"For Europe as a whole, about 200,000 people die from excess heat each year.

However, about 1.5 million Europeans die annually from excess cold."




Global Warming, the Great Lifesaver

Bjorn Lomborg says balmier weather could ward off millions of deaths.
by Bjorn Lomborg


Yes, Bjorn Lomborg, the controversial Danish economist, believes that “global warming is real and man-made.” But he is convinced that we are not thinking the problem through correctly and are, in fact, lost in a kind of green fog about how best to deal with global warming and other major environmental threats. In this excerpt from his new book, Cool It, Lomborg illustrates how a major climate-related killer goes underreported, while human deaths from heat waves make front-page news.


The heat wave in Europe in early August 2003 was a catastrophe of heartbreaking proportions. With more than 3,500 dead in Paris alone, France suffered nearly 15,000 fatalities from the heat wave. Another 7,000 died in Germany, 8,000 in Spain and Italy, and 2,000 in the United Kingdom: The total death toll ran to more than 35,000. Understandably, this event has become a psychologically powerful metaphor for the frightening vision of a warmer future and our immediate need to prevent it.


The green group Earth Policy Institute, which first totaled the deaths, tells us that as “awareness of the scale of this tragedy spreads, it is likely to generate pressure to reduce carbon emissions. For many of the millions who suffered through these record heat waves and the relatives of the tens of thousands who died, cutting carbon emissions is becoming a pressing personal issue.”
While 35,000 dead is a terrifyingly large number, all deaths should in principle be treated with equal concern. Yet this is not happening. When 2,000 people died from heat in the United Kingdom, it produced a public outcry that is still heard. However, the BBC recently ran a very quiet story telling us that deaths caused by cold weather in England and Wales for the past years have hovered around 25,000 each winter, casually adding that the winters of 1998–2000 saw about 47,000 cold deaths each year. The story then goes on to discuss how the government should make the cost of winter fuel economically bearable and how the majority of deaths are caused by strokes and heart attacks.
It is remarkable that a single heat-death episode of 35,000 from many countries can get everyone up in arms, whereas cold deaths of 25,000 to 50,000 a year in just a single country pass almost unnoticed. Of course, we want to help avoid another 2,000 dying from heat in the United Kingdom. But presumably we also want to avoid many more dying from cold.
For Europe as a whole, about 200,000 people die from excess heat each year. However, about 1.5 million Europeans die annually from excess cold. That is more than seven times the total number of heat deaths. Just in the past decade, Europe has lost about 15 million people to the cold, more than 400 times the iconic heat deaths from 2003. That we so easily neglect these deaths and so easily embrace those caused by global warming tells us of a breakdown in our sense of proportion.
How will heat and cold deaths change over the coming century with global warming? Let us for the moment assume—very unrealistically—that we will not adapt at all to the future heat. Still, the biggest cross-European cold/heat study concludes that for an increase of 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit in the average European temperatures, “our data suggest that any increases in mortality due to increased temperatures would be outweighed by much larger short-term declines in cold-related mortalities.” For Britain, it is estimated a 3.6°F increase will mean 2,000 more heat deaths but 20,000 fewer cold deaths. Likewise, another paper incorporating all studies on this issue and applying them to a broad variety of settings in both developed and developing countries found that “global warming may cause a decrease in mortality rates, especially of cardiovascular diseases.”
But of course, it seems very unrealistic and conservative to assume that we will not adapt to rising temperatures throughout the 21st century. Several recent studies have looked at adaptation in up to 28 of the biggest cities in the United States. Take Philadelphia. The optimal temperature seems to be about 80°F. In the 1960s, on days when it got significantly hotter than that (about 100°F), the death rate increased sharply. Likewise, when the temperature dropped below freezing, deaths increased sharply.
Yet something great happened in the decades following. Death rates in Philadelphia and around the country dropped in general because of better health care. But crucially, temperatures of 100°F today cause almost no excess deaths. However, people still die more because of cold weather. One of the main reasons for the lower heat susceptibility is most likely increased access to air-conditioning. Studies seem to indicate that over time and with sufficient resources, we actually learn to adapt to higher temperatures. Consequently we will experience fewer heat deaths even when temperatures rise.

Well, I guess if someone writes it, there will be a audience. I suspect the consumers of this book will be those looking for reasons and excuses not to do the right thing.

There is always an excuse. Seems like the wrong attitude to me. I look forward to the day that I don't have to inhale disgusting diesel exhaust on the way to work. I look forward to the day that the city isn't covered by a brown smog fog and be concerned about the health of my family. I hope someday the sensible and responsible people reach critical mass and we can move to a society that encourages sustainability rather promoting consumption as a principle.

As for whatever is written in that book, I am sure he didn't make the connection that global warming would cause a cooling of Europe which is a fairly common scientific estimation of what will happen. But hey, we are on our own to discern what is fit to print and what provides the truest representation of the situation. The rest of it, like this book I suspect, is better for starting fires.

Err, OK. So, let's ignore the fact that the concern with global warming is that it will change weather patterns drastically and quickly, meaning places where we grow our food and expect to be able to find suitable amounts of water, etc. will suddenly not be suitable. Thus, large scale crop failures, etc. In costal areas, especially many cities, flooding is likely to occur. Many of the cities largest cities are along coastlines.

So, while it is conceivable that more people die from freezing then heat stroke, I don't think the concern simply is that global warming makes it too "hot" to live, more that it make will too quickly change the places that are livable year round or suitable for large scale crop growth. It's about famine, flooding, larger hurricanes (the warmer the water, the bigger the hurricane), etc.

Of course, I've seen the right wing argument again global warming morph from denying it, to more recently arguing it isn't man-made so get used to it, to the latest one, that it'll be good for us! LOL!

Anyway, I don't even understand why this is a left/right issue in the USA. In the rest of the world, it is a science issue, and when 90% of scientists say one thing 5% another, and 5% in-between, us non-scientists pretty much have to go with the majority opinion. It could be wrong, but IMO I'm more likely to take the word of 90% of people trained in something than the smallest majority...unless I only listen to what I want to here.

Oh mighty Master of Disaster expert on every subject. I don't think your numbers of scientists is in any way correct. Check again. BTW, do you have any idea what it takes to be one of the "scientists" in your statistics?

If it weren't for global warming we would still be in the last ice age, but I'm sure that THIS warming period is because of man. LOL

BTW, wasn't global cooling all the rage just a couple of decades ago? As the champion of your political soulmates once said: " A lie told often enough becomes the truth".



Basic References:

• Challenge to Scientific Consensus on Global Warming: Analysis Finds Hundreds of Scientists Have Published Evidence Countering Man-Made Global Warming Fears
• The Year the Global Warming Hoax Died
• Hostages to a hoax
• Water Experts Find Earth's Warming, Rainfall Linked to Sun
• Global Warming and Solar Radiation
• Milankovitch Cycles and Glaciation
• The Myth of Dangerous Human-Caused Climate Change (PDF)
• Up against the warming zealots
• When Physics Trumps Hysteria in Global Warming
• Environmental Effects of Increased Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide
• Global Warming: Forecasts by Scientists versus Scientific Forecasts
• Geophysical, archeological and historical evidence support a solar-output model for climate change (PDF)
• Gamma rays and climate (PDF)
• Temperature vs. Cosmic Ray Flux
• Linkages between solar activity, climate predictability and water resource development (PDF)
• Proof on Ice: Southern Greenland Was Once Green; Earth Warmer
• Global Warming and Nature's Thermostat
• The Past and Future of Climate (PDF)
• Global warming is not a crisis
• The Great Global Warming Swindle
• IceCap

Lawrence Solomon's "The Deniers" (a series of articles on the view of scientists who have been labelled "Global Warming Deniers"):

• Science, not politics
• Statistics needed
• The original denier: into the cold
• End the chill
• They call this a consensus?
• The limits of predictability
• Unsettled science
• Models trump measurements
• The ice-core man
• The hurricane expert who stood up to UN junk science
• Polar scientists on thin ice
• The sun moves climate change
• Bright sun, warm Earth. Coincidence?
• Look to Mars for the truth on global warming
• Read the sunspots
• Forget warming - beware the new ice age
• Little Ice Age is still with us
• Fighting climate 'fluff'

Other References:

• Alarmist global warming claims melt under scientific scrutiny
• The Global Warming Myth
• Global Warming: A Chilling Perspective
• Strong Evidence Points to Earth's Proximity to Sun as Ice Age Trigger
• THE NEXT ICE AGE - NOW!
• Father of Climatology Throws Up at the Thought of Al Gore's 'An Inconvenient Truth'
• IPCC Scientists Challenge Al Gore's View of Global Warming Consensus
• Swedish Scientist Accuses UN's IPCC of Falsifying Data and Destroying Evidence
• CO2 Science
• Global Warming and Climate Forcing by Recent Albedo Changes on Mars
• Climate Momentum Shifting: Prominent Scientists Reverse Belief in Man-made Global Warming - Now Skeptics
• The Real 'Inconvenient Truth'
• New findings indicate today's greenhouse gas levels not unusual
• Climate Change: Incorrect information on pre-industrial CO2
• Global Warming as a Religion
• I Was On the Global Warming Gravy Train (By David Evans)
• Global Warming: it's not caused by greenhouse gases says academic
• Still Waiting for Greenhouse
• GREENIE WATCH
• Why Global Warming Would be Good for You
• Global Warming Primer (PDF)
• Global Warming: An Official Pseudoscience
• Sun's Output Increasing in Possible Trend Fueling Global Warming
• Fiddler On The Roof
• Debating Global Warming
• Climate Resistance

Beauty of a post Captain!
I don't think these "what he says" - "global warming" followers even know what to say to a post like that. If they only follow the coverstory on Newsweek or watch CNN they don't have a clue there is another story to tell out there. I think they just dismiss those that question Global Warming as freaks or wacko's.

Of course , to be constistant, they must also believe the world is flat and the Sun revolves around the Earth.

OK, I was going to let it die, but since you called it out, 133 countries (or something like that) signing the Kyoto Deal in my mind trumps 30 propaganda articles probably collected from a website that puts that stuff together.

I could just as easily find a site that'd give you as many links to why Jews or Blacks ar inferior. Or I can find numerous links as to the "proof" the the Twin Towers was actually a conspiracy of th Isreali's or the American government. I was in a book store the other day and perused the "new age" section. There were 4 books on how the world is going to end in 2012 (no lie). So there's a market out there for any sort of truth you want, the question becomes, does it hold up to a hard look by the majority of experts?

Anyway, like I say, I see the global warming deniers constantly switch stories...from non-existant, to not-our-fault, to now it's-a-good-thing. That makes me pretty suspicious. The only thing they seem to refuse to believe is that it is both real, and we could do something about it.

I'll admit, no one can know for sure what's going on, but please, tell me what other arguments there are out there where you believe the minority of scientists studying an issue as opposed to a majority. And tell me, if this is a BIG lie, who is the big "winners" supposed to be by telling this lie? Who are the powerful people who could tell and sell such an enormous lie? How can it be that the oil and gas industries, with more money than anyone, are "losing" this propaganda war, to what, the wind mill manufacturers?

Anyway, in the end, someone will be right, and someone will be wrong. I sure hope thew global warming deniers are right actually, since the one country where the debate mattered most, the USA, the global warming deniers are winning. The biggest polluter in the world won't sign on, the rest of the world isn't going to knock itself out while the US basically does no more than a few token gestures. So whatever is going to happen, will happen, there's no doubt. Man made or not, the globe is warming up, and there's no evidence the trend is reversing. In fact, the evidence is that it is speeding. I guess we'll just have to hope it means longer summers, less cold days, and heck, maybe more lives saved! However, despite not being an expert, I do continue to have a hard time believing that something like 90% of scientists have been bamboozled by some tree huggers and the wind-mill lobby!


Anyway, as a FINAL note, I do not consider myself a know-it-all. But I'm not the one who keeps bringing right-wing pieces into the forum for debate. If you want to bring this stuff in here, be prepared for the alternative view to be presented with roughly as much certainty as you present yours. The rest of the people can make up their opinions from that, but let's stop with the "we're right, you're arrogant and pompous" attitiude.

Personally, topics like this just aren't that great for a clan forum. They're devisive and people rarely agree. I think that's why most people, wisely, are avoiding these debates. Sometimes I wish I did.

so you question that man has not messed with our enviromet ,its just a cycle? amarica is the only one whos still debating (including our two republican friends) its not just emmisions but as a whole we are screwing our childrens future . its all about the here and now-lets spray pesticides now so we can have decent crops even though its poison to ingest and has tainted the soils in amarica to the point where there is not one body of water ,river or stream that isnt tainted-were fine now but our kids will have to deal with that . lets cut all the trees down for building or palm farms for fuel now because WE dont have to worry about it ,our kids wont need a rain forrest or everglades ,wet lands etc...in some places theres so much garbage buried theres no where else to put it . all of this combined alon with emissions is killing this planet. if you dont want to believe it ,shore , you can find 1000s of links to back yourself up buuuut-



what if you debators are wrong? i guess it wont matter because when it really gets bad youll be dead and the next generation will have to deal with it .the technology is there and CHEAP why not utilize it to try and help rather than argue? i agree with some help ,it would be nice if you could not smell smog or if your hiking far from where man lives you could drink from the stream .christ i caught a massive bass in the everglades and had to throw it back-not eat it- because its a known fact the mercury levels are extremely toxic (sugar mills).we always wait till alot of people die before passing a law to change something -FACT- this isnt something were going to be able to change .

mod 2012 is end of all days-its a clander year the aztecs have chose . ive actually watched a segment on history channel which was interesting.

If Al Gore says it IT MUST BE TRUE

The debate is over. Denial... is unfortunately the kind of attitude the cigarette companies had... hmmm. I can't remember did smoking cause cancer on not? If you look hard enough I am positive you could find a 90 year old guy that smokes a pack a day and is 'healthy as a horse' but that doesn't really speak to whether smoking causes cancer.

I've been sucked in again. Yes there was a global warming to end the last Ice Age. If you look though, it 60,000 years for the ice to fully recede. If you compare that to the Ward Hunt Ice Shelf in the Artic which in 3000 years hadn't split at all and in 2 years it has totally split through. Found many sources that estimate the decline of polar ice at 9% every decade. When the ice melts it also releases trapped CO2 and methane into the atmosphere. Less ice also means for light being let in, thusly warming the Earth. The stats are directly from NASA, not a left wing entity the last i checked.

As far as adpating to the heat, come live in Phoenix for a summer. I've lived in AZ my whole life and Phx the last 10 years and has def. gotten warmer, nay hotter. We had at least 30 days of 110 degree weather and something like 100 days of 105+.

That's all i will say on this subject.

OR florida where we normally get an extreme amount of rain,instead none,infact ,our only water source lake okechobee (sp?)has dropped 4 inches and is drying up as we speak. its happening too quick to be a cycle.there finding all the bodies and vehicles from the 80s drug years-not good.

Global Warming, is it real? YES! End of story.
I be more worry about one of these hitting the earth >>>again<<<

Why do we do nothing to change the way our governments looks at Global Warming?

CAPITALISM, you will see that it is not easy fighting Capitalism (money isn't everything, it's the only thing)......do you really think they will do away with OIL or any other form of energy used for propulsion that we are currently using..............think again.

There are and were scientists that actually figured out how to make a car run entirely on water with no emissions, do you see any of those cars around? NO, because the auto manufacturers suppress developements like this, not to mention the governments of the world especially those that have an abundance of oil fields. The prototype cars (Hybrids etc.) are just there for our peace of mind, "to calm the angry mob" if you will. Don't think for a second that we will all be driving "Green" cars in 10, 20, 30 years from now, because those that control the fuel control what we drive, and as long as there is fuel left on the planet we will be driving gas guzzling cars.

You see, as long as someone can make money from fuels like the ones we are using now they will do everything in their power to prolong and even avoid switching over to "Green" vehicles, be it cars, bikes, boats or whatever.

I must say that I don't see anything good happening within the next 50 - 100 years unless there is a major environmental disaster ( that leads to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people in the west (the east, what's the east?), as long as the west comes out on top.....no problem!! ) that can be directly linked to our insane cunsumption of the planets natural resources.

from a pessimistic skeptic.

I am not a environmentalist, not even close. In fact i live in a city (Scottsdale/Phoenix) that must have the largest fleet of Escalades and Hummers (asst. other SUVs) in the western U.S. Just seems like the documented fndings from varied sources are kind of hard to deny. Sources that often back the claims through photographic evidence.

I think most of you missed the point of the original post.
'Global warming is real but is it good'
This is the arguement made by Bjorn Lomborg

More warmth = More life

Fact is when the earth was hotter animals and plants grew to huge sizes



Less cold = Less deaths

People die from cold much more than from heat.

I've noticed some large spiders around my house lately. I was going to get a spider killer spray to kill these ugly nasty spiders once and for all. Will this be okay, or will I be contributing to Global Warming.....

Well, either way.. those spiders are going down!!!!

from what ive read in the begining it wuld be good ,with the exception of the folks that live in the warmer areas.my dad loves it in maryland because he plays golf nearly year round but what happens when the crops dry up? massive drought? i know for a fact the entire west depends on the winters in the mid west for waters from the colorado river (not just for rafting,hehe) but their seasons are not the same these days and the snows are coming a little later.

Didn't miss the point of the guy's book at all. More warm equals more life just doesn't work. More heat = more fresh water in oceans = ocean currents are ruined = life cycles in oceans upended = less food for people = more dead people, but at least they'll be warm. Larger animals and plants really doesn't work either. For animals (or humans) to evolve or adapt it takes thousands of years not the tens of years that will be needed to survive the heat up on the way. Maybe Mr. Lomburg is as much of a scientist as i and i'm a graphic designer. The Danish government had this say about his his first book:

Objectively speaking, the publication of the work under consideration is deemed to fall within the concept of scientific dishonesty. ...In view of the subjective requirements made in terms of intent or gross negligence, however, Bjørn Lomborg's publication cannot fall within the bounds of this characterization. Conversely, the publication is deemed clearly contrary to the standards of good scientific practice.

The DCSD cited The Skeptical Environmentalist for:
Fabrication of data;
Selective discarding of unwanted results (selective citation);
Deliberately misleading use of statistical methods;
Distorted interpretation of conclusions;
Plagiarism;
Deliberate misinterpretation of others' results.

Hard to think that this guy all of a sudden became a "real" scientitist in the interm.

http://www.lomborg-errors.dk/coolit.htm

Well, I do believe that carbon emissions cause a "green house" effect. That is how we got our atmosphere to begin with.
What I haven't been convinced of is that the Earth has stopped being a self regulating object.
If you look at science without looking at an agenda, the Earth regulates temperatures across the globe. It has done this since it's formation. It changes over time, and very well may be speeding up, but that doesn't stop the science of how the Earth regulates temperatures.
As the Earth warms our ice caps are melting. This is a fact. It is happening right now. This fresh water is going into our oceans. The oceans are the main regulator of heat on Earth. The currents are driven by cold water from the poles moving towards the less dense warm water of the Equator, whose water moves towards the poles and loses it's heat to the atmosphere, cooling, and falling, and moving towards less dense water at the Eqautor. Science. It's a simple convection cell and it's how the Earth regulates it's temperature.
So, we now have this fresh water coming in. Well, this changes the salinity of the water slowing the whole process down. This causes an overall cooling of the Earths temperature. The ice caps grow and eventually the waters warm again and the temperature has gone back to "normal".
I learned this in Science class before anyone was talking about global warming.
In the early '80's all anyone talked about was Global Cooling and how much colder the Earth had been getting. Well, that didn't happen.
Two years ago after some massive hurricanes Global Warming activests announced that it was just the beginning and the storms would get worse every year because of Global Warming. Well, if anyone talked to historical meteorologists you would have heard that it was just part of a 70 year cycle and was part of a normal pattern that wouldn't be repeated again for another 70 years.

Do I deny global warming? No. Do I think that man isn't the cause? No. Do I think that there is not enough data to make any kind of Dooms Day predictions? Yes. Should we try to make the world a cleaner place? Yes.
But don't tell me that a few years of research = the end of the world. Science without agenda usually shows a different view of things.

BTW - Texas had it's wettest, coolest summer in over a decade this summer ending a drought that had been going on since the mid '90's. Thanks global warming. I really didn't want to deal with another summer of a month of 100 degree + weather.

Thank you Bargod. My view is nearly the same.
-The earth's temperature appears to be slightly increasing given limited sporadic data. (In the 70's and early 80's scientist were preparing us for the coming ice-age).

-What is causing this, or what impact 'man' may have in this, is highly debatable

-Should Americans and the rest of the world spend 100's of Trillions of dollars to regulate a myriad of things that may or may not have any impact on the earth's temperature?
(Many people are using the 'Global Warming' Issue to advance political agenda's, seize power and control on the masses.)

And despite what many think, there are many scientist that do not fall lock step in the 'world is flat' or 'man-made global warming' theories.

I want to know how many of those links Capt.Andtenille read through or was it a copy n paste thing from somewhere else....
LOL, I say regardless it will always be debatable and 50/50 as to guessing which side is ultimately correct. It's one of those grand design things humans can't comprehend fully at our stage of knowledge -in my opinion. I think the debate should be not about man-made, but about how the issue is man-accelerated whether global warming is man-made or not we shouldn't just sit back and guestimate that it's a natural occurence that we can only sit back and watch happen.
For those of you firmly on the 'its a natural cycle' side, that's fine but it's pretty weak-willed in character to not make an effort to offset the potential disasters looming ahead- especially when you have no clue about the duration of such a heatening up cycle.

Anyways Captains Ant. and S.R, I'll be taking an extended break from the forums for a while since my task is now accomplished in providing fresh material in the forums for the insomniacs here to find getting zzzz's easier just by looking at-not even reading - my biblical length posts. Been nice 'debating' with yaz

While I would love to take the opportunity to respond to your charges Hellfighter, I am trying to refrain from making any more political posts in these forums. I just want to let it be about the game. That said, it's not wise to "misunderestimate" me. LOL

UHG, i cant understand why some people have to prove a point -to be right about the enviromental issues at hand. i hope your right ...... or our kids hope your right.

With all do respect - YOU! are the one that's claiming the world is flat. Your lame approach to this topic witness of a complete lack of knowledge and a big disrespect to all the people who takes this problem seriously. This is an irreversible process. When the damage is done you can't turn it around. That's why the world cannot afford to let this happen. That's why UN is now defining pollution quotas because this speed cannot continue. That's a fact -like it or not. Don't look up arguments from any nutcase out there just to back up your fortified opinion. The independent scientific elite is coming with these warnings because it's important - not to annoy anyone. And personally I trust Al Gore (and most european politicians) more than I trust Mr. Snot Rocket (and I'm not a democrat by heart). Denial of unpleasant facts is cheap and wrong. Open your eyes and face them - they are here and they are for real.

Ummm, still wondering.... is it okay to use the spider spray???

I had a long reply Kleerance but the stupid forums somehow erasus it everytime I'm about ready to hit send. No more long posts for me! Ugghh!



I am not going to repeat it other than to say:

I am rubber, you are glue

names bounce off of me and stick to you.

It's great that less people will freeze to death, but unfortunatly the fertile growing areas will also shift. This will leave the former soviet union with a huge area of cropland and turn our agricultural areas into desert. My humble opinion is that it is to late to change it now. We're in for a wild ride I wish I was gonna be here to see it.

I know we've all seen those film strips in school where they talk about geologic time and us humans have been here for a wink of an eye. Yes the graph is true, there have been many temp. fluctuations over the past 60 millions years, all at a geologic pace. This warm up is going to be over tens of years, makes the graph kind of irrelavent. I think Capt.Andtenille has the right idea, it's all about the game for me from this point on.

Shar, i give you permission to nuke those freaking spiders .

Actually, the changes happen quite quickly, not at a slow pace. Not as fast as that movie... whatever it was called, where there was an ice age over night, but they happen in a lifetime, not thousands of years.

In a heartbeat (150 years) humans threw as much CO2 into the atmosphere as it took nature 100's of millions of years to produce. The atmosphere is incredibly thin... You ever jog? Ever jog 5 miles... if you jogged 5 miles straight up, you would be on the top of Everst with 98% of the atmosphere below you.

When you think of the atmosphere as an incredibly thin band of gas, and pumping billions of TONS of pollutants into it, you can't help but shudder at the implications. What does global warming mean? It means the PLANET IS WARMER, the whole friggen rock.

Impact at the poles has been dramatic this year. You can read about the dramatic reduction of ice in the north on CBC, canada's BBC or ugh, CNN. "The Big Melt" is the series. Also, the Russians, Dutch (I think the Dutch) Canada and even the US are racing to the north to secure who gets what, LAND grab (not ice) of the 21st century.

Again and again we read about scientists that are shocked... these are the same scientists that are warning us of dramatic changes... I suppose that means they may have underestimated the changes too. The scarest changes I think are, as Undead said, drought, as the planet changes weather patterns. Famine, war, migration... down right medieval it will be.

Lastly and quite simply, the weather is the way the planet reorganizes the heat from the sun. Weather is a symptom... like an iceberg the weather is the small little top on a significant piece of unseen change. If you are talking about a small weather change you are talking about a huge difference on a global scale.

Thankfully this debate is 15 people saying its a problem and 1 or 2 stirring the pot. I hope the 15 of us make some good choices and teach our kids how to live in the future and for the future.

Here's the 60 sec answer.



Global warming is a natural effect that has occured throughout the history of earth without global warming we would be in an ice age.



Human activities have effected the rate of change between the cycles between an ice age and a hot house period. This can be readily ocserved by looking at he isotopic composition of gases collected in ice cores. There is really no demying this fact. Unless you're a complete idiot.



Oour current lifestyle situation does not allow for an immediate reverse to this effect so we are stuck with the situation we have.



Oceans and forests will continue to absorb excess CO2 from the atmosphere (do not forget there are plenty or other pollutants in the air but global warming gets the worst rap by politicians and media). We have obviously seen the degradation of coral reefs, glaciers, and other ice masses because of this. Please don't make me do the calculation again, it's painful.



At this point I don't think we can do anything to significantly change the outcome of these effects, in many respects we are reeping what our grandparnets soe when they didn't know any better. So we're to far down the road. Who want's to start walking ten miles to the mall, without milk or ice cream when you get there, then there's no hamburger or fries when you get home, let alone your diet coke.



It is scientifically obivious that humans are effecting the atmosphere and oceans space that we live in. in many ways in really shouldn't be a surprise. If you shit in the same 20000 L pool for years and years eventually you'll see an effect.



The main problem is how do we make sure that our children aren't left with a planet full of scavengers like crows, roaches, catfish, and rodents. This is what will happen if we don't actively address alternatives.



Okl Now I need another drink! LOL

There are some excellent points made. I'd like to reiterate that I believe humans are having a definate effect on the atmosphere, but I believe that "in the long run" the Earth will be fine. This is where my arguement differs from most.
Humans have survived an Ice Age already, and they did that in animal skins.
Are we changing the environment? Absolutely. Is it because we drive SUV's? Yes, and no.
Ugh. I just realised that this is probably going to be a longer explanation than I've really got time to get into, so if I drop it off at some point, I'll pick it up later.
So, first off, we started effecting the atmosphere early in our history when we started clearing land and domesticating animals.
No? We didn't?
Well, scientists agree that the ozone hole of New Zealand was caused by sheep. So, domestication of animals was the first step in effecting the atmosphere.
Yeah, but that wasn't such a big deal.
Well, let's skip ahead to the clear cutting of forests in the middle ages in Europe, especially England. That effected the environment.
Sure, Chris, but not like the clear cutting of forests for the last 50 years. OK, but it was the start, and it has effected the environment.

Skip waaaaay ahead to the industrial revolution. This is where "today" realy starts. That was well over 100 years ago. That made it possible for us to be having this discussion on our computers today.

"Well, that doesn't mean that we have to be this way"!

Well, unfortunately, for the time being, it does. And the damage is done!
However, there is an unknown.
Nobody knows what will actually happen because it's nearly impossible to forcast weather or anything related to global warming with computer models because it is so damn complex our current computers can't do the math accurately enough.

This is not governments speaking.

Go out and find the RAW DATA.

You can find it in the people that actually say "Global Warming is bad and we need to change it today!".
You can find it in NASA pages and OSHA (the water people not the work people, I may have the initials wrong, it's late).

I've been reading more and more into this on the most scientific pages I could find that were pure research and not "agenda driven".

Basically, we don't know what will happen. Like I said in my first post, we know how the Earth regulates tempurature. But some forcasts say that the cooling will be so severe that a new "mini ice age" will occur, while other scientific models say "everything will heat up and massive deserts will form".

But the overall knowledge is:
The Earth regulates it's tempurature.

Will this effect humans to the point that it will be chaos?

Nobody really knows. It will definately effect us.
Overall the Earth will be fine.

I do think it's better to try to live our lives cleaner, but I also believe that whatever we do today is too little too late. The Earth will regulate itself and I will either live in a temperate climate in Dallas, or a desert in Dallas.

thanks to a small amount of doubt ,it has bought our government more time to commit on putting a cap on co2 along with china and india.funny how we used to set examples for the world .

those of you that want to sit back and make yourself feel better by saying its a natural process ,go ahead . theres no doubt in my mind that there is a natural process of warming but humans have hit the ffwd X10 button on this process due to irresponsibility.

economic growth.

We are on the same page Bargod. My point in this post was to get people to understand that there are differing viewpoints on this subject and outlawing the combustion engine (Gore's Idea), or other drastic changes should be deeply considered and not a knee jerk reaction.

Yes the data suggests the globe is warming right now. The globe is always warming and cooling. I am not ignorant enough to assume that mankind has no impact on the globe's weather and atmosphere. All we have is circumstatial evidence that mankind MAY be causing some global warming. "Greenhouse gasses should do this and that". But in reality we don't know why the earth keeps changing temperature. Therefore, how can we know excatly what is happening know.

Carbon dioxide is at all time highs in our atmoshere. Yes, most likely put there by us. However, this is not a deadly gas. It is actually the life blood of our plants!!! They thrive on this!!

I am an environmentalist because it is my Christian duty to do so. I fully support measured restrictions on pollution, recycling, etc.

But I also realize that UNDEAD'S evil "economy" can also save millions of lives around the planet by providing people with jobs to care for their families and well as allowing impoverished nations to develop engergy stations to provide life supporting techonlogy like agriculture, heat, and water.
I've seen families living in dirt caves in China. And the caves are nicer than many of the "homes". And that is in China, a world power!

It's funny but those of us that want to understand all the different opinions and arguements from all sides are labeled, "idiots", "wacko's", "nut cases", on and on and on.

Either I believe man is directly causing global warming or I am evil spawn and should be whipped and thrown in a dungeon. Sounds like Islamic Fundementalist would do well in this subject.

I think you mean NOAA (National Ocean and Atmospheric Administration)



www.noaa.gov







You're right, it is a natural process that we have accelerated. With out our economy most of us wouldn't be here. Could we do some things differently and be more responsible, of course, I think that is what most realists are encouraging. Does it make sense to ban combustion engines? No way. Should we be developing new more responsible technology? We sure should. But of course this would lead to a whole new business sector so we'll always have that.

i have always believed there is a balance in this world and we are abusing every resource.all i wanted to see this week was our government to sign on with the rest of the world to TRY and put a cap co2.seems like the next administration wether dem or rep is going to have their work cut out for them.

I did a paper on this in college

The details of my research are foggy to me now, but I seem to remember a few things.

1. We couldn't accurately track global temeratures until the 1970's when we got satellites.
2. Accuweather only measures temperatures around populated areas. Cities give off heat.
3. Global warming occurs naturally.
4. Most greenhouse gases are not caused by people. Water Vapor causes a lot of the greenhouse effect.
5. Ocean currents caused the last global warming. Pleistocene period? (spelling?)

I'm sure we are not helping matters.

Let it get warmer. I'll just turn up the AC in my V-8 gas guzzler on my way to work (at an oil company).

He will. I've met him. He wouldn't lie about that.

I laughed, this is one of the funnier comments I've seen in a while. So thank you Blk for making me laugh during this slow night.

My big objection to man made Global Warming is the fact that the Democrats have found an issue that is very subjective that they can use for political gain. That alone makes me more suspicioius than anything.

"There are some excellent points made. I'd like to reiterate that I believe humans are having a definate effect on the atmosphere, but I believe that "in the long run" the Earth will be fine. This is where my arguement differs from most."
Bargod
********************************************************************************
***
The earth will be fine. We do not have the power to destroy the planet. What we can do is kill every living thing on it. The earth will be here for billions of years, the question is, will the human race go along for the ride?
We are turning the planet into an uninhabitable, for humans, cesspool. Humans have an uncanny ability to stick their heads in the sand and pretend that things are fine even when the mounting evidence suggests otherwise.. Just yesterday the local news was reporting a beach closing due to fecal coliform in the water. That's poop to you and me. They reported that it was "part of a natural and cycle and would soon clear up."
There is nothing natural about pumping untreated sewage into the water where people swim daily. But we are expected to just take it in stride and live with it.
People will ignore the filth and the rising water until they have to swim across the room to change the channell.

Waterworld was cool.

Exactly. Animals go extcint all the time. The Earth will go on and there will be life. It will be different than we know it, but there will be life.

However, I personally still believe that there will not be a catostrophic disaster because of global warming because the earth regulates it's temperature. Will there be changes? Sure. Man lived through an ice age with animal skins. I'm sure we'll be OK what with our modern heaters and what not.

Also, I never said we shouldn't change. I recycle, and although I own an SUV, my wife and I use our fuel efficient car for driving back and forth to work. I also recycle almost all of my trash, as well as composting whatever I can.

Oh, and you know how they get rid of feces out of the waste water in California? Well, one of the stages is passing it through pools filled with carp and tilapia. These fish eat the crap out of the water. Know what they do with the tilapia when they are fully grown? They sell them to restaurants where you eat them.
LOL!

omg. mob finally recruits a few liberal members?

WWRDS (what would real deal say)

joke of course.

i see you have a cod4 server.