Berkeley Earth Study Group..Global Warming

Discussion in 'Free Speech Alley' started by HalloweenRun, Oct 23, 2011.

Page 9 of 12
  1. martin

    martin Banned Forever

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    19,026
    Likes Received:
    934
    do you believe that mass extinctions of humans are possible because of warming? how likely is this?
     
    martin, Nov 17, 2011
    #81
  2. red55

    red55 curmudgeon Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    45,195
    Likes Received:
    8,736
    First of all "mass extinctions" doesn't apply to humans alone, it means extinctions of a significant percentage of the worlds species. The extinctions have already started. Humans are at the top of the food chain. When the species at the base of the food chain start dying, it snowballs. It could take many centuries, but at the current rate of warming, it is highly likely.

    During the Cretaceous extinction when the dinosaurs died out, 85% of the worlds species became extinct.

    During the Permain mass extinction, over 90% of the earths speciiers became extinct. Because so much biodiversity was lost, the recovery of life on Earth took significantly longer than after other extinction events.
     
    red55, Nov 17, 2011
    #82
  3. martin

    martin Banned Forever

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    19,026
    Likes Received:
    934
    that is a nice way of saying u cant answer my question. just how much danger are we in, and how soon?

    also i would argue that many of these mass extinctions are part of the process of evolution, eliminating creatures that cant adapt. this is not something you should see as a negative or really assign any sort of value to.

    "but at the current rate of warming, it is highly likely"

    wont the current rate of warming only get worse? havent we already passed a tipping point where we are screwed no matter what?

    will we be technologically superior in the future where we will be more able to adapt? wouldnt just learning to adapt be cheaper and simple, especiall;y given the progress of the global economy and technology that has been enabled by the industrialization that you claim is gonna kill our children (which neither of us have)
     
    martin, Nov 17, 2011
    #83
  4. red55

    red55 curmudgeon Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    45,195
    Likes Received:
    8,736
    Of course I did, so you just ignored that and asked two more questions. Sorry, do your own research if you think you have a case. I'm waiting to see your numbers.

    You are stupid today. Evolution is the slow change resulting from natural selection. Catastrophic change is not evolutionary at all and it is always bad because it takes nature a long time to adapt. Evolution moves at a natural pace allow for adaptation.

    No. The warming will get worse if humans keep adding unnatural amounts of carbon and other pollution into the habitat. But if we have control of that we can influence the curve downwards just as we have influenced it upwards.

    Technological progress (including their side-effects) work far faster than evolution. Unfortunately, humans are natural creatures that evolved to live in a pre-industrial environment. We will not naturally evolve fast enough to keep up with technological adaptation so we must advance very wisely, which is not always "damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead".
     
    red55, Nov 18, 2011
    #84
  5. red55

    red55 curmudgeon Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    45,195
    Likes Received:
    8,736
    Don't try to speak for me, you never get it right. I never said that industrialization was at fault. I said that pollution was at fault. We have legacy of 150 years of industrial pollution from an era when we didn't know better. But we can make industrial production cleaner, it is clear.
     
    red55, Nov 18, 2011
    #85
  6. SabanFan

    SabanFan The voice of reason

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    26,080
    Likes Received:
    1,247
    But we can't...or we would.
     
    SabanFan, Nov 18, 2011
    #86
  7. red55

    red55 curmudgeon Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    45,195
    Likes Received:
    8,736
    Who says?
     
    red55, Nov 18, 2011
    #87
  8. SabanFan

    SabanFan The voice of reason

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    26,080
    Likes Received:
    1,247
    Common sense. Carbon isn't foisted into the atmosphere out of spite. It's a necessary byproduct of the way we live.
     
    SabanFan, Nov 18, 2011
    #88
  9. red55

    red55 curmudgeon Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    45,195
    Likes Received:
    8,736
    Ah yes, ole Common Sense, he bails you out a lot. :lol:

    It can be reduced substantially if you and your ilk will get your craniums out of your anuses.
     
    red55, Nov 18, 2011
    #89
  10. SabanFan

    SabanFan The voice of reason

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    26,080
    Likes Received:
    1,247
    Not while maintaing our standard of living vis a vis the energy we use. Let humans 2 gazillion years from now be pissed at us. I don't really care that much.
     
    SabanFan, Nov 18, 2011
    #90
Page 9 of 12

Share This Page