I don't believe climate change is caused by farts. I ws being rather sillykaos wrote:to believe in something like that you have to disregard the several ice ages that have occurred before we could even pollute beyond cutting a nasty fart.
Recycling and Eco Friendly
What? That's not what it's saying at all. It's saying that we can make fairly good predictions about climate change even though our predictions about the weather in the immediate future aren't that great because they're completely different kinds of predictions - macro and micro.
Last edited by Chewi on Wed Aug 22, 2007 12:35 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
Super Goat Weed
- Anti-Hero
- Posts: 3407
- Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2004 3:13 pm
-
Super Goat Weed
- Anti-Hero
- Posts: 3407
- Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2004 3:13 pm
James, I've read the comments and, I must say, I agree to most of the comments rather than the article. Yes I know the article isn't about scientists and blar blar blar. However, it's funny how scientists can point these theories out like they are fucking fact, whilst science is very much to blame for climate change:Chewi wrote:What? That's not what it's saying at all. It's saying that we can make fairly good predictions about climate change even though our predictions about the weather in the immediate future aren't that great because they're completely different kinds of predictions - macro and micro.
Also, to people who complain about fossil fuel usage and shit. This is nothing compared to the Great Smog of 1952! Smogs were rife during the 50's and eariler anyway, because of the use of coal. Be thankful that you can see your hand in front of you! Be thankful that there aren't any killer diseases, like hypoxia, about, and that we don't suffer from bronchitis due to air pollution. Apprently, according to my father Poland still burns coal. Oh and another thing, be thankful you don't live in an asbestos house. /end rantEnviromental Catastraphe
Even when science was applied to human benefit, unintended comsequences could appear. Racheal Carson's Slient Sping (1963) awakened the world to the dangers of pollution - all the songbirds had gone away from the pesticide ridden farms of America. The thalidomide tragedy showed that science in the service of business can cause catastrophic results. [Taken from 'Introducing Science' by Ziauddin Sardar and Borin Van Loon (2002)]
Okay back on to this article from The Register.
No one has explained how cliamate models predict changes, so why are the results used by the government who raise more and more of our taxes? And by environmentalists who bash the populace?
Like one person said: "Are we that arrogant to think that the world has to stop changing because we say so?" I rememeber one documentary telling me that England was once a tropical island for fucks sake.
Another thing, James, the article doesn't actually reflect on global warming as a cause for climate change. Yes, climate change is happening, because it happens all the time. Take the floods that happened in towns like Tewksbury, and the amount of rain we had in July. That was caused by the 'jet stream' were it is usually over places like Iceland and Scandinavia. It is a change. But no one really knows what caused this to happen.
Like Ben mentioned we need to look at the bigger picture. It is a policy debate that needs to be balanced out by "error costs." In other words, we need to make sure our economic system is not damaged by energy restrictions, unless we are quite sure about global warming.
Last edited by Squirrel on Sun Aug 26, 2007 11:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.