So you have literally never known a world that didn't have doom hanging over it. Does that mean you had to get comfortable with doom? How did you deal with that? — frank
fear of the impending ice age
— Agree to Disagree
Right. I've read about that, but you lived through it?
Was acid rain abd ozone depletion also part of it? I read that there was overlap with those things and an amplified greenhouse effect. Same scientists? — frank
Yes, I think that there has always been some level of doom hanging around for most of my life (I am now in my 60's). You don't really ever get totally comfortable with doom (because there is always a small chance that it might happen). My normal strategy is to ignore it or pretend that it doesn't exist. This explains why I was initially very skeptical about global warming. — Agree to Disagree
Yes, I lived through the fear of an impending ice age. — Agree to Disagree
His response: New ice age comes in the next 50 000 years, climate change happening now.
But that was decades ago. — ssu
They contribute a good deal to global warming. Try learning about the subject. — Mikie
Most people do think that cattle farming is a significant contributor to greenhouse gas emissions. But most people don't understand the Biogenic Carbon Cycle. If you are interested there is a very good article here:
https://www.goodmeat.com.au/environmental-sustainability/biogenic-carbon-cycle — Agree to Disagree
Read the link that I gave earlier about the Biogenic Carbon Cycle. — Agree to Disagree
Right. Yet that won’t stop ignoramuses from discussing it at length. “Scientists were screaming we were all gonna freeze to death in 10 years!”
It’d be funny if it weren’t so pathetic— and dangerous. — Mikie
So you literally quote from a MEAT COMPANY. No conflict of interest there, I’m sure. — Mikie
Scientists raised the issue of a possible pending ice age around about the mid 70's.
In a previous post I said that I remember the scare being in 1976 (my first year at university). — Agree to Disagree
I was reading some science fiction short stories and there was one where these people are struggling to survive the onset of an ice age, but then the protagonist wakes up and global warming is what's really happening. It was supposed to be about the psychological whiplash related to ice-age to global-warming news. — frank
Scientists raised the issue of a possible pending ice age around about the mid 70's. — Agree to Disagree
There was speculation, among some scientists, about the cooling effect of aerosols. — Mikie
Why don't you comment on what they say, rather than who they are? — Agree to Disagree
Delivery vans in Pittsburgh. Buses in Milwaukee. Cranes loading freight at the Port of Los Angeles. Every municipal building in Houston. All are powered by electricity derived from the sun, wind or other sources of clean energy.
Across the country, a profound shift is taking place that is nearly invisible to most Americans. The nation that burned coal, oil and gas for more than a century to become the richest economy on the planet, as well as historically the most polluting, is rapidly shifting away from fossil fuels.
A similar energy transition is already well underway in Europe and elsewhere. But the United States is catching up, and globally, change is happening at a pace that is surprising even the experts who track it closely.
Wind and solar power are breaking records, and renewables are now expected to overtake coal by 2025 as the world’s largest source of electricity. Automakers have made electric vehicles central to their business strategies and are openly talking about an expiration date on the internal combustion engine. Heating, cooling, cooking and some manufacturing are going electric. — The Clean Energy Future Is Arriving Faster Than You Think, NY Times
Odd that you don’t remember the warnings about global warming from back then. Talk about selective memory — Mikie
Maybe you can pull up some of those articles from those eras, warning of global warming. I'm curious. — jgill
I'll answer this. There were so many other things happening during the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s, it must have slipped right past me. I do remember the oil embargo. Maybe you can pull up some of those articles from those eras, warning of global warming. I'm curious. — jgill
recalls was quite real back then. The fear was that our balmy existence could quickly, say in a decade, revert back to its normal frozen ways except for wide swath of equatorial belt.Scientists raised the issue of a possible pending ice age around about the mid 70's. — Agree to Disagree
Maybe you can pull up some of those articles from those eras, warning of global warming. I'm curious. — jgill
But Thomas Peterson of the National Climatic Data Center surveyed dozens of peer-reviewed scientific articles from 1965 to 1979 and found that only seven supported global cooling, while 44 predicted warming. Peterson says 20 others were neutral in their assessments of climate trends.
The study reports, "There was no scientific consensus in the 1970s that the Earth was headed into an imminent ice age.
"A review of the literature suggests that, to the contrary, greenhouse warming even then dominated scientists' thinking about the most important forces shaping Earth's climate on human time scales."
"I was surprised that global warming was so dominant in the peer-reviewed literature of the time," says Peterson, who was also a contributor to the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 2007 report.
trial in Montana going on right now. — Mikie
The court determined that a provision in the Montana Environmental Policy Act has harmed the state’s environment and the young plaintiffs by preventing Montana from considering the climate impacts of energy projects. The provision is accordingly unconstitutional, the court said.
“This is a huge win for Montana, for youth, for democracy and for our climate,” said Julia Olson, the executive director of Our Children’s Trust, which brought the case. “More rulings like this will certainly come.”
The sweeping win, one of the strongest decisions on climate change ever issued by a court, could energize the environmental movement and usher in a wave of cases aimed at advancing action on climate change, experts say.
The ruling — which invalidates the provision blocking climate considerations — also represents a rare victory for climate activists who have tried to use the courts to push back against government policies and industrial activities they say are harming the planet. In this case, it involved 16 young Montanans, ranging in age from 5 to 22, who brought the nation’s first constitutional and first youth-led climate lawsuit to go to trial. Those youths are elated by the decision, according to Our Children’s Trust.
Yes, read that! I was about to post it. Here's some of the key text: — Quixodian
The Montana attorney general’s office said the state would appeal, which would send the case to the state Supreme Court.
“This ruling is absurd, but not surprising from a judge who let the plaintiffs’ attorneys put on a weeklong taxpayer-funded publicity stunt that was supposed to be a trial, ...”
The government, which was given one week to present its defense, rested after just one day and did not call its main expert witness, surprising many legal experts.
Insulting me makes me less likely to do anything about climate change. — Agree to Disagree
Young people seem to blame everyone except themselves (e.g. oil companies and older people). They refuse to take responsibility for their own carbon footprint and blame it all on the oil companies. — Agree to Disagree
Insulting me makes me less likely to do anything about climate change. — Agree to Disagree
Here are the parts of this news story that stand out to me: — Agree to Disagree
lol. "Carbon footprint."
Big oil coined ‘carbon footprints’ to blame us for their greed. — Mikie
It is Big Oil's fault, not mine. — Agree to Disagree
British Petroleum, the second largest non-state owned oil company in the world, with 18,700 gas and service stations worldwide, hired the public relations professionals Ogilvy & Mather to promote the slant that climate change is not the fault of an oil giant, but that of individuals. It’s here that British Petroleum, or BP, first promoted and soon successfully popularized the term “carbon footprint” in the early aughts. The company unveiled its “carbon footprint calculator” in 2004 so one could assess how their normal daily life – going to work, buying food, and (gasp) traveling – is largely responsible for heating the globe.
Underlying this is a conflict in how we imagine ourselves, as consumers or as citizens. Consumers define themselves by what they buy, own, watch – or don’t. Citizens see themselves as part of civil society, as actors in the political system (and by citizen I don’t mean people who hold citizenship status, but those who participate, as noncitizens often do quite powerfully). Too, even personal virtue is made more or less possible by the systems that surround us. If you have solar panels on your roof, it’s because there’s a market and manufacturers for solar and installers and maybe an arrangement with your power company to compensate you for energy you’re putting into the grid.
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.