Leo's latest missive - Silicon Chip editorial - Page 2

Do you have a question? Post it now! No Registration Necessary

Translate This Thread From English to

Threaded View
Re: Leo's latest missive - Silicon Chip editorial
On Thu, 28 May 2009 12:45:49 +1000, "Trevor Wilson"

Quoted text here. Click to load it

I dont byt he rag, so did not read the article. Sounds like it may be
opinion?

I assume he is talking about global warming/climate change? I dont
subscribe to the theory either so perhaps I might share his opinion?

Re: Leo's latest missive - Silicon Chip editorial

"Trevor Wilson"
Quoted text here. Click to load it

 **  Does not matter a hoot.


Quoted text here. Click to load it

**  How strange you brought it up then.


Quoted text here. Click to load it


** Shame it is perfecty correct logic.

CO2 is still a  *very small* component of the atmosphere but  IS the
substanvce responsible for all animal adn vegetable  life on earth.

So CO2 ain't air pollution ( should be sung to the tune of Rock 'n Roll
Ain't Noise Plollution)

Problem is only the bad press dished out by a bunch of politically motivated
zealots.




Quoted text here. Click to load it


**  How strange you brought it up then.



Quoted text here. Click to load it


** There is no such animal as a credible  "climate scientist".

Cos the subject is still in its infancy and its promoter's predictions no
better than Voodoo.


Quoted text here. Click to load it


** Easy to see which side of the fence TW is on.



.....   Phil

 



Re: Leo's latest missive - Silicon Chip editorial
hi, did you know there is NO  proof of global warming.



Quoted text here. Click to load it



Re: Leo's latest missive - Silicon Chip editorial
On Thu, 28 May 2009 21:15:41 +0930, "mark krawczuk"

Quoted text here. Click to load it
Of course there is no proof as you cant prove future events today.
Global warming is essentially a hypothesis that states that unless we
do something now, then something terrible will happen at some future
date.
Only way to prove this is for someone to build a time machine.
As to whether you want to beleive the hypothesis, thats a differant
issue.


Re: Leo's latest missive - Silicon Chip editorial

Quoted text here. Click to load it

  There is, it's just a question of WHO (or what) is causing it, and by how much.

  Current consensus is the earth is in a phase where it's warming up anyway,
though it would be a reasonable guess that humans factor in somewhat too.

  The question is HOW much are the humans actually effecting it.  Blaming it
entirely on humans is incorrect, likewise, it would be a good guess that
blaming it on the earth doing it behind our backs entirely isn't quite right
either.

  Cow flatulence factors significantly in some circles, but if you've ever met
my brother in law, his flatulence would probably account for a fair proportion
too.

  My point being, hypothetically, if you were to remove ALL sources of animal,
human warming, and basically everything you have control over, then the earth
would STILL warm up.  Surely not as quickly, but it would still warm anyway.

  Personally, I think a diet change for my BIL would be a good start.
--
Linux Registered User # 302622
<http://counter.li.org

Re: Leo's latest missive - Silicon Chip editorial

Quoted text here. Click to load it
animal,
earth
anyway.

That's hard to say. In the seventies Scientific American ran an article
stating the earth was moving towards another ice age (albeit very slowly of
course), which is a natural cycle independant of human interference.
The current global warming is a natural consequence of overpopulation, which
probably goes too far in the other direction. No-one wants to tackle the
population problem however, so the rest is just empty rhetoric, vested
interests and loonies.
Hard to say whether humans will adapt better to global warming or global
cooling however, and how many of the 7+ billion people the earth can really
support in either case.

MrT.



Re: Leo's latest missive - Silicon Chip editorial

Quoted text here. Click to load it

**Sciam probably ran an article on 'Cold Fusion' too. Sciam does run
articles of a highly speculative nature from time to time. That does not
suggest that the majority of scientists feel there is (or was) any credence
to the issue. Personally, I am doubtful of your claim, but I am certainly
prepared to concede that Sciam did run such an article, after you provide
some proof. In the meantime, I suggest you read this:

http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/shortsharpscience/2008/10/global-cooling-was-a-myth.html

And this:

http://ams.confex.com/ams/pdfpapers/131047.pdf

It puts paid to the myth that the scientific community gave any real
credence to the notion of global cooling. It was mostly in the realm of
popular press.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au



Re: Leo's latest missive - Silicon Chip editorial

Quoted text here. Click to load it

you do realise that "global warming" does not mean that temperatures
every where are going to rise, but that the "weather" will have more
energy driving it with more extreme (both ends) weather events?

Quoted text here. Click to load it

That depends on the life style you want them to have.

Re: Leo's latest missive - Silicon Chip editorial

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Sure, but it does mean an average increase in temperature rather than a
decrease. And thus consequences such as polar caps reducing rather than
increasing.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

I'd rather not swap for one worse than a homeless Biafran, and I don't know
anyone else who is.
But you're welcome to it.

MrT.



Re: Leo's latest missive - Silicon Chip editorial


Quoted text here. Click to load it

At that level, noproblem is there?


Re: Leo's latest missive - Silicon Chip editorial

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Well I would call that a problem!

MrT.




Re: Leo's latest missive - Silicon Chip editorial

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Are you now changing yor story and saying that you want some living
standard higher than a homeless biafran?

Please be clear, ths might be your application for exemption from culling.
l visit;
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/04/27/2553855.htm

Re: Leo's latest missive - Silicon Chip editorial

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Sorry if you are a homeless Biafran, but I still haven't met anyone else who
wants to trade places with one.

MrT.



Re: Leo's latest missive - Silicon Chip editorial
Quoted text here. Click to load it

What it comes down to with regard to pollution or global warming is that
it ain't what you do, it's the scale on which you do it. Unfortunately,
with the exponential growth of population, the effect on the planet goes
up similarly.

Re: Leo's latest missive - Silicon Chip editorial

Quoted text here. Click to load it

**I guess it depends on what you call "proof". We have clear, undeniable
proof of the following:

* CO2 is a known GHG.
* In the past 600,000 years, CO2 levels and temperatures show a clear link.
CO2 sometimes precedes temperature rise and sometimes lags.
* Since the advent of the industrial revolution, CO2 levels have increased
by around 30%.
* Since the advent of the industrial revolution, temperatures have
increased.
* Since the advent of the industrial revolution, temperatures and CO2 levels
have increased at a faster rate than at any time in the last 600,000 years.
* The warmest 11 years on record have all occured in the last 13 years.

To disregard global warming and man's influence on climate merely
demonstrates a breath-taking lack of understanding of the science involved.
I suggest you read the IPCC reports and get back to us.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au



Re: Leo's latest missive - Silicon Chip editorial
Quoted text here. Click to load it

There is absolute proof of global warming, the only argument is whether
it is the result of man's activities or a purely natural phenomonom.

Re: Leo's latest missive - Silicon Chip editorial

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Ignopring the colourful language, the problem with all this climate
change stuff is that a lot of it IS NOT science, but more correctly
mathematically projections, which can be very problematic.

The real problem is that a more and more data is re-analysed and
scientifically evaluated, it is changing and since some of this is base
data, oh dear.

My bottom line is that we are going to see some climate change, but
weather it is runaway, and what percentage anthromorphological (sp
stuffed) I don't know.

Since we do not fully understand Australia's weather, I am very sceptical
of climate change scare stories. Credibility is nt helped by the swine
flu scare story beat up doing the rounds.


Re: Leo's latest missive - Silicon Chip editorial

Quoted text here. Click to load it

**Can be. Unfortunately, the evidence is clear. The future effects are not
so clear. It would seem prudent to act early, before any possible thermal
runaway effects take hold. No?

Quoted text here. Click to load it

**As the data is accumulated, it is becoming clear that the upper limits of
the IPCC reports are appearing conservative.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

**Nor do I. However, this is the only planet we have. We should look after
it. We should act conservatively to the only (known) home we have in this
universe.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

**Strawman noted.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au



Re: Leo's latest missive - Silicon Chip editorial

Quoted text here. Click to load it

*IF* we could actually change anything sufficiently to have any noticeable
benefit. No plans whatsoever to do that at the moment.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Why? It is unimaginable that we are the only planet in the universe with
life forms of any kind, just because you don't know of any others.
We may well do the rest of the universe a favour and save many other planets
by our becoming extinct.

MrT.



Re: Leo's latest missive - Silicon Chip editorial

Quoted text here. Click to load it

**Er, so we can perpetuate our species.

 It is unimaginable that we are the only planet in the universe with
Quoted text here. Click to load it

**That would be the pessimistic view. It is possible that humans are the
only intelligent species in the universe. Even if we are not, it is possible
that we may have something of worth to offer the universe.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au



Site Timeline