Hardware Analysis - Re: Global warming, fact or farce?

Re: Re: Global warming, fact or farce?

Gerritt — 2008-04-16T05:37:58-05:00

Fredric said:

I am very happy to hear that there are sane Americans as well! For a while I was a bit sceptic that such an American existed, sorry.

SANE?!? Did you say SANE!!!? OMFG, what ever gave you that idea? I am a semi-rational mind in a irrational world, at best!
You keep bringing up science, and the scientific method, like a religion. Unlike religion, science talks about probabilities, not absolutes. If any scientist states a %100 certainty, they are as much of a religious nut as any Creationist! For instance, I am %99.9999 certain that I exist as a individual entity, but am only about %80 sure that my perceptions about myself are accurate....more collaborative study needed by outside sources....

Fredric said:

"There is a 90 % probability that humans are causing global warming. Global warming can lead to increases in sea level, severe droughts, floods and a scarcity of food and clean water."

Even that statement is unclear. Though you stated a probability, you stated it in a manner that was ambiguous, and still up to misinterpretation. Global warming is a fact; though the present trend is not open ended, but a specific provable variation, which in this case is cyclic; but the scientific method requires that we look at it in a slightly different manner. I would modify the quote to be:
Though global thermal cycles have been shown to exist, it is highly probable; at a 99% degree of certainty; that humans are contributing the the acceleration of the present warming trend. Global climatic changes on the scales being discussed could lead to increases in sea level, severe droughts, floods and a scaricity of food and clean water in different areas. These stresses on the local level could and have led to social, political and physical impacts in the real world. A continued trend in this direction indicates that the impact will be catastrophic to the human race. The question remains where the cycle will peak, and if humans can survive at the peak, and if not, what actions can we take now to either lower the peak to an acceptable parameter, or offset the unacceptable peak to a future date at which time we will have other manners in which to deal with it.

I was going to insert some other quotes of Fredrics here, but after writing the above, I do not think it necessary. The two quotes that I was going to insert here were the original and the editted versions. Green House Gases. Are these bad things? NO! On one hand, they are here because life is here, but (isn't there always a but?), if they get out of balance, then we have a problem. (that's a period). So we have a problem. (that's another one!).
How soon we deal with the problem, and how, is what we need to be discussing. Not who or what caused it.
A lot of folks that are trying to do something about this are the ones building Nuclear Power Plants, but these are bad things. Why? I don't know. When they work properly, and we have many, many of these things working around the world, but if one or two or six screw up, then they're prevented. So lets look at the day to day damage done by properly operated coal fired power plants ( the majority of power production in the world), vs. the daily impact of a Nuclear power plant. Even with the damage caused by TMI and Chernobol, the environmental impact of these types of plants are much less than that of coal or oil fired plants over a period of time.

I could keep going, about thermal, solar or wind energy, but I'm sure that most are happy for me to say....enough for now.

Thoughts? Anyone?

Gerritt

Re: Re: Global warming, fact or farce?

thebell — 2008-04-15T20:56:55-05:00

Gerritt:
I am very happy to hear that there are sane Americans as well! For a while I was a bit sceptic that such an American existed, sorry. For example see this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1KR8SigWQuY . It shows some deep problems that I don't think will be so easy to change as you say they will be. It will take a lot of time and also changes needs to be made to both education systems as well as the culture in itself.

About my exaggerated fact:
it was one single fact among a very large amount of facts, some 50 or 100 or so? I haven't counted them but anyway. I was hoping that Sanders would actually read anything of what I had written but it seems like he hasn't. The article is still displayed on the front page even though it's obviously a document of faith, not facts. So was my exaggeration a bad move? Perhaps. If I was aiming for telling the absolute truth it would've been. But my goal was to state facts to inspire people to read more, and to try to figure out more about how the world works, and also what the scientific method is all about. There will be errors in many reports. It's the readers responsibility to be sceptic and try to find evidence for the arguments. And the author is doing the right thing only if he/she corrects the mistakes and changes his/her world view after discovering that he/she was wrong.

That no one has spotted my exaggerated fact also tells me that no one really cares much about the matter anyway. They believe what the want and don't care about what the research behind that "fact" says. It also tells me why the other side can get away with anything.

The way I see it we have two sides in an information war.

The scientific side HAS to play by the rules you say...
The other side can say whatever they want to???
Most people hear what they want to hear in my experience.

The side who doesn't care about facts, the ones who are saying that there is absolutely no problems associated with burning fossil fuels, are obviously lying in extreme amounts, but who cares? It sounds good, people believe in it. They don't "need" to check the facts.

Compare these two statements:

"There's no problem. Just go about your daily life. Humans aren't doing it, so you have no responsibility. The one's who tell you something else is lying. It's not you who are responsible, it's the sun! It's the volcanoes! It's the sea! Carbon dioxide is great, plants love it!"

To this:

"There is a 90 % probability that humans are causing global warming. Global warming can lead to increases in sea level, severe droughts, floods and a scarcity of food and clean water."

One side doesn't require you to do anything, the enemy is external and cannot be controlled. The other is just offering probabilities. They don't even know for sure! They can obviously not be relied on.

Do you see the problem when science has to compete with the entirely fictional arguments of "the other side"? That doesn't mean I think the scientific side should lie. Obviously as you say that would make the two sides equally big liers and losers. But how do one go about inspiring people to try to learn as much as possible and to check the facts for themselves? To be sceptic of information offered by both sides and really try to figure out what is going on instead of just taking the easy way out? I don't have the answer.

I still think it was a rather interesting experiment. There is to my knowledge as I have said only one exaggerated fact in my first post. The rest is based on recent and sound science. Quite disturbing arguments in my opinion.

Finally I will now correct my exaggerated fact:

"Without green house gasses our planet would have a mean temperature about 200 degrees C colder than it is today. That is a fact. Look up green house effect on wikipedia for starters and verify your sources. Look it up for yourself."

Should read:

"Without green house gasses our planet would have a mean temperature about 33 degrees C colder than it is today..."

I even specifically wrote you should check the source.

Re: Re: Global warming, fact or farce?

Gerritt — 2008-04-15T08:28:11-05:00

Point taken Dark.

Re: Re: Global warming, fact or farce?

dark41 — 2008-04-15T07:24:56-05:00

I always believed that vanity was the ugliest human trait, and that some day it'll lead to our end.

And yea, isn't it strange that the Chinese government allows their people to reproduce like rabbits, yet treats them all like mushrooms?

Re: Re: Global warming, fact or farce?

Gerritt — 2008-04-14T22:28:46-05:00

Fredric,
I, like you, believe that the USA is in a downslide, and that most folks here are not aware of it.
(Start of Rant)
Unlike you, I believe that if we (the USA citizens) are properly informed (usually by a good smack of a 2x4 upside our extremely dense skulls), that WE will raise out of the consumeristic coma that we've been put into by governmental and commercial influences, to overcome whatever challenge there is for us to achieve. This will not be changed by just who is in office, or thier party affiliation, but by seeing that these affiliations have little impact on our lives, and that we need to think differently about ourselves as a whole.
Even today, it is by the efforts of USA companies, and thier offerings, that permit other countries to adopt more reasonable policies, but at the same time seem to preclude thier implementation here at "home". For instance, windmills are not ugly, especially as seen from 1 or 2 miles, but our wonderful "elite" just don't give a.....well you know.

I am a proud citizen of the USA. There are times that I'm less proud of my country, thus my postings and talking about what makes me less proud. I and others are willing, or starting to be willing, to be held accountable for our global impact.

If the structure that we have is lying or even as you've said: "No my fact was just exaggerated, not false. "The other side", those who say that global warming is a scam, lie in a different manner." how does that make it better for the general populace to see a difference between the sides. It is in our exaggerated sense of self-worth, based upon the exaggerated statistics fed to us that we remain resistant to the necessary changes in our lives. Honestly, these changes, if extrapolated over a period of 20 years or more, are very minimal indeed. Thus my questioning of your exaggeration.

Additionally, the question of 6+ Billion humans, vs. 2 Billion humans. I maintain that our support of the triple population is making it more difficult, if not impossible for us to overcome our present situation. This is just my take on it given my background and the explosive population growth over the last 50 years. There are studies that indicate that the human population DECREASE due to disease in the 15, 16 and early 17 hundreds actually reversed some earlier warming trends. My family's giving to charities that extend life expectancy in the 3rd world, may actually be contributing to the warming factor, but I am not without some sense of compassion, so still give, in hopes that some of the children in the 3rd world economies will grow to be capable of changing them into 2nd or 1st world over the long term, and thus allow for the 6 Billion + population stresses that we have world wide.

I'm not sure if it was you or someone else that brought up Methane as a "greenhouse" gas. The largest impact by gas between carbon-dioxide and methane by humans is via methane. This is caused by the reliance of agricultural societies on using paddies, or flooded beds for the purpose of growing rice. The use of large rangelands for cattle is a distant 2nd if not 3rd. What is pertinent to the conversation is that the USA has one of the lowest per capita densities per square mile of any of the 1st world populations/economies, thus allowing less impactful agricultural utilization, while at the same time being agriculturally less efficient utilization to be of less impact per capita. At the same time our impact on the power usage is much, much higher.

If we were to extrapolate a USA population growth, and the food required to feed that growth from the Indian or Chinese growth figures over the next 100 years, it would not matter how energy efficient the USA became, we'd all still loose. Controlled population growth, as well as power consumtion, need to be included in any reasonable, sustainable environment for the human race.
(End of Rant)

Gerritt

Re: Re: Global warming, fact or farce?

dark41 — 2008-04-12T09:20:12-05:00

Gerritt,
I agree, location is everything for a decent education. My kids and I all went to smaller primary and high schools in WI. I'm pretty happy with the smaller class sizes (20-30 kids per class) and level of teachers. It's not big money, so the teachers that are there really care about their students and take pride in them. My daugthers will both be going to UW. The oldest will start at UW Stout in September, and then transfer after 2 years to UW Madison to get more specialized courses for weather/weather control. My 2nd oldest will do 4 yrs at UW Madison. It's not ivy league, but I think it has a very good reputation. Medicine is probably UW's strong point, but no kids show an interest in that field. But yea, if they were interested in IT I'd have to look at sending them internationally. Lucky for my wallet they're not.

Re: Re: Global warming, fact or farce?

thebell — 2008-04-12T09:08:20-05:00

dark41
Seems like the race has already begun then. Australian people have taken huge steps I agree, Kevin Rudd signing the Kyoto protocol was really nice.

You seem to agree that when the US "fall", they will fall hard. I think the US gov has protected the American people from the truth for far too long, even using the army to do so, and that when that nation has to correct it's way of thinking it will be a really tough task. Perhaps they weren't the first, and they might not fall the hardest as you say. But we will probably see enormous amounts of American outcry in media.

Re: Re: Global warming, fact or farce?

Gerritt — 2008-04-12T01:30:50-05:00

Dark,

Don't get me wrong, I am working, just all my clients are overseas. The Caribbean, S. and C. America primarily, though I did have a short contract in England a while ago. But due to my being self employed, I don't have the option of a 401k or any other type of retirement package. My wife has been at her present job as a temporary employee for about 15 years now, and they finally made her a permanent employee last year, so we could finally get some sort of reasonablly priced (reletively speaking) health insurance, and she is now taking part in their retirement package. The bad news is that they are closing the office in about 2 years as JAXA (the Japanese Space Agency) has gotten fed up with NASA and the US government, so will be partnering closer with the ESA (European Space Agency) from then on.

Education like real estate is totally dependent on three things....location, location, location.
The schools here can be pretty hit or miss, depending on how affluent your neighborhood is. One of the reasons I'm mortgaged up to my eyeballs is that I can send my two girls to some of the highest rated schools in Florida. Florida education overall isn't much to be proud of, but this school is very progressive....my fifth grader brought home a math/science question about mass, joules and ergs...I had to go look it up! Unfortunately due to GWB, and his brother Jeb, the poorest schools don't get any additional moneys or help, but get moneys taken away from them, so they can't afford the good teachers, and most move into more affluent schools. Am I taking advantage of this, yes, but for those that can't afford it, it totally sucks.
China and India are cranking out more technology graduates than the US. The US cranks out MBAs and Lawyers, and people wonder why nothing gets done here anymore.

Gerritt

Re: Re: Global warming, fact or farce?

dark41 — 2008-04-11T18:14:15-05:00

Gerritt said:

I have not been able to get a job in the USA in the last 5 or 6 years.
Niether I or my spouse will ever be able to have the capability to retire at any reasonable age.
Gerrittt

I'm really sorry to hear that Gerritt.

Here we have all kinds of IT jobs available, but Visa issues are preventing qualified people from entering the country. One major thing I like about Australia is they watch very closely who enters the country. There's also a big demand for skilled tradesmen (plumbers, carpenters, etc.). All of these jobs pay pretty well.

I keep telling my kids in the USA to keep an open mind about moving here some day as they can make a good living here with a decent education. And regardless of what anyone else thinks, I still believe the USA offers a pretty good education.

Re: Re: Global warming, fact or farce?

dark41 — 2008-04-11T18:01:33-05:00

Well Fredric, I quoted you because I didn't want a misunderstanding.

Fredric Georgsson said:

The economy to be worst hit, and first, by the increasing costs of resources, will be the US. No doubt about it.

There are already many countries whose economies have been hit by the increasing costs of resources, so the USA cannot be first. Sweden is apparently one of them. Australia is another, and I'm waiting for the Brits to chime in as they've been feeling it for awhile now too.

And as I stated earlier, I doubt the USA will get it the worst because they will keep flooding their economy with USD which has no basis for value. They've done this since 1972 and continue to do so every time there's a hint of a recession. Maybe someday their government will learn that you can't change the factors that cause a recession by flooding the economy with money that has no basis, but obviously they haven't learned yet. But gas prices there are still ridiculously low compared to everywhere else in the world who doesn't produce their own. I suspect that when they fall, they will fall hard. I'm quite sure their news will report it as the worst thing to ever happen to any country in history, but I doubt many Americans will have to live as poorly as some 3rd world countries are already living. I still think 3rd world countries and some others will get it much worse later too.

Australia may be the 1st country to offer an affordable electric car to the public. Australia has also been using wind mills for electricity in areas where the land is already devalued, and we have the entire outback to fill with wind mills if need be. No one can live there as drinking water is not available.

I'd be the first to point out that Australia is not perfect, but at least they've taken steps in the right direction and will be more proactive that way now that the Howard (Bush ass-kissin') government is gone. As far as the economy goes, it's a very good time to be in Oz. Not that Oz hasn't felt the repercussions from lack of resources, but the people and government have adapted along the way.

Re: Re: Global warming, fact or farce?

thebell — 2008-04-11T11:15:50-05:00

Gerritt:
No my fact was just exaggerated, not false. "The other side", those who say that global warming is a scam, lie in a different manner.

For example they say that the oceans release more carbon dioxide per year than humans do. That is in itself actually true. But what they fail to mention is that oceans also absorb more than they release, so they have a net absorbing effect of about 30 % of our carbon dioxide emissions. That is, the oceans have so far been very very helpful in protecting us from our ignorant fossil fuel burning. But in the long wrong the oceans are becoming increasingly acidic due to the carbon dioxide absorption. Now that is a terrible lie to me to fail to mention this.

Exaggerating a number to make someone learn to check their sources is a different story I think. Also I will correct my statement over time.

Yes if you're willing to kill 4 billion people to be able to live at the current level of materialistic wealth, I guess you're right. Go ahead. Just kill them for your SUV. I'm messing with you. Sorry.

But there is no law written in stone that says that humans are happy when they consume enormous amounts of products. Actually I've seen plenty of evidence of the opposite. See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VO6XEQIsCoM for example. I think it is incorrect to assume that we must continue on the path of enormous consumption to be happy, thus 4 billion people has to die.

Actually I believe that the current level of consumption, and it's steady increase, is designed to keep us in the dark. When we consume, we don't think, argue, study etc. We're getting dumber to become better consumers. When we have to consume less we will find that we have more time to think about other aspects of life. "Why am I here" and so forth. This might seem controversial, I hope it is.

"Telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.� - G.Orwell

Re: Re: Global warming, fact or farce?

thebell — 2008-04-11T10:56:26-05:00

dark41:
I'm not from the US if you thought so? I'm from Sweden.

I think they will be worst hit because:
* Americans are used to extreme consumption, a "liberty"/"right".
* Americans are used to cheap gas prices, even tough their national reserves ran out in the 1970's.
* Americans in general seem to have a low level of education and too much faith in gods.

The cost of the Iraq war now exceeds $500 billion. That is roughly 3,5 % of the GDP. I guess you could say that Americans have had to sacrifice 3,5 % of their wage this year, but of course that would be too simple of a picture. Also they make absolutely horrifying economic decisions. Some time in august 2007 during two days the amount of dollars in the system was increased by 10 - 15 %. That will cause inflation. Usually if I understand this correctly, that is countered by an increase of interest, but the FED lowered the interest rates instead. Many times. I'm pretty sure the dollar will continue to decrease in value because of this. To lend money, from other countries, and from the future generations, can cause a dramatic decrease in consumption and perhaps even an economic depression. All done to be able to continue to consume in unsustainable amounts right now, for a little longer. What really upsets me is how private investors get filthy rich in the process. Blackwater, Haliburton etc.

Gas prices in Sweden can be adjusted somewhat, we're currently paying $ 2,20 per litre. We've had this prices for many years. Half of it is taxes. I'm confident this has put a great force behind innovation. Much of our goods is transported by railway, and the gov is looking into extending the railway network to further simplify goods being transported by railway. Unfortunately much of our former municipal transports are now in the private sector and the prices have gone up considerably. Definitely a big problem I don't know how to solve.

Our gov is running a test on the island of Gotland where all new municipal cars are electric vehicles, consuming locally produced wind power. I hope this test fares well and that other counties here in Sweden will take a similar approach.

I just can't see how the Americans would be willing to give up their SUV:s and muscle cars, how they would change their consumption patterns to the degree that Swedes are. Granted, there's a whole lot of blind stubborn people here as well, pretty much a whole generation says: "It's too late, let's just party like hell until the planet implodes." But they're a minority.

Perhaps I don't have enough evidence to be able to say that the US will be the first to fall, and the hardest. But it seems logical when looking at it's current economic strategies.

Re: Re: Global warming, fact or farce?

Gerritt — 2008-04-11T09:07:36-05:00

Dark,
Yes we have "the USA" been taking more and more of the worlds resorces.
I have not been able to get a job in the USA in the last 5 or 6 years.
Niether I or my spouse will ever be able to have the capability to retire at any reasonable age. You're right. I hate it, but I'm the only one that seems to see it.

Gerrittt

Re: Re: Global warming, fact or farce?

dark41 — 2008-04-11T06:03:20-05:00

Fredric Georgsson said:

The economy to be worst hit, and first, by the increasing costs of resources, will be the US. No doubt about it.

Now you've gotten my attention!

I'd like to know what you base that on. The USA economy may see the biggest difference since they've been spared the adjustment all along, but they'll be far from the 1st to see it. Face it, you're spoiled.

Do you have any idea what other countries have been paying for gasoline for years? AU has been over $1.15/liter since I've been here (just over 5 years). I have no idea how long it was that way before I got here, but i didn't hear anyone complaining about it like it was a new situation. Currently we're paying $1.50+/liter. If you convert that to USD/gallon, we were paying roughly $4/gallon for years, and are now at $6/gallon. Still, I don't hear many Ozzies complaining. Americans are still nowhere near what we've been paying, let alone what we are paying. I think the USA will be among the last to experience the repercussions as they just keep pumping their economy with worthless money (thank Nixon for taking you off the gold standard to implement a quick fix which has amplified the inflation problem over the years). When the levy breaks, you'll have no place to go. Some in the world would call that justice.

This is why the rest of the world is seriously considering changing over to the euro, which may be the best thing to happen to the global economy but will wreak havoc on the USA's and China's economies.

The difference is that the AU economy has gotten stronger as the USA economy has weakened. Why? I'm no expert, but I think the main reason is that the AU government has been passing on the rewards of a strong economy to their people. The USA government just sees a strong economy as a chance for legislators to spend more money, rather than passing it on to the people.

Currently AU minimum wage is $15.50/hr. That's almost as much as I made as a production supervisor in the USA for 17 years ($35-42k/yr). I don't remember ever getting much of a raise there other than 2-4% cost of living annually. My Ozzie wife just got a 15% bonus at her job on top of her annual salary increase. She's making more $ as a help desk/IT assistant in AU than I ever did as a plant manager in the USA. Our computer business is icing on the cake. Most people in the USA are struggling to build a retirement nest egg. I was amazed at how many Australians have enough to survive comfortably at retirement by the time they're 40.

And before someone says the USD goes further than the AUD, that's no longer true for most things. In '02 the AUD was 68% of the USD. It's now almost 1:1. Cars still cost a bit more here than they do in the USA, but housing has evened out with USA cities for the most part, and we pay roughly the same for groceries that you do.

People in many countries feel the USA has been the biggest culprit for pollution and waste, and gotten off the easiest for way too long. You may not hear that on your local news as it's all filtered, but this kind of talk is common in world news. I find it hard to argue that point after seeing how the other half lives. Obviously China has been a bigger contributor to environmental problems, but their people haven't lived as luxuriously as Americans either.

I'm from a small town of 2500 in WI, Wisconsin Dells. I also lived in NM, CA, and MD for a few years each. I lived in the USA for 40+ years. I still like to go back and visit, and WI will always be home. I believe the USA has dug themselves into a hole with pollution and the economy. I expect it'll get much worse before it gets better. What comes around, goes around. Here's hoping that Americans can overcome as well as other countries already have.

But don't kid yourselves that your the 1st country to experience the repercussions of the weakened USA economy. Other countries have already been paying for your mistakes, and some have even prospered along the way. Time for the USA to catch up a bit to the rest of the world and learn to adapt. Your fall may be farther, but that's only because you've been spared the adjustment all along.

Re: Re: Global warming, fact or farce?

Gerritt — 2008-04-11T02:47:01-05:00

Fredric,
My appologies for seeming to attack you, it was not my intention, it's just my style of thinking/writing. You do seem to agree that you mistated a fact in order to accomplish a statement in point, but isn't this what "the other side" is continually doing in order to undermine the actual supportive science of the global climatic trends?

I just watched a program about the construction of one of the most consumer centric products built, the Queen Mary II, in which it was stated in passing that the average wave sizes in the Atlantic have increased by as much as 40% over the last 50 years or so, thus requiring a more robust hull. So business can accept science, when it lowers their operational exposure to liability. The QMII being the single largest and most expensive passenger liner built at the time of the programs production.

My, and I repeat, MY, 2 Billion mark as being sustainable is, while perhaps low, indicates a level of human population that permits a sustained increase in quality of life for the entire population through better utilization of resources, while at the present population levels, to exclude the expected growth, everyone CAN survive, but at a lower quality of life than is present, especially in the areas of smallest population growth for the betterment of all. I don't expect that the most affluent, and smallest growth areas, will be willing to continually support those areas of highest population growth at their own cost in quality of life is all.
Just my take on the human condition. You've had the opportunity to live in an enlightened area/country that permits the utilization of wind or solar resorces, where I live in an environment that the establishment of a wind farm 2+ miles from shore are shot down because someone might see them, and thus reduce property values. Bah...Mayhap we can start trimming there.

And you think you're frustrated......

Gerritt