions attempted to treat you as such because they either could not keep up with your arguments, nor could they discredit the opinions you shared. My comment was simply an assertion of the 'modis operandi' of some members here.
C
cristycurves
Guest
- Thread starter
- #38
Primo, you're using the straw man argument and in the case of global warming, it doesn't work. Al gore has done more than most to enlighten many and to bring change, to help slow the process. If you are truly concerned about who and what is causing the highest amount of green house gases, or emissions, then do your part to not participate in attributing to factory farming, agriculture.....it is this that is doing most harm, to the planet and to human health.But you know you and me, we usually disagree,lol.:wink2:
papasmerf
Senior Member
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2010
- Messages
- 33,614
C
cristycurves
Guest
- Thread starter
- #40
I always use my words, and I'd have an award and be famous if I had the solutions. My desire would be to change farming back to what it used to be and not allow government or corporations to run or control it, that's one thing. Another would be to convince you Americans to recycle at least as much as we Canadians. I'd also like serious commitments towards wind and other forms of energy that are kinder to the environment and more sustainable. Perceived crisis? Even Stevie Wonder can see that man kind has dangerously accelerated climate change. And why I even care.....is funny to me, since I've no one to leave this planet to. I've no children, so when I'm gone what mankind does to his home will have no further effect on me, yet I do care.....go figure.
