Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9
111 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 16


  Reply # 1927552 1-Jan-2018 10:34
3 people support this post
Send private message

Mistenfuru:

 

The scientific truth is that man is affecting the climate faster than what the climate would change naturally. You might say this is debatable, and it has been debated, thousands of times as a matter of fact, and the scientific consensus still remains the same: Humans are affecting the climate at a rate that is unsustainable to life as we know it.

 

 

Dead right.  I really don't know why there would be any continuing debate on this subject, certainly for anyone with a physics-based education who has studied even a small portion of the reams of data and lectures available from credible sources.  For someone without a suitable education, they would be well-advised to accept expert opinion rather than think they know better.  Every scientist in the world would love to be the one person to solve this nasty problem and become the most famous person in history, yet no one has stepped up with an answer or uncovered any mass conspiracy, certainly not any of the politically-motivated or industry-funded deniers.

 

The difficulties the general population have with understanding this is clearly because humans are not hard-wired to understand threats which are not immediately obvious.  Adding to that the fact that warming is due to long-term cumulative emissions and delayed decades by the thermal masses involved.  The US for example is roughly responsible for 27% of the total cumulative warming but today contributes only about 11% annually.

 

Our next few generations are absolutely in dire trouble.  The time to act was 1980.  Today, we are almost locked in to 1.5°C (2040-ish) and will easily exceed 2, probably more because of the enormity of accepting that we must stop burning all fossil fuels immediately.  Today we see the climates effects of 1°C and it it unknown how worse that can get with 1.5 or 2 but anyone can guess it won't magically improve.

 

Once the Arctic summer ice mass reaches zero (<2040) the latent heat storage component disappears and the northern hemisphere weather could radically change.  Consequently, as countries experience summer wet bulb temperatures over 35°C there will be mass deaths and mass migrations, and guess what country is a good place to go?


1404 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 260

Subscriber

  Reply # 1927553 1-Jan-2018 10:37
Send private message

MaxLV:

 

gzt:
MaxLV: And this is why I'm so sceptical about Climate Change/Global Warming...

As soon as you find out this particular article is atrocious science reporting you will change your mind right?


Change my mind to believe what exactly? Reporting that X computer models are the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Any other computer models that dont support x computer models are bad science and atrocious science reporting?

 

But what is agreed on is the fact that our actions as humans are exaggerating the natural climate change cycle so the issue isn't warming or cooling but how our actions influence that cycle and draw that cycle to the extremes that ultimately threaten us as a species. The problem is that there are far too many people who have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo out of self interest or if they believe things need to change then it is something that everyone else must do but they themselves have good reason for not changing hence we're at this impasse of politicians talking big but delivering little out of fear of upsetting the voting base.





Laptop: MacBook Pro (15-inch, 2017)
Desktop: iMac (27-inch, 2017)
Smartphone: iPhone X 256GB 'Space Grey'
Additional devices: Unifi Security Gateway, Unifi Switch, Unifi AP AC HD, Unifi Cloud Key, Apple TV 4K 64GB
Services: iCloud, YouTube Premium, Wordpress, Skinny

 


11900 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3858

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1927565 1-Jan-2018 10:40
Send private message

KiwiME:

 

Mistenfuru:

 

The scientific truth is that man is affecting the climate faster than what the climate would change naturally. You might say this is debatable, and it has been debated, thousands of times as a matter of fact, and the scientific consensus still remains the same: Humans are affecting the climate at a rate that is unsustainable to life as we know it.

 

 

Dead right.  I really don't know why there would be any continuing debate on this subject, certainly for anyone with a physics-based education who has studied even a small portion of the reams of data and lectures available from credible sources.  For someone without a suitable education, they would be well-advised to accept expert opinion rather than think they know better.  Every scientist in the world would love to be the one person to solve this nasty problem and become the most famous person in history, yet no one has stepped up with an answer or uncovered any mass conspiracy, certainly not any of the politically-motivated or industry-funded deniers.

 

The difficulties the general population have with understanding this is clearly because humans are not hard-wired to understand threats which are not immediately obvious.  Adding to that the fact that warming is due to long-term cumulative emissions and delayed decades by the thermal masses involved.  The US for example is roughly responsible for 27% of the total cumulative warming but today contributes only about 11% annually.

 

Our next few generations are absolutely in dire trouble.  The time to act was 1980.  Today, we are almost locked in to 1.5°C (2040-ish) and will easily exceed 2, probably more because of the enormity of accepting that we must stop burning all fossil fuels immediately.  Today we see the climates effects of 1°C and it it unknown how worse that can get with 1.5 or 2 but anyone can guess it won't magically improve.

 

Once the Arctic summer ice mass reaches zero (<2040) the latent heat storage component disappears and the northern hemisphere weather could radically change.  Consequently, as countries experience summer wet bulb temperatures over 35°C there will be mass deaths and mass migrations, and guess what country is a good place to go?

 

 

 

 

Better start building up the Navy to repel boarders then...






11900 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3858

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1927567 1-Jan-2018 10:44
One person supports this post
Send private message

tdgeek:

 

Geektastic: The climate will do whatever it does. Humans will adapt or die.

The end.

 

Nein

 

You are correct but when you factor in human interventions its another ball game

 

 

 

 

Still have to adapt or die.

 

 

 

What I am not too sure of is why there is so much importance attached to the continued survival of the human race, as if that single thing was more important than anything else. It bothers me not at all - why would I care particularly if human beings ceased to exist any more than I would if mice did?






Glurp
8238 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3791

Subscriber

  Reply # 1927568 1-Jan-2018 10:45
3 people support this post
Send private message

I suspect money is the reason vested interests keep their heads so firmly in the sand. There are vast amounts tied up in the current ways of doing things, and any major changes are going to cause lots of financial pain. Humans are also not hard-wired to act in a selfless manner. Some of us may be prepared to run into a burning building to rescue a child, but far fewer are willing to give up their current lifestyles for the sake of a better future. Communism failed as an economic system because without personal reward no-one was willing to do more than the absolute minimum they could get away with.   

 

 





I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage
 




652 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 157


Reply # 1927573 1-Jan-2018 10:54
Send private message

Geektastic:

 

KiwiME:

 

Mistenfuru:

 

The scientific truth is that man is affecting the climate faster than what the climate would change naturally. You might say this is debatable, and it has been debated, thousands of times as a matter of fact, and the scientific consensus still remains the same: Humans are affecting the climate at a rate that is unsustainable to life as we know it.

 

 

Dead right.  I really don't know why there would be any continuing debate on this subject, certainly for anyone with a physics-based education who has studied even a small portion of the reams of data and lectures available from credible sources.  For someone without a suitable education, they would be well-advised to accept expert opinion rather than think they know better.  Every scientist in the world would love to be the one person to solve this nasty problem and become the most famous person in history, yet no one has stepped up with an answer or uncovered any mass conspiracy, certainly not any of the politically-motivated or industry-funded deniers.

 

The difficulties the general population have with understanding this is clearly because humans are not hard-wired to understand threats which are not immediately obvious.  Adding to that the fact that warming is due to long-term cumulative emissions and delayed decades by the thermal masses involved.  The US for example is roughly responsible for 27% of the total cumulative warming but today contributes only about 11% annually.

 

Our next few generations are absolutely in dire trouble.  The time to act was 1980.  Today, we are almost locked in to 1.5°C (2040-ish) and will easily exceed 2, probably more because of the enormity of accepting that we must stop burning all fossil fuels immediately.  Today we see the climates effects of 1°C and it it unknown how worse that can get with 1.5 or 2 but anyone can guess it won't magically improve.

 

Once the Arctic summer ice mass reaches zero (<2040) the latent heat storage component disappears and the northern hemisphere weather could radically change.  Consequently, as countries experience summer wet bulb temperatures over 35°C there will be mass deaths and mass migrations, and guess what country is a good place to go?

 

 

 

 

Better start building up the Navy to repel boarders then...

 

 

 

 

Or survival bunkers in in remote New Zealand.

 

However, it isn't all bad...
After all once all the ice melts, New Zealand has control of a significant portion of that huge continent to the south of us,  just waiting to be terra-formed with the current polluting dairy farming technology we're well known for...

 

A 1.5 - 2c temperature rise is going to be a global disaster and world wide extinction event? 

 

Maybe I should stop spreading mis-information and outright lies about this religion/so called unquestionable scientific truth huh....

Yeah right. Mines a Tui thanks... 

 

Or to quote a 'famous British army captain':

 

"you're getting into the realms of fantasy Jones"

 

 


1404 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 260

Subscriber

  Reply # 1927591 1-Jan-2018 12:51
Send private message

Rikkitic:

 

I suspect money is the reason vested interests keep their heads so firmly in the sand. There are vast amounts tied up in the current ways of doing things, and any major changes are going to cause lots of financial pain. Humans are also not hard-wired to act in a selfless manner. Some of us may be prepared to run into a burning building to rescue a child, but far fewer are willing to give up their current lifestyles for the sake of a better future. Communism failed as an economic system because without personal reward no-one was willing to do more than the absolute minimum they could get away with.

 

I think a fair amount of it has to do with snobbishness rather than financial reasons. Just check out the anti-public transport anti-bicycle path circle jerk up in Auckland then add on that the leafy suburb complainers who see terrace houses and apartments as 'lower class', then there is that cycle bridge clip-on that residents on one side of the bridge claimed it would encourage burglaries in their suburb. I used to get frustrated but I've pretty much adopted the George Carlin approach these days - grabbing a chair and watching at the front row of the freak show known as humanity.





Laptop: MacBook Pro (15-inch, 2017)
Desktop: iMac (27-inch, 2017)
Smartphone: iPhone X 256GB 'Space Grey'
Additional devices: Unifi Security Gateway, Unifi Switch, Unifi AP AC HD, Unifi Cloud Key, Apple TV 4K 64GB
Services: iCloud, YouTube Premium, Wordpress, Skinny

 


14353 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1866


  Reply # 1927595 1-Jan-2018 13:28
Send private message

Rikkitic:

 

I suspect money is the reason vested interests keep their heads so firmly in the sand. There are vast amounts tied up in the current ways of doing things, and any major changes are going to cause lots of financial pain. Humans are also not hard-wired to act in a selfless manner. Some of us may be prepared to run into a burning building to rescue a child, but far fewer are willing to give up their current lifestyles for the sake of a better future. Communism failed as an economic system because without personal reward no-one was willing to do more than the absolute minimum they could get away with.   

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yeap. It somewhat reminds me of what happens after a major earthquake. After a major one, often they will rebuild the town in the same place, rather than move it to a totally different area that is not likely to be subject to the same risk. Even though starting from afresh  can be cheaper and reduces the risk.


11900 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3858

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1927610 1-Jan-2018 14:18
Send private message

mattwnz:

Rikkitic:


I suspect money is the reason vested interests keep their heads so firmly in the sand. There are vast amounts tied up in the current ways of doing things, and any major changes are going to cause lots of financial pain. Humans are also not hard-wired to act in a selfless manner. Some of us may be prepared to run into a burning building to rescue a child, but far fewer are willing to give up their current lifestyles for the sake of a better future. Communism failed as an economic system because without personal reward no-one was willing to do more than the absolute minimum they could get away with.   


 



 


Yeap. It somewhat reminds me of what happens after a major earthquake. After a major one, often they will rebuild the town in the same place, rather than move it to a totally different area that is not likely to be subject to the same risk. Even though starting from afresh  can be cheaper and reduces the risk.



Ahem*Christchurch*ahem





13430 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2428

Trusted

  Reply # 1927614 1-Jan-2018 14:28
Send private message

Geektastic:
mattwnz:

 

Rikkitic:

 

 

 

I suspect money is the reason vested interests keep their heads so firmly in the sand. There are vast amounts tied up in the current ways of doing things, and any major changes are going to cause lots of financial pain. Humans are also not hard-wired to act in a selfless manner. Some of us may be prepared to run into a burning building to rescue a child, but far fewer are willing to give up their current lifestyles for the sake of a better future. Communism failed as an economic system because without personal reward no-one was willing to do more than the absolute minimum they could get away with.   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yeap. It somewhat reminds me of what happens after a major earthquake. After a major one, often they will rebuild the town in the same place, rather than move it to a totally different area that is not likely to be subject to the same risk. Even though starting from afresh  can be cheaper and reduces the risk.

 



Ahem*Christchurch*ahem

 

Rebuilding many houses that had low damage is a bit strange. Where would you put ChCh? Antarctica? Sahara? Ohio? Not NZ as nowhere here is a low earthquake risk. You build/strengthen d to withstand 


SJB

1165 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 276

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1927632 1-Jan-2018 15:37
2 people support this post
Send private message

Rikkitic:

 

Some of us may be prepared to run into a burning building to rescue a child, but far fewer are willing to give up their current lifestyles for the sake of a better future.

 

 

And of course that better future is not for the ones who give up something but for future generations. So your quality of life possibly gets worse for some apparent future improvement that you will never live to see.

 

99.99% of people won't do anything.

 

 

 

 


269 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 24


  Reply # 1927660 1-Jan-2018 16:26
Send private message

Technofreak:

Have you heard of Ancel Keys? I know it's nothing to do with climate change but still scientific research related. He "proved" cholesterol was bad and convinced the world to reduce cholesterol consumption. Until very recently cholesterol was considered a major contributor to cardiac health problems. His theory has now been debunked, but it didn't stop years and years of anti cholesterol sentiment. I'm skeptical of any scientific research. Some people have too much invested (either professional reputation or money) to acknowledge they might have got it wrong. Ancel Keys did some dodgy stuff to prove his theory.


I'm on the fence so far as climate change being primarily caused by mankind. There's too many variables.



The debunking of Ancel Keys tends to be overstated and based on misrepresentations, e.g. https://www.thenutritionwonk.com/single-post/2016/04/13/Ancel-Keys-and-the-Seven-Country-Study-A-Response-to-The-Sugar-Conspiracy

13430 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2428

Trusted

  Reply # 1927739 1-Jan-2018 20:13
Send private message

Technofreak:

 

 

 

I'm on the fence so far as climate change being primarily caused by mankind. There's too many variables.

 

 

There are too many variables, I agree. This is why I watched many climate change docos, and many anti climate change docos

 

The human intervention is a constant. Yes, the Earth will recover. In decades or tens of thousands of years when we are gone. Or we cold reduce emissions, target green tech. But that doesn't work selfishly and economically right now. Oil companies, votes, GDP. Th human race is unbelievably intelligent, but just as short sighted and stupid. Imagine if a cure came next week which gives us all a 300 year lifespan. THEN IT WOULD CHANGE


1461 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 739


  Reply # 1927788 1-Jan-2018 21:41
Send private message

Let me use a simple analogy.

You're woken by a fire alarm in a hotel, but you don't see any evidence of a fire.

You could either ignore the fire alarm, assume everything's OK. The best thing that happens is you live, the worst thing that happens is you die.

Or you could take action, get out of bed, and leave the hotel. The best thing that can happen is you're likely to survive. The worst thing that could happen is you were too slow, you die, but at least you tried.

So if we ignore what 99% of scientist say and assume climate change is a hoax, the best outcome is nothing happens. The worst is a run-away greenhouse affect that turns wipes out most life, turning the Earth into Venus-like hell.

Well, do you react to the smoke alarm, or not?

1461 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 739


  Reply # 1927791 1-Jan-2018 21:47
Send private message

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-40461726

From Stephen Hawking:

"'We are close to the tipping point where global warming becomes irreversible. Trump's action could push the Earth over the brink, to become like Venus, with a temperature of two hundred and fifty degrees, and raining sulphuric acid,' he told BBC News.

'Climate change is one of the great dangers we face, and it's one we can prevent if we act now. By denying the evidence for climate change, and pulling out of the Paris Climate Agreement, Donald Trump will cause avoidable environmental damage to our beautiful planet, endangering the natural world, for us and our children.'

The UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) also highlights the potential risk of hitting climate tipping points as temperatures increase - though there are gaps in our knowledge of this topic.

In its Fifth Assessment Report, the IPCC authors wrote: 'The precise levels of climate change sufficient to trigger tipping points (thresholds for abrupt and irreversible change) remain uncertain, but the risk associated with crossing multiple tipping points in the Earth system or in interlinked human and natural systems increases with rising temperature.'"

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic

Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.