What if Global Warming is a Red Herring?

Worst case - We clean up things that have not been good for us anyway. I would take that as a positive.

The IPCC is a collective group of scientist built into multiple work groups to study vast amounts of data sets. They are climatologists, meterologist, biologist, marine biologist, etc.
This who’ll not “scientific” statement is used by many extreme right wing who some have been unconvered as working for exxon and other major oil companies.
It is extremely apparent that we have started to outgrow our planet, have polluted it to an extreme and are now suffering the consequences.

furthermore, the planet can only hold 9.6 billion people and we are struggling to do that now with the extreme over population of some areas of Asia and South America.

Veerabhadran Ramanathan, David Suzuki, even Stephen Hawking has agreed to global warming.

I think I am going to listen to Dr. Ramanathan, a global figure in climatology before I go and believe what I read on the internet.

Yes … Capitalizing on the green brand doesn’t mean they don’t care about global warming. And yes there are others who don’t really get it or feel it, and adopt the “trend” .

Consideration for our habitat even for selfish reasons is the wise things to do.
GW have already triggered changes , and it will only get worse… And i am not talking about drought, desertification, raising levels of ocean and sea waters.
One very disturbing things are conflicts that will arise because of climate changes…
Did you know it’s one of the main causes of Darfur?

The original question if Global Warming is paraded by marketer only interest me superficially.

But i am very very concerned not only about Global Warming and green house gases, but contamination of the environment and the threat ecosystems, and for humans. mercury in fishes, carbon in our lungs, exposure to toxic substances, from teflon and aluminium in cookware, to research about the harmful effects of mobile phone and wireless radiation links to cancer. To the manufacturing process, the search of cheaper and cheaper labor, the working conditions, etc …

Something is wrong with the system
And it is irresponsible to not try to correct it


I read this story on Atlantic Review discussing tactics employed by oil companies similar to those used by the tobacco companies of sponsoring covert front groups/writers to exaggerate uncertainties regarding the effects of tobacco on health

“conspiring to cover up the threat of man-made climate change, in much the same way the tobacco industry tried to conceal the risks of smoking—by using a series of think tanks and other organizations to falsely sow public doubt in an emerging scientific consensus”

Ionically two lawyers who were on opposite sides, one suing Phillip Morris and the other who defended PM in the case were they settled for billions of dollars are now working together in a case against Oil Companies

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200806/conspiracy/2

Toxicity is an important issue. Consumption is an issue, although I don’t believe that should be forced upon anyone. I do not, however, believe that global warming and carbon dioxide emissions are an issue.

Please consider the following:

1 - Scientists do not know what the cause/effect relationship is between C02 levels and temperature, only that there seems to be one.

2 - How do we know what Earth’s ideal temperature is?

3 - Why is C02 a bad thing? Won’t plants balance C02 levels on their own?

4 - Scientists make lots of mistakes. Last year they discovered the Milky Way is twice as big as they thought it was.
http://www.usyd.edu.au/news/84.html?newsstoryid=2163

5 - When is “the debate over” in science? I don’t believe it ever was, or ever will be. Just because we know a lot now, does not mean we know all, or even most of what there is to know.

6 - Consensus does not prove facts. History offers many examples of this, including heliocentrism, the flat earth, etc.

7 - Climate alarmism has been occurring regularly for the last century or so. It sells news. The Boston Globe tells the history here:

8 - People need a new moral code to replace the religions they’re leaving behind. The green lifestyle has filled this emotional need. ‘What’s right for the planet’ replaces traditional values.

9 - As more people are becoming aware of the facts, they realize that man-made global warming alarmism is a fraud. The problem never was stupidity, it was ignorance. Most people don’t care enough to find out things for themselves, but misinformation can only hold up for so long.

*Please do not take my comments as anti-environment. Obviously, we need clean air and water, and should rethink our attitude towards products. I’m as much a conservationist as anyone else. However, I don’t believe this is in any way related to carbon dioxide or the earth’s temperature.

Please check out this article on global warming. It’s on an environment web site for pete’s sakes!

http://www.ecoworld.com/features/2008/02/07/a-case-against-climate-alarmism/

One quote from the above link reads as follows:

“The notion of a static, unchanging climate is foreign to the history of the earth or any other planet with a fluid envelope. The fact that the developed world went into hysterics over changes in global mean temperature of a few tenths of a degree will astound future generations.”


Thank you.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=288952680655100870

worth a watch

We should just call Global Warming and all other factors under that umbrella “Global poisoning” and end any argument.

for those still interested and to make things even more confusing

oh and that 9,6 billion people limit is BS (bad science :stuck_out_tongue:).
the planet’s carrying capacity is changeable, it all depends on the sustainability of human practices and their relationship to the environment, for example, if we were all still hunters and gatherers, we would need much more land to sustain the same number of people, because the resources we were consuming would grow naturally. But if we can sustain and grow that which sustains us, then there is no limit.

Just saw this comment in my local paper’s online edition and it really sums up the debate in my opinion.

Whether global warming is occuring or not…

…it is fun to witness the detractors talk bad about it. If it is warm out, they refer to emails and the bad economy for reasons to remain stagnant. If it is cold out then it is because there is no warming. If it is warm out, you hear that the USA can’t make a difference without China. If it is cold out, you hear; “What warming?” If it is warm out, you will hear about there always being fluctuations in the earth’s temp. If it is cold out, people are relieved because it means they are not to blame for overheating the planet. It is a viscous cycle to end up in. The truth of the matter is, we should change the way we do things based on many other ideas (sustainability just makes more sense). Global warming or not.

Nice quote, very well put. Some things you should do just because it’s the right thing to do, not just forcing yourself for a specific outcome or cause. Unfortunately, business cares about money so they have to be forced. But for us in our daily lives, it shouldn’t even have anything to do with “global warming” or whatever other new buzzword we have to battle in the future.

things like…?

Regulating or forcing the “free” market is sure to get a LOT of opposition, only by dictatorship this would happen.
And the new buzzword is “climate change”, no matter what happens its always bad now. :laughing:

That second quote wasn’t mine…

oops don’t know what happened there, edited anyway sorry.

I remember reading a reader’s comment to Time Magazine in Aug or Sep 2006. The comment was from a global warming “expert” who happily made it known from her signature block. She said that it was important to end debate of any kind on the subject of global warming. Children should not hear the opposing views because it hampers progress. In other words, brainwashing is acceptable, free speech is not, and the scientific method is no longer needed.

Now before people jump on me for the brainwashing comment, think about what brainwashing actually is. It’s a systematic approach of getting someone to believe whatever you tell them. You do it by silencing critics, not allowing others to voice opinions, controlling what you hear, read, or watch, or learn. Once the other side has been silenced, you can do or say whatever you want. It happens all the time in third world and communist nations.

Stifling discussion is dangerous and wrong. Say what you want about global warming. But the truth is, not everyone agrees. And those who tell you everyone agrees only thinks so because they haven’t heard the other arguments. The argument that it doesn’t matter is absurd. All scientific research matters. If truth and accuracy don’t matter when it comes to global warming, then where do we draw the line? Does it ever matter? Truth and accuracy never matters as long as we can justify it for the “greater good”? The whole global warming alarmist mantra reminds me of the lead up to the Iraq war. What if we demolish our economy and never find the proverbial weapon of mass destruction?

It takes 300 years to offset the amount of energy it takes to create one windmill. Are we making windmills to last longer than 300 years? One post said that San Diego is going through the worst fire season in history. Could it be that the state of California is just too stupid to clear out the dead brush and trees? I drove through Big Bear not long ago. Beetles moved in and infected the trees, killing 90% of the forest. It’s a tinder box waiting for a cigarette. California is suicidal, economically and ecologically.

If global warming is a red herring and we continue to enact crushing laws, it will collapse entire economies, bankrupt nations, create another green tech bubble, tax the hell out of civilians, strangle the poor, and make very few people very rich.

I think the biggest mess comes from the fact that sometimes people don’t even know WHAT they’re questioning anymore. And some people have adopted the attitude of “what, you think the world is flat?” when you even mention questions the idea of global warming DUE TO HUMANS.

The average world temperature is getting warmer. This can be stated as a factual statement (although recent articles in the news regarding the labs that did the worlds most “authoritiative study” then threw away all the original data because they didn’t want to bother backing it up is very shady).

But to say the average world temperature is getting warmer due to humans is a theory, and one that currently can not be proven. We know that the earth went through ice ages and all kinds of global climate change long before the invention of the Automobile, so while we may be spiralling towards death, it does make sense to continually question these things.

And RE the green tech bubble. Yes - thats going to happen, and yes, it will most likely collapse on itself. People also disconnect doing what is right for the environment (recycling, sustainablity) even if it has nothing to do with global warming. But the Al Gore threat of giant-wave death is certainly motivation to recycle your now $.05 water bottles.

It’s really a shame that sustainability has been lumped in with climate change. I know that having a compost bin in my backyard helps my plants grow the next year, but I also know that by me composting it’s not really doing anything to prevent the ice caps from melting, or keeping them melting.

The recent IPCC email leaks seem to confirm my opinion (I think it is mostly a red herring), but I agree with above posts that citing anecdotal evidence (ie - well it’s freezing/burning up this year) on either side is silly.

I see climate change as a dangerous power grab by socialists, while the sustainability movement is something that is rapidly gaining traction in the free market. Sometimes we can get impatient as designers, but when we think of how far things have come in a mere several years, there is ample room for optimism.

do your have a source for this info so that I can look at?

Cameron, have you read any specific IPCC documents that you found more convincing?

why?

which is kinda like an oxymoron.

In light of recent events, I think the IPCC’s credibility is in question.

History is replete with examples of why highly concentrated power in the hands of few is a bad thing. This is necessary to an extent, but we passed the balance point many years ago. Climate change is the ultimate nebulous excuse for more power and less individual freedom.

I don’t see how. In a free market, businesses must offer what customers want or they will die. Sustainability is just the latest variable in the equation.