Climate change could kill ice hockey in Canada

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Iginla

No, I should have been more clear. When I think climate change I always assume its talking about man changing the climate which is what I think is a myth. Climate change is real but I don't think it's anything we understand yet.

One constant with the earth over the ages has been changing climate. Humans are arrogant enough to believe they somehow control it when the realiy like the dinosaurs we are helpless bystanders on a planet that has never stood still for any inhabitants.

[Tinordi]

Humans are rapidly changing the climate. If you deny this reality you are the human equivalent of an ostrich and immediately ruin the credibility of any of your opinions on the topic.

Sound harsh? That's how you deal with ignorance, self-serving fantasies and a general lack of basic cognition.

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by valo403

Huh? I can somewhat get on board with arguments about the true extent to which humans have impacted climate change, but you're denying that it exists? That's a new one.

I thought he meant it tasted good with some yellow mustard and two pieces of rye bread, myself.

[AR_Six]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

Humans are rapidly changing the climate. If you deny this reality you are the human equivalent of an ostrich and immediately ruin the credibility of any of your opinions on the topic.

Sound harsh? That's how you deal with ignorance, self-serving fantasies and a general lack of basic cognition.

Pretty much. There is no point in even talking to these people. There is consensus. Anyone who denies this consensus can be termed a flat-earther and ignored for irrelevance.

[Hemi-Cuda]

Originally Posted by Iginla

No, I should have been more clear. When I think climate change I always assume its talking about man changing the climate which is what I think is a myth. Climate change is real but I don't think it's anything we understand yet.

it's really not that hard. more carbon in the atmosphere, the hotter the planet gets. and for the past 100 years humans have been pumping carbon that was previously trapped below the Earth's crust into the atmosphere at an astounding rate

the Earth has natural periods of cooling and warming, all it takes is looking at core samples to see the evidence. and while we may be in the middle of a natural warming cycle, human activity has helped to speed it up quite a bit

[polak]

Most people who don't jump on board the climate change train don't deny that it's a thing.

I personally think the consequences are extremely blown out of proportion in terms of impact for the human species.

[KOgear]

So true, it is already happening right under our eyes!!! Saddledome ice sucks balls!

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

Humans are rapidly changing the climate. If you deny this reality you are the human equivalent of an ostrich and immediately ruin the credibility of any of your opinions on the topic.

Sound harsh? That's how you deal with ignorance, self-serving fantasies and a general lack of basic cognition.

Isn't that a testament to the power of the human mind though? In the 70's the concern was global cooling and another ice age!

[Thor]

Originally Posted by Iginla

No that it just might not be as uncommon as we think. Who knows what the norm is. Maybe this is a 10 million year cycle we are in. Heck we thought the earth was flat not that long ago, wouldn't be amazed that there are other things we don't know.

Edit: I guess I should clarify that man changing the climate is what I think is bologna.

You understand we have been able to see the ups and downs back for millions of years, to the time when antartica was a tropical jungle and there was no ice anywhere on earth.

People seem to think because it WAS once way hotter that we would go back to that cycle naturally, but the warming periods and mini ice ages is a normal 10-20,000 yr cycle while the planet on the longer time scale has reached before the last 100 yrs a cycle that would never lead back to the extremes that are a big part of the fact 99.9% of all species have died out since life began.

There is no question we are harming and speeding up the warming, the question is how bad will this be for us in the next 50, 100yrs, 500yrs. Sea level rise is the most immediate concern, then there is more extreme weather, more droughts, more crazy winter storms, etc..

The evidence for what is coming is overwhelming, the problem is figuring out how severe it will be, we don't know but we can look at the distant past to see massive disasters caused by warming like releasing all the frozen methane gas at the bottom of the oceans and especially near Siberia, if the ocean warms enough it can turn the oceans into lifeless toxic waters.

There are literally dozens of distasterous scenarious we risk facing with allowing our planet to warm up over 4-5c, and more seriously closer to 10c warming.

No matter what happens, we are going to face some brutal challenges, and we have people with no expertise treating this like a conservative vs liberal argument, ignoring the experts and we do so at our own peril.

Doesn't mean we have to do extreme things now, but we have to start, we have to address this and we can even make money by doing it.

Sadly I have little hope of that, this issue deals with many decades and hundreds of years, politicians only care about the next 4 yrs, so how this issue ever gets addressed properly is problematic to say the least.

[photon]

Originally Posted by Hemi-Cuda

and for the past 100 years humans have been pumping carbon that was previously trapped below the Earth's crust into the atmosphere at an astounding rate

And we can verify the source of the carbon in the atmosphere by measuring Carbon isotope ratios in the atmosphere.

The physics of CO2 acting as a greenhouse gas isn't (or shouldn't I guess I mean, some deny even that) up for debate. Anyone who doesn't think CO2 is a greenhouse gas can buy a bridge that I have for sale on Venus.

Originally Posted by Hemi-Cuda

and while we may be in the middle of a natural warming cycle, human activity has helped to speed it up quite a bit

We're in an inter-glacial warm period which has gone longer than the average (though not nearly as long as the last inter-glacial that had similar properties to this one like orbit and axial tilt, this one's been 12,000 years that one was 30,000 years), and things like solar input and volcanic activity since 1950 should lead to a cooling trend rather than a warming one.

[polak]

Yeah but we're nowhere near 10c. Not even remotely close.

If we make no changes what so ever to our ghg output, we MIGHT raise temps a 3 or 4 degrees in the next 100 years. MIGHT.

Thing is there are a lot of technologies in the works to not only fix our CO2 output, but correct what we have already done so I don't see us getting anywhere near that.

On top of that, Canada would fare pretty well if Climate Change does end up really picking up.

[Tinordi]

Originally Posted by polak

Yeah but we're nowhere near 10c. Not even remotely close.

If we make no changes what so ever to our ghg output, we MIGHT raise temps a 3 or 4 degrees in the next 100 years. MIGHT.

Thing is there are a lot of technologies in the works to not only fix our CO2 output, but correct what we have already done so I don't see us getting anywhere near that.

On top of that, Canada would fare pretty well if Climate Change does end up really picking up.

Nothing in this post is correct. This is basically a heap of lies and stupidity.

[polak]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

Nothing in this post is correct. This is basically a heap of lies and stupidity.

You should let NASA know then...

http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Fea...ming/page5.php

Based on a range of plausible emission scenarios, average surface temperatures could rise between 2°C and 6°C by the end of the 21st century

You should let everyone in this industry know then too...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_capture_and_storage

As for Canada, we'd gain shipping lanes, easier access to resources from melted ice and tundra and the tundra melting will also increase our potential for other industries such as real estate and farming.

[Tinordi]

Originally Posted by Slava

Isn't that a testament to the power of the human mind though? In the 70's the concern was global cooling and another ice age!

Yes because we're at solar minimums and should be on a cooling trend. That view is not mutually exclusive to what's happening now, infact it's another log on the fire. Thanks for supporting my point!

[Tinordi]

Originally Posted by polak

You should let NASA know then...

http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Fea...ming/page5.php



You should let everyone in this industry know then too...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_capture_and_storage

10 degree warming is well within range and there are a number of sources to back that up. Even so, 6 degree warming is catastrophic and likely a severe stress on human civilization. You seem to think that unless we make hell on earth with 10 degree warming it's not a problem. Nothing could be stupider.

[photon]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

Nothing in this post is correct. This is basically a heap of lies and stupidity.

Being incorrect does not mean it is a lie or stupidity, it simply means incorrect.

Combat incorrectness with correct information. If a person doesn't seem to want to engage in understanding or constructive discussion, then just ignore them.

Going right to "lies and stupidity" adds just as much to a thread as a lying or stupid post would.

[AR_Six]

Originally Posted by photon

Being incorrect does not mean it is a lie or stupidity, it simply means incorrect. Combat incorrectness with correct information. If a person doesn't seem to want to engage in understanding or constructive discussion, then just ignore them. Going right to "lies and stupidity" adds just as much to a thread as a lying or stupid post would.

Obviously this is the right sentiment and the high-road is the best road to take on these things, but it's so damned frustrating dealing with people who stubbornly refuse to accept reality. Not that Polak is one of those but they are frequently encountered. You could explain to them in detail, take them through powerpoint presentations explaining exactly why they're wrong, and 24 hours later will be back to the same idiotic garbage they were spewing in the first place. This is particularly so with ostensibly "commonsense" responses like "Well I think it's arrogant to assume Man could have such an effect on the planet in so few years, it's been around for billions and it'll be fine!"

At some point you get tired of it and start asking yourself when you signed up to be an educator, when it's easier to just shame people.

[Tinordi]

Originally Posted by photon

Being incorrect does not mean it is a lie or stupidity, it simply means incorrect.

Combat incorrectness with correct information. If a person doesn't seem to want to engage in understanding or constructive discussion, then just ignore them.

Going right to "lies and stupidity" adds just as much to a thread as a lying or stupid post would.

I'm at the point where climate change discussion have reached saturation with the amount of fact based research and analysis is out there. There is no way that an educated human looking for truth could arrive to the conclusion that global warming is not a severe problem facing us right now.

If people still deny the existence or the reason to act they aren't well positioned to be argued with further. These people should be called out for what they are, moronically self interested and ultimately very dangerous not coddled further to support their straw men and irrelevant arguments that further promote stasis.

[polak]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

10 degree warming is well within range and there are a number of sources to back that up. Even so, 6 degree warming is catastrophic and likely a severe stress on human civilization. You seem to think that unless we make hell on earth with 10 degree warming it's not a problem. Nothing could be stupider.

Show me your 10 Degree sources please? I guess they must be better and more credible than NASA.

That would have to assume rapid increase in GHG output and no technology advances to curb it which is ludacris.

Even the nasa model that says we could hit 6 degrees is assuming an increase in GHG emissions.

While populations are developing and industrializing, there is also a massive amount of investment and policies going into place to curb these emissions.

[photon]

Originally Posted by Slava

In the 70's the concern was global cooling and another ice age!

Not really, unless by concern you mean a cover on some magazine. Don't get science information from the media...

http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/pdf/...2008BAMS2370.1
http://www.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/...w/warm1956.pdf
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=94