Expert: We must act fast on warming

Expert: We must act fast on warming

There are 28463 comments on the Kansas.com story from Sep 24, 2008, titled Expert: We must act fast on warming. In it, Kansas.com reports that:

Droughts, melting ice caps and glaciers, rising sea levels and mass extinctions will all be a reality unless the U.S. and the world cut back on carbon emissions dramatically, said James Hansen, director of ...

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Kansas.com.

gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#27154 Aug 14, 2013
home in lincoln county wrote:
<quoted text> in a way dust is a ghg was my quote not that it is a 100% ghg and to be fair ghg is what greenhous gas . wonder what would happen to your greenhouse if it were covered in volcanic dust ???? to much blot out the sun ,go cold or just a little act as a giant warming solar panel . so in a way it makes dust a ghg after all you warmers call everything thats in the air floating around the planet ( from cow farts to lint ) ghg so why not dust ? what you mad because a 81 year old fart thought of it before one of your so called over edumactaded science brains did .
Chill out, Archie, you gonna give yourself a coronary!

Fighting the irrefragable will always leave you girnning.

Since: Aug 13

Hilo, HI

#27155 Aug 14, 2013
home in lincoln county wrote:
<quoted text> no i just don't want to read the biased bull from both sides , i can look outside and see for myself the the planets not on fire and the cities are not below sea level .which i sorry to say make you and the rest of the believers very ignorant because you can't and don't think for yourselves but need to have other do it for you .
You have no idea as to what science is.

Each scientific advancement is based upon the body of knowledge that went before it.

You cannot hope to advance science unless you have a clear understanding of the fundamentals in your field.

You are not going to be able to express a scientific finding in a credible publication unless you go through a peer review process.

Don't confuse the learning process with having someone else think for you.
SpaceBlues

United States

#27156 Aug 14, 2013
gcaveman1 wrote:
<quoted text>
I am 97.5% to 99% sure that he has not.
Why not 100%? I am sure 100% that he has not.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#27157 Aug 15, 2013
home in lincoln county wrote:
<quoted text> in a way dust is a ghg was my quote not that it is a 100% ghg and to be fair ghg is what greenhous gas . wonder what would happen to your greenhouse if it were covered in volcanic dust ???? to much blot out the sun ,go cold or just a little act as a giant warming solar panel . so in a way it makes dust a ghg after all you warmers call everything thats in the air floating around the planet ( from cow farts to lint ) ghg so why not dust ? what you mad because a 81 year old fart thought of it before one of your so called over edumactaded science brains did .
Mostly, atmosphetic dust has a cooling effect. Opposite effect of a ghg.

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#27158 Aug 15, 2013
gcaveman1 wrote:
Are you a born idiot or did you have to go to a fossil fuel school to learn it?
I'm using your premise and demonstrating the idiocy involved. If global warming means more extreme weather of all kinds, then it means more extremely beautiful summer days too. You shouldn't demean that argument; it's the most attractive one you've got.

Who can't find something to love about climate change? If I accept gcaveman's assumption man made greenhouse gas changes global climate then we are already mitigating climate change against catastrophic cooling; the well known and documented ice age climate scenario. How does that feel?

Don't get hung up in the assumptions; I don't believe 'global warming means more extreme weather of all kinds' and I don't believe man made greenhouse gases change global climate either. I believe things I can experience and test. There are no experiments that test either of those assumptions; that's why it's a hoax.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#27159 Aug 15, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>I'm using your premise and demonstrating the idiocy involved. If global warming means more extreme weather of all kinds, then it means more extremely beautiful summer days too. You shouldn't demean that argument; it's the most attractive one you've got.
Who can't find something to love about climate change? If I accept gcaveman's assumption man made greenhouse gas changes global climate then we are already mitigating climate change against catastrophic cooling; the well known and documented ice age climate scenario. How does that feel?
Don't get hung up in the assumptions; I don't believe 'global warming means more extreme weather of all kinds' and I don't believe man made greenhouse gases change global climate either. I believe things I can experience and test. There are no experiments that test either of those assumptions; that's why it's a hoax.
It is not the nice summer days that we are worried about, it is the extreme weather, the melting ice, the rising sea level, the displacement or invasion of species. Of course, you have no clue what is going on. You just like to babble.
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#27160 Aug 15, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>Why not 100%? I am sure 100% that he has not.
I was being scientific.

;)

Since: Aug 13

Hilo, HI

#27161 Aug 15, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>I'm using your premise and demonstrating the idiocy involved. If global warming means more extreme weather of all kinds, then it means more extremely beautiful summer days too. You shouldn't demean that argument; it's the most attractive one you've got.
Who can't find something to love about climate change? If I accept gcaveman's assumption man made greenhouse gas changes global climate then we are already mitigating climate change against catastrophic cooling; the well known and documented ice age climate scenario. How does that feel?
Don't get hung up in the assumptions; I don't believe 'global warming means more extreme weather of all kinds' and I don't believe man made greenhouse gases change global climate either. I believe things I can experience and test. There are no experiments that test either of those assumptions; that's why it's a hoax.
If you can look at the following NASA generated graph and say that Global Warming is a hoax you are totally insane.

http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/388674main...
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#27162 Aug 15, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>I'm using your premise and demonstrating the idiocy involved. If global warming means more extreme weather of all kinds, then it means more extremely beautiful summer days too. You shouldn't demean that argument; it's the most attractive one you've got.
Who can't find something to love about climate change? If I accept gcaveman's assumption man made greenhouse gas changes global climate then we are already mitigating climate change against catastrophic cooling; the well known and documented ice age climate scenario. How does that feel?
Don't get hung up in the assumptions; I don't believe 'global warming means more extreme weather of all kinds' and I don't believe man made greenhouse gases change global climate either. I believe things I can experience and test. There are no experiments that test either of those assumptions; that's why it's a hoax.
This is the idiot part of your post:

"You no longer have to pack up and travel to that seaside summer holiday you always dreamed of. Now you can sit on your sofa and watch TV while rising ocean levels to bring that beach to you. What's not to love about global warming? "

Millions of acres of farmland will submerge, as well as small villages and huge cities, nuclear power plants, sewerage treatment plants, subways, and port facilities. You frame the problem as having to move your beach lounger back a few feet. THAT'S IDIOTIC!

Every day is a beautiful day. I want them to stay that way.

Avoiding an ice age is OK with me. Turning the Earth into a Hell is not.

And you have been told, I don't know how many times, that science doesn't live by experiments alone. Your insistence on an experiment for mitigation is what makes you a liar and a fool.
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#27163 Aug 15, 2013
The Integral wrote:
<quoted text>
If you can look at the following NASA generated graph and say that Global Warming is a hoax you are totally insane.
http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/388674main...
By my understanding, brain_dead does not disbelieve that the world is warming. He wants it to. He urges us to put even more GHG's into the air.

What he claims as a hoax are attempts to stop it.

As an oil company puppet, he fears the loss of revenue and the regulations, like any good fossil fuel puppet would.

Even his attempted denial that I had caught his true thoughts ("Using fossil fuel helps free ancient carbon back into the atmosphere where it can do some good. Freeing carbon dioxide into the air helps mitigate climate change against global cooling; the well known ice age climate scenario.") falls flat when we remember that his urging us to add more CO2 so the Earth will get warmer is in direct contradiction to his claim that we can't do anything about it.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#27164 Aug 16, 2013
Rush Limbaugh:'If You Believe In God ... You Cannot Believe In Man-Made Global Warming'

There folks is the best evidence against global warming.
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#27165 Aug 16, 2013
home in lincoln county wrote:
<quoted text> in a way dust is a ghg was my quote not that it is a 100% ghg and to be fair ghg is what greenhous gas . wonder what would happen to your greenhouse if it were covered in volcanic dust ???? to much blot out the sun ,go cold or just a little act as a giant warming solar panel . so in a way it makes dust a ghg after all you warmers call everything thats in the air floating around the planet ( from cow farts to lint ) ghg so why not dust ? what you mad because a 81 year old fart thought of it before one of your so called over edumactaded science brains did .
Sure, go on and make dust a greenhouse gas.

You're a denier. You can distort anything. The scientific definition doesn't mean squat.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#27166 Aug 17, 2013
Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
<quoted text>
Mostly, atmosphetic dust has a cooling effect. Opposite effect of a ghg.
well geeeeessss there brain i think thats what i posted , can't we read any more need new glasses ? but in the proper amount it will cause heating . i mean really does a person have to spell out everything for you over edumacted types to understand anything . no common sense 5% and cant read

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#27167 Aug 17, 2013
gcaveman1 wrote:
<quoted text>
I am 97.5% to 99% sure that he has not.
that would be the division of noaa that monitors the polar ice shelf , which i am sure none of you have ever heard of because we all know that the only sources warmers use are the flaming planet ,under sea times and doom and gloom daily !

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#27168 Aug 17, 2013
going to oz for the next week i believe it's winter down under now , wonder how much snow in the south lands . back in a week
SpaceBlues

United States

#27169 Aug 17, 2013
Oh no, don't go; we won't miss you.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#27170 Aug 17, 2013
home in lincoln county wrote:
<quoted text> well geeeeessss there brain i think thats what i posted , can't we read any more need new glasses ? but in the proper amount it will cause heating . i mean really does a person have to spell out everything for you over edumacted types to understand anything . no common sense 5% and cant read
I read a whole lot better than you write. Dust is not a GHG as you stated.
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#27171 Aug 17, 2013
Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
Rush Limbaugh:'If You Believe In God ... You Cannot Believe In Man-Made Global Warming'
There folks is the best evidence against global warming.
"Jess Zimmerman could barely contain his scorn for Limbaugh’s absurd drivel in his article entitled “Rush Limbaugh, esteemed logician, proves that if you believe in God you can’t believe in climate change,” published this week in Grist magazine.

“Noted logician, theologian, and climate scientist Rush Limbaugh has issued a philosophical treatise on religion and climate change, proving that if you believe in God you cannot believe in anthropogenic global warming”, Zimmerman wrote."

In all fairness, we must allow for the religious perspective of those who might contradict Rush, like "Pope Francis, newly elected head of the Catholic Church and consummate expert on all things God, who could never be confused with an atheist or agnostic, said that climate change was a major concern for the world’s faithful during his inaugural speech earlier this year.

It apparently has escaped Limbaugh’s small sphere of attention that many churches recognize man-caused global warming is a very real problem. According to a report in ThinkProgress, they include the Catholic Church, the United Methodist Church, the Presbyterian Church (USA) and the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America."

Rush has fallen victim to the flawed philosophy of "If God be with us, who can stand against us?" Many a historian would tell him that it's often very difficult to tell whose side God is on.
SpaceBlues

United States

#27172 Aug 17, 2013
In the face of an expanding global population, and given that the current path is leading to significant and perhaps catastrophic climate change, mitigation requires:

1.major interventions in the environment;

2.significant changes in day-to-day activities; and

3.basic changes in society that will affect our technologies, economic system, institutions, beliefs and behaviors, and even the structure of families.

Making such changes necessarily entails significant policy intervention. It is not surprising that more-conservative elements of society and government resist changing the way they live; it is not surprising that we have the “climate wars.”
gcaveman1

Laurel, MS

#27173 Aug 18, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
In the face of an expanding global population, and given that the current path is leading to significant and perhaps catastrophic climate change, mitigation requires:
1.major interventions in the environment;
2.significant changes in day-to-day activities; and
3.basic changes in society that will affect our technologies, economic system, institutions, beliefs and behaviors, and even the structure of families.
Making such changes necessarily entails significant policy intervention. It is not surprising that more-conservative elements of society and government resist changing the way they live; it is not surprising that we have the “climate wars.”
Change doesn't have to be painful. Lifestyle doesn't have to be altered radically. How hard can it be if termites have figured it out?

<><><>< ><><><> <><><>< ><><>

With heat waves gripping much of the planet, electricity grid operators are sweating even more than their customers. Air-conditioning uses a tremendous amount of energy, but a new group of designers think they can solve that problem by mimicking Mother Nature's craftiness.

Janine Benyus, a biologist, innovation consultant, and author of the book Biomimicry: Innovation Inspired by Nature, told National Geographic that copying the way plants and animals solve natural problems can provide many benefits, from environmental sustainability to economic efficiency.(See "Nature Yields New Ideas for Energy and Efficiency.")

"With biomimicry we're able to apply fresh thinking to traditional manufacturing, to undo the toxic and energy-intensive mistakes of the past," said Benyus, who is part of a group that hopes to lead a new revolution in design by imitating nature. "I wish we had been at the design table at the Industrial Revolution."

In natural systems, nothing is wasted, since everything can be used by something else. Instead of using large inputs of energy and toxic chemicals to make things and ship them across the globe, nature makes what it needs where it needs it, with water-based chemistry.

These designs suggest some of what could be learned by applying the lessons of biomimicry to the problem of air-conditioning in particular.(See "In Search of Green Air-Conditioning.")

Ventilation Inspired by Termites

Perhaps the most famous example of biomimicry when it comes to heating and cooling is ventilation inspired by termites. A few years ago, scientists observed that big termite mounds in Africa stay remarkably cool inside, even in blistering heat. The insects accomplish that feat with a clever system of air pockets, which drive natural ventilation through convection.

Architect Mick Pearce and engineering firm Arup borrowed that idea to build Eastgate Centre, a large office and shopping center in Zimbabwe that is cooled with the outside air. The system uses only 10 percent as much energy as conventional air-conditioning to drive fans that keep the air circulating.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Alternative Energy Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News ASU Prof: Clean-Energy Goals Are 'Folly and Fut... Thu Solarman 1
News APS teams with First Solar on plant with batter... Wed Solarman 1
News A Possible Formula for Puerto Rico's Hurricane ... Wed Solarman 1
News Sierra Nevada lauded for alternative energy, st... Feb 12 Solarman 1
News Ballot initiative aims to increase Arizona's us... Feb 12 Solarman 1
News Grant lets RHIT students explore sustainability Feb 11 Brandon B 1
News Oklahoma pulling up red carpet offered to wind ... Feb 10 Solarman 1
More from around the web