| Author | Thread |
|
|
06/08/2005 02:07:19 PM · #26 |
Originally posted by louddog:
What do you suggest the government do to stop global warming? |
Create a multinational research group, financed by the governments on a pro rata of their GNP, with the brief to look into all matters that relate to it? Or has this already been done in some way? |
|
|
|
06/08/2005 02:52:08 PM · #27 |
| No other suggestions? (bump) |
|
|
|
06/08/2005 03:18:51 PM · #28 |
|
|
|
06/08/2005 03:35:13 PM · #29 |
Hmmm...I wonder if sales/rentals for The Day After Tomorrow takes a jump after today? ;^)
|
|
|
|
06/08/2005 04:17:49 PM · #30 |
| perhaps the oversensationalised images in films such as these do more to make people think all predictions are fictional and it will ner=ver happen? Or that it will not happen in our lifetime so why worry? |
|
|
|
06/08/2005 05:07:39 PM · #31 |
Originally posted by louddog:
What do you suggest the government do to stop global warming? |
Why not ask the experts? Like the - what was it - 10,000 scientists who have publicly attested to their honest and grim assessment thet global warming is indeed happening.
It''s not like we need to invent the wheel as DPC forum posters. There are a lot of PhD's who have been working on this for a long, long time. We should listen to their suggestions.
Which have been freely available on the web for years. |
|
|
|
06/08/2005 05:19:41 PM · #32 |
Originally posted by louddog:
What do you suggest the government do to stop global warming? |
The U.S. likely has one of the worst public transportation systems of any highly-developed nation in the world.
Finland, I believe, has made the commitment that 100% of its public energy production will be carbon-free very soon - re 2006, I think.
We have just about reached the point of "Peak Oil", where we will have more than half-depleted the worlds oil reserves. Every drop of crude now becomes more difficult to produce, and way more expensive.
Many alternative ( carbon-free) energy sources have actually been cost-effective for years despite true government support. This will only be more apparent every year.
Every generator in this country pretty much goes off-line at night when power consumption declines. They could, instead, all be cracking water into hydrogen to power our cars, furnaces, stoves, water heaters, lawn mowers etc.
We can get "no-cost" hydrogen by using solar fuel cells everywhere, which produce H2 when in sunshine.
There are a million ways to satisfy our energy needs if only we truly wanted to get the job done as a country.
What is ironic, is that somebody is eventually going to make an enormous heap of money innovating and selling clean, renewable energy to the masses. Why can't it be an American company instead of one from euro/asia? |
|
|
|
06/08/2005 05:24:24 PM · #33 |
[quote=aerogurl] so true so true... I just can't understand how our government can stand infront of a group of scientists and tell them they are wrong.
Also another good thing happeneing right now..
Probably because if you look back to the 1970's those same scientists were worried about the coming Ice Age. I don't think that they really know, they just say what ever will get them government funding to pay their salaries....... Here is a quote from the link "In the 1970's concerned environmentalists like Stephen Schneider of the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado feared a return to another ice age due to manmade atmospheric pollution blocking out the sun."
//www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/ice_ages.html
Message edited by author 2005-06-08 17:28:33. |
|
|
|
06/10/2005 07:35:15 PM · #34 |
Yet the site you supply describes Dr Schneider as a leading global warming advocate? Which is he?
This site is antiglobal warming to the Nth degree, and contains blatant falsehoods, all industry "talking points", wrapped up in scientific disguise.
The true scientific community is of one mind - global warming is happening, and is due to mankind.
This website, which is the product of two brothers, not a university or scientific society, has evidently found the 4 "scientists" in the world who think such things as:
"The bottom line is that climatic change is a given. It is inescapable, it happens. There is no reason to be very concerned about it or spend bazillions of dollars to try and even things out."
The Kyoto Protocol-- Bad for the Environment?:
" What we are seeing really is just another interglacial phase within our big icehouse climate. Dismissing political calls for a global effort to reverse climate change, she said, ' It's really farcical because the climate has been changing constantly... What we should do is be more aware of the fact that it is changing and that we should be ready to adapt to the change.' "
etc.
If you wouls like to see what the true scientific community has to say, the best place to look is the IPCC - the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
Here is a good place to read summaries of their findings, as well as access the nitty gritty:
//www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/vol4/english/index.htm
|
|
|
|
06/10/2005 11:58:51 PM · #35 |
I've just finished reading an excellent three-part series in the New Yorker magazine on climate change. Here are the links:
The Climate of Man - Part I
The Climate of Man - Part II
The Climate of Man - Part III
If you can't manage them all, I'd highly recommend reading Part III at least. It attempts to answer the question what can be done and explains the Bush administration's stand on the issue.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/21/2025 03:35:37 PM EDT.
