Climate Change Discussion/ split from What is the purpose of a Taekwondo form?

[Flying Crane]

Your's is the "I want it fixed and I want it now" voice. Not rational.

Show me what Ive said that is irrational. Show me where I’ve said anything at all in line with your accusation. I’ve said it is a real problem that we need to be working on, and we need a government committed to that course of action. We need a government that does not deny the science, and does not try to reverse the progresses that we have made, a government that does not believe that burning more coal is the solution, which is an insane notion.

It is a big problem that will not go away, and avoiding facing it will only make it worse. But fixing it, if possible, will take a tremendous effort and a long time. That is simply seeing the problem for what it is; that is accepting reality.

I’ve said nothing irrational, and I challenge you to support your claim.

You know you cannot back up that accusation.
So instead you resort to casting me as an extremist. Which you know is a lie. So, are you a liar?

 

[Tony Dismukes]

Your's is the "I want it fixed and I want it now" voice. Not rational.

I don't see anything in any of FC's posts which indicates that he expects global warming can be instantly fixed.

I'd guess his position is pretty much in line with mine, to wit:

I want society and government to acknowledge that anthropogenic climate change is a real phenomenon which is likely to cause dire consequences and to devote substantial resources into doing whatever we can to mitigate those consequences. (And yes, economists and engineers are likely to have useful input into plans for how we can most effectively use those resources for maximum effect.)

What we actually have, particularly in the United States, is an active disinformation campaign pushing the ideas that: global warming isn't real, it's media scaremongering, it's a deliberate hoax by either scientists wanting funding or liberals wanting increased government control (or both), it is real but has nothing to do with human activity, global temperatures are actually dropping, it might be real but wouldn't actually be a bad thing, it might be real but we don't have evidence enough to decide so we shouldn't do anything about it, etc, etc.

These aren't conspiracy theorists chatting on the fringes. These are public statements from the policy makers who should be working to find solutions.

I welcome debate on the best ways to address the problem, but we can't get to that point if all the energy has to go into persuading people that there actually is a problem to be solved.

 

[DaveB]

ALL of this is already being done. Maybe not at the pace the liberals like but it is being done. FWIW "green tech" is nothing more than a political buzz word. Again, (and again) if you listen to only one stream of information, climatologist for example, you gen ONLY one opinion. That is not informed information. It is hearing what you want to hear.
I agree that our petroleum energy dependency should and will change. That is a global reality. People way smarter than me are working on ways to replace petroleum. Are you willing to do without transportation, and heat, and most of the things in your house that are in some way dependent on petroleum? Most people are not so demand plays a HUGE roll. Oh by the way, it is the largest part of our economy, directly and indirectly. Are you ready to give up the luxuries this country affords? It is easy to stand in the me too crowd and cry.

I realise that this was a while back, but I wanted to come back on the idea of green tech as a political buzz word.

I personally have seen wind turbines and solar panels and can attest to the fact that they do exist. I've also seen early model wave power devices.

Now given that I'm sure you've seen some off these things too, how do you dismiss them and their development and the development of other high efficiency low waste techniques and technologies as a political buzz word?

 

[Flying Crane]

I realise that this was a while back, but I wanted to come back on the idea of green tech as a political buzz word.

I personally have seen wind turbines and solar panels and can attest to the fact that they do exist. I've also seen early model wave power devices.

Now given that I'm sure you've seen some off these things too, how do you dismiss them and their development and the development of other high efficiency low waste techniques and technologies as a political buzz word?

I’ve got solar panels on my house and I drove an electric car for a few years until the expiration of the lease coincided with a financial reality that forced us to give it up.

They exist, they are good things, they need to become much more widespread.

 

[dvcochran]

I realise that this was a while back, but I wanted to come back on the idea of green tech as a political buzz word.

I personally have seen wind turbines and solar panels and can attest to the fact that they do exist. I've also seen early model wave power devices.

Now given that I'm sure you've seen some off these things too, how do you dismiss them and their development and the development of other high efficiency low waste techniques and technologies as a political buzz word?

I don't dismiss them at all. Turbines are incredibly efficient where the is ample flat land. Of course that is not the case everywhere. The downside is they take up a very big footprint when you compare the energy generated with water generation. There have been way too many documented stories of wasted millions during the Obama administration and the green energy movement.
I am very intrigued by the wave energy model. Makes a lot of sense. It does ring of trying to tame mother nature which I think cannot fully be accomplished. So there will be some mishaps as we figure out the technology.

 

[DaveB]

I am curious of this is personal and present experience? Are you currently in this situation? I would love to hear the details if that is the case.

My post was a generic example of a common workplace scenario, ie people without expertise weighing in counter to the people with expertise.

My engineer buddy never stops complaining about it and in my own field I have similar issues.

 

[dvcochran]

I don't see anything in any of FC's posts which indicates that he expects global warming can be instantly fixed.

I'd guess his position is pretty much in line with mine, to wit:

I want society and government to acknowledge that anthropogenic climate change is a real phenomenon which is likely to cause dire consequences and to devote substantial resources into doing whatever we can to mitigate those consequences. (And yes, economists and engineers are likely to have useful input into plans for how we can most effectively use those resources for maximum effect.)

What we actually have, particularly in the United States, is an active disinformation campaign pushing the ideas that: global warming isn't real, it's media scaremongering, it's a deliberate hoax by either scientists wanting funding or liberals wanting increased government control (or both), it is real but has nothing to do with human activity, global temperatures are actually dropping, it might be real but wouldn't actually be a bad thing, it might be real but we don't have evidence enough to decide so we shouldn't do anything about it, etc, etc.

These aren't conspiracy theorists chatting on the fringes. These are public statements from the policy makers who should be working to find solutions.

I welcome debate on the best ways to address the problem, but we can't get to that point if all the energy has to go into persuading people that there actually is a problem to be solved.

What we actually have, particularly in the United States, is an active disinformation campaign pushing the ideas that: global warming isn't real, it's media scaremongering, it's a deliberate hoax by either scientists wanting funding or liberals wanting increased government control (or both), it is real but has nothing to do with human activity, global temperatures are actually dropping, it might be real but wouldn't actually be a bad thing, it might be real but we don't have evidence enough to decide so we shouldn't do anything about it, etc, etc.

All of your explanations are real and actual arguments being thrown out there.
*It is media scaremongering on both sides of the argument.
*Whether it is a hoax or not some scientific bodies have already been caught with their hand in the cookie jar making claims that have been proven unfounded.
*Liberal always want increased government control. Have you ever spent significant time in a Socialist economy? I have and it just sucks.
*Of course it has to do with humans; we are the main consumer of, everything.
*Global temperatures are dropping if you look at the long term models. We are in a mini-ice age. That said I am certain we have milder winters in middle TN. It is freaky how easy it is to see the line of weather that goes just north of us. We seem to be in an unending loop of temperatures the drop below freezing but don't stay that way long enough for a hard freeze. TN weather is literally from the 20's to the 70's in the same week frequently. I am more inclined to believe the shift in the earth's axis has more to do with our weather. It is a physical shift that seems more inline with how the weather patterns flow. It is a shift of only around 200 miles which is exactly how our weather patterns seem to have shifted. We do not get the jet stream effect as much now either.
*I have no clue if it is a bad thing.
*I have no clue if it is real. We don't know if we should or can do anything about it. But we do need to try.

 

[dvcochran]

My post was a generic example of a common workplace scenario, ie people without expertise weighing in counter to the people with expertise.

My engineer buddy never stops complaining about it and in my own field I have similar issues.

Yea, it is real and can be quite frustrating.

 

[Flying Crane]

All of your explanations are real and actual arguments being thrown out there.
*It is media scaremongering on both sides of the argument.
*Whether it is a hoax or not some scientific bodies have already been caught with their hand in the cookie jar making claims that have been proven unfounded.
*Liberal always want increased government control. Have you ever spent significant time in a Socialist economy? I have and it just sucks.
*Of course it has to do with humans; we are the main consumer of, everything.
*Global temperatures are dropping if you look at the long term models. We are in a mini-ice age. That said I am certain we have milder winters in middle TN. It is freaky how easy it is to see the line of weather that goes just north of us. We seem to be in an unending loop of temperatures the drop below freezing but don't stay that way long enough for a hard freeze. TN weather is literally from the 20's to the 70's in the same week frequently. I am more inclined to believe the shift in the earth's axis has more to do with our weather. It is a physical shift that seems more inline with how the weather patterns flow. It is a shift of only around 200 miles which is exactly how our weather patterns seem to have shifted. We do not get the jet stream effect as much now either.
*I have no clue if it is a bad thing.
*I have no clue if it is real. We don't know if we should or can do anything about it. But we do need to try.

Reporting on the actual consensus of the scientific community is not scaremongering.

 

[dvcochran]

Reporting on the actual consensus of the scientific community is not scaremongering.

So you don't think there is grandstanding on both "sides"? That is just being naïve.

 

[Flying Crane]

*Whether it is a hoax or not some scientific bodies have already been caught with their hand in the cookie jar making claims that have been proven unfounded.

Not true. Those accusations were investigated and found to be baseless.

You can read about it on numerous websites. Here is one:
Debunking Misinformation About Stolen Climate Emails in the "Climategate" Manufactured Controversy

*Liberal always want increased government control. Have you ever spent significant time in a Socialist economy? I have and it just sucks.

This opening statement is simply nonsense, followed by scaremongering of your own. Believe it or not, we live in a society that has governmental control over many aspects of it. The Postal Service, roads, police forces, libraries, military, etc. come to mind. Playing the socialism card is pretty weak. Nobody is advocating a move to actual socialism.

*Global temperatures are dropping if you look at the long term models. We are in a mini-ice age. That said I am certain we have milder winters in middle TN. It is freaky how easy it is to see the line of weather that goes just north of us. We seem to be in an unending loop of temperatures the drop below freezing but don't stay that way long enough for a hard freeze. TN weather is literally from the 20's to the 70's in the same week frequently. I am more inclined to believe the shift in the earth's axis has more to do with our weather. It is a physical shift that seems more inline with how the weather patterns flow. It is a shift of only around 200 miles which is exactly how our weather patterns seem to have shifted. We do not get the jet stream effect as much now either.

I thought I already discussed this. Yes, we are in the middle of an ice age. But it cycles on periods of tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of years. We are in a period of ice recession. If it is getting colder, that would take tens of thousands of years, or more.
The anthropogenic climate change we are seeing, while in the middle of this ice recession period, is happening over the period of decades. Average global temperature is rising, right now, at rates that will very directly affect us. Meaning you and me as well as the generations to come. We already see extreme weather patterns like Hurricane Katrina and Superstorm Sandy, causing billions of dollars in damage. Think it’s cheaper to ignore the problem? We are already paying the cost of it.

*I have no clue if it is a bad thing.
*I have no clue if it is real. We don't know if we should or can do anything about it. But we do need to try.

Regarding the bolded part, thanks for that much, at least.

 

[dvcochran]

Not true. Those accusations were investigated and found to be baseless.

You can read about it on numerous websites. Here is one:
Debunking Misinformation About Stolen Climate Emails in the "Climategate" Manufactured Controversy



This opening statement is simply nonsense, followed by scaremongering of your own. Believe it or not, we live in a society that has governmental control over many aspects of it. The Postal Service, roads, police forces, libraries, military, etc. come to mind. Playing the socialism card is pretty weak. Nobody is advocating a move to actual socialism.

You view of freedoms and control is very different from mine. I will ask again, have you ever spent time in a socialist government ran country? I am certain it would change your thinking.

 

[Flying Crane]

So you don't think there is grandstanding on both "sides"? That is just being naïve.

No, I do not.

From what I have seen, it seems to me that the news outlets that lean conservative tend to deny the climate science. If you can point me to a conservative-leaning news source that accepts the climate science and champions the need to take action, please do. I would like to be wrong about that.

At the same time, liberal-leaning outlets tend to champion the climate science, and stand in line with the overwhelming consensus of the scientific community.

This is what I see.

I wonder why these divisions are so clear.

Why do the conservative outlets stand in opposition to the overwhelming scientific consensus?

 

[Flying Crane]

You view of freedoms and control is very different from mine. I will ask again, have you ever spent time in a socialist government ran country? I am certain it would change your thinking.

I have. I was an exchange studen in Croatia, when it was still part of Yugoslavia.

But this is just another distraction tactic. Please point out to me who and where folks are saying we out to become full-fledged Socialist, in the US., especially in regards to dealing with the climate problem.

 

[dvcochran]

No, I do not.

From what I have seen, it seems to me that the news outlets that lean conservative tend to deny the climate science. If you can point me to a conservative-leaning news source that accepts the climate science and champions the need to take action, please do. I would like to be wrong about that.

At the same time, liberal-leaning outlets tend to champion the climate science, and stand in line with the overwhelming consensus of the scientific community.

This is what I see.

I wonder why these divisions are so clear.

Why do the conservative outlets stand in opposition to the overwhelming scientific consensus?

I am tapping out. You have only one view.

 

[elder999]

There have been way too many documented stories of wasted millions during the Obama administration and the green energy movement.
I.

Name 2.

 

[DaveB]

I am tapping out. You have only one view.

How many views should a person have if only one thing is true?

It is very disappointing to see you leave the discussion right after you are asked to support your statements.

I don't dismiss them at all. Turbines are incredibly efficient where the is ample flat land. Of course that is not the case everywhere. The downside is they take up a very big footprint when you compare the energy generated with water generation. There have been way too many documented stories of wasted millions during the Obama administration and the green energy movement.
I am very intrigued by the wave energy model. Makes a lot of sense. It does ring of trying to tame mother nature which I think cannot fully be accomplished. So there will be some mishaps as we figure out the technology.

So why call green tech a political buzz word?

Why not advocate investment and job creation in these technologies, including the retraining of people from coal and oil etc?

 

[DaveB]

*Liberal always want increased government control. Have you ever spent significant time in a Socialist economy? I have and it just sucks.

Is this it then? The real reason for the "doubt". Fear of government "control"?

Yet we are in this mess precisely because governments around the world have been unwilling to exert control over the corporations that pollute the world.

Left to these companies, they will simply adjust their business models to sell us inflatable rafts and other post apocalypse survival gear; to profit off the end of the world. Fixing global problems just isn't in their wheel house.

I've never understood how you are more free when corporations are in control than a government that is accountable to the people?

Nor can I grasp how the idea of any sort of impingement or curtailment of current freedoms is seen as too great a cost to help your fellow man?

For example you keep straw manning the argument by suggesting people who believe the science want everyone to stop driving immediately etc. We don't, but given the choice between driving and irreversible climate change and all that comes with it, I would stop driving.

Incidentally, there's a reason you keep leaping to extreme ideas that nobody has suggested. If you can frame the opposition as unreasonable then you don't need to listen to them and then you don't have to face the things about the opposition that scare you, like losing cars, eating less meat and letting government make more rules. It's not unique to you or even to a political side. But it is something we should consider in ourselves.

I'm afraid of the planet dying, so it's easy for me to dismiss deniers as stupid, but that's not true: you clearly aren't stupid. One of the advantages of forum discussion is that words are permanent and easy to review, so when our biases twist them we can compare our view of the argument with the actual argument.

 

[DaveB]

My post was a generic example of a common workplace scenario, ie people without expertise weighing in counter to the people with expertise.

My engineer buddy never stops complaining about it and in my own field I have similar issues.

Yea, it is real and can be quite frustrating.

Ok, can you not see a comparison between this common issue in engineering, where specialist expertise is countered by people who have non...

...and your view that the information about the conditon of the global climate should be weighed in on by people who do not study climate science and have done no research themselves?

Because to me that is exactly same thing and it is equally frustrating.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I don't dismiss them at all. Turbines are incredibly efficient where the is ample flat land. Of course that is not the case everywhere. The downside is they take up a very big footprint when you compare the energy generated with water generation. There have been way too many documented stories of wasted millions during the Obama administration and the green energy movement.
I am very intrigued by the wave energy model. Makes a lot of sense. It does ring of trying to tame mother nature which I think cannot fully be accomplished. So there will be some mishaps as we figure out the technology.

Wave energy conversion technology has nothing to do with taming nature. It just makes use of the kinetic energy of waves. As for waste, we've not had any scarcity if that under any recent administration. The budget is set by Congress, not the President, though the President has some influence on the process.