Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Nasa.gov: Evidence of Climate Change

climate.nasa.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 94 posts

Re: Nasa.gov: Evidence of Climate Change

#61

Post by seabee »

mkempe wrote: post #31
ceejayoz wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For Earth? No. For human society as we currently know it? Seems that way. We'll survive climate change, but flooding places like Bangladesh is going to cause tremendous upheaval. Humanity survived the ice age, but that didn't make it a fun period in our history.

You seem to suggest a pessimistic and static view of human society. The planet is not static, climate isn't either; why would society and civilization be? is there a single, optimum equilibrium for humanity? what's the evidence?

There is no single optimum, however there is value beyond merely surviving. Our quality of life is better than it was in the past, so why would anyone be happy at the prospect of that going down due to climate change?

Re: Nasa.gov: Evidence of Climate Change

#62

Post by seabee »

rdtsc wrote: post #58
prawn wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately, I think you're right. A friend of mine (who works in energy) was telling me about how the case for renewable energy is being made (to some extent) successfully in Kansas. They push three points: - reduce expenditure - US should reduce reliance on foreign oil - have a duty to protect the earth god gave us I wonder if the broader case could be made more successfully along these lines (with variations for…

> - have a duty to protect the earth god gave us One thing that has always baffled me about American Christians is how apathetic they are towards the environment. At its core, I guess, the issue is that many are suckered by the right wingers and propaganda from large corporations to vote in their camp, by always bringing up other, more "pressing", moral issues. I think as long as there are only 2 main viable parties…

Many folks still vote along traditional party lines even when you have 3 or more viable parties, as is the case in most of Europe. Tribalism is rather persistent.

Re: Nasa.gov: Evidence of Climate Change

#63

Post by eduardo_f »

nice1 wrote: post #34
todayiamme wrote: post #32

You know whenever I read about this debate for some reason I recall George Carlin's prophetic words; "The planet is fine.... The people are fucked." http://www.google.co.in/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=1&#38... Whether we like to admit this or not; the earth and life will go on without us. It's our own survival we are fighting for over here; not a complex system in which life has taken hold by surviving through tough odds…

Alarmism has a really bad track record.

Wrong do-gooders are more dangerous than evildoers.

Re: Nasa.gov: Evidence of Climate Change

#64

Post by electromagnetic »

mmphosis wrote: post #38
kia wrote: post #20

Why did they decided to cut the graphic at 400,000 years before today? Maybe that's because a couple of million years ago the concentration of CO2 was well above today's level? By the way here is another picture: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Atmospheric_CO2_with_glaci...

Look closely at the right edge of the picture. The text below the picture is revealing... Human deforestation and burning of fossil fuel has raised atmospheric CO2 to over 380 ppm in the last century, well above pre-industrialized levels, and "off the scale" of this graph top.

"Off the scale" is a complete fucking BS term. The carboniferous period had a mean CO2 concentration of around 800ppm and was marked by glaciation and low sea levels - our current correlation between CO2 and "global warming" is off the bullshit scale.

The mean global temperature in the carboniferous period, with CO2 concentrations over double of present day was an astounding, just wait for it... 14C, which is the incredible, * unbelievable* 0C above the mean present day global temperature.

As CO2 levels spiked in the carboniferous period, it is marked by the drop of sea levels by 120m to the present day level, and as the CO2 level subsided, the sea levels rose 80m.

Sorry, but "off the scale" only counts when you actively pick and choose what scale you want to use, which in terms of geological temperature, CO2 and O2 concentrations quite literally means disregarding millions of years of geological time.

Re: Nasa.gov: Evidence of Climate Change

#65

Post by [deleted] »

electromagnetic wrote: post #64
mmphosis wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look closely at the right edge of the picture. The text below the picture is revealing... Human deforestation and burning of fossil fuel has raised atmospheric CO2 to over 380 ppm in the last century, well above pre-industrialized levels, and "off the scale" of this graph top.

"Off the scale" is a complete fucking BS term. The carboniferous period had a mean CO2 concentration of around 800ppm and was marked by glaciation and low sea levels - our current correlation between CO2 and "global warming" is off the bullshit scale. The mean global temperature in the carboniferous period, with CO2 concentrations over double of present day was an astounding, just wait for it... 14C, which is the inc…

[deleted]

Re: Nasa.gov: Evidence of Climate Change

#66

Post by mkempe »

mkempe wrote: post #31
ceejayoz wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For Earth? No. For human society as we currently know it? Seems that way. We'll survive climate change, but flooding places like Bangladesh is going to cause tremendous upheaval. Humanity survived the ice age, but that didn't make it a fun period in our history.

You seem to suggest a pessimistic and static view of human society. The planet is not static, climate isn't either; why would society and civilization be? is there a single, optimum equilibrium for humanity? what's the evidence?

How interesting that my honest questions are being down-voted.

Edit: I want to be scientific, include all relevant evidence, and some people here dislike it? (I'm not interested in the politics -- I've never even voted in a national election. And yes, I see these down-votes as a form of political activism. Disagree and argue if you have reason and facts.)

Re: Nasa.gov: Evidence of Climate Change

#67

Post by jselzer »

electromagnetic wrote: post #64
mmphosis wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look closely at the right edge of the picture. The text below the picture is revealing... Human deforestation and burning of fossil fuel has raised atmospheric CO2 to over 380 ppm in the last century, well above pre-industrialized levels, and "off the scale" of this graph top.

"Off the scale" is a complete fucking BS term. The carboniferous period had a mean CO2 concentration of around 800ppm and was marked by glaciation and low sea levels - our current correlation between CO2 and "global warming" is off the bullshit scale. The mean global temperature in the carboniferous period, with CO2 concentrations over double of present day was an astounding, just wait for it... 14C, which is the inc…

I have not taken the time to verify your claims here, but don't you think it's fair to use "off the scale" when comparing this to any other time period during the modern human era?

As other people have said, life on earth will go on in one form or another. But "off the scale" is a necessary term in this context to drive home the incredible turmoil and human suffering that will result as we are forced to adjust the local pressures of water shortages, mass human migration, and agricultural failures that will be caused by this...

Re: Nasa.gov: Evidence of Climate Change

#68

Post by mkempe »

seabee wrote: post #61
mkempe wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You seem to suggest a pessimistic and static view of human society. The planet is not static, climate isn't either; why would society and civilization be? is there a single, optimum equilibrium for humanity? what's the evidence?

There is no single optimum, however there is value beyond merely surviving. Our quality of life is better than it was in the past, so why would anyone be happy at the prospect of that going down due to climate change?

True, it shouldn't be survival for its own sake. But do we really believe that our quality of life will be going down because of (some, warmer or glacial) climate change? how soon does that happen, and is humanity powerless to adapt? I have a very optimistic view of human potential, I think in essence and the long term all problems can be solved.

Does the fact that CO2 levels have varied hugely in Geologic Time affirm that we are under imminent threat of terrible climate changes? is it irrelevant? or contradictory? or a puzzle? is it impolitick to ask such questions?

Re: Nasa.gov: Evidence of Climate Change

#69

Post by 16s »

jbooth wrote: post #44
TerraHertz wrote: post #37

For anyone who still thinks Anthropogenic Global Warming is real, some reading material: http://everist.org/archives/links/!_AGW_links.txt http://everist.org/archives/links/!_CRU_emails_links.txt Oh and yes, the graph was limited to 400K years,because otherwise it would show CO2 levels in the past FAR higher than today. And it doesn't show CO2 vs temp over geological timescales, because that graph clearly shows that…

"figure out who hopes to make money from a scam, and things get a lot clearer." So let's get this straight. Your theory is that a 95% scientific consensus exists because they're all trying to make money off a scam? What's the scam, you get a PhD, postdoc, do 4 years of research at poverty-level wages and you get a 40k grant? Wow, that's effective. Wouldn't they just work in finance or technology if they wanted money?…

The scam is this... they all own stock in Toyota.

The same people who cannot accurately predict whether or not it will rain tomorrow know with 100% certainty that the polar ice caps will melt if I don't buy a Prius.

Re: Nasa.gov: Evidence of Climate Change

#70

Post by [deleted] »

nice1 wrote: post #34
todayiamme wrote: post #32

You know whenever I read about this debate for some reason I recall George Carlin's prophetic words; "The planet is fine.... The people are fucked." http://www.google.co.in/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=1&#38... Whether we like to admit this or not; the earth and life will go on without us. It's our own survival we are fighting for over here; not a complex system in which life has taken hold by surviving through tough odds…

Alarmism has a really bad track record.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN