Global Warming Debate

[PBzeer]

Food has to be grown. To do this requires it be planted. To do this requires machinery. To use machinery takes fuel. To get fuel, it has to be found, drilled and refined, then shipped (which at most points, requires fuel.).

To be harvested, we again need machinery, which entails the above steps. After harvest, it then needs to be shipped, in a timely manner, and then placed for sale within a building that requires power. Then, people use fuel, to go to the store to buy the food and bring it home to houses that require power.

At this point in time, and at no discernible point of the future, is there the means to replace the fuel, necessary for you to have food. I guess that wouldn't be a disruption for you.

[souljour2000]

Amazing that we are in a sailing forum and it must be described how food has been delivered from farms and ports near farms by sailing craft for thousands of years to other ports near and far without the internal cumbustion engine...

What are the hidden costs of technology is the question..if we destroy our own world then the technology is evil and must be discarded. A sufficient and self-preserving technology must be found or returned to..or we are doomed. We can find these technologies that are practical and don't invite our doom...fossil fuels are finite and therefore contain seeds of our doom unless we act....undertstand now?

[souljour2000]

What you are now witnessing with the Obama campaign is the biggest grass roots American political movement since the Civil Rights era...this is the beginning of a century that will determine the fate of the world and humans in a way we have not seen since WWII.almost 65 years ago.
Like WWII it will require a global effort to ensure the planet remains livable, and that we and under-developed countries find ways to solve critical problems so they don't become our problem too..(9-11-2001)....and American technology must lead the way for the new global energy and resource paradigm

[Sapperwhite]

Originally Posted by souljour2000

We can find these technologies that are practical and don't invite our doom...fossil fuels are finite and therefore contain seeds of our doom unless we act....undertstand now?

How many petroleum products do you think go into the making of your boat? You contribute too. Unless you live in a cave and wear a deerskin loin cloth, you contribute. Even then, the open fire you make to cook your hunt contributes.

You too are sowing the "seeds of doom" friend

[danjarch]

Souljour, My anology with the books was an example of what is being proposed for the industrial world. They want to mandate building codes, mileage standards, fuel use. Already, our use of grain for ethanol has been linked to food riots in Egypt and Cambodia. It has caused thousands of people to go hungry. Families in Haiti who've dropped down to two meals a day and have given up what little meat they were eating.

The methods being suggested to combat global warming are going to drive businesses into bankruptcy and leave millions unemployed. And if you look into the number of scientists who think its this big threat, against the number who think it's not that threatening, still yet the number that have found more evidence that global warming is part of a cycle and that nothing we do is going to stop it, you'll find it's not so cut and dry. In fact there are far more questions then answers at this point.

You don't have to just take my word for the doom and gloom sugestions that carbon credits or major building code changes will have a bad effect. We can look at other "Big Scares". There was the listeria/salmonela scare. Lucky for us this mostly played out in Europe but thousands of chicken farmers, cheese makers, dairy farmers, egg processers, milk processers, resturants and other businesses were forced out of business by draconian regulations. The kicker is that it was never proved to be a threat from these quaters in the first place and has since been shown to have been more or less new strands that developed and until we developed a natural defense ( which human bodies do on there own) we were getting it through under cooked meats and the other usual places. Most of the regulations are still in effect and costing European businesses' millions a year, though.

Mad cow, same thing. Still hasn't been proven. Drove people out of business. Still costing billions though out the world. If the doom sayers we're even remotely correct then England would have gone through a total economic melt down by now because of the millions exposed to mad cow. Hasn't happened. CJd is still a rare disease that aflicks one in 100,000 or so.

And it goes on. Aspestos, five very different substances of which only one has been proven to cause permenant lung damage. 95% of all aspestos lawsuit for the other four. Cost, trillions and counting. Thousands of businesses' gone. Millions of lost jobs. Still adds thousands to the cost of cars, building, and just about everything manufactured.

Lead in gas, never proven to be danger. MTBE it's replacement, more expensive are a proven Carconigen.

We might want to keep the debate over global warming going untill we really have 80 to 90% of scientist in agreement. Not just 90% of the people who lean to one side of the political spectrum.

[souljour2000]

it's not just a question of energy and where we get it..it's a question of having enough clean food and clean water and clean air...for as many people as possible...because people who little of the above ultimately either die/starve (not good really) or try to steal resources from someone else (also not desirable because both sides experience loss in the struggle)...kinda like what has started alot of wars (wars not good)over the last hundred milleniums...

[danjarch]

until the 1920's Food was delivered by sailing vessels

Until refrigerated cargo vessel, the only foods shipped were dry goods that had long self lives. Fresh meat and Vegtables could only be shipped short distances. even then, the rate of spoilage could often be higher then the rate of deliver goods. Scurvy and other vitamin deficency diseases were a regular ocurance in northern areas.

As to the Obama campain. What your seeing is the largest group of uninformed voters ever in the history of America going to the polls. People who don't really know what life was like before modern times. Simple things like having a tomato on your burger in december, didn't exist. Being able to drink water from the tap, could have killed you.

You might want to read a little about life prior to human figuring out that oil can be used for more then just pouring it on your enemies. As to us destoying the planet, a bit more history on the subject would do you good. Volcanic eruptions that blacken the sky for years, Massive floods that strip everything in there path, forrest fires that burn areas bigger then states. Mother nature isn't the sweety you've been led to believe. We're in more danger from forces beyond our control, asteroids, earthquakes, volcanos, tsunomies, solar forces, antimatter, supernovas, and crap that we don't even know about yet, but can probably kill us all is the conditions are right.

[camaraderie]

Souljour...with respect...this is the GLOBAL WARMING thread...not the clean oceans, save the whales or reduce coal soot thread. Please feel free to start an anti-pollution ideas thread elsewhere and I am sure it will spark a lively discussion.

You said you admired Arnolds efforts in California. Do you know that under current gloabal warming theories (which I do not subscribe to) that if the California plan was implemented over the entire country it would result in less than a .1 degree decrease in warming in the next 100 years? What is required if you believe the theory... is something 10 times more drastic than anything Arnold has done.
There is a graph on this thread showing that somewhere but I'm not gonna look for it now.

[PBzeer]

There doesn't seem to be a catch-phrase, slogan, or bumper sticker that souljour isn't up to date on. Of course, by not actually thinking, it frees up a lot of time to do other things.

[camaraderie]

For what it is worth I dug out my old graph on what effect Californias 26% reduction in emssions law might acheive in terms of Global Warming Temperature reductions. To understand this graph:
1. The graph ASSUMES that the UN Report on warming is TRUE and then compares California's reductions if apllied ONLY to California, Only to the Northeast and finally...if the ENTIRE USA adopted this plan AND achieved the goal of a 26% reduction by 2016.
2. The AB 1493 referred to is Assembly Bill 1493 in support of the Air Resources Board.
3. The RED line is the UN projected increase in temperature over time. The Dark Blue line is ifg JUST California implements the law. The light blue line is if the entire industrial northeast adopted the law and the Purple line is if the whole country adopted the law.
ca.JPG

All the lines are the same. Doesn't it feel good to do something about global warming California??!!