[Texgreen] Irresponsible scientists spread fear
David Pollard
dopollard@yahoo.com
Fri, 1 Sep 2006 10:02:29 -0700 (PDT)
--0-851159453-1157130149=:95011
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Well, paleoclimatologist live in a different world than the rest of us.
This proves it:
"No. It has happened before, he says.
During the final few centuries of the last ice
age, the sea level rose 20 metres in 400 years,
an average of 20 times faster than now. These
were sudden, violent times."
To the rest of the world, A tsunami is sudden and violent.
20m in 400 years, or more accurately a half inch every season makes a snail look like a Grand Prix racer. Especially, if you live somewhere that is more than 20m above sea level.
I *do* agree with what they say about tipping points, it is just that it's FAR too late for us to stop that process. In this Lovelock is right. Kyoto is not about "solving global warming." It's about baking our distant ancestors instead of frying them. The destruction of the glaciers was sealed with the start of the industrial revolution, and that it would happen within several hundred years rather than several thousand when the human population exceeded two billion.
However does the risk of having most of Earth poorly suited towards human life in a couple thousand years make life not worth living now?
The increased risks this will pose will accumulate incrimentally over centuries. It is not rational to respond to this sort of thing with fear. So, to the extent that scientists are prompting people to be fearful for their immediate well being - yes, they are being irresponsible.
However, this does prompt a dilemna in that US leaders will not propose large scale changes unless prompted by one of two things: fear and greed. So until, scientists are willing to lie to acheive policy objectives (which I think you can see some of on *both* sides of this issue.) or until US leaders see embracing the necessary changes as a way of making a quick buck, there will be no significant action. (Greed is what is pulling California ahead of the rest of the country on global warming - state leaders have determined that they have the intellectual capital necessary to put their state at a compeitive advantage over the rest of the country if they enforce modest carbon limits.)
All the Best,
David Pollard
---------------------------------
Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates starting at 1¢/min.
--0-851159453-1157130149=:95011
Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
<div>Well, paleoclimatologist live in a different world than the rest of us. </div> <div> </div> <div>This proves it:</div> <div>"No. It has happened before, he says.<BR>During the final few centuries of the last ice<BR>age, the sea level rose 20 metres in 400 years,<BR>an average of 20 times faster than now. These<BR>were sudden, violent times."</div> <div> </div> <div>To the rest of the world, A tsunami is sudden and violent. </div> <div>20m in 400 years, or more accurately a half inch every season makes a snail look like a Grand Prix racer. Especially, if you live somewhere that is more than 20m above sea level. <BR></div> <div>I *do* agree with what they say about tipping points, it is just that it's FAR too late for us to stop that process. In this Lovelock is right. Kyoto is not about "solving global warming." It's about baking our distant ancestors instead of frying them. The destruction of the glaciers was sealed with the start of the
industrial revolution, and that it would happen within several hundred years rather than several thousand when the human population exceeded two billion.</div> <div> </div> <div>However does the risk of having most of Earth poorly suited towards human life in a couple thousand years make life not worth living now? </div> <div>The increased risks this will pose will accumulate incrimentally over centuries. It is not rational to respond to this sort of thing with fear. So, to the extent that scientists are prompting people to be fearful for their immediate well being - yes, they are being irresponsible. </div> <div> </div> <div>However, this does prompt a dilemna in that US leaders will not propose large scale changes unless prompted by one of two things: fear and greed. So until, scientists are willing to lie to acheive policy objectives (which I think you can see some of on *both* sides of this issue.) or until US leaders see embracing the
necessary changes as a way of making a quick buck, there will be no significant action. (Greed is what is pulling California ahead of the rest of the country on global warming - state leaders have determined that they have the intellectual capital necessary to put their state at a compeitive advantage over the rest of the country if they enforce modest carbon limits.)<BR><BR>All the Best,</div> <div>David Pollard</div><p> 
<hr size=1>Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. <a href="http://us.rd.yahoo.com/mail_us/taglines/postman7/*http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=39666/*http://messenger.yahoo.com"> Great rates starting at 1¢/min.
--0-851159453-1157130149=:95011--