The Economic Argument Against Sitting On Our Hands
 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinio...y.html?hpid=z2

"Good economic decisions require good data. And to get good data, we must account for all relevant variables. But we’re not doing this when it comes to climate change — and that means we’re making decisions based on a flawed picture of future risks. While we can’t define future climate-change risks with precision, they should be included in economic policy, fiscal and business decisions because of their potential magnitude.
The scientific community is all but unanimous in its agreement that climate change is a serious threat. According to Gallup, nearly 60 percent of Americans believe that global warming is caused by human activity. Still, for many people, the effects of climate change seem like a future problem — something that falls by the wayside as we tackle what seem like more immediate crises." Robert Rubin

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Rubin

This would be the never popular known unknown variable. Not as difficult as the unknown unknown, but a bear nonetheless.

Wasn't there a study or two by DOD about this? Maybe you can shed some light there Bob?

I guess I am in the 40%. I don't believe humans are the cause of global warming. Significant contributors I can go along with, but not the cause. I also don't believe anything our 5% of the worlds population does will alter it significantly for the better unless the rest of the world jumps on board.

I believe the overwhelming majority of scientists.

You know, the people that know a helluva lot more about it than me or you.

I don't know what percent that puts me in.

I haven't read any DOD documents in almost 7 years (dancing banana). IIRC I never came across one that discussed how Global Warming would impact military operations. I did participate in meetings where the impact of known unknowns on planning was discussed, but I'm unable to name a DOD document that discusses this.

I've no doubt that DOD is at a minimum considering how Global Warming will impact military operations from a long-term perspective. My last report (GAO's report that is) was focused on NORTHCOM's operations and contingency planning, and its ability to execute these plans. We analyzed every plan and none of mine mentioned Global Warming. No one else mentioned that the plans they reviewed touch on this, and if Global Warming had been mentioned we would have talked about it.

If the sea level is going up I think we need to look at barriers/relocation.

Current models and actual measurable data show that, for now at least, 97% of climate change scientists are wrong.

Pete

Three 3 percenter's analysis?

Both groups say the same thing: Our models and analyses show we are right.

It's mathematically possible that 97% of the worlds most imminent scientists are wrong and that the 3% that have whored themselves out to big corporate interests are right, but I kinda fucken doubt it.

The models have been off for 20 years and don't work backwards.

That's 97% of scientists that wrote about human caused global warming, not 97% of all scientists.

Pete

That's climatologists with Phd's after their names not southern fried phrenologists Pete. :rolleyes:

Someone needs to lead the way :)

Agree though that if China and India don't get on board we're done for.

Lead from behind, of course.

I think that the fact that much of our manufacturing base moving to China (partially) because of it's lax pollution laws only add scorn to any debate regarding pollution control. That Americans keep buying these products knowing the damage it does both to the environment and labor rights magnifies that scorn.

Mr Pots I agree, our outsourcing of pollution is practically scandalous. They'll say (the Chinese/Indians etc) we're hypocrites and IMO they're right.

Don't forget final entropy Bob ;)

Pete

Easy to put pressure on them if we are leading the way.

Huh????

And that pressure would be economic shunning.

To do so however we would have to

A) - let loose of our dependence on collecting crap we really don't need

B) - re-build our manufacturing base

C) - decide if we want a strong middle class or two class plutocracy...which is pretty much what we have now..

Sure, a lot of science isn't exact.

When I was in grade school I learned that there were 92 elements and that humans had been around for about 50,000 years. But the thing about science is that it is always moving forward and always seeking new knowledge, and willing to change based on those findings.

That sure beats the Hell out of letting people like Rush Limbaugh tell you what to believe.

Yeah well that's what your homies in the corporate boardrooms have done for us.

Check this out: http://rainforests.mongabay.com/09-carbon_emissions.htm

I find this interesting, we remain a nuke powerhouse: http://photos.mongabay.com/09/nuclea...0-2030-568.jpg

And if we stop CO2 right now! Not just the increase but the current output:

http://photos.mongabay.com/09/nuclea...0-2030-568.jpg

Pete

I see. So you think the ones that are working on finding a cure for cancer think Global Warming is a hoax?

I agree. So why take current theory as fact, and ridicule those who are skeptical?

Pete

Because your side has a Monopoly on idiots.

http://i843.photobucket.com/albums/z...omp_ap_605.jpg

That's part of their problem, the incredible (literally) quality of their implicitly approved spokesfolks. BTW, Where are all the others, Sarah, the Michelles, Ted, ect? The klown kar awaits its regulars.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

This guy is on one side of the global warming issue.

http://i843.photobucket.com/albums/z...asse-tyson.jpg

This guy is on the other.

http://i843.photobucket.com/albums/z...p_ap_605-1.jpg

Where do you want to be Pete?

Kucinich? I like Dr Kaku but when it comes to politics he's a bit nutty. There's Dr Kaczynski too. Or perhaps I should go with LaRouche.

But my choices are a single popular professor or a single popular talk show host. I MUST believe what I'm told.

Pete

In other words you're going to side with the fat junior college dropout.

He should count himself lucky.

Pete

You can run, but you can't hide.

Your side is the stupid side.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlA35y0bGQc

That's true, now that we're though the ice age everyone was predicting in the 70s it'll be the warm age.

Pete

The 70's?

Really?

Is that the best you can come up with Pete?

http://i843.photobucket.com/albums/z...in-1970-10.jpg

Gaa my eyes! Ain't nobody got time for that TJ! :p

Are you saying you didn't wear tinted aviators and polyester shirts?

Pete

I was a Nixon voting conservative back in those days.

http://i843.photobucket.com/albums/z...arth/1973a.jpg

Wow :D I was in grade school!

Pass the chicken please.

Pete

Tricked by Dick, fooled by Ron. :cool:

IIRC Nixon was a moderate.

Ron did not fool anyone; he said it would trickle down.

That is: just look for a little, if any...you knew what he was about. :D

I agree.

I'd say Nixon was to the left of Obama.

Probably true. He created OSHA and the EPA, after all. Beyond that, he cozied up to the Chinese commies.

And how about this:

http://www.salon.com/2013/10/29/nixo...e_act_partner/