Our Sponsor Sideshow Collectibles Send us News
Lord of the Rings Tolkien
Search Tolkien
Lord of The RingsTheOneRing.net - Forged By And For Fans Of JRR Tolkien
Lord of The Rings Serving Middle-Earth Since The First Age

Lord of the Rings Movie News - J.R.R. Tolkien
Do you enjoy the 100% volunteer, not for profit services of TheOneRing.net?
Consider a donation!

  Main Index   Search Posts   Who's Online   Log in
The One Ring Forums: Off Topic: The Pollantir:
Is Climate Change (Global Warming) a problem?
First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next page Last page  View All
Poll: Is Climate Change (Global Warming) a problem?
Yes - major crisis
No - not on the grand scheme of things
Climate change? No such thing!
Other
View Results (49 votes)
 

Ingwion
Lorien


Nov 13 2016, 6:13pm

Post #1 of 149 (1422 views)
Shortcut
Is Climate Change (Global Warming) a problem? Can't Post

This has been brought to the fore-front of my mind by Trump, but obviously I'm not trying to start a debate about whether Trump is right or not, I'm just curious to know what people think.


Otaku-sempai
Immortal


Nov 13 2016, 7:21pm

Post #2 of 149 (1198 views)
Shortcut
Yes. [In reply to] Can't Post

Climate Change does seem to be an important issue, though I'd like to believe that it's not too late to ameliorate at least some of its effects.


Ataahua
Superuser / Moderator


Nov 13 2016, 7:22pm

Post #3 of 149 (1204 views)
Shortcut
Check this out: [In reply to] Can't Post

https://xkcd.com/1732/

TLDR: this is a warming that humans haven't faced before.


Gianna
Rohan


Nov 13 2016, 10:04pm

Post #4 of 149 (1167 views)
Shortcut
The climate has changed drastically before and it will do it again. Earth spins on // [In reply to] Can't Post

 


Ingwion
Lorien


Nov 13 2016, 10:42pm

Post #5 of 149 (1169 views)
Shortcut
Couldn't agree more [In reply to] Can't Post

I actually think the slight temperature rise is due to a sunspot cycle kind of thing, more so than anything humans are doing.


Ingwion
Lorien


Nov 13 2016, 10:45pm

Post #6 of 149 (1171 views)
Shortcut
And they know this how? [In reply to] Can't Post

I'm not sure that they recorded temperature 22000 years ago....Crazy


dernwyn
Forum Admin / Moderator


Nov 13 2016, 11:01pm

Post #7 of 149 (1157 views)
Shortcut
It should be taken more seriously, especially in certain areas. [In reply to] Can't Post

I answered the "Yes", because of the impact of rising sea levels in heavily populated areas.

I live in a coastal area, and we're all very aware of how this is affecting erosion and our protective marshlands, as well as those who live on the shoreline. But I fear for those areas of the world where large populations live in near-sea-level elevations. Keeping their homes and livelihoods intact will require imagination, inventiveness and innovation.


Otaku-sempai
Immortal


Nov 13 2016, 11:03pm

Post #8 of 149 (1155 views)
Shortcut
It's an estimate [In reply to] Can't Post

The prehistoric temperature is estimated based on chemical analysis of fossil evidence, arctic and antarctic core samples and other such evidence that provides usable data.


Ingwion
Lorien


Nov 13 2016, 11:08pm

Post #9 of 149 (1166 views)
Shortcut
But those same scientists [In reply to] Can't Post

Claim - against observable and testable science - that some fossils are tens of thousands of years old! Crazy


Dame Ioreth
Tol Eressea


Nov 14 2016, 12:19am

Post #10 of 149 (1149 views)
Shortcut
The cyclical nature of the Earth's climate [In reply to] Can't Post

is not what is happening now though. Why? Because it is happening too fast. This isn't like the Ice Age or retreat of the glaciers after the Ice Age. That happened over hundreds of year. What we face now is measurable increases in temperature and measurable decreases in polar ice and measurable rise of sea levels that are happening over years, not hundreds of years.

Denying it exists is an option but at some point, one has to believe the evidence that is out there.

It's not a political strategy or a partisan ploy.

It just is.


N.E. Brigand
Half-elven


Nov 14 2016, 12:40am

Post #11 of 149 (1142 views)
Shortcut
Some fossils are hundreds of milions of years old. [In reply to] Can't Post

And the earth itself is about 4.5 billion years old.

There is no scientific dispute about these facts.

(Also the earth is round. Just in case anyone was wondering.)

And at this point, there is very little scientific dispute about the basic facts of man-made global warming. It's real, and it's serious, and we're running out of time to stop it.

This is not political. If someone could convincingly prove otherwise, they'd be a scientific rock star.


silneldor
Half-elven


Nov 14 2016, 12:47am

Post #12 of 149 (1145 views)
Shortcut
fantasyland [In reply to] Can't Post

 ''against observable and testable science '' ? What data and who's authority? 1-2% of so called scientists are in the pocket of the oil companies not to mention a host of politicians.

Reputable scientists in all disciplines of science agree on fossils dating many millions of years ago.

CO2 levels are MUCH higher that precious levels and intact ice cores from many thousand of years ago speak for that.

CO2 levels will accelerate when the oceans, which act as buffers, absorbing CO2, will fail. Meanwhile vast evidence of glacier melt is happening, sea ice is failing. Iceland will be without ice and the northern passages will be open to ships.

But the real calamity is, already starting, VAST amounts of permafrost will melt releasing methane in VAST amounts. Methane is 10x at least more damaging than CO2.

Florida where folks joke about climate change the most will one day see south florida become an island. And it will be a bridge too far, in more ways that one.


Otaku-sempai
Immortal


Nov 14 2016, 2:39am

Post #13 of 149 (1130 views)
Shortcut
They're not? [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
But those same scientists Claim - against observable and testable science - that some fossils are tens of thousands of years old! Crazy


Some fossils ARE tens of thousands of years old. And some are far older than that. Some are millions and even billions of years old. Sorry, mate, you're arguing with someone who used to study geology with the intention of becoming a paleontologist.

You're going to have to do a lot better than that if you hope to convince me of a young Earth. And across multiple fields of science since astronomy tells us that the universe itself is billions of years old.


(This post was edited by Otaku-sempai on Nov 14 2016, 2:43am)


silneldor
Half-elven


Nov 14 2016, 3:04am

Post #14 of 149 (1113 views)
Shortcut
Gee whiz...... [In reply to] Can't Post

Why can't i find any cave men riding one of those dinosaurs in those cave pictures.....


Maciliel
Valinor


Nov 14 2016, 3:11am

Post #15 of 149 (1111 views)
Shortcut
fossil evidence goes back millions of years [In reply to] Can't Post

  
fossil evidence goes back +millions+ of years -- much farther back than tens of thousands of years.

fossil evidence is validated by using many other scientific disciplines, empirical (provable) data and process.

scientific data overwhelmingly notes that climate change is real, and has accelerated at a dangerous rate. we are at or beyond the tipping point to reverse it, but there is some hope that by changing CO2 emissions we can blunt some of its most destructive effects.

these effects will be (and not limited to)...

1. increasing extremes of weather (e.g., increasing frequency of storms like hurricane sandy -- no longer a once-in-a-100-years storm event)

2. collapsing ecosystems -- which will mean less arable land to produce food -- and unpredictable weather that will damage / reduce / greatly destroy our crops.

3. rising sea levels --- there are many islands across the oceans that are near sea level that are disappearing -- whole populations which have lived there for thousands of years are being forced to move

https://www.theguardian.com/...-seas-climate-change
http://www.nytimes.com/...sappearing.html?_r=0

science is not based on belief --- but rigorous testing of hypotheses resulting in +repeatable+ effects / data.

science is +conservative+ in nature --- what does this mean?

it means that science does +not+ like to jump to conclusions.

it means that science moves slowly, because it wants proof -- and it wants that proof proven over and over and over.

it means that science wants a preponderance of repeatable results.

it means that scientists, when they examine and publish data, invite all of their scientific colleagues to review that data.

consensus among those scientific minds -- minds that are trained by science to always question and not assume -- when consensus is reached over time, we get to where we are now with climate change ---

the +legitimate+, science community is firmly aligned that climate change is a real force, and that we are at (or beyond) the tipping point to do something about it.


the +same+ scientific +principles+, +objectivity+, and +rigor+ exist in paleontology as exist in physics as exist in biology as exist in astrophysics. these are different bodies of knowledge, but they all approach the investigation and examination and vetting of data in the same way.

the same scientific rigor and process that gives us advances in cancer treatment, gives us advances in understanding climate change.

niel degrasse tyson is a brilliant scientist --- he's an astrophysicist -- who is also a gifted communicator, and explains science and its value well. a very engaging speaker.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...works_b_8595642.html

https://www.youtube.com/...EbZz0CpBhUb&index=19

https://www.youtube.com/...bEbZz0CpBhUb&index=4


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qhAgeLipr00

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qhAgeLipr00

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rYFbokcFT1w

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PfPdtfbPsRw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1te01rfEF0g



cheers --


.


(This post was edited by Altaira on Nov 14 2016, 5:49am)


Otaku-sempai
Immortal


Nov 14 2016, 3:36am

Post #16 of 149 (1103 views)
Shortcut
Cave Paintings [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
Why can't i find any cave men riding one of those dinosaurs in those cave pictures.....


Nope! But they did draw the giant elk, mastodons and other prehistoric critters that lived contemporaneously with them. It's hard to depict something that went extinct when your ancestors still looked more like 'possums than human beings (unless you're Fred Flintstone).


(This post was edited by Otaku-sempai on Nov 14 2016, 3:37am)


Annael
Half-elven


Nov 14 2016, 4:14am

Post #17 of 149 (1087 views)
Shortcut
yes [In reply to] Can't Post

Yes, there are natural cycles to the earth's climate. However, when you take a closed system and change variables - i.e., greatly increase the amount of carbon dioxide going into the atmosphere through industrialization while at the same time drastically reducing the number of trees that normally help take the CO2 back out of the atmosphere - it's going to change things and it has.

Cliff Mass, a meteorologist who does a great job of presenting the facts in a calm and rational way, recently said "it's no longer about whether or not we can reverse global warming. It's already too late. Now it's about living with the consequences."


Annael
Half-elven


Nov 14 2016, 4:17am

Post #18 of 149 (1088 views)
Shortcut
'fraid not [In reply to] Can't Post

https://www.scientificamerican.com/...-and-climate-change/


Starling
Half-elven


Nov 14 2016, 4:46am

Post #19 of 149 (1079 views)
Shortcut
Is this a rhetorical question? // [In reply to] Can't Post

 


Annael
Half-elven


Nov 14 2016, 5:41am

Post #20 of 149 (1075 views)
Shortcut
this cartoon sums up my attitude [In reply to] Can't Post

http://www.kentucky.com/...1140/n85re.So.79.jpg


Altaira
Superuser / Moderator


Nov 14 2016, 6:14am

Post #21 of 149 (1073 views)
Shortcut
Please keep the discussion focused on the topic at hand [In reply to] Can't Post

Personal comments have been edited out of this thread. Additional posts containing personal comments will automatically be deleted and will put the entire thread at risk of being locked or deleted.

Thanks


DanielLB
Immortal


Nov 14 2016, 7:07am

Post #22 of 149 (1076 views)
Shortcut
Since I'm a climate scientist ... [In reply to] Can't Post

Yes, climate change (changes in long-term weather patterns as a result of human-induced and natural climate variability) is very much a problem: regardless if you are in Antarctica, up in the Himalayas, or being in the back of beyond. And for the record, global warming refers only to the rising surface temperatures of the Earth as a result of increasing greenhouse gas concentrations. The side effects of which (e.g. retreating glaciers, droughts) come under climate change.

I also always like to remind people that, even with our most accurate climate models, the recent observed warming trend cannot be replicated without the influence of increasing greenhouse gases nor natural variability. This means that the current climate trend is neither completely natural nor completely human-induced.

But regardless of the cause, statistically significant changes are occurring and responding to climatic changes is important, and we must change our behaviours to respond.

Unfortunately, people don't do well with change. Especially change that offer long periods of times (i.e. lifetimes).


DanielLB
Immortal


Nov 14 2016, 7:15am

Post #23 of 149 (1066 views)
Shortcut
Suspiciously smooth. [In reply to] Can't Post

One thing to note with this cartoon is that the long dotted line of historical temperatures is really, really smooth. It isn't until the 1980s when everything goes haywire and the the temperature increases sharply. While we have (sub-hourly, daily, monthly ...) measurements for the solid black line, the data for rest of the dotted line comes from "proxy" measurements (tree rings, ice cores, lake sediments etc.) which have a temporal resolution of 1000s of years. So the historical temperature estimate is rather rough, and there could easily have been equivalent warming trends that are just smoothed out of the graph. Unfortunately, glaciers don't record temperature the same way a thermometer does. Any (historical) change in temperature that lasts less than 2,000 years might not be reliable.

But it's a good graph, and it sends out the right message.
Smile


(This post was edited by DanielLB on Nov 14 2016, 7:18am)


DanielLB
Immortal


Nov 14 2016, 7:23am

Post #24 of 149 (1060 views)
Shortcut
Absolutely, it's a rigorous process. [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To

it means that scientists, when they examine and publish data, invite all of their scientific colleagues to review that data.


Any reputable scientist will publish their results and analysis in peer reviewed journals (e.g. Nature, Journal of Geophysical Research, Journal of Climate). It can be exhausting at times ... especially when you've had to wait over 6 months to get comments back on a manuscript on future temperature change in China!


dormouse
Half-elven


Nov 14 2016, 8:43am

Post #25 of 149 (1032 views)
Shortcut
Yes [In reply to] Can't Post

I'm not a scientist. When people who are scientists and have studied this all their working lives say that there is a serious problem what grounds do I have to disagree? After all, there are effects that even I as a not-scientist can see.

And as a historian it doesn't surprise me to be told that humanity's management of the earth is disrupting the climate. Humanity's management of itself down the centuries has hardly been a raging success story, for all its flashes of creativity, kindness and wonder. WE do seem to have an immense capacity for making a mess of things. Think I'll stop there before I start quoting Hamlet... Wink

First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next page Last page  View All
 
 

Search for (options) Powered by Gossamer Forum v.1.2.3

home | advertising | contact us | back to top | search news | join list | Content Rating

This site is maintained and updated by fans of The Lord of the Rings, and is in no way affiliated with Tolkien Enterprises or the Tolkien Estate. We in no way claim the artwork displayed to be our own. Copyrights and trademarks for the books, films, articles, and other promotional materials are held by their respective owners and their use is allowed under the fair use clause of the Copyright Law. Design and original photography however are copyright © 1999-2012 TheOneRing.net. Binary hosting provided by Nexcess.net

Do not follow this link, or your host will be blocked from this site. This is a spider trap.