I have been trying for the last few days to discover a coherent logic towards my feelings on man’s relationship with his environment. This is proving not to be simple.
The process started when I heard on World Service radio a gentleman from the International Panel on Climate Change discussing their latest report. As you know, I tend to accept the established opinion on climate change, and rather take the view that if all our industrial activity were not affecting the atmosphere, that would be strange.
But what struck me was that the gentleman said that a pause in warming for the last fifteen years was not significant, as fifteen years was a blip in processes that last over millennia.
Well, that would certainly be very true if you are considering natural climate change. But we are not – we are considering man-made climate change. In terms of the period in which the scale of man’s industrial activity has been having a significant impact on the environment, surely fifteen years is a pretty important percentage of that period? Especially as you might naturally imagine the process to be cumulative – fifteen years at the start when nothing much happened would be more explicable.
Having tucked away that doubt, I started to try to think deeper. Man is, of course, himself a part of nature. Anything man does on this planet is natural to this planet. I do not take the view man should not change his environment – otherwise I should not be sitting in a house. The question is rather, are we inadvertently making changes to the environment to our own long term detriment?
That rejection of what you might call the Gaia principle – that the environmental status quo is an end in itself – has ramifications. It is hard to conceptualise our relationship with gases or soil, but easier in terms of animals. I am not a vegetarian – I am quite happy that we farm and eat cattle, for example – and you might argue that the cattle are pretty successful themselves, symbiotic survivors of a kind. Do I think other species have a value in themselves? Is there any harm in killing off a species of insect, other than the fact that biodiversity may be reduced in ways that remove potential future advantages to man, or there may be knock on consequences we know not of that damage man somehow? I am not quite sure, but in general I seem in practice to take the view that exploitation of other species and substantial distortion of prior ecological balance to suit men’s needs is fine, so presumably the odd extinction is fine too, unless it damages man long term.
I strongly disapprove of hurting animals for sport, and want to see them have the best quality of life possible, preferably wild. But I like to eat and wear them. I am not quite sure why it is OK to wear animal skin on our feet or carry it as a bag, but not to wear “fur”. What is the difference, other than that leather has had the hair systematically rubbed off as part of the process of making it? A trivial issue, but one that obviously relates to the deeper questions.
Yes I draw a distinction between animals which are intelligent and those which are not. I would not eat whale or dolphin. But this does not seem entirely logical – animal intelligence and sensibility is evidently a continuum. Many animals mourn, for example. The BBC World Service radio (my main contact with the outside world at present – I have just today found my very, very weak internet connection just about works if I try it at 5am) informed me a couple of days ago that orang-utans have the ability to think forward and tell others where they will be the next day. Why cattle and fish are daft enough to eat is hard to justify.
I quite appreciate the disbenefits to man of radically changing his environment, even if it could be done without long term risk to his existence – the loss of beauty, of connection to seasons and forms of behaviour with which we evolved. But I regard those as important only as losses to man, not because nature is important intrinsically. In short, if I thought higher seas, no polar bears and no glaciers would not hurt man particularly, I don’t suppose I would have much to say against it. I fear the potential repercussions are too dangerous to man. At base, I don’t actually care about a polar bear.
Fred
You seem to be all over the place on this one; first you mention the Thames freezing and then not freezing any longer because of the building of new bridges and the Embankment and now you’re calling it “climate sceptic bullshit”. Best to drop it, I think, because you’re not really making sense, sorry.
My response having disappeared, here it is again:
Fred: “It’s a bit more cut and dried than that. They have had satellites in orbit for the last 40 years which can measure the amount of heat the earth is radiating into space at the frequencies associated with co2.”
As always, the presumption is: increase in CO2 equals increase in world temperatures. The recent stop is proof that the situation is more complicated. Frankly production of CO2 from human sources is only one of many sources for global warming.
That’s not to say that humans shouldn’t stop polluting the planet. Temperature increase is not the only issue. The shit in the air is perceptible for any inhabitant of a city.
@Londoner
You seem to have got it wrong again.
It wasn’t me who mentioned the Thames freezing, it was the sceptics, twice.
I’m just the one pointing out they were talking bollocks.
I think you are not talking sense so you drop it.
Could it be BRRISON, you know the balloon sent up because Hubble is what, studying moon dust?
http://www.cometisonnews.com/1430/strange-light-seen-south-africa/
I just don’t understand why ISON can be seen vaguely by small-mirrored amateur astronomers, but Hubble can’t get a fix…strange.
Ben,
BRRISON broke down!
http://www.nasa.gov/content/brrison-suffers-science-payload-anomaly-unable-to-collect-data/
The wing man joins in drive by sniping;
The fucking tag team feel they own the fucking joint, headlong rush to help by laying the suppressive fire cover, on goes the fucking charade.
You are far too fucking obvious, and too fucking amateurish to deliver what you are supposed to be delivering; “Hamas”! Says it all.
Craig Murray the British diplomat is doing what UK diplomats do when diplomacy is undergoing massive convulsions, viz: talk about the weather in a nonchalant kind of way.
The UKUSIS ziofuckwits have given the go-ahead to political Islam to put in place the 40 year old Zionist plan to give Militant Islam a territory in Eastern Syria/ Western Iraq as part of a land grab to make a Greater Israel.
Militant Islam believes that possession is 90% of the law and that a Shariah base of any kind will enable a non-compromise Shariah zone to be established.
Every Muslim would agree with that dream, a government in which unlike Saudi Arabia, rich and poor are treated equally in the eyes of the law, and lawmakers are themselves subject to the same scrutiny as those charged with crime.
Unlike every other power base in Islam, spying which is haram according to the Qur’an would be illegal. The obvious people to establish such a haven of justice would obviously those who are on the payroll and best chums list of UKUSIS.
http://aangirfan.blogspot.co.uk/2010/05/israel-to-grab-more-land.html
This farticle is telling of the desperation of the fuckwits busy selling the man made global warming.
The same way the cat food sales goes; nine out of ten cat owners prefer whiskas! (fact that none of the fuckers have ever dined on the said cat food matters not one jot). But sounds really good, and is used all day long to close deals. Also bringing another factor; nicotine kills, and cigarettes are bad for you and we told you so. The higher authority says so, game goes;
However because the figure of 95 percent have been shoved in, the writers used to the black and white, yes or no, binary propositions, proceeds to educate the great unwashed and the illiterate Mongos. Needless to point out, the writer presenting the plutocrats interests knows damn fucking fine well about the appalling standards of education that is being delivered to educate the great unwashed. Hence the need to expand further that ninety five percent means one hundred percent really. Here is more scientists who say;
However in case the deal is not closed then here is yet another higher authority;
Presto this chap goes and manages the risk with the idea of spending more money to keep the risk away, and the must need for the financial markets being the only hope of humanity to save it from itself!
However reading the comments, the farticle seems to fall flat, the lot of the anti-sem…. right wing nut jobs, who hate Freemasons, and eat meat dripping with blood all day long (luxury would be a fucking fine chance), simply are not buying this shit.
99.99 certainty, with real evidence that everyone can check themselves that the 7/7 bombings were a hoax
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=kwyzpzEgUWE#t=5403
@ Passerby,
One orange may lean heavily on 2 other oranges in an attempt to impress me as [or goad me into believing he’s] being ‘taller’ as the rest, but, at the end of the day, he’ll be OJ as well.
As a heretic, I never go knocking on people’s doors to convince them to join me on ‘this’ side of the godless field of Nothingness, located 350 nautical miles NE of Fatherswell.
@ Jon,
Don’t know if you have time to read every entry on this blog, but back in the day when I was a bouncer, drug/alcohol fueled boneheads didn’t dictate the rules, I was the rules [thank you judge Dredd]. Given my disposition wrt ‘banning’ have you [re]considered to allow Habbakkuk back in?
I sincerely believe in freedom of speech, but would have kicked Habbakkuk’s ff-ing ass all over the ff-ing place for what he said. There is no excuse for sinking that low. Nevertheless, once one starts to contain and purge anyone’s thoughts, what is the ff-ing difference between Kim and me?
“Yes, I KO-ed you, but I don’t ff-ing hate you and you ff-ing well know that.” – minutes after a won cage fight.
After a loss? You don’t wanna know.
That’s what fair fights are all bout [including warnings].
Brings me back to that Thai person, who asked us “why do you say ‘F’ all the time?’
Until today, I ff-ng don’t know.
To anyone who thinks s/he has got all the answers: F you. The universe prohibits singularity, for its roots need fungi in order to breathe and prosper. Not you or me.
Anyway, I, for one, am all for letting H back into the ring [the gloves are off anyway].
For the record: I hate Canadians who hate Palestinians, Arabs and Jews too!!!!!
@ Juteman,
See if Jon can get you in touch with me outside this board and I’ll see what I can do to help you out.
Laguerre – the IPCC was given a narrow remit: to study Anthropogenic Global Warming. They do not address natural factors (like the sun) which kind of says it all regarding its “scientific” credentials.
Fred said “They know that with the increase in co2 more heat is being reflected back and they know how much more.”
Wrong – only their computer models come up with this nonsense.
Real world data show that temperature increase leads to increased CO2 (principally through ocean outgassing) NOT the other way round.
CO2 reflects heat back to Earth’s surface? Lol show me empirical proof NOT presumptive computer models or the Kiehl-Trenberth cartoon!
Try reading the article below:
“A team of experts from the “hard” sciences working with climate researchers at Principia Scientific International (PSI) have devised what they believe is an important new energy model of our planet that turns conventional “flat earth” climate thinking on its head.
Published below, the diagram deftly accounts for all the energy Earth receives from our sun without the need to factor in the hotly disputed “greenhouse gas theory.” The diagram serves as a simplified version of an earlier PSI model produced in answer to a “put up or shut up” challenge (May 10, 2013) by climatologist, Dr Roy Spencer that appears to have the now subdued Spencer stumped.”
http://principia-scientific.org/supportnews/latest-news/259-new-climate-model-trumps-flat-earthers-of-greenhouse-gas-science.html
There’s something very queer about the global warming ‘sceptics,’ as they like to be called. When any numerate and technically competent person evaluates model results, she speaks in terms of model assumptions and relationships. But the sceptics won’t touch the IPCC models with a barge pole. They might throw incommensurable studies in over the transom, “Hey look at this!” Or they lecture you about trends they have eyeballed. Or they argue from ignorance to dismiss models entirely.
Anyone with any hope of contributing to the debate will be poring over this:
http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/wg1/ar4-wg1-chapter8.pdf
This is where you go to find the errors. How come sceptics don’t look here? Don’t they know their way around a model? And they don’t, why would anyone give a toss what they think?
IPeCaC – some of us like to deal with reality not what someone has cooked up with pre-ordained algorithms.
Bit like Purdue University’s “simulation” of a Boeing 757 impacting the Pentagon – their 757 had no engines!
Why was that? 😉
Sad to say, that makes no sense.
Watch this then
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=LOyBfihjQvI#t=2705
One of the closest misses just recorded in a record breaking week for fireballs.
http://www.astronomerstelegram.org/?read=5432
And, as things stand, 97% of NASA employees will likely be “furloughed” and sent home tomorrow night according to http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2013/09/27/us/who-goes-to-work-during-government-shutdown.html
Fuck that. Show me where the AOGCMs are wrong. Show me where the EMICs are wrong.
Otherwise all you have is words words words. No proof of consistency. No measure of uncertainty. No defined tie to anything observable at all. The mathematics of the IPCC models is nothing but a language that has those things built in.
If you no sabee, you can’t talk to pukka sahib.
Clearly you are unable to think for yourself – sad to say…
I know what your problem is. You can’t even solve a solve a diffyq, Can you?
cos^2(t)sin(t)y’ = -cos^2(t)Y+1, y(t/2)=0
Go ahead, solve it.
…or not. But if you don’t understand differential equations, don’t talk out your ass about thermodynamics.
The real problem with the AGW hoax is that it gives the geoengineers the excuse to destroy the biosphere.
Allan Buckman is the President and co-founder of Microbetech, a Nevada-based bioremediation company. A former wildlife biologist and environmental scientist with the California Department of Fish & Game, Allan’s 38-year career has given him crucial insight into environmental stress and the decline of ecosystems.
In Allan’s presentation at the 60th Annual DPI/NGO Conference at the United Nations (New York) in 2007, he spoke about the role of pollution in an ever-increasing plant death problem related to the “persistent jet clouds” we now associate with stratospheric aerosol geoengineering operations (chemtrail spraying) and discussed a biorestoration alternative. In his speech, Allan corroborates the data presented in What In The World Are They Spraying?, saying:
“The fallout contains aluminum, strontium, radium, boron, and many more metals, all of which have been documented in every drinking water supply in California and Arizona since about 1987. They only way that could happen is from air application, but no explanations are available.”
The time for skepticism is over: whatever their purpose, these operations are destroying the planet. Tune in as Allan discusses the impact of aerosol geoengineering on all life.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FSGD9mkt0Ss
But footballs don’t have wheels!
Alcanon
WTF is going on
All this Fireball Activity, all on the east cost to Close to Region 3
Another Mysterious Malfunction at a critical time, Scratches head,
Do you reckon it’s too early for the fireballs to be associated with FT3, in these circumstances, i’m not up for coincidences
Have you heard anything about flashing lights in Low in the S.W.
a little over a week ago i caght sight of 3 flashes, very bright, too bright to be tumbling debris, and it stayed in same part of sky, unlike passing Debris it flashed brightly 3 times then gone, it puzzled me.
Same thing happened tonight, the same 2 bright flashes then Gone, same part of sky at 10 pm, seemed to be no movement, it was situated close to Ophiuchus. Have never seen the likes of it before.
Climate Computer Modeling Problems
Dr. Nicola Scafetta offers invaluable insight into the way climate change is studied within the framework of the anthropogenic global warming (AGW) theory, and explains how the actual data tells us a very different story. He details the ways in which the sun contributes to both warming and cooling climate cycles, and makes it clear that it has always been this way. Furthermore, he explains why computer modeling doesn’t work, and why climate modeling predictions are so far off the mark. This interview will leave you with an understanding of the complexity involved in measuring climate, the problems inherent in computer modeling, and the role of the sun in climate.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVZryjibU7o
That’s extrapolation, not dynamic modeling. If you picked stocks like that you would be wearing barrel & suspenders in no time.
Islam’s protection of environment is being applied in Misali Island for the perservation of under-water life. The Island located on the channel between Zanzibar and mainland Tanzania – is only 1 km in size.
The UK-based Islamic Foundation for Ecology and Environment along with CARE and Misali Island Coservation Association met with Zanzibar religious leaders and fishermen to discuss how teaching of Holy Qur’an can be applied to preserve depleting fishery by not using dynamite, dragnets and spears. The project was launched in 1998 and since then it has proved to be a success story in Misali. Misali is famous for a rich variety of fish and turtles and home to some of the most magnificient coral slopes in the western Indian Ocean.
http://rehmat1.com/2009/03/12/island-islam/
When David Attenborough and his film crew stumbled over a bunch of chimps sucking voraciously on the mammary glands of female quadruped mammals [and thus the living daylights out of cows], they knew instantly that the pouted lips of the apes had to be the evolutionary answer to help carnivores in being able to drink dairy products in their fav deli.
I have found the book State of Fear by Michael Crichton (if you can ignore the plot which is wince making) a very interesting analysis of the climate change industry. I have now moved from belief to scepticism.
Why so much anger here and so many insults overnight?
~~
Why are Chinese solar panel manufacturers in financial trouble?
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/29/china-solar-idUSL4N0HP0BO20130929
Surely solar panels are in great demand judging from the increasing number of solar farms I noticed in the SW (which are using agricultural land) and also the arrays on house roofs.
What is the life of a solar panel and does the efficiency remain the same over its life? Anyone know?
@ Hannibal,
off topic:
I can find nothing wrong with being skeptical, I’m even inclined to say it’s a rather healthy insolence and might prevent the blind following of this or that. Perhaps you have a clue as to why the same is not applicable to certain aspects of WWII?