Join Early Retirement Today
View Poll Results: Global Warming is
Real, it is caused by humans, and we should try to do something about it 59 50.43%
Real, it is not caused by humans, and we should try to do something about it 7 5.98%
Real, it is caused by humans, and we should not try to do anything about it 6 5.13%
Real, it is not caused by humans, and we should not try to do anything about it 24 20.51%
Not real, and we should try to do something about it just in case 5 4.27%
Not real, and we should not try to do anything about it 16 13.68%
Voters: 117. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 06-19-2007, 03:50 PM   #41
Moderator Emeritus
CuppaJoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: At The Cafe
Posts: 6,866
Is this "old timer" day? I remember back in '86 when the office clown was joking that the animal Styro will soon be extinct. Well today, I had my first "to go" lunch in a pressed paper box, that place had Styro last week; it makes no difference to the taste of the food.

Sold my car in January 1980 and funded by Retirement accounts with the amount I would have spent on the car.
__________________

__________________
CuppaJoe is offline   Reply With Quote
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 06-19-2007, 04:08 PM   #42
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 18,271
Quote:
Originally Posted by cute fuzzy bunny View Post
I think we should propose a completely different poll:

1. Any issue brought up that looks liberal is not true
2. I said it couldnt be true and then a crushing weight of people who actually know what they're talking about proveed that it was, but i'm going to try to save face and stick with my line.
3. I have a huge hairball around government spending and/or programs and it doesnt matter what the issue is, i'll oppose it.
4. I'd like to be dry, able to breathe the air, sit outside in the sub-100 degree weather once in a while and eat tuna fish more than once a month.
5. I failed 3rd grade reading.
6. I dont like Al Gore
6.1 What was this topic about anyhow?

:confused: Fortunately, my CFB Secret Decoder Ring came in the mail today. Let's see what CFB really means....

Translated:

Well, I have no data to counter the other posters to support my own personal beliefs, so I'll just declare this whole thread invalid and all the posters in it idiots. Weapon of choice: a cluster bomb of straw man, red herring, ad hominem, irrelevant items and a dash of personal insult thrown in for good measure.

Note to self: reserve words like 'boob' and 'h*c*s' for other threads.



With the deluxe model (not consistent with LBYM), you also get the alternative translation:

We were brought out of several Ice Ages by 20,000 cave men simultaneously rubbing sticks together. Without benefit of written word, this technique was lost and had to be rediscovered every 50,000 years or so.

No, really.





C'mon CFB, you can do better than that. Right?

-ERD50
__________________

__________________
ERD50 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2007, 04:36 PM   #43
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 13,263
Someone help me with this one......


I remember in college (I think it was economics) where there was predictions from someone that the earth could only support so many people and that we needed to do something to stop the population growth... it got the name from the guy who said it... it was in the 18th or 19th century and we now have a few billion more people than he said could be supported...

Long term predictions are usually very far off reality... so I don't put that much stock in them....

But, let us reduce energy consumption and clean up the air and water (which can be SEEN as a problem TODAY)... and if this 'helps' the long term models then great..
__________________
Texas Proud is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2007, 04:46 PM   #44
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
cute fuzzy bunny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Losing my whump
Posts: 22,697
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50 View Post
C'mon CFB, you can do better than that. Right?

Oh i'm sorry, was I too verbose again?

Lets keep it to as few a number of words as possible.

We have excellent data on the current matter at hand. It says that we created a problem and we can solve it. I supplied the direct bullet points from the scientific community that says exactly what I just said.

Some people just dont like the answer, or dont like the people asking the questions.

But to be fair, i'm completely willing to accept that you're an idiot, if that is your will. I aim to please.
__________________
Be fearful when others are greedy, and greedy when others are fearful. Just another form of "buy low, sell high" for those who have trouble with things. This rule is not universal. Do not buy a 1973 Pinto because everyone else is afraid of it.
cute fuzzy bunny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2007, 04:54 PM   #45
Moderator Emeritus
Nords's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Oahu
Posts: 26,617
Quote:
Originally Posted by Texas Proud View Post
Someone help me with this one......
I remember in college (I think it was economics) where there was predictions from someone that the earth could only support so many people and that we needed to do something to stop the population growth... it got the name from the guy who said it... it was in the 18th or 19th century and we now have a few billion more people than he said could be supported...
Malthus, and Isaac Asimov popularized his scary numbers in the 1970s.

Thomas Malthus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What do we do all day indeed.
__________________
*
*

The book written on E-R.org, "The Military Guide to Financial Independence and Retirement", on sale now! For more info see "About Me" in my profile.
I don't spend much time here anymore, so please send me a PM. Thanks.
Nords is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2007, 06:31 PM   #46
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 18,271
Quote:
Originally Posted by cute fuzzy bunny View Post

Some people just dont like the answer, or dont like the people asking the questions.
I love questions, I'm taking the time to post here to learn. One way to learn is to have your own understanding challenged.

Quote:
We have excellent data on the current matter at hand. It says that we created a problem and we can solve it. I supplied the direct bullet points from the scientific community that says exactly what I just said.
Really, it says that? Where?

Does taking a 100 year sea level rise from the 10-23 inch range to the 8-18 inch range 'solve' the problem? I'd call it roughly a 20% reduction, still almost 80% of the problem remains. Solved? Tell that to the people in the lowlands.

I didn't see any bullet points that said they could solve it. Maybe my reading level is poor, maybe I just missed it, but I would love to see that info.

thanks - ERD50
__________________
ERD50 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2007, 09:54 PM   #47
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
cute fuzzy bunny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Losing my whump
Posts: 22,697
I'm figuring english isnt your first language, not that theres anything wrong with that. It seems you're going to make incorrect statements, then when those are proven wrong, shift the argument to other irrelevant points.

The IPCC summary for policy makers includes two full sections on short and longer term activities. Two separate studies are currently being run by the IPCC to give specific actionable items and time frames.

One deals with mitigation of emissions, the other deals with how we react to the results of the existing higher temperatures and the implications.

But then, you knew all of that given your extensive knowledge of climatology, right?

Perhaps we should go back to that part where you said the IPCC stated that man was not responsible?

""There is no question that this is driven by human activity" - Susan Solomon, an IPCC panel director

"[The report] reflects the sizeable and robust body of knowledge regarding the physical science of climate change, including the finding that the Earth is warming and that human activities have very likely caused most of the warming of the last 50 years." - Dr. Sharon Hays, Associate Director/Deputy Director for Science at the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy and head of the US delegation to the IPCC

"We have to be responsible members of the global community and we must do something in this area. . . I think the time has come for us to develop a roadmap for the future." – IPCC chairman Rajendra Pachauri



So whats next? Will we be debating the meaning of the word "is"?
__________________
Be fearful when others are greedy, and greedy when others are fearful. Just another form of "buy low, sell high" for those who have trouble with things. This rule is not universal. Do not buy a 1973 Pinto because everyone else is afraid of it.
cute fuzzy bunny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2007, 10:27 PM   #48
Dryer sheet aficionado
Rick S's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 45
I wonder.... is how it was done really the important question here?
Granted, I'm sure it is the one that is most polarizing, but isn't the more pertinent question:

Is there anything we can or should do about it given that all choices on funds spent are "either/or" ?
__________________
This life is a test... it is only a test. Had it been a real life, we would have been given further instructions on where to go and what to do.
Rick S is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2007, 10:34 PM   #49
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 18,271
Geez, I was hopeful there for a second that I was going to learn something.

Who is having trouble with the language? We've been through this already, you are repeating yourself:

Quote:
".... including the finding that the Earth is warming and that human activities have very likely caused most of the warming of the last 50 years."
So, what is the context there? "The last 50 years". I've hashed this out in the previous posts - here you go:

Quote:
ERD50 earlier post -

However, the IPCC only associates human action with the warming over the past 50 years. That's about 6/10th of a degree while we have had about 8 degrees warming since the ice age. I don't think we can extrapolate that man was responsible for the other 7.4 C warming. So, man is *not* primarily responsible for the long term warming, Mother Nature is. But we still need to figure out what we are going to do about it, no matter who caused it.
So... almost 8 degrees Mother Nature, about 6/10th of a degree partially man-made. IOW, we are riding on Mother Nature's roller-coaster. Maybe we can tip it a bit one way or the other, but it doesn't look like much does it? And if we can - then why doesn't the IPCC say - OK, reduce carbon emissions and most of the the sea level rise goes away?

Nothing in my statements is intended to let man-kind 'off the hook'. I'm just saying that we need to try to understand what we can and cannot change, and take the appropriate actions. As far as I can see, most of that action may be to adapt to a rise in sea level. Is there something 'evil' in that view that ticks you off?

And, you didn't answer my earlier question - you said the IPCC says the problem can be solved. I said that their numbers indicate that we could maybe reduce the rise in sea level by about 20% (leaving 80% of the problem). Are you backing off from that one? If I'm wrong, I'd like to know so I don't continue telling people that.

-ERD50

PS - RickS - I agree, I hope this post answers your question too, thanks
__________________
ERD50 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2007, 11:06 PM   #50
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 18,271
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick S View Post
I wonder.... is how it was done really the important question here?
Granted, I'm sure it is the one that is most polarizing, but isn't the more pertinent question:

Is there anything we can or should do about it given that all choices on funds spent are "either/or" ?
Rick S, Understanding the cause is important only to the extent that it helps us determine solutions. Beyond that, it is only of academic interest (and forum argument food ). But, many would say it is tough to know where you are going if you don't understand where you came from.

What should we do about it? Well, I keep going back to the IPCC report that seems to say that doing the 'non-fossil fuel' thing only softens the problem by about 20%. So, I think we better figure out how to move people out of low lying areas, because 20% isn't that much.

There's a couple far out ideas I've heard, but they might work. Send up 'stuff' in orbit to block a few percent of the Sun's rays - reversible if we could remove it from orbit too. Iron fertilization of the oceans supposedly can absorb a lot of CO2 (side effects?). Some researcher says he can make a CO2 filter device, but it takes considerable energy to get the CO2 off the filters (reducing the net benefit). These ideas were all covered on the 'Science Friday' podcasts if you want to check them out.

Any one else got ideas?

-ERD50
__________________
ERD50 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2007, 01:43 AM   #51
Full time employment: Posting here.
bosco's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 987
Erd50, just a friendly observation. IMO, you need to find another hobby. There's another thread about famous movie posts. Here's one, from "White Men Can't Jump."

"sometimes when you win you lose. And sometimes when you lose, you win."

just my $.02 (take it for what it's worth--I'm no technical expert in global warming, but I can recognize an obsession when I see one).
__________________
bosco is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2007, 07:46 AM   #52
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
wildcat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Lou-evil
Posts: 2,025
I know we are debating about whether GW is caused by man or whether or not we can do something but I worry much more about the potential side effects of GW -- none of which to my knowledge we are prepared for. So debate away, it will solve very little in terms of what we can do to prepare for the impact of GW. Oh wait, our govt's style is to wait for catastrophic things to happen and then react. Nevermind...
__________________
"These walls are kind of funny. First you hate 'em, then you get used to 'em. Enough time passes, gets so you depend on them"
wildcat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2007, 08:27 AM   #53
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 18,271
Quote:
Originally Posted by bosco View Post
Erd50, just a friendly observation. IMO, you need to find another hobby.
equally friendly, bosco - the overall subject of energy conservation, alternate energy sources, pollution, and now Global Warming *is* one of my hobbies. I find it a fascinating blend of technology, finance, science, and is a lesson in public perception and politics. Oh, and since the decisions we make today may very well impact our kids and grandkids (financially if not environmentally), well, maybe it's a better hobby than stamp collecting, or whatever. But, to each their own.

Unless by 'hobby' you meant trying to make sense of CFB's posts. Yeah, you got a point there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bosco View Post
.... am a National Beer judge, ...
If it makes you feel better, I'm bottling a 'clone' I brewed of a Boont Amber Ale later today. Three week primary, no secondary. Lots of people at this brewing forum ( The Northern Brewer Homebrew Forum :: Index) say that works great for an Ale. First time I tried a 'clone' recipe ( from 'Beer Captured'), I usually just look at recipes and adjust to something I think I'll like.

Quote:
just my $.02 (take it for what it's worth--I'm no technical expert in global warming, but I can recognize an obsession when I see one).
Hobby, obsession - what's the difference?

Yeah, but the media and our politicians seem pretty obsessed about it. Just trying to stay informed on the subject and try to inform others. Our politicians are good at giving us 'solutions' (satire) like ethanol, hydrogen, etc. I think it's good citizenship and stewardship to try to stay informed of the real impacts of the proposed solutions.

And I only started *one* (IIRC) of the threads on the topic, so it seems others are interested too.

But, I still get your point.

Well, off to sanitize some bottles.... -ERD50
__________________
ERD50 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2007, 10:25 AM   #54
Full time employment: Posting here.
bosco's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 987
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50 View Post

If it makes you feel better, I'm bottling a 'clone' I brewed of a Boont Amber Ale later today. Three week primary, no secondary. Lots of people at this brewing forum ( The Northern Brewer Homebrew Forum :: Index) say that works great for an Ale. First time I tried a 'clone' recipe ( from 'Beer Captured'), I usually just look at recipes and adjust to something I think I'll like.

Hobby, obsession - what's the difference?
point taken

cheers!!
__________________
bosco is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2007, 12:20 PM   #55
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
kcowan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Pacific latitude 20/49
Posts: 5,717
Send a message via Skype™ to kcowan
Quote:
Originally Posted by wildcat View Post
...Oh wait, our govt's style is to wait for catastrophic things to happen and then react. Nevermind...
I guess you have forgotten Katrina already. Sometimes they don't even react...
__________________
For the fun of it...Keith
kcowan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2007, 12:23 PM   #56
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
MasterBlaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,359
Yesterday's Dilbert strip

__________________
MasterBlaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2007, 12:25 PM   #57
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
MasterBlaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,359
Quote:
...Oh wait, our govt's style is to wait for catastrophic things to happen and then react. Nevermind...


These are the same people that many want to run our healthcare system. The horror, The horror...
__________________
MasterBlaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2007, 02:12 PM   #58
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
wildcat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Lou-evil
Posts: 2,025
Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterBlaster View Post

These are the same people that many want to run our healthcare system. The horror, The horror...
Maybe not run it but FIX it!
__________________
"These walls are kind of funny. First you hate 'em, then you get used to 'em. Enough time passes, gets so you depend on them"
wildcat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-2007, 10:03 AM   #59
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
greg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,071
ERD:

I’m back and less prone to babbling today. I hope.

You said this the other day:

That is not to say we don't have serious problems today, but let's not view the past in rosy-colored revisionist-history glasses. Things are *so much* better today!

And yes, I do think that we need to look at Global Warming and pollution as separate (but often inter-twined) issues. I'll throw this one out again: We can sequester the CO2 from coal plants, but... the coal plant will use 30% more coal. Hmmm, we aren't quite sure how much that reduction of CO2 will mitigate global warming, but we do know that 30% more coal mining means more destruction of forests, more run-off, more loss of habitat, etc. I think it's important to understand which of those is the 'right' thing to do. That is not the same as doing nothing.


My pre-argument:

A few months back while staring at Fidel Castro on the wall, the DW and I were discussing the state of health care in this country. We both know the real solution to the problem: just do more of what the doctors (experts?) tell you and less of what the advertisers tell you. A very simple solution. For example, if the doctor says eat less meat and after a few months you probably can get off that Lipitor stuff, you should do it; or if he says lose a bit of weight and eat less salt and you probably can get off that high blood pressure medication, you should try to do that too. If one just did these little things, life could be much better, more vibrant, freer (less burdensome and costly). And over time folks would start having much better life endings also, with fewer complications arising as one aged, fewer mad dashes by the kids to bedsides, etc, etc, etc. Life would improve enormously and would probably cost far less. And after 10-20 years, my guess is that health care expenses may drop by up to 50%--but maybe not exactly that much. This to me, anyway, is what real freedom is all about, at least as related to my own personal life: living a life less burdened by health problems so that my options are always greater, less dependent upon my lack of health and more contingent upon my good health.

Analogously, I see way too much argument about whether a Ford is better or worse than a Chevy, and far too little about how if my health was just a little bit better, I could just walk to California. This car argument over and over again is mildly superficial to my mind (although Hondas are much better than Chevys). Real freedom is oftentimes different that we initially imagine—or fight for, 'more better' than just having lower taxes and more money.

The Argument:

Yes things are better today--kinda. But it is more like “things are slightly different now.” We have cleaned up a lot of the old health and sanitation problems. We’ve stopped lots of diseases; we’ve cleaned up much of the grosser car pollution, etc. All good things. And we’ve done a great deal of environmental clean up in this country and passed lots of good laws that make things much, much better and make sure that it’s easy to do those chores and recycling. And we should all be very happy and proud that we all helped and created a gov’t that made these things possible . . . but now we need to step up and do more because not doing things may have very grave consequences for all and especially for our children and grandchildren.

We have a serious global warming problem—or so the vast majority of experts say. (And I defer to them, the major scientists, not the crackpot ones on the periphery of the issue).

The easiest argument to make is to just say “Let’s wait until all the evidence is in before we make a decision.” Or as our current president does (and others in the past too), we can just defer the tough decisions to the future. We have debt/bankruptcy issues among individuals because they defer the decisions to stop spending and borrowings. Our gov’t uses the exact same deferral process as individuals use, the latest being deferring the cost of our current war and lowered taxes so that it’s paid off by others, our children and grandchildren. It is basically the same sort of argument I see some conservative types make on this thread and many others.

Finally, you made a comment above about coal plants and sequestering CO2, laying out a real life problem that exists today. All true as far as I can see. But . . . a partial solution lays in Canada. I believe they recently passed a law that mandates no more retail incandescent lights will be sold there in the near future. Their gov’t will require everyone use floros. I read somewhere right after this law was passed that if we did the same in this country, we could build ten fewer coal-fired electrical plants each year. Wow! Nice! Poof, the problems spewing from ten plants eliminated before they’re even built. It’s like building a healthy body by doing things right in the first place, rather than treating it with Lipitor after the fact. Your CO2 argument never even makes it to first base in this context.

Windmill energy is good too, and like good, healthy behaviors developed early in life, windmill energy and other clean energy creation methods create good behaviors and prevent bad consequences from developing at a later time. This is a good thing. In fact, it may actually be well worth some extra subsidies (just as we train, expend time, effort, and money, so that our children learn to eat better) now, to prevent the bad stuff from happening later. Ask any doctor or scientist, they’ll probably tell you it’s better to solve a problem early rather than later.

Plus, floro lights actually save more electricity over their life than they initial cost. Now we need to explain to the Chinese (and help them?), that having a healthy environment actually saves them from having huge health bills and costs in the future—that they don’t have to lead superficial lives that revolve solely around accumulating money and reducing taxes and giving rise to poorer choices revolving around crappy end game pills and medicines.

I better quit right nowbefore um . . . well you know.
__________________
Compounding: Never forget! Never not remember!
greg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-2007, 10:20 AM   #60
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
MasterBlaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,359
CFL bulbs, windmills...

That's the problem. People have not realized the magnitude of the cuts that are being proposed. CFBs and windmills help, yes that's true but they help only in the low single digit percentage of total emitted CO2.

If we are really serious about solving global warming we probably need to eliminate private cars. Cut electricity usage by two thirds. and so on.

The lifestyle implications are profound and far reaching and draconian. And I suspect that almost everyone when confronted with the reality of what some environmental activists are proposing will object to the solution.

Smaller cars and CFB's and windmills won't change anything.
__________________

__________________
MasterBlaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Global Warming statistic -- any truth ?? Rick S Other topics 43 06-18-2007 08:46 PM
The Most Intelligent Statement Made on Global Warming (IMO)... gindie Other topics 58 06-16-2007 07:44 PM
Global warming and financial positioning janeeyre FIRE and Money 274 04-18-2007 04:25 PM
global warming real estate investment ideas? winnie Other topics 13 03-15-2007 07:12 PM
A New Global Warming Strategy marty Other topics 3 02-13-2007 08:54 PM

 

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:19 AM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.