Quote:
|
Originally Posted by aceventura3
The predictive ability of economist using mathmatic models is contengent on the assumptions used. I have faith in logic and math not in economists. My faith in people with a few exceptions has usually lead to disappointment.
|
I'm the same way.
Quote:
|
We know polar bears adapted to cold conditions having evolved from brown bears and the thought that we will make significant changes to industrial policy and the use of fossil fuels for the benefit of polar bears, who most likely will continue adapting to whatever their conditions are, is on its face kind of silly. So I reject the whole idea of connecting polar bears to global warming as some kind of tool to prove anything or make political points.
|
You're pretty casual with the whole extinction thing, aren't you? There isn't an organism that can adapt to everything. How can you be certain that polar bears will adapt and how can you advocate that kind of wait and see approach when the natural existence of an entire species might possibly be in the balance?
Quote:
|
If objective science tells us the globe is warming because of industrial and fossil fuel greenhouse gases, I won't reject or dispute the science. However, I will reject proposed solutions if I think they are unfair to what is important to me. I would assume you would do the same.
|
I think that objective science has already told us that the globe is warming because of industrial and fossil fuel greenhouse gases. And actually, you're wrong about what kind of solutions i would accept and reject. I don't care much for the long term welfare of industries who can't exist without doing unreasonable and possibly irreversible damage to the world. Besides, how can you possibly justify putting industry ahead of averting a planet scale catastrophe?
Quote:
I am not rejecting global warming. I just don't understand it, given the history of this planet and Newton's third law of
physics (for every action there is an equal but opposit reaction), so if the globe is getting warmer what is getting colder? If ice starts to melt wont that lead to more cloud cover, more rain and cooler tempratures over time? I have not seen any response to this question in the limited reading I have done on the subject.
|
There isn't a response because it's a trivial concept for most anyone learned in the hard sciences and so they probably assume(unfortunately) that everyone already knows about it. In any case, here's an explanation: the earth is constantly being fed energy by the sun and it is constantly relinquishing some of that energy back into space. The idea with global warming, as i'm sure you're aware, is that the buildup of greenhouse gases is causing the earth to retain more of that energy and relinquish less. So to answer your question, everything other than the earth is getting colder. Energy that would have previously been reflected back into space is being reflected into space no longer and is hanging around, heating up ur planit. More open water won't necessarily lead to more cloud cover and more cloud cover won't necessarily lead to cooler temperatures.
Quote:
|
I can create a chart showing the average temprature dropping. All I have to do is start measuring tempratures in my backyard in August and end in December. Given the age of the earth, the length of time and places where we have been collecting data - how can you be so certain?
|
I'm not a global warming expert, so i just defer to the thousands of scientists for whom the evidence passes muster. I'm fairly certain that the evidence supporting global warming is a lot more compelling than any evidence that polar bears will adapt to their new environmental problems.