Unbelieveable.
GGG Ping.
Even the worst-case scenarios of the GW alarmists is far better for civilization than global cooling would be.
http://www.nyas.org/ebrief/miniEB.asp?ebriefID=524
http://stephenschneider.stanford.edu/Publications/PDF_Papers/Ruddiman2003.pdf
According to the author, Canada would have been covered with ice 5,000 years ago if it weren’t for anthropogenic emissions of CO2 and methane — from early agriculture.
“There’s a grim symmetry to this theory - that human beings had to wait for a period of climate stability before they could develop the technology to destabilize the climate. And it offers a rather dismal prognosis for the future, which Kolbert expressed this way:”
“An organism that depends on stability, but produces instability, can only survive for so long.”
What a crock. There is no natural “stability” (mean average temperature) that the earth “reached” and can only UNNATURALLY fall back from.
There were any number of times, prior to man, when the earth was “stable and warm” for longer than it has most recently been warm. And there has been and will continue to be periods of much greater cold, and periods of greater “warming”, even if humanity immigrated off of earth today.
Oh how arrogant humanity is.
...and he would make far more sense than the professors who "teach" there--and be far wiser than Elizabeth Kolbert and her disciples.
Modern man has actually accelerated global warming by bringing about daylite savings time. This additional hour of daylite every day over the years has really speeded up global warming.
Hey, it makes as much sense as their theory.
That is debatable.
Unless new ice cores have been collected in the last ten years to cover the entire time span (400,000 years), many who should know argue that the cores were not handled carefully enough to analyze gas concentrations. I have seen documentaries of these cores being handled where it would be impossible to study the 'in situ' gases.
The original cores were obtained primarily to study plant spores and dust; not gases. The simple act of handling them unprotected at normal atmospheric pressure after being raised from several-thousand meter depths makes any trapped gas analysis invalid.
A total non sequitur.
First of all, CLIMATE does not change all that fast. And even when climate is changing from cold to warm, or from warm to cold, those highly industrious social hive creatures known as humans can adapt with amazing speed. There is an enormous amount of effort directed at discovering a need, and filling it. When this effort is well rewarded, the original need is filled quickly, and new needs arise. One would think that the new conditions created by climate change would generate considerable opportunities to find these additional needs.
There are three possible responses to any challenge.
Lead, follow, or get the hell out of the way.
Photo of Elizabeth Kolbert, “climate journalist” and professional “global warming evangelist”:
“Elizabeth Kolbert...was a reporter for the New York Times for fourteen years before becoming a staff writer covering politics for the New Yorker. She and her husband, John Kleiner have three sons. They recently moved from New York to Williamstown, MA.”
http://www.bloomsbury.com/authors/microsite.asp?id=684§ion=2
http://www.grist.org/news/maindish/2006/04/10/roberts/
I don’t see any mention of science in her background...
he author is proof that some Neanderthals have survived to this day. The article fails to mention that cold is the norm, and that the last 10,000 years has been warmer than normal. If there really were to be antrhopogenic global warming is would offset the return to normal cold, and the temperature would stay constant!
Let’s create a “stable climate tax”. /sarc
It is far more dependent upon decent leadership. I don't think we have any hope.
More BS from this bunch of mint cherries.
From the article cited:
About 150 years ago, modern humans began unintentionally tinkering with the climate system, setting in motion a trend toward warmer temperatures - higher than any in the experience of our species - that threatens to end this period of stability.This is an assertation. Everything that follows is of non-consequence.
"An organism that depends on stability, but produces instability, can only survive for so long."Without doubt the author has never heard of the truism that correlation does not establish causation.
Quite frankly, I could have abusive fun with that person and they'd probably willingly check into rehab after our "discussion". Without doubt, I'm certain I'd be picked up as being a threat to the State for throwing uncouched ideas around "willy-nilly and akin to discharge of a firearm within a crowd that causes no physical harm."
Quite frankly it matters not if the person ended up a blubbering idiot that knew not what reality was, or if they were convinced that I'd taken an extract out of my AID's infected veins and shot them full of my AID's jiz. That I don't have AID's is irrelevent and immaterial, and incidentally not even germane. Making somebody feel bad, or lose direction, focus and perspective is a capital offenze.
Without doubt I certain to come to a bad end.
Anyways, I'm guessing that other than the author's emotional quackary, nothing else really matters. I'd like to see this person and a Flat Earther get it on.
Wait.
Scratch that...
How about: they had no need since population wasn't dense enough to require intensive cultivation?
Please FREEPMAIL me if you want on or off the
"Gods, Graves, Glyphs" PING list or GGG weekly digest
-- Archaeology/Anthropology/Ancient Cultures/Artifacts/Antiquities, etc.
Gods, Graves, Glyphs (alpha order)
It’s a moronic conclusion. If ice ages are what drove humans to continual migrations, then human induced global warming would be a GOOD thing.