babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


Post New Topic  Post A Reply
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » right brain babble   » humanities & science   » climate change will destroy us

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: climate change will destroy us
Cougyr
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3336

posted 28 February 2004 05:20 PM      Profile for Cougyr     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
"Now the Pentagon tells Bush: climate change will destroy us" Guardian story
quote:
The findings will prove humiliating to the Bush administration, which has repeatedly denied that climate change even exists. Experts said that they will also make unsettling reading for a President who has insisted national defence is a priority.

Not a problem; Bush doesn't read any reports.


From: over the mountain | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Agent 204
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4668

posted 28 February 2004 06:43 PM      Profile for Agent 204   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I find it very interesting that the Pentagon is scared shitless about this. Maybe it's a very good thing that they're onside- they, after all, are one more instrument to keep Bush under control. After all, they will have the ability to remove Bush from power even if nobody else can. I hope it's not necessary, because such a development would have negative effects on democracy, at least in the short term. But then, the situation described in the article will also have negative effects on democracy.

We'll have a better idea of the situation in November.

[ 28 February 2004: Message edited by: Mike Keenan ]


From: home of the Guess Who | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged
SHH
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1527

posted 28 February 2004 08:12 PM      Profile for SHH     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Not a problem; Bush doesn't read any reports.
But if he did he’d read this in the forward:
quote:
Imagining the Unthinkable

The purpose of this report is to imagine the unthinkable – to push the boundaries of current research on climate change so we may better understand the potential implications on United States national security.

We have interviewed leading climate change scientists, conducted additional research, and reviewed several iterations of the scenario with these experts. The scientists support this project, but caution that the scenario depicted is extreme in two fundamental ways. First, they suggest the occurrences we outline would most likely happen in a few regions, rather than on globally. Second, they say the magnitude of the event may be considerably smaller.

We have created a climate change scenario that although not the most likely, is plausible, and would challenge United States national security in ways that should be considered immediately.


It appears the Pentagon outsourced this project to some so-called Futurists who fabricated the extreme case of the extreme case. Those boys, always thinking ahead.

The Report.


From: Ex-Silicon Valley to State Saguaro | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
No Yards
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4169

posted 28 February 2004 08:19 PM      Profile for No Yards   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
So? It's based on better and more though out realistic information that was used to justify going into Iraq
From: Defending traditional marriage since June 28, 2005 | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
CMOT Dibbler
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4117

posted 28 February 2004 08:37 PM      Profile for CMOT Dibbler     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by SHH:
It appears the Pentagon outsourced this project to some so-called Futurists who fabricated the extreme case of the extreme case. Those boys, always thinking ahead.

The Report.


You sound rather like King Ralph, desperately trying to deny that climate change actually exists. please tell me this isn't so.


From: Just outside Fernie, British Columbia | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
SHH
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1527

posted 28 February 2004 09:20 PM      Profile for SHH     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
It is not so. I’m currently desperate about nothing. I’ve seen so many Chicken Littles lately that I’m left wondering where are all the Pollyanna’s?

I’ve found over the years that a wait-and-see approach usually works best. It is so...I’m not yet a member of the club.


From: Ex-Silicon Valley to State Saguaro | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
CMOT Dibbler
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4117

posted 28 February 2004 09:40 PM      Profile for CMOT Dibbler     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by SHH:
It is not so. I’m currently desperate about nothing. I’ve seen so many Chicken Littles lately that I’m left wondering where are all the Pollyanna’s?

I’ve found over the years that a wait-and-see approach usually works best. It is so...I’m not yet a member of the club.



What "Chicken littles" have you seen before this one?


From: Just outside Fernie, British Columbia | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 29 February 2004 12:46 AM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Even kids can read simple charts, and a simple chart I saw in a Highlights magazine from about 1979 (or was it 1982?) showed the long-term rise in the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

Any idiot can tell you that if the CO2 content is only about 0.2% (or 0.02, I don't have my chemistry text in front of me and can't be buggered to go get it right this moment) to begin with, then perhaps even very small changes in that amount can have rather large results.

SHH, climate change means not just global warming, but in general, more volatility in the climate whether cold or warm. So just because last winter 6 feet of snow fell down on the ground, that does not and I mean that emphatically, not mean that global warming is nonexistent.

Has it ever occurred to you that the rate of water circulation as the vapor phase in the atmosphere is affected by the rate of heat transfer between the oceans and the atmosphere, which is in turn affected by, wait for it.... the proportion of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere!

WHOA! DAMN!

So maybe climate change manifested itself that year as more frequent and more violent precipitation.

Oh, but I'm just an alarmist chicken little left-wing nuclear chemist. Discount everything I say.

[ 29 February 2004: Message edited by: DrConway ]


From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
CMOT Dibbler
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4117

posted 29 February 2004 01:55 AM      Profile for CMOT Dibbler     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Are these findings correct, doc?
From: Just outside Fernie, British Columbia | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 29 February 2004 03:29 AM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Well, I wouldn't call them findings so much as predictions, and while my oceanography is a bit sketchy, I do know that one of the important drivers of climate is the rate of internal heat transfer in the oceans themselves, and this is partly dictated by differential changes in density (which is itself a function of how much salt is in a given volume of water) in different points in the ocean.

The summary of the above statement runs as follows:

Water moves from high density (high salt concentration) to low density (low salt concentration), carrying thermal energy with it. Anything that changes this flow rate will screw up the climate due to ocean-atmosphere heat transfer.

A sudden boost in the flow rate of cold water to the surface of the oceans would cool the surrounding air, increasing the number of cloudy days and possibly ruining agriculture if this change is large enough.


From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Cougyr
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3336

posted 29 February 2004 01:56 PM      Profile for Cougyr     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by DrConway:
Even kids can read simple charts . . .
[ 29 February 2004: Message edited by: DrConway ]

Yes, but I bet George Bush doesn't. If he won't seriously work toward real change, then Chicken Little will be proved right.


From: over the mountain | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
CMOT Dibbler
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4117

posted 29 February 2004 04:10 PM      Profile for CMOT Dibbler     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
This news is very depressing. It's even more depressing because I can't do anything about it. I am a poor student. I don't belong to Greenpeace or any of the other powerful environmental organizations. I live at home. It would be very difficult for me to head to Vancouver and participate in protests. I just hope Kerry has the balls to take on the oil companies.
If this report becomes public the NRA will have a field day. I can just imagine the propaganda: "the Apocalypse is upon us! we must lobby against all efforts to restrict gun use, and start stockpiling handguns for home defense!"

From: Just outside Fernie, British Columbia | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
redshift
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1675

posted 29 February 2004 04:43 PM      Profile for redshift     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
the problem is the same as with the IRAQ war, bad intelligence. they put it all in graphs so it'd easier for george.the trouble with graphs is...

http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/images/blbushbookupsidedown.htm

[ 29 February 2004: Message edited by: redshift ]


From: cranbrook,bc | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
Briguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1885

posted 29 February 2004 07:25 PM      Profile for Briguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Tuvalu is sinking man, and I don't wanna swim...
From: No one is arguing that we should run the space program based on Physics 101. | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
CMOT Dibbler
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4117

posted 29 February 2004 07:46 PM      Profile for CMOT Dibbler     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
"As long as Tuvalu is above sea water there will be people staying here. We will not move," he said.


"The boy stood on the burning deck when all around had fled! Git."


From: Just outside Fernie, British Columbia | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Trinitty
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 826

posted 01 March 2004 11:34 AM      Profile for Trinitty     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I read the in the Guardian last month that Oil production will peak this year and that the supply will run OUT in "our lifetimes" - the writer was in his forties.

So. Companies will keep burning it for fuel while it is in shorter and shorter supply.

Good thing we don't need it for things like plastics... what good have they ever done?

sigh


From: Europa | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 01 March 2004 12:54 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by CMOT Dibbler:
This news is very depressing. It's even more depressing because I can't do anything about it. I am a poor student. I don't belong to Greenpeace or any of the other powerful environmental organizations. I live at home. It would be very difficult for me to head to Vancouver and participate in protests.

That's okay, because that won't help either. It may make the protesters feel better, but it's not really going to do anything to help the environment, because those who have the power to change things won't be listening to them.

The best thing you can do for the environment is to change the way you live, and perhaps, if you can, influence those around you to change, too. Do the three r's. Walk, bike, or take public transit. Buy organic if you can afford it, or at least eat lower on the food chain if you can't afford organic (I can't). Stop buying stuff you don't need.

That's revolutionary, and if enough people did it, that's what would change the world. If you're already doing these things, then you're doing your part.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
redshift
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1675

posted 03 March 2004 11:58 PM      Profile for redshift     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
consumer capitalism is about to eat itself, and the appetite for change is hard to see.
"In other cases, governments need to restrict risk-taking, such as approving housing developments in low-lying areas, and improve catastrophe management capabilities.

In the long term, Swiss Re said, greenhouse gases widely thought to trigger global warming will need to be reduced, the use of fossil fuels cut and new energy technologies developed.

"The role of the insurance industry is through establishing risk adequate tariffs and to give the risk taker the opportunity to implement appropriate measures to reduce the chance of possible losses," Heck said."

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0303-07.htm

what happens when the financial power structure in the technologically dependent countries collapses, the developing countries are pursuing the same destructive course that caused global destruction, and the marginalized and exploited are armed and dangerous?
picture fortress north america, under seige and torn by domestic civil unrest and factionalism. retirement isn't looking so good.


From: cranbrook,bc | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
Rufus Polson
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3308

posted 04 March 2004 03:30 AM      Profile for Rufus Polson     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Uh, to be fair to the fossil fuel burners (which I am loath to do), the plastics issue is irrelevant. Crude oil is a sludge which they separate out into various different fractions, some very volatile, some thicker and more tarry. The more volatile end is what gets burned. The thicker end gets used for plastics and waxes and things. Incidentally, this also means that oil companies make more money than we realize--typically, they make their investment back on the gasoline and diesel and aviation fuel, maybe with a profit; the plastics et al. are gravy.
From: Caithnard College | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca