IGNORING CLIMATE CHANGE

1. 0

   Justsilvieposted 11 years ago

   A couple of weeks ago, Munich Re, one of the world’s largest reinsurance firms, issued a study titled “Severe Weather in North America.” According to the press release that accompanied the report, “Nowhere in the world is the rising number of natural catastrophes more evident than in North America.” The number of what Munich Re refers to as “weather-related loss events,” and what the rest of us would probably call weather-related disasters, has quintupled over the last three decades. While many factors have contributed to this trend, including an increase in the number of people living in flood-prone areas, the report identified global warming as one of the major culprits: “Climate change particularly affects formation of heat-waves, droughts, intense precipitation events, and in the long run most probably also tropical cyclone intensity.”
   
   Read more http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/n … z2Au4RAEpJ
   
   Seems that party affiliation splits the topic on to believers and non believers and I am wondering how anyone can ignore the sign and events and argue "it ain't so"?
   

   replyreport
   1. 95

      wildernessposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Seems to me that most people agree there is some global warming going on.
      
      The bigger question, though, is just how much of it is due to human activity?

      replyreport
   2. 61

      oz-vitezposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Did you see the article which stated no global warming has occurred for the past 16 years? Of course, the author hits both sides, calling it global warming and climate change. Cover all the bases.
      
      http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/ … ve-it.html

      replyreport
   3. 60

      Al Baconposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Those who argue that global warming is fiction often do so because to accept that would be to change their way of living, and in many cases their income as well.  We can claim the warming is a natural cycle earth goes through or perhaps blame it on solar flares or even the increase in the number of bodies on earth, but that does not mean that we do not have to do something to counteract the warming trend as much as we can.

      replyreport
2. 90

   jponiatoposted 11 years ago

   I think most of the nay-sayers have switched from "it ain't so" to "yes, the climate is changing but it's part of a naturally occurring cycle which has little to do with man's use of fossil fuels."
   
   I agree, it is hard to imagine that some people don't believe there is such a thing as global climate change.  I've written about it myself.

   replyreport
3. 0

   Justsilvieposted 11 years ago

   The majority of scientist have come to the conclusion that primarily through the burning of fossil fuels, with a smaller contribution from deforestation is the cause . Why should we not believe them?

   replyreport
   1. 90

      jponiatoposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I believe them.  I don't know why anyone wouldn't, but I do know there are corporations and other entities with vested interests who would try to convince us otherwise.

      replyreport
      1. 0

         Justsilvieposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Thanks for the reply. I just found your Hub on the subject... so I will share it.
         
         http://jponiato.hubpages.com/hub/Alarmi … ate-Trends

         replyreport
         1. 90

            jponiatoposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            Cool, thanks.  I've been thinking of brining it up to date with events over the last year or so.

            replyreport
4. 60

   xstaticposted 11 years ago

   I just heard about this inurance info this morning on NPR. If the insurance companies are starting to consider global waming in their rates, that surely means it is real, just as all reputable scientists who are not in the pocket of industry say. Romney actually made some stupid joke recently about this threat to the world and to the United States. That alone should disqualify him as presidential material.

   replyreport
   1. 85

      Marisa Wrightposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Exactly so.   I do wish people would stop calling it "global warming", though. People who don't study the news - who, I suspect, make up 99% of the population these days - take those words at face value and simply decide it's wrong the next time there's a cold snap. 
      
      The truth is, if the globe is warming that doesn't mean we just get hotter.  Global weather systems react to warming by going out of balance, so we're getting extremes of weather - both hot and cold - and increasingly wild weather, too.  I've lived in Australia for nearly 30 years and we've always had droughts, bushfires,  cyclones and floods - but never so severe and in such quick succession.   And I don't remember a big hurricane in New York in my lifetime.  Any fool can see something big is changing - and if the insurance companies are seeing it hit their bottom line, we're not imagining it.

      replyreport
5. 77

   Uninvited Writerposted 11 years ago

   Yes, I believe the earth is flat too.

   replyreport
6. 86

   rebekahELLEposted 11 years ago

   I've never understood why people refuse to ignore it, or acknowledge that with over 7 billion human beings performing human activity on the planet earth that it would not have some effect.

   replyreport
7. 69

   BloodRedPenposted 11 years ago

   I won't say the climate isn't in a period of change. But I feel you give humankind way to much credit for being the cause. The arctic is shrinking but at the same time the antarctic is growing (link below).
        Case in point - The US military used the Bikini islands to test nuclear weapons. For 12 years(1950s to 60s) they hit that island with the most destructive force known to man. In the late 1990s a survey found no lasting effects - Mother nature aka The planet earth had cleaned thing up. The recent storm (Sandy) showed us - What mankind takes years to build can be destroyed in seconds. My Opinion - Mankind is but a pimple on the face of the planet. A minor annoyance. http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/

   replyreport
   1. 60

      Al Baconposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      You are not quite correct on Bikini islands because as late as 1998 an international team found the island to be not habitable because of radiation.
      and  the only way to make the island liveable would be to remove the top 15 inches of soil which would destroy the island anyway.  studies of global warming too often ignore some possible causes, such as the HAARP program for example or the affect of fresh cold water from melting icebergs flowing into warmer ocean waters.

      replyreport
      1. 69

         BloodRedPenposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Al the Bikini islands are open for tourism. I went diving there in 2002. As for the radiation. http://www.bikiniatoll.com/  It's a beautiful place and life looks good for a the locals.

         replyreport
         1. 60

            Al Baconposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            The Bikini atoll is open for diving and other recreation but the island of Bikini itself is not, as it states in the website you provided.  It is beautiful there but as Bob Hope once said, they found the most beautiful place on earth and blew it all to hell.  I agree with you as to the pimple comment and perhaps some of the things we do are a minor annoyance but we need to worry about the things we do not yet understand such as the effect HAARP has on the earth and environment among other things.  What we do not know can indeed hurt us.

            replyreport
8. 86

   rebekahELLEposted 11 years ago

   I'm not sure if you're posting in response to my comment, but I'll add that I don't believe that humans are the cause, but I do believe we contribute to the changes that are taking place.  I realize that the planet is going through a shift and that we will experience related effects.  But continual population growth along with the destruction of our natural ecosystems affects our biosphere. Everything in some way affects everything.

   replyreport
9. 60

   Gnarles Snarklyposted 11 years ago

   To me, climate change is a non-issue. We pollute our home too much and need to change our ways . . . regardless. We are so technologically advanced, yet we still produce and deliver power the same way Edison did on day one. BP . . . beyond petroleum and off the grid . . . modular, baby!

   replyreport
   1. 69

      BloodRedPenposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Gnarles There is a reason solar panels are manufactured in China. The most efficient cells are made from Gallium arsenide (highly toxic) and as they age they give off a toxic gas and a grey powdery film. Not good for you or the environment. Current technology won't take you off the grid without severely impairing your lifestyle. So I would like to wish you good luck with going off the grid. Please keep us posted on your progress.

      replyreport
      1. 60

         Al Baconposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         The Union of Concerned scientists have addressed some of those issues:
         "Despite this, solar energy is still considerable cleaner than fossil fuels. Manufacturing solar panels may require energy from fossil fuels, but the energy used to produce those pales in comparison to the amount of clean energy those panels will produce according to the Union of Concerned Scientists. Moreover, the amount of land needed to generate solar power is roughly the same as the amount of land needed to mine coal."
           I think we need to keep looking at existing technology as well as search for usable new sources whether nuclear energy or perhaps some Tesla technology in order to find a balance between lifestyle and ecology.  Either denying that the earth is warming, for whatever reason, or accepting that it is without searching for answers and solutions is equally insane.
         
         Read more: The Environmental Impact of Solar Panels | eHow.com http://www.ehow.com/about_5437044_envir … z2B4vbP8iO

         replyreport