Man Made Global Warming

[binny]

Yes we are all doomed!

[Eilonnwy]

It's not the future of the world that is at stake here. The world is fine, the people are fucked.

Indeed. The earth has survived ice ages, and all kinds of climate changes. However, I believe that's when extinction rates increase. -_^

[Tiberius]

We have the technology to survive ice-ages, and we have the technology to survive "global warming".

[Pippy]

If we decide to use our tech for that purpose.

That seems to be part of the prob, since the industrial revolution we have used all advances either as weaponry or as a way to damage the ecosphere to acquire short term profit, like cutting down and selling trees... It is important that we change our priorities and realities so that we stop making such a mess of the only home we have. But this is all an identity trick too. I don't own a car, and likley never will. I try to eat locally, I don't celebrate cashmas... Humanity needs to make better overall decisions, but we need to accept that there is a chance that on a large scale we are being manipulated to destroy, if only out of greed (although it might be a far worse motivator).

Even the whole "humanity is doomed" perspective. With what are we identifying ourselves when we think that?

Thanks,
-Pip

[theVOID]

If we decide to use our tech for that purpose.

That seems to be part of the prob, since the industrial revolution we have used all advances either as weaponry or as a way to damage the ecosphere to acquire short term profit, like cutting down and selling trees... It is important that we change our priorities and realities so that we stop making such a mess of the only home we have. But this is all an identity trick too. I don't own a car, and likley never will. I try to eat locally, I don't celebrate cashmas... Humanity needs to make better overall decisions, but we need to accept that there is a chance that on a large scale we are being manipulated to destroy, if only out of greed (although it might be a far worse motivator).

Even the whole "humanity is doomed" perspective. With what are we identifying ourselves when we think that?

Thanks,
-Pip

I think it's going to be easier to cool the atmosphere directly than to change our habits, and if we can do that then why not?

Also, Fossil fuels are going to be phased out due to availability, not because they harm the planet, and that phase is going to be in the next few decades, after which time any sign of global pollution will slowly fade into history.

I don't think this is ever going to be about making better decisions, it's about developing technology to suit us and the way we want to live.

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

We have the technology to survive ice-ages, and we have the technology to survive "global warming".

WE might,but our major food plants don't [yet].

[Pippy]

Allow me to apologize beforehand for the length and tone of this post.

With that disclaimer...

I think it's going to be easier to cool the atmosphere directly than to change our habits,

Ahem... I don't even know where to start. It's going to be easier to try to modify our own atmosphere with technology than it would be to try not to use said technology in a wasteful, inefficient and fatal manner? It would be easier? Our relationship with tech is harmful, so... what we need is... more tech? I am flabbergasted. Literally. It's like your saying the way to get out of this whole is to keep digging.

and if we can do that then why not?

How many reasons may I give? First and foremost, the Law of Unintended Consequence. If we try to modify our atmosphere, either with cloud seeding, carbon addition or subtraction or maybe even the HARP thingy in Alaska, there is a very, very good likelihood that within the complexity of the ecosystem in question, and the staggeringly complex relationship to us as humans, there will be an unintentional consequence that would create another problem to solve. Now there's a run on sentence. So it being "easier" (as if that is a moral judgment, or even a strong scientific one) to modify our atmosphere to try to solve a problem with us modifying out atmosphere seems ridiculous, and more than a little ignorant.

But there's more. Also why not? How about inadvertently defining humanity by presumption? It is possible that humanity is not supposed to be destroying it's home. Is a human something so disconnected with nature that the earth is there for us not only to exploit (we really just use it to exploit each other), but to modify and manipulate in any dangerous or poorly-conceived manner? By saying why shouldn't we, you have said that humans seem to have some eminent domain, some amount of rule over the earth that made us. And I maintain that we as humans have been done a great disservice to wake up in a world that so disconnects us from what we actually are, where we actually fit in the ecosystem. We don't need to go further down this path, but rather need to radically change direction. I know full well that we can't go backwards, only ever forwards. But we can surely go forwards in a better direction...

Also, Fossil fuels are going to be phased out due to availability, not because they harm the planet,

And that says what about humanity's ability to make good choices. We should have tried too phase out fossil fuel usage as soon as we realized that it was harmful. And when I make all these statement about modern human nature, I feel the need to make something very clear. That it is in fact NOT modern human nature. Most of the people I have ever met are good people. They would not light there own house on fire and sit in it denying that there was a problem. But someone at the top is acting like that, in this case the oil complex and lobbyists and government agents with conflicts of interest in their favour. But it is not that humanity can't solve the fossil fuel problems, it is that they (god damn you They!) won't let us. I have to try to be clear, and assuming that such things as modern war, money, economics, or policy are some kind of human nature, or even an accurate representation of the majority of us people, is incorrect.

and that phase is going to be in the next few decades, after which time any sign of global pollution will slowly fade into history.

Because the only sign of global pollution is fossil fuel based? Are we on the same planet? The fossil fuel is maybe in the top 5 pollutions, but it gets much, much worse. What about, for example, the plastics pollution? The PCBs that have been found now literally everywhere on the planet. The other compunds of chemicals that have been shown to have dire effects on (especially) male fetus', children and adults. How is the changing of the fuel systems of the majority of cars going to deal with that pollution? Will any sign of plastics just go away with fossil fuel? Well the argument could be made that if we run out of, or run up the prices on fossil fuels, there will be less plastic, but that would be a complete side point for fun. There is reported to be a pile of floating plastic trash in the Pacific's northern gyre that can be about the size of Texas. That plastic is breaking down and devastating the ecosystem of the oceans. Will that just go away with cars that run on gas?
What about the nuclear facilities?
What about, much, much more pressing, the Depleted Uranium pollution. There are now a few major hotspots of radioactive fallout from the use of DU weaponry. Palestine, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and some testing ground in Oz. That pollution will be there for a long, long, long fucking time. Will the magical free market cumbersomely moving on from oil based transport solve the DU pollution problem as well?

The point is that the pollution problem is much, much bigger and multi-faceted than just cars and fossil fuel use.

I don't think this is ever going to be about making better decisions, it's about developing technology to suit us and the way we want to live.

If you don't think it will ever be about making better decisions... Than I am at a loss. All we have as humans are our decisions, and I would ask that if you want to ignore your responsibilities as a human, and you want to pretend it isn't about the decisions we make, please do so in a way that does not make the planet I also live on uninhabitable. That might be a little rude of you. Developing tech to suit us and the way we want to live. That's fundy talk man. God gave us dominion over the earth to rape and do whatever we want. We have no responsibility as aware and alive humans either to the ones who came before us and built what we know, or the ones who could come after and inherit our world. I mean really. Ab-fucking-surd. Go be a cyborg, but leave the rest of us out.

I don't mean to be so loud, but it is very important to me, and I was left in a state from reading this post.
Thank you all for your time,
The,
-Pip

[littlegrimlin1]

Well, there's nothing left to do but declare war on the atmosphere! "FU atmosphere (fires artillery)"


But no, in all seriousness, I concur that it is a huge issue at hand.... and long term one. Global warming probably got its start around the invention of what? Cars and motors? In respect to earths age, it is nearly an infinitesimal fraction of the earths age ago. If we continue, imagine how bad it could get in say.. 100-200 years... ;\

[binny]

Why don't we make a weather modification grid, like on Star Trek TNG.

[Autumnlicious]

Why don't we make a weather modification grid, like on Star Trek TNG.

An excellent and inventive suggestion, ma'am, with just two tiny drawbacks; A) We don't have any weather modification technology and B) There's no such thing as a weather modification grid outside of the fictional television show Star Trek.

I expect you to return with: "Well that's put a crimp an otherwise damn fine plan."

Kudos if you can identify what series this redefined quote came from. Hint: It "is a British television situation comedy franchise," according to the Wikipedia entry.