Bwak, bwak, chicken littles!
The environment is self-correcting. You are a fool if you think CFL bulbs, carbon offsets and Prius ownership will impact the environment in a positive way. In ANY way.
The mean temperature on all the planets in our own solar system has gone up at about the same rate as the mean temperature on Earth over the same period of time. Did we pollute Mars with SUV's and burning coal, too? Oops, no. It is just the sun burning hotter.
Let's see, wasn't there a recent report on how whales in the arctic were in trouble because the ice is too THICK? Much like the skulls of the sheeple who bleat the same sad rhetoric about "man-made climate change". Horse hockey (stick graph)!
Show me a weatherman who can predict with better than 50% accuracy where and when it will storm (including hurricanes) in any given region more than a week from now. There are none. Yet I am supposed to drink the eco-nazi koolade of "climate change disaster" that is allegedly coming in the coming DECADES? Isn't a planetary climate a bit more complex than a storm front? Now what are their chances of being correct about the climate in 10 years? 40% 25%? 10%???
Let's go with 1% accuracy. Nice round number. A percentage still 10 times as big as the TOTAL percentage of "greenhouse gasses" liberal scientists say humans are allegedly responsible for. So all the doom and gloom talk has 99% chance of not happening.
Get a grip, people. You are being swindled by folks with a social or political agenda. Or you ARE those folks.
2007-08-22 10:58:08
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
3⤋
Your question has been interior the information of late. Tony Blair, the best Minister of britain, gave a speech some days in the past emphatically pointing out that human habit ought to alter now or we are able to stand "dire consequences" interior our lifetimes. The speech became on the celebration of the receipt of a British government commissioned scientific checklist, the strict evaluation, spelling out the financial specifics of what awaits if climate exchange isn't stabilized straight away, and likewise emphatically shows that the only logical reason for the speedy exchange in climate is human interest. i urge all of us to a minimum of study the 27 website precis which additionally contains a graph showing what consequences take place at what temperature exchange. The solutions to the questions you raised are all there. The precis and the entire checklist may well be got here upon on the area listed by way of fact the reference under. Lest you fall into entire melancholy, the checklist states that committing a million% of world GDP to the subject could be sufficient to stabilize the climate, IF we act NOW. hyperlinks from the fewer than website will lead you to the extremely some suited technology-based worldwide warming suggestions i've got got here upon on the internet.
2016-10-16 12:14:44
·
answer #2
·
answered by mayben 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Water levels would rise enough to change the landscape-some of the poorer ppl will die, wars will erupt over available goods/services, and most people/corporations will lose money.
Some ppl might not be able to adapt to the accompanying climate changes.
Basically, the world will have to adjust to different living conditions-some will make it, others not.
BTW, if Global Warming was not an issue, why are Russia, Canada and the US already conducting meetings over land rights about new land that is being 'discovered' b/c of the melting glaciers?
And, the weather around here (FtW, TX) is off by a few days at times, but overall, fairly accurate.
2007-08-22 12:02:49
·
answer #3
·
answered by strpenta 7
·
0⤊
2⤋
The best assessment of the economic impact of Global Warming has been carried out by Nicholas STERN, former vice president of the world bank
The executive summary is available at:
http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/independent_reviews/stern_review_economics_climate_change/sternreview_summary.cfm
2007-08-22 09:44:20
·
answer #4
·
answered by NLBNLB 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well, some believe all of the harsh weather we have had is due to global warming. I honestly don't know if that can be proven one way or another.
I don't think there will really be anything TOO bad from global warming in our life-times.
2007-08-26 08:34:40
·
answer #5
·
answered by jezyka 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
Among many things that will happen are:
1. Increasing temperatures make it impossible to grow traditional crops in areas currently used. For example the USA Mid-west is going to dry out and become unsuitable for growing wheat.
2. The soils in land where the climate will become similar to the wheat-belt now are not immediately suitable for growing wheat in.
Ergo: The bread-baskets of the world will fail. Rumbly tummies all round.
3. Multi-meter rise in seal level expected by 2100. IPCC is wrong in its estimates of just a few centimetres.
4. Combined with population growth one metre rise will affect between 200 and 450 million people in the Asia-Pacific region alone. A seven metre rise (100 to 200 years) will see places like Bangladesh completely under water.
Ergo: Ports will be submerged. Coastal water-cooled power stations will fail. People will be displaced from their property – their assets gone and their loan from the banks still to be paid. They will have no money and nowhere to go. Don’t be the last person to buy a coastal property! High quality coastal/estuarine soils will be drowned, impacting intensive horticulture over the globe. Vital rice-growing areas like the Mekong Delta will be inundated and production will cease with no replacement likely.
5. River flows derived by snow and glacier melt will diminish substantially, creating incomprehensible difficulties for China, India, and California too.
6. To address a lot of these climate-induced problems there will be a tendency to increase energy consumption (running desalination plants, air conditioning etc) which will exacerbate the run-away climate effects.
7. It will start out with roving bands of refugees trying to get a piece of other still viable living areas; it will end out with wars. Those snuggled in beside the highest, driest and most heavily armed and best resourced nations will fare best. For the rest it will be anarchy and death.
Before we grow old, it will be very very hard. And even harder to explain to our grand children.
And it’s all our fault. Enjoy!
2007-08-22 12:55:38
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
What about the good effects? Believe it or not, they probably outweigh the bad if the temperature rises 1 or 2 degrees as expected.
2007-08-22 10:43:34
·
answer #7
·
answered by JimZ 7
·
2⤊
2⤋
Significant flooding initially. Intensification of existing weather patterns, regardless of their nature. Then complete extinction of all life, when the temperature rise reaches approximately double what has already occurred.
2007-08-22 14:10:02
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
Let's see, melting ice caps, changes in weather patterns, floods in Texas, drought in the Southeast USA.
The trouble with Global Warming is that it is like a cold. Many subtle symptoms that don't register until too late, and you are already sick.
2007-08-22 10:12:07
·
answer #9
·
answered by Liberty for All 4
·
1⤊
3⤋
There haven't been any bad effects from global warming.
2007-08-22 09:41:07
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
4⤋