International Man made climate change

[deviake]

Question about climate change for the knowledgeable. I see the science, but can't wrap my head around one thing.

If we're causing it, and it's such a new occurrence, how do you explain all of the variable temperatures years, hundreds, thousands, millions of years before? We've had massive heat waves worse than most in the early 1900s. We have had years and years long ice ages, heat ages that changed Earth's form, etc. Earth survived it all.

How do we know that it isn't just earth being earth now, given the history?

Simple

climate changes with or without human interference

the present warming trend however has been directly linked with human activity by thousands of climate scientists across the world and the body of research spans decades. The evidence strongly points to human activity. There's lots of things that we're doing that are having measurable effects.

As an aside, the common thing I hear that is that the planet is in danger; it's not. We are because of our actions, and inaction in fixing the problems we're creating. The planet has survived and come back from far worse than what we're doing to it but if we have any self interest we'll need to change our trajectory.

 

[HIMBOB]

Climate change deniers are so weird, because you don't need to be a science nerd to see its effects. The bark is falling from the trees in Belgium because of the incredibly high temperatures and drought.

If you observe the fauna yearly you'd also see a change in types of insects and disappearing of certain amphibians, for example.

I have no doubt about Mm climate change being real. However I don't think people can see it like that. I don't think anyone can see enough of the world to ever say they have seen it.


We know what higher levels of CO2 do,
we know we have unusually high levels,
we know we caused a lot of that increase,
We know fossil fuels companies will happily spend billions protecting assets worth 100s of trillions.

On the plus side the argument against fossil fuels has gone beyond environmental protection, now it's simply cheaper for electricity and any nation careless enough to not reduce car emissions will have the dead citizens to show for it.

 

[HIMBOB]

There has to be some way to suck up all the cow farts though. Why cant we just put some filters out in the fields with the cows, or mount them on ATVs that will travel with the roaming cows? They will be constantly sucking in the surrounding air, and capturing the methane.

There is some thing like that.
Basically a cow diaper.

https://bigthink.com/design-for-good/this-is-how-you-turn-cow-fart-gas-into-energy
Worth it just to see the cows face.

 

[Islam Imamate]

There has to be some way to suck up all the cow farts though. Why cant we just put some filters out in the fields with the cows, or mount them on ATVs that will travel with the roaming cows? They will be constantly sucking in the surrounding air, and capturing the methane.

Honestly that sounds ridiculously expensive and just not worth it, it just makes more sense to use more sustainable source of animal protein like poultry. Actually insects are p4p the best in that they require the least resources to harvest but its difficult to scale up insect farming and of course most people would never accept replacing beef with locusts or something like that so poultry seems like a good middle ground.

 

[MadSquabbles500]

Honestly that sounds ridiculously expensive and just not worth it, it just makes more sense to use more sustainable source of animal protein like poultry. Actually insects are p4p the best in that they require the least resources to harvest but its difficult to scale up insect farming and of course most people would never accept replacing beef with locusts or something like that so poultry seems like a good middle ground.

I think it be worth it for the beef industry. The captured methane has to be worth something too. Especially if there is going to be an assault on the beef industry. And in order to really combat climate change if it is real, then the beef industry has to be attacked.

Plus moslems, and south aSians will not eat pork. So it seems we may be embroiled in a war there again.

 

[bigkick]

People don't care enough, honestly. We'll all be dead long before anything we can do would have any effect. Plus who wants to chance messing with the economy.

 

[AGGAMEMNON66]

I believe in climate change. Its hot outside right now and in about 5 months its gonna be cold outside

lol



Anyway, I consider myself a moderate conservative and I believe humans and their ‘inventions’ effect the climate.. but to what end? How much is natural Vs manufactured by us?


This is where the arguing starts, at least for me.


But yeah, we effect the climate if you’re just looking for a straight ‘yes’ or ‘no’ here.

 

[NC252]

Lol by passing policy and having it funded.

Which specific policy are you referring to that ended the hole in the ozone?

 

[HIMBOB]

Which specific policy are you referring to that ended the hole in the ozone?

Banning CFCs did the lions share I believe.

 

[Islam Imamate]

I think it be worth it for the beef industry. The captured methane has to be worth something too. Especially if there is going to be an assault on the beef industry. And in order to really combat climate change if it is real, then the beef industry has to be attacked.

Plus moslems, and south aSians will not eat pork. So it seems we may be embroiled in a war there again.

Well @HIMBOB posted something that seems along those lines in terms of harvesting the methane. But who knows if its feasible to apply at the industrial level? And if it could be that only addresses the methane problem with beef which is not the only one. Beef also requires large tracts of land and a lot of resources to breed them until they can be harvested. Not only that but their shit is a problem too. Manure is good fertilizer but often there are so many cows on a given tract of land that the land can't absorb all the shit and collectively it too also emits greenhouse gases. So really the problem with beef is manifold and its likely better to just reduce beef consumption.

Muslims always have recourse to poultry and fish and South Asian Hindus don't even eat beef to begin with, in fact its banned in many states in India and even rumors of eating beef can incite a deadly mob in many parts of the country.

 

[Johnny Alpha]

Is it true about cow farts?

I can't believe how many cattle there are.

Brazil
211,764,292


Holy shit.


I think the best way to go about all this is we need to reduce these countries populations and then we wont need so many cattle either.

But how can we tell Chinese, Indians and Africa who's population has exploded for decades to have less kids?
Good luck with that.

 

[Fawlty]

There has to be some way to suck up all the cow farts though. Why cant we just put some filters out in the fields with the cows, or mount them on ATVs that will travel with the roaming cows? They will be constantly sucking in the surrounding air, and capturing the methane.

According to a show I heard on NPR a couple weeks back, it's actually cow belches. Researchers have reduced output by 50% by combining seaweed with the cow's food. There's the issue of how to get so damn much seaweed, but if that can be solved, it's a really good way to make a major impact. Price of beef wouldn't have to go up all that much either.

 

[MadSquabbles500]

Is it true about cow farts?

I can't believe how many cattle there are.

Brazil
211,764,292


Holy shit.


I think the best way to go about all this is we need to reduce these countries populations and then we wont need so many cattle either.

But how can we tell Chinese, Indians and Africa who's population has exploded for decades to have less kids?
Good luck with that.

And we definitely dont eat all those cows either. There does not need to be that many cows in existence to start with. But it is a perishable good, and takes a while to develop it. So retailers will buy in excess and accept some losses on wasted food, wholesalers will sell them the excess, and the producers, naturally, have to keep up with that demand.

 

[Voodoo_Child906]

I hate to break it to you man but "science" is just as political as anything else. You don't think there aren't alot of people, groups, institutions, governments, ect that greatly benefit from the idea of fighting global warming/climate change? You think they are going to be quick to just accept and embrace findings that may disgrace their life's work, reputation, purpose, funding, ect and leave themselves without a livelihood?

You can't just be lazy and appeal to whatever the scientific consensus appears to be because you may be just falling to routine politics. I know it sucks but you have to look at these things for yourself and decide.

Exxon now admits climate change is real, this destroys your entire conspiracy minded thesis!!

http://corporate.exxonmobil.com/en/current-issues/climate-policy/climate-perspectives/our-position

"The risk of climate change is clear and the risk warrants action. Increasing carbon emissions in the atmosphere are having a warming effect. There is a broad scientific and policy consensus that action must be taken to further quantify and assess the risks."

 

[Islam Imamate]

Exxon now admits climate change is real, this destroys your entire conspiracy minded thesis!!

http://corporate.exxonmobil.com/en/current-issues/climate-policy/climate-perspectives/our-position

"The risk of climate change is clear and the risk warrants action. Increasing carbon emissions in the atmosphere are having a warming effect. There is a broad scientific and policy consensus that action must be taken to further quantify and assess the risks."

Not really. TCK does have a point here though I disagree in general as I do think climate change is real and driven in part by humans. But Exxon Mobile saying so does not prove it, a corporation like Exxon Mobil can have a hundred cynical reasons for conceding this point.

 

[Islam Imamate]

And we definitely dont eat all those cows either. There does not need to be that many cows in existence to start with. But it is a perishable good, and takes a while to develop it. So retailers will buy in excess and accept some losses on wasted food, wholesalers will sell them the excess, and the producers, naturally, have to keep up with that demand.

That's a big issue with agriculture and food production in the US, it accepts a ridiculous amount of waste. I remember reading somewhere it might be as high as 40% from farm to check out at the supermarket. In many cases perfectly good produce is left to rot because its not aesthetically appealing enough and thus not worth the transportation and storage costs despite being perfectly edible.

 

[Voodoo_Child906]

Not really. TCK does have a point here though I disagree in general as I do think climate change is real and driven in part by humans. But Exxon Mobile saying so does not prove it, a corporation like Exxon Mobil can have a hundred cynical reasons for conceding this point.

I'm not saying Climate Change is true, I'm stating that political bias can no longer be pointed to as Exxon, Chevron (along with other producers) and their scientists agree that the evidence is strongly pointing to AGW.

 

[tonni]

it is literally willful ignorance and it turns me off the Republican party. I enjoy the ideals they pretend to espouse like freedom and personal responsibility but have to pull away because of corruption and science denial

I think being skeptic is good, and als

I have no doubt about Mm climate change being real. However I don't think people can see it like that. I don't think anyone can see enough of the world to ever say they have seen it.


We know what higher levels of CO2 do,
we know we have unusually high levels,
we know we caused a lot of that increase,
We know fossil fuels companies will happily spend billions protecting assets worth 100s of trillions.

On the plus side the argument against fossil fuels has gone beyond environmental protection, now it's simply cheaper for electricity and any nation careless enough to not reduce car emissions will have the dead citizens to show for it.

Local changes and extremes are a reflection of global changes.

 

[andnowweknow]

Just a thought exercise. It may well be that human induced warming, whether a nudge or main driver, could be the catalyst for preventing an ice age onset.

The Holocene has already well exceeded (by several millenia) the next longest interglacial period since modern humans hit the scene.

 

[Deleted member 457759]

I believe in climate change. Its hot outside right now and in about 5 months its gonna be cold outside

That's seasonal change, but I know you're just trying to be funny.