Message boards :
Politics :
Climate Change, 'Greenhouse' effects, Environment, etc part III
Message board moderation
Previous · 1 . . . 7 · 8 · 9 · 10 · 11 · 12 · 13 . . . 27 · Next
Author | Message |
---|---|
Es99 Send message Joined: 23 Aug 05 Posts: 10874 Credit: 350,402 RAC: 0 |
Your graph may be bigger than my graph, but even you can see that the long term trend is that at some point in the future the growth rate will be negative. I'll repost the link again that you obviously didn't read: The most surprising demographic crisis Now I shall quote the passage that you should have read the first time and that proves you wrong: "But new census figures bolster claims made in the past few years that China is suffering from a demographic problem of a different sort: too low a birth rate. The latest numbers, released on April 28th and based on the nationwide census conducted last year, show a total population for mainland China of 1.34 billion. They also reveal a steep decline in the average annual population growth rate, down to 0.57% in 2000-10, half the rate of 1.07% in the previous decade. The data imply that the total fertility rate, which is the number of children a woman of child-bearing age can expect to have, on average, during her lifetime, may now be just 1.4, far below the “replacement rate†of 2.1, which eventually leads to the population stabilising." Now I shall quote another part of the article RE the one child policy that you didn't read either: "Other countries achieved similar declines in fertility during the same period. The crucial influences, Mr Wang reckons, are the benefits of development, including better health care and sharp drops in high infant-mortality rates which led people to have many children in order to ensure that at least some would survive. By implication, coercive controls had little to do with lowering fertility, which would have happened anyway. Countries that simply improved access to contraceptives—Thailand and Indonesia, for instance—did as much to reduce fertility as China, with its draconian policies. Taiwan, which the government in Beijing regards as an integral part of China, cut its fertility rate as much as China without population controls." Sure don't take my word for what I say, but at least read the source I put up with some actual data before you get all snitty and condescending. I don't tend to just pull things out of my arse you know. Reality Internet Personality |
BarryAZ Send message Joined: 1 Apr 01 Posts: 2580 Credit: 16,982,517 RAC: 0 |
One of the effects of China's single child policy -- an unstable male/female ratio -- something like 1.15 to 1.0.... |
ML1 Send message Joined: 25 Nov 01 Posts: 20265 Credit: 7,508,002 RAC: 20 |
euh... i always thought about this ... 'greenhouse'' effect is a joke, a big joke. tahts a big LIE For your part of the world, and for the UK unfortunately, that may well be the case. (The Gulf stream gets killed due to lack of salinity due to ice melt...) Meanwhile, other parts of the world cook into temperatures that become uninhabitable. (And the death/redirection of the Gulf stream exacerbates that further...) All a severe case of the forced change of climate rearranging the weather circulation for everyone. Rather uncomfortably disruptive. Don't believe it?... Well, there's very hard acknowledged evidence that just the pollution and "global dimming" from European industry shifted the clouds and rain pattern for Africa by hundreds of miles with the obvious resultant drought in some places, floods in others. We've had the debacle of deforestation due to acid rain from pollution, now largely cleaned up. We're still ongoing with the CFCs cleanup to avert the loss of atmospheric ozone. Worldwide sunburn anyone?... CO2 pollution is the BIGGIE. Can we avert that in time before we melt the Canadian and Russian permafrost? (We've already lost the Arctic summer ice, and ahead of time...) Ooops... Almost forgot about the Canadian Alberta "Burn baby burn"... That one is also threatening the Great Lakes through good old fashioned oil production/mining pollution... All on our only planet, Martin See new freedom: Mageia Linux Take a look for yourself: Linux Format The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3) |
W-K 666 Send message Joined: 18 May 99 Posts: 19048 Credit: 40,757,560 RAC: 67 |
New piece in the Washington Post Warmer still: Extreme climate predictions appear most accurate, report says Climate scientists agree the Earth will be hotter by the end of the century, but their simulations don’t agree on how much. Now a study suggests the gloomier predictions may be closer to the mark. |
John Clark Send message Joined: 29 Sep 99 Posts: 16515 Credit: 4,418,829 RAC: 0 |
An unfair comment when the impact of climate warming is not really fully understood. Certainly the predictions of a 5C rise in average temperatures will cause the biosphere to die is likely to be a proven lie. But, we certainly will get more freak (once in a 100 years) weather on a regular basis. But, the doomsayers are exaggerating. It's good to be back amongst friends and colleagues |
John Clark Send message Joined: 29 Sep 99 Posts: 16515 Credit: 4,418,829 RAC: 0 |
A modern equivalent of the 1600s looking for monsters in the woods, or the Grimm fairy tales ... The population seems to love and support the doom mongers. That is except there are many more educated sane and clearer thinking people around now to challenge them. Unfortunately, as you say, they make predictions of disaster that is unrealistic - like sea levels will rise more than 150 metres (you will all drown), average temperatures will rise 10C and you will all fry to death, etc. I would love to come back in 2230 and find they were right on a temperature rise, and an increase in freak weather, but the biosphere, and humans, were in rude health and slightly fewer than now. It's good to be back amongst friends and colleagues |
W-K 666 Send message Joined: 18 May 99 Posts: 19048 Credit: 40,757,560 RAC: 67 |
You two are beginning to sound like the Republican supporters in the US. Elderly white and stuck in your beliefs. It only needs the Atlantic currents to change because of the Artic ice melting and UK weather will change drastically. The Northern parts of UK are at the same latitude as southern Alaska. Therefore it is possible the the UK is going to get colder not warmer. I admit to being a believer in climate change since I did a filler module associated with the subject (alternative power sources) at the OU to get my degree in the 70's. |
ML1 Send message Joined: 25 Nov 01 Posts: 20265 Credit: 7,508,002 RAC: 20 |
You two are beginning to sound like the Republican supporters in the US. Elderly white and stuck in your beliefs. Nothing new then, only that the pollution problems have remained ignored for yet longer. Amongst the known sponsored FUD by the fossil fuels industry, and likely also from the farming industry: I wonder if there is also a strong element of the present older people of influence who blindly refuse to admit they and their careers have had a hand in the ever increasing pollution. Old misplaced embarrassment and pride fueling outright denial? Or just plain old corruption to selfishly make more profit at everyone else's cost? Can our politicians timely steer industry to 'save us'? All on our only planet, Martin See new freedom: Mageia Linux Take a look for yourself: Linux Format The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3) |
Gary Charpentier Send message Joined: 25 Dec 00 Posts: 30640 Credit: 53,134,872 RAC: 32 |
Nuclear winter only solution to global warming that can be implemented from an engineering standpoint in time to save the planet. |
Terror Australis Send message Joined: 14 Feb 04 Posts: 1817 Credit: 262,693,308 RAC: 44 |
.....I admit to being a believer in climate change since I did a filler module associated with the subject (alternative power sources) at the OU to get my degree in the 70's. If you did your degree in the 1970's, "Climate Change" mean't Global Cooling" didn't it ? IIRC, "We were all gonna die" because crops would fail due to shorter growing seasons, harsher winters, increased glaciation etc. etc. T.A. |
John Clark Send message Joined: 29 Sep 99 Posts: 16515 Credit: 4,418,829 RAC: 0 |
I also believe that Global Warming is happening, and I also believe that the extra energy (temperature) in the atmosphere is producing a more frequent and freaky weather patterns. I can also see the Arctic ice is disappearing. So, when the North Atlantic currents (Gulf Stream) stops flowing, and the UK and the near continent starts to cool (same latitude ad Newfoundland and Moscow). Then winter will set in, and, on the same scare mongering prediction as the warmists, within 100 years we will have permanent 9-10 month winters, and start to starve as crop growing cycles are too short. Then within 1,000 years Britain will be under 2 miles of ice and the next great glaciation will occur. Following this, as the ocean levels drop by 200 meters, as the moisture is locked in the ice and snow across Europe and North America, the Gulf Stream will restart after 10,000 years. Then things will warm up in the UK and Europe, but the human population will be a meer 1,000 billion strong. In the mean time, for survival, humans will burn wood and coal and it all starts again ... It's good to be back amongst friends and colleagues |
W-K 666 Send message Joined: 18 May 99 Posts: 19048 Credit: 40,757,560 RAC: 67 |
No, there were studies in the 60's indicating that increased CO2 was having an effect. Think smog in CA. And there have been studies, rejected at the time, that the greenhouse effect was increasing back in the 1930's. |
W-K 666 Send message Joined: 18 May 99 Posts: 19048 Credit: 40,757,560 RAC: 67 |
You two are beginning to sound like the Republican supporters in the US. Elderly white and stuck in your beliefs. Without looking it up but wasn't there a report recently that said Greenland's glaciers were melting faster than expected. |
Reed Young Send message Joined: 23 Feb 06 Posts: 122 Credit: 81,383 RAC: 0 |
If you did your degree in the 1970's, "Climate Change" mean't Global Cooling" didn't it ? Only if you got your "science" from two corporate media pieces and ignored the scientific journals. Which it seems you still do. |
ML1 Send message Joined: 25 Nov 01 Posts: 20265 Credit: 7,508,002 RAC: 20 |
No, there were studies in the 60's indicating that increased CO2 was having an effect. Think smog in CA. ... And others stretching right back the start of the Industrial Revolution. One recently in the press from 40 years ago which was 'swept under the political carpet' back then for not being 'immediate enough' was: Moynihan, as Nixon aide, warned of global warming ... There is widespread agreement that carbon dioxide content will rise 25 percent by 2000, Moynihan wrote in a September 1969 memo. "This could increase the average temperature near the earth's surface by 7 degrees Fahrenheit," he wrote. "This in turn could raise the level of the sea by 10 feet. Goodbye New York. Goodbye Washington, for that matter."... Do we really have to wait until too late to clean up our latest biggest industrial pollution? Or is this all a cruel political and Marketing game with our planet? All on our only planet, Martin See new freedom: Mageia Linux Take a look for yourself: Linux Format The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3) |
ML1 Send message Joined: 25 Nov 01 Posts: 20265 Credit: 7,508,002 RAC: 20 |
Todays UK daily Express ... All well and so... Anything in there as to "why" and "how"?... Or should we guess that the focus will be on sensationalism and profiteering by the fossil fuels companies? All on our only planet, Martin See new freedom: Mageia Linux Take a look for yourself: Linux Format The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3) |
Gary Charpentier Send message Joined: 25 Dec 00 Posts: 30640 Credit: 53,134,872 RAC: 32 |
... There is widespread agreement that carbon dioxide content will rise 25 percent by 2000, Moynihan wrote in a September 1969 memo. Did it happen? No. Why should anyone listen to chicken little? The CO2 is rising ... The CO2 is rising ... The CO2 is rising ... Just plain obvious to anyone with a functioning brain that the models that call for this have serious significant errors in them, or garbage inputs are being applied, or BOTH! |
Es99 Send message Joined: 23 Aug 05 Posts: 10874 Credit: 350,402 RAC: 0 |
... There is widespread agreement that carbon dioxide content will rise 25 percent by 2000, Moynihan wrote in a September 1969 memo. You've been duped Gary. The climate change deniers: influence out of all proportion to science Reality Internet Personality |
ML1 Send message Joined: 25 Nov 01 Posts: 20265 Credit: 7,508,002 RAC: 20 |
... There is widespread agreement that carbon dioxide content will rise 25 percent by 2000, Moynihan wrote in a September 1969 memo. Yes it has... The various consequent effects are following on. Note the no Arctic summertime ice just for one significant example?... Can you please give some real world substance as opposed to your manic desperation to scream "no change" and "not our fault"?... Or are you just an old contrary troll denying over 200 years of industrialization? All on our only planet, Martin See new freedom: Mageia Linux Take a look for yourself: Linux Format The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3) |
Es99 Send message Joined: 23 Aug 05 Posts: 10874 Credit: 350,402 RAC: 0 |
How about an actual peer reviewed paper? Expert credibility in climate change and Everything you need to know about climate change - interactive If you are still a climate change denier you are on the wrong side of history and the consequences are too devastating to ignore. The same people that ran a huge campaign to confuse the issue on whether smoking is safe on behalf of the tobacco industry are at work here, this time working for the oil companies. Reality Internet Personality |
©2024 University of California
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.