Global Warming: Long term observations yield unsurprising results

[Thumpalumpacus]

I have a question though that maybe someone more versed in this topic will know. Aren't we going to run out of fossil fuel to burn somewhat soon? Won't this problem work itself out in a weird sort of way?

Eventually we will run out of fossil fuels. But I don't think "somewhat soon" is accurate, in human terms.

And the real question is, is the carbon held in those fossil fuels enough to fuck us up? Because we could, in theory, burn them all up in one day, and that would end the burning of fossil fuels -- but it wouldn't end the consequences of that event.

[Aractus]

http://youtu.be/potLQR7-_Tg

http://youtu.be/mOU306AvvHE

[ManMachine]

The physics behind global warming are simple. When energy in is greater than energy out things warm up. Even professional climate change skeptics like Roy Spencer admit as much. Likewise the theory behind anthropic climate change is equally as simple. Increasing the amount of greenhouse gasses such as CO2 cause our planet to radiate less energy back into space which results in energy in being greater than energy out. Therefore warming.

CO2 does absorb energy. This is an observable, testable scientific fact verified by many experiments. A recently released study, Observational determination of surface radiative forcing by CO2 from 2000 to 2010, has confirmed the amount of energy absorbed by atmospheric CO2. The unsurprising part is that the conclusion that an increase of 22 parts per million results in an energy absorption equivalent to .2 watts per meter squared falls within the assumptions used for most climate change models. What would be a surprise is if this new nail in the coffin lid of climate change denial made a bit of difference to the nuh-uh crowd.

Here's another point of view.

Humans, like every other species, are subject to the machinery of evolution. The environmental changes that give rise to organism efficiencies from mutation, drift and the other gene-scape forming processes can be caused by many different things, not least of all the organism itself.

It's a branch of Chaos Theory called Complex Adaptive System Theory (CAS Theory). CAS Theory tells us that there are two critical features of any complex system:

1. The initial conditions that 'kick-start' the system
2. The point at which the system generates feedback that affects the system itself

The human race are at point 2, which is giving rise all kinds of unnecessary histrionics and hyperbole. We have reached a point where our actions are impacting the environment that sustains us to our determent, which is a natural evolutionary process, it's happened before to other species and it will happen again.

Fighting to perpetuate conditions optimal for our survival is both futile and arrogant. We have known for over a hundred years how the forces of evolution work and yet we are blind to them when it comes to a critical analysis of our own place on the planet. People like 'Friends of the Earth' are not behaving is a manner that is friendly to the Earth at all - this is a gross misrepresentation - they should be called Friends of Humanity by Attempting to Perpetuate the Conditions Optimal for Human Survival and Fuck the Earth, FoHAPCOHSaFE is not a catchy title I know but is accurate.

So there you have it, the debate about whether or not global 'warming' is an inevitable part of climate change is utterly beside the point and has hidden the real debate for decades. When it comes to the real debate any position that argues from a position that is predicated on our ability to master evolution is nothing short of overblown, out-of-control, species-egotism and is rightly doomed to fail.

MM

[downbeatplumb]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0VeMXoCXOXE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2JmrmwIyhAE

[Void]

I have a question though that maybe someone more versed in this topic will know. Aren't we going to run out of fossil fuel to burn somewhat soon? Won't this problem work itself out in a weird sort of way?

Eventually we will run out of fossil fuels. But I don't think "somewhat soon" is accurate, in human terms.

I'm just wondering... Since fossil fuel is the remnants of past animals and plants. If we burn it all, and let all the gasses out, wouldn't we be resetting the atmosphere to a state which it has previously been?

[Faith No More]

---

Here's another point of view.

Humans, like every other species, are subject to the machinery of evolution. The environmental changes that give rise to organism efficiencies from mutation, drift and the other gene-scape forming processes can be caused by many different things, not least of all the organism itself.

It's a branch of Chaos Theory called Complex Adaptive System Theory (CAS Theory). CAS Theory tells us that there are two critical features of any complex system:

1. The initial conditions that 'kick-start' the system
2. The point at which the system generates feedback that affects the system itself

The human race are at point 2, which is giving rise all kinds of unnecessary histrionics and hyperbole. We have reached a point where our actions are impacting the environment that sustains us to our determent, which is a natural evolutionary process, it's happened before to other species and it will happen again.

Fighting to perpetuate conditions optimal for our survival is both futile and arrogant. We have known for over a hundred years how the forces of evolution work and yet we are blind to them when it comes to a critical analysis of our own place on the planet. People like 'Friends of the Earth' are not behaving is a manner that is friendly to the Earth at all - this is a gross misrepresentation - they should be called Friends of Humanity by Attempting to Perpetuate the Conditions Optimal for Human Survival and Fuck the Earth, FoHAPCOHSaFE is not a catchy title I know but is accurate.

So there you have it, the debate about whether or not global 'warming' is an inevitable part of climate change is utterly beside the point and has hidden the real debate for decades. When it comes to the real debate any position that argues from a position that is predicated on our ability to master evolution is nothing short of overblown, out-of-control, species-egotism and is rightly doomed to fail.

MM

---

What makes you certain that gaining more control over our environment isn't evolutionary progress?

[ManMachine]

---

Here's another point of view.

Humans, like every other species, are subject to the machinery of evolution. The environmental changes that give rise to organism efficiencies from mutation, drift and the other gene-scape forming processes can be caused by many different things, not least of all the organism itself.

It's a branch of Chaos Theory called Complex Adaptive System Theory (CAS Theory). CAS Theory tells us that there are two critical features of any complex system:

1. The initial conditions that 'kick-start' the system
2. The point at which the system generates feedback that affects the system itself

The human race are at point 2, which is giving rise all kinds of unnecessary histrionics and hyperbole. We have reached a point where our actions are impacting the environment that sustains us to our determent, which is a natural evolutionary process, it's happened before to other species and it will happen again.

Fighting to perpetuate conditions optimal for our survival is both futile and arrogant. We have known for over a hundred years how the forces of evolution work and yet we are blind to them when it comes to a critical analysis of our own place on the planet. People like 'Friends of the Earth' are not behaving is a manner that is friendly to the Earth at all - this is a gross misrepresentation - they should be called Friends of Humanity by Attempting to Perpetuate the Conditions Optimal for Human Survival and Fuck the Earth, FoHAPCOHSaFE is not a catchy title I know but is accurate.

So there you have it, the debate about whether or not global 'warming' is an inevitable part of climate change is utterly beside the point and has hidden the real debate for decades. When it comes to the real debate any position that argues from a position that is predicated on our ability to master evolution is nothing short of overblown, out-of-control, species-egotism and is rightly doomed to fail.

MM

---

What makes you certain that gaining more control over our environment isn't evolutionary progress?

Progress? Against what? There isn't some Universal unit we measure our 'evolutionary progress' by, the very concept is anthropocentric irrelevance and demonstrates my point perfectly.

MM

[Faith No More]

[quote='Faith No More' pid='891851' dateline='1425591112']
Progress? Against what? There isn't some Universal unit we measure our 'evolutionary progress' by, the very concept is anthropocentric irrelevance and demonstrates my point perfectly.

MM

Why can't you measure evolutionary progress by an organism's ability to adapt and survive?

ETA: what I meant by evolutionary progress was following the path evolution naturally leads us down.

[CapnAwesome]

I have a question though that maybe someone more versed in this topic will know. Aren't we going to run out of fossil fuel to burn somewhat soon? Won't this problem work itself out in a weird sort of way?

Eventually we will run out of fossil fuels. But I don't think "somewhat soon" is accurate, in human terms.

And the real question is, is the carbon held in those fossil fuels enough to fuck us up? Because we could, in theory, burn them all up in one day, and that would end the burning of fossil fuels -- but it wouldn't end the consequences of that event.

What is the estimation for running out? When I was a child they said that it could very well happen within my lifetime. Now I never hear it discussed at all.

[popeyespappy]

Economics says we won't run out of oil for a very very long time. Oil will become more expensive as we use up the stuff that is the easiest to obtain. Eventually it will become to expensive to use for everything it is used for today, and we will either find alternative energy sources or a lot of people will die. This will happen a long time before all the resource is depleted.