Did I miss your conclusion as to what needs to be done to stop it?

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

"Did I miss your conclusion as to what needs to be done to stop it?"

what we tend to do around here is figure out what our posses think about an issue, and then run around and dig up evidence to support our predetermined views. in an attempt to break from that routine i attempted to ferret out and elicited help from those whose task it is to generate the science.

i thought that was enough to bite off. if you ask the scientists themselves, "what do we do?" they're going to *rightly* beg off in large measure. that's a public policy discussion, and while scientists get a seat at that table, it's a large table. do we nuke other countries that aren't complying with our environmental protocols? or just drop large conventional bombs on them? or blockade their ports? do we shoot our own domestic polluters? jail them for 10 years? ignore them? will raising CAFE standards by 5mi/gal per year be possible? good for us? bad for us?

that's another discussion, which i'd love to have, but it's outside the circumscription of the exercise in which i sought to engage us.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

I have been deceived!

if you ask the scientists themselves, "what do we do?" they're going to *rightly* beg off in large measure. that's a public policy discussion

No, they don't rightly beg off, and no, it's not a public policy matter.

I stipulate that global warming is happening, and is significantly man-made.

The next logical question is, what needs to be done to stop it? "We need to eliminate 70% of current global greenhouse gas emissions within 20 years, or we'll reach tipping point," for example.

After that, the public policy discussion comes into play.

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

"We need to eliminate 70% of current global greenhouse gas emissions within 20 years, or we'll reach tipping point," for example.

yes, you're right. i guess i just thought we'd tackle this one chapter at a time, so not to diffuse the impact of each constituent of this issue. if we can keep our eyes on the ball long enough to reach a scientific consensus on the cause and effect of man-made global warming, then perhaps we can pull in one direction as to the cure.

i'd like to go further on this, as you suggest. but have we reached a consensus yet as to the cause and effect? do we need to go back and look at that, or can we stipulate to the scientific consensus?

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

I confess, I didn't read the entire 800 page report. But what I did read was compelling enough that I will stipulate.

---

Swimming Workout of the Day:

Favourite Swim Sets:

2020 National Masters Champion - M50-54 - 50m Butterfly

if we can keep our eyes on the ball long enough to reach a scientific consensus on the cause and effect of man-made global warming

You guys have said (over and over and over and over) that we have reached a scientific consensus. Let's move on to determine what needs to be done to effect a repair. Or at least, the scientists should have by now, right?

but have we reached a consensus yet as to the cause and effect? do we need to go back and look at that, or can we stipulate to the scientific consensus?

Let's stipulate. Those few who won't never will, and at this point, who cares? I want to hear what the scientists say needs to happen.

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

Good article and a good exercise in intellectual honesty. Thanks for this.



/r

---

Steve

[reply]Did I miss your conclusion as to what needs to be done to stop it?[/reply]

it's neither simple nor easy, just like getting out of Iraq.. the first step is admitting there is a problem, which is what we're working on now.

Once the heads are out of the sand,
http://www.stabilisation2005.com/Steering_Commitee_Report.pdf
has a review of the possibilities.
Go and see Al Gore's movie if reading that hurts your head. As Andrew Tobias says, "if they made a movie about your home, would you go and see it ? "

The sceptics were right about one thing - the simulation models were wrong. Unfortunately the models were wrong only in being too conservative - the Greenland icesheets are melting much faster than predicted..
http://www.latimes.com/news/science/la-sci-greenland25jun25,0,1900887,full.story

as for the conflation of advocacy with science, aka Lysenkoism, it's mostly a Repugnican/Bush thing - see the UCS report mentioned here,
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/12.06/view.html?pg=4?tw=wn_tophead_

---

"It is a good feeling for old men who have begun to fear failure, any sort of failure, to set a schedule for exercise and stick to it. If an aging man can run a distance of three miles, for instance, he knows that whatever his other failures may be, he is not completely wasted away." Romain Gary, SI interview

"it's neither simple nor easy, just like getting out of Iraq.. the first step is admitting there is a problem, which is what we're working on now."

Well, other nations are ahead of that "step" for more than a decade.

Why is it that the US always have to ignore lessons learned/knowledge earned in other places on this planet?

Because they are not applicable to the american society or culture,?

What makes this counrty/culture so different or unique when dealing with global problems?

Because they are to proud to accept that other nations have solutions too?

I don't see any (and I have spent plenty of time on either side of the pond to make that statement).

I know you are proud of your country (and rightfully so), but I very often see foolish pride get into your way on so many levels....

---

adrialin

(BOMK, racing drug and supplement free since 1985)

"I very often see foolish pride get into your way on so many levels..."

you need to understand that we lead the world in all technologies, and so we aren't polluting like other countries are. we burn our hydrocarbons clean, unlike asia, and our big cities lead the world in clean air.

oh, wait. i forgot. we're by far the world's largest emitter of greenhouse gases, based on any metric you choose (per capita, per GDP, overall). oh well, let's change the subject!

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

Excellent article - thanks for the links and the analysis. I hate that I've become so cynical, but facts keep reinforcing such an attitude.

Nicely done, Dan. I've printed out the article for a few of my friends.

One of the things I think is missing in this discussion is the extent to which auto/truck/bus exhaust fumes impact BREATHING. Just in case you may have missed it, COPD is the fastest growing disease in the world. A large contribution to the growth is being made by our emissions. (Cigarette smoking and second hand smoke make huge contributions, yet in Virginia you can still smoke in most restaurants.)

For triathletes, clean air should be a priority.

-Robert

---

"How wonderful it is that nobody need wait a single moment before starting to improve the world." ~Anne Frank

I think individually and as a group we know what we have to do, but doing it is more than most of us can handle.