Re: OT: "Global Warming" again



On Jan 30, 11:08 am, "Frithiof Andreas Jensen"
<frithiof.jensen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
<bill.slo...@xxxxxxxx> wrote in messagenews:1170072022.864584.94600@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On Jan 29, 12:03 pm, "Frithiof Andreas Jensen"
<frithiof.jensen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
<bill.slo...@xxxxxxxx> wrote inmessagenews:1169913207.308199.231860@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx







On Jan 27, 2:50 am, Richard The Dreaded Libertarian <n...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
When Algore gets CO2 banned, I wonder how he plans to plug up all of
the volcanoes?

That's a stupid question. We don't have to get rid of CO2, just reduce
the level to something like what it's been for the last ten million
years.Make your mind up:

Averaged over 10 million years CO2 level certainly is *Flat*; Going back 10
million years you will find peaks and troughs all over, so which one do you
select as "Normal"??

PS:

CO2 reduction as a goal to "prevent global warming" *will fail* for the
following reasons:

1) Nobody yet knows if CO2 levels are causing warming or is caused by
warming! If the latter is shown to apply then *all* of the
"environmental-protectioneggs" were put in that same basket and nobody
will care about anything of that
sort the next 30 years or so.

You don't seem to have digested the information extracted from the
Greenland and Antartic ice cores.

I floated it this morning.

Where?

2) Cutting back on fossil fuels will cause prices to drop, making fossil
fuels more attractive to China, India, Afrika and Asia (Who will
additionally claim that CO2 limits, when applied to them, are the White
Man's way of keeping the Coloured Folks away from the same living
standards as the evil and decadent westerners).
I.e. MORE of the stuff will be burned in worse technology than
we have.

India and China have an interest in continueing to feed their
populations. Their agriculture is adapted to current weather
conditions and if the climate gets significantly warmer, they are
going to have to make massive changes to what they grow and where,
which may distract them from trying to attain the (unsustainable)
living standards we currently enjoy in the West.

China has managed for ~5000 years - which incidentially include periods with
double-digit temperature shifts. I am sure that China will continue to manage
change.

When do you think that there has been a double-digit temperature
change in the
last 5000 years? The "little ice age", whch had serious effects in
Europe and North America changed the average temperature in these
regions by just one degree Celcius.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Ice_Age

China and India have only recently stopped losing significant chunks
of their population to starvation, and any significant climate change
is going to undo that considerable achievement.

3) There is no clear, immediably visible objective. If cutting CO2 by N
percent *maybe* has an effect in 100 years, nobody, apart from the
believers, will give a rat's arse in the long run.

Because then there won't be anybody around to care in the long run.

Egg-Acktly Shurlog: In no more than ten years time CO2 and Climate Change will
be as "hot" as orange terrylene trousers and Tamagochi! It's a fad, it will be
mined to extinction by people like Al Gore - actual climate change or not - then
another problem that "we" should supposedly buy protection from will arise.

Dream on.

Think "Live Aid", "Bangladesh", "Palestine" e.t.c; Same shit, different day (but
no overall measureable effect in spite of the circus surrounding it and all the
effort spent).

You need to do a little more reading. This particular problem is real,
and already starting to have serious effects.

Australia's wheat production has fallen enormously in the past few
years due to a prolonged and anomalous drought, and Australia no
longer exports any wheat worth a damn - exports used to account for
64% of the production. It doesn't take much of a temperature change to
mess up agricultural production and 100 years could mess up pretty
much everything.

We will be *happy* to sell them some of the surplus production currently being
burnt in furnaces of our power plants as "CO2 Neutral Fuel"! Besides,
double-digit changes are normal. People obviously survived before Al Gore.

The abrupt changes in temperature recorded in the Greenland and
Antarctic ice cores pre-date modern cilivisation. Human beings, as a
species, obviously survived them - there is an arguement that language-
transmitted cultural skills allowed human beings to adapt to these
changes more rapidly than other species who had to evolve new
behaviours addapted to changed conditions - but there are a lot more
of us around now, and we don't live as hunter-gatherers.

The immediate effect of a sudden temperature change is going to be to
destroy our agricultural productivity and create a dramatic population
crash, starving somethig like 99% of the current human population.

4) If one really, really wanted to cut back on fossils the only *sane*
is to state the unstated and declare it plain stupid to keep basing our
argument econnomy on countries that openly, in speach and action,
declare that they want to destroy us!!

Correct. Winkling the U.S. out of the world economy is going to be
difficult, but it wouldn't take much of a disaster in the maize
farming industry for them find themselves starving - the current high
productivity of their maize fields depends (amongst other things) on
fertilisers made with oil-derived energy, and they can't afford to
keep on importing oil at anything like their current rate, even
without global warming to mess things up further.

Sure "they" can; The USD is mere paper. The US can print as much as it bloody
well like *and* ram it down the Arabs whining throats too in return for more
Oil: Because the Arabs - having failed utterly to create viable societies -
*will* starve without imports that all happen to costs money!!

The U.S. isn't the only country that needs oil, and it isn't the only
country that can ship food to the near East.

Check out The Omnivore's Dilemma: A Natural History of Four Meals
(Paperback) by Michael Pollan ISBN-10: 1594200823 ISBN-13:
978-1594200823.

It reads very much like a supplement to Jared Diamond's "Collapse".

--
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: LOL of the day
    ... Inside each cylinder of 156 cubic inch displacement (same as ... pressure, equivalent to 21 psi above ambient pressure. ... charge to burn at the proper rate and at a sub-solar temperature. ... the 2 pressure oil pumps have sent 148 fluid ...
    (rec.gambling.poker)
  • Re: turkey deep fryer recommendations?
    ... >> year people burn their house down with these things. ... > The instruction manual says it would take about an hour to heat the oil up ... > I've fried a few turkeys in my day, probably between 15 and 20 of them. ... > Bringing the oil up to temperature takes quite a while even with a big ...
    (rec.food.equipment)
  • Search for a fryer, part 2...
    ... "Since you were thinking of buying one like the Presto Kitchen Kettle I bought I thought you might be interested in our experience with it. ... I defrosted the shrimp, fixed an egg wash, and breaded them in Panko. ... Since this was our first use with it, I clipped a dial type analog thermometer in to monitor the temperature of the oil. ...
    (rec.food.cooking)
  • Re: Kanji for ishi (stone) can be pronounced koku
    ... it strikes me that zero is a nice number to associate with the freezing temperature of water. ... What about the lemmings? ... gallon-using country would seem to take the prize. ...
    (sci.lang.japan)
  • Re: Canola oil does not increase lipid peroxidation
    ... >Canola oil can be used in cooking in moderate temperatures but it contains ... >some PUFAs and that is why it is not suitable for cooking in high ... temperature than intact triglycerides). ...
    (sci.med.nutrition)