3 ms·

On the other hand, a lot more people die from cold, so if you decrease that, it could be a net win... http://discovermagazine.com/2007/sep/global-warming-the-g

On the other hand, a lot more people die from cold, so if you decrease that, it could be a net win... http://discovermagazine.com/2007/sep/global-warming-the-great-lifesaver http://discovermagazine.com/2007/sep/global-warming-the-grea... Let me be even more sarcastic and snide... maybe people who are afraid of global warming are close minded and afraid of change...

jshen 17y ago
Wanting to avoid death, disease, and destruction is not the same as a general fear of change.
- anon-e-moose 17y ago
  And you could make a similar point about almost any other time someone is said to be afraid of change... that's why I'm making fun of it.
  - jshen 17y ago
    changing jobs or moving to a new city is not remotely the same as the consequences of global warming. Sorry, it just isn't.
- pj 17y ago
  I read the post you are replying to as a jab at those who believe change leads to death and destruction. We could move the cities inland. We could optimize buildings to keep people cooler. We could find more efficient forms of energy to enable more indoor climate control. The current stress right now is to stop climate control. We humans believe we can stop climate control, but what if we can't? What if it actually is due to sun spots and beyond our control? It seems like it would make sense to adapt to the change rather than try to stop the change.
  - jshen 17y ago
    And if it is due primarily to carbon why not stop putting out so much carbon? I can't seem to find it right now, but I've seen a study that showed that the temperature changes we've seen do not coincide with sun activity. We can measure these things. Also, global warming will cause death, disease, and destruction. This is clear from only one of it's effects, sea level rise.
  - jshen 17y ago
    Sorry, had to reply again. "I read the post you are replying to as a jab at those who believe change leads to death and destruction." What I was saying is that global warming will lead to death and destruction. "We could move the cities inland. " I love how people say this like it's no biggie. Let's hire some contractors and bam, city moved. LOL. I'm guessing it's a lot easier to reduce are use of fossil fuels than it is to move a few major cities. what do you think?
    - pj 17y ago
      China moved hundreds of millions of people away from the lake formed behind the three gorges dam. That's ultimately what will happen. Either we'll build levies around the whole continent to protect coastal areas or the people will move. It'll probably be a combination of both.
      - jshen 17y ago
        China doesn't have the same level of infrastructure as we do. Imagine trying to move large chunks of Los Angeles. That's a completely different animal isn't it? Doesn't it seem easier and cheaper to reduce our energy use than to move multiple cities like Los Angeles? I personally think it's a better idea to avoid serious problems than to accept the enormous pain that will come with ideas like "hey, change is normal".
        pj 17y ago
        I don't believe reducing our energy consumption is going to have much effect on global warming. I think the sun is way more powerful an influence on our climate than humans.
        jshen 17y ago
        I don't understand your point of view. The sun certainly can affect climate in large ways, but that does not mean that all climate change is due to the sun or that human activity can't cause climate change. "But even if solar forcing in the past was more important than this estimate suggests, as some scientists think, there is no correlation between solar activity and the strong warming during the past 40 years. Claims that this is the case have not stood up to scrutiny (pdf document). Direct measurements of solar output since 1978 show a steady rise and fall over the 11-year sunspot cycle, but no upwards or downward trend . Similarly, there is no trend in direct measurements of the Sun's ultraviolet output and in cosmic rays. So for the period for which we have direct, reliable records, the Earth has warmed dramatically even though there has been no corresponding rise in any kind of solar activity." source: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11650-climate-myths-global-warming-is-down-to-the-sun-not-humans.html http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11650-climate-myths-gl...

jshen 17y ago

Wanting to avoid death, disease, and destruction is not the same as a general fear of change.

anon-e-moose 17y ago
And you could make a similar point about almost any other time someone is said to be afraid of change... that's why I'm making fun of it.
- jshen 17y ago
  changing jobs or moving to a new city is not remotely the same as the consequences of global warming. Sorry, it just isn't.
pj 17y ago
I read the post you are replying to as a jab at those who believe change leads to death and destruction. We could move the cities inland. We could optimize buildings to keep people cooler. We could find more efficient forms of energy to enable more indoor climate control. The current stress right now is to stop climate control. We humans believe we can stop climate control, but what if we can't? What if it actually is due to sun spots and beyond our control? It seems like it would make sense to adapt to the change rather than try to stop the change.
- jshen 17y ago
  And if it is due primarily to carbon why not stop putting out so much carbon? I can't seem to find it right now, but I've seen a study that showed that the temperature changes we've seen do not coincide with sun activity. We can measure these things. Also, global warming will cause death, disease, and destruction. This is clear from only one of it's effects, sea level rise.
- jshen 17y ago
  Sorry, had to reply again. "I read the post you are replying to as a jab at those who believe change leads to death and destruction." What I was saying is that global warming will lead to death and destruction. "We could move the cities inland. " I love how people say this like it's no biggie. Let's hire some contractors and bam, city moved. LOL. I'm guessing it's a lot easier to reduce are use of fossil fuels than it is to move a few major cities. what do you think?
  - pj 17y ago
    China moved hundreds of millions of people away from the lake formed behind the three gorges dam. That's ultimately what will happen. Either we'll build levies around the whole continent to protect coastal areas or the people will move. It'll probably be a combination of both.
    - jshen 17y ago
      China doesn't have the same level of infrastructure as we do. Imagine trying to move large chunks of Los Angeles. That's a completely different animal isn't it? Doesn't it seem easier and cheaper to reduce our energy use than to move multiple cities like Los Angeles? I personally think it's a better idea to avoid serious problems than to accept the enormous pain that will come with ideas like "hey, change is normal".
      - pj 17y ago
        I don't believe reducing our energy consumption is going to have much effect on global warming. I think the sun is way more powerful an influence on our climate than humans.
        jshen 17y ago
        I don't understand your point of view. The sun certainly can affect climate in large ways, but that does not mean that all climate change is due to the sun or that human activity can't cause climate change. "But even if solar forcing in the past was more important than this estimate suggests, as some scientists think, there is no correlation between solar activity and the strong warming during the past 40 years. Claims that this is the case have not stood up to scrutiny (pdf document). Direct measurements of solar output since 1978 show a steady rise and fall over the 11-year sunspot cycle, but no upwards or downward trend . Similarly, there is no trend in direct measurements of the Sun's ultraviolet output and in cosmic rays. So for the period for which we have direct, reliable records, the Earth has warmed dramatically even though there has been no corresponding rise in any kind of solar activity." source: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11650-climate-myths-global-warming-is-down-to-the-sun-not-humans.html http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11650-climate-myths-gl...