Dirk pitt, I follow you but you have to distinguish 2 things in the problem of warming:
a) its causes
b) its consequences
If the point a) can be the subject of controversies or countervailing (more or less become sterile since the time), the point b) seems to him indisputable: lThe planet is getting hotter ... and the CO2, if it is not the trigger, can only AGREE the situation.
So to say that the planet will survive a major warming is a huge illusion because it already happened during the Permian especially if it is to make the people feel guilty ...
Cabrol should therefore go for an artic or antartic tour or compare the alpine glaciers in the space of 20 years that I say 10 years, it will change the air-conditioned Studios of Billancourt ...
Cabrol, if the Earth was doing alone? Holocaust denial?
-
Christophe
- Moderator
- posts: 79323
- Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
- Location: Greenhouse planet
- x 11042
Last edited by Christophe the 10 / 06 / 08, 16: 14, 1 edited once.
0 x
Do a image search or an text search - Netiquette of forum
I follow you too.
I am glad to see that we can have healthy discussions on the part of causes due to man; which does not exempt us from doing the maximum to reduce these causes.
on point b), the consequences are already partially present, as you point out with glaciers or polar caps. But if we want to stay in line with the doubts of point a) (the part due to man) we should also start to think about how to adapt to these consequences if we cannot (or do not want) to act on the whole .
Maybe I will buy the book to see if it talks about this aspect.
the influence of climate change on our way of life (coupled with the depletion of fossil fuels) is an interesting subject that I do not hear so much about. I just read "2030, the ecological crash" but I was left unsatisfied.
between those who predict decay, the return to the 19th century, etc., the arguments for salvation by technology, etc.
there are quite a few questions. So in a context where everyone is crying out for disaster and where the consensus is to feel guilty, a title like that of cabrol arouses my curiosity. Having said that, I may be disappointed by a hollow book solely dedicated to strengthening the media presence of its "author" ???
I am glad to see that we can have healthy discussions on the part of causes due to man; which does not exempt us from doing the maximum to reduce these causes.
on point b), the consequences are already partially present, as you point out with glaciers or polar caps. But if we want to stay in line with the doubts of point a) (the part due to man) we should also start to think about how to adapt to these consequences if we cannot (or do not want) to act on the whole .
Maybe I will buy the book to see if it talks about this aspect.
the influence of climate change on our way of life (coupled with the depletion of fossil fuels) is an interesting subject that I do not hear so much about. I just read "2030, the ecological crash" but I was left unsatisfied.
between those who predict decay, the return to the 19th century, etc., the arguments for salvation by technology, etc.
there are quite a few questions. So in a context where everyone is crying out for disaster and where the consensus is to feel guilty, a title like that of cabrol arouses my curiosity. Having said that, I may be disappointed by a hollow book solely dedicated to strengthening the media presence of its "author" ???
0 x
Click my signature
-
Christophe
- Moderator
- posts: 79323
- Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
- Location: Greenhouse planet
- x 11042
Amazon.fr Sales Rank: 134 in Pounds
It sells well it seems ... normal to excuse ... What a little clever Cabrol ...
0 x
Do a image search or an text search - Netiquette of forum
-
Woodcutter
- Econologue expert
- posts: 4731
- Registration: 07/11/05, 10:45
- Location: Mountain ... (Trièves)
- x 2
I think he is absolutely right ... 
Indeed, the EARTH as a global ecosystem has nothing to fear from global warming, it has already gone through much more critical phases (SnowBall Earth, or conversely the climatic conditions of the carboniferous with 7000 ppm of CO2. ..)!
But there, the problem is absolutely not the Earth, but the human societies which live there ... These will not get out of it, it is inevitable.
Indeed, the EARTH as a global ecosystem has nothing to fear from global warming, it has already gone through much more critical phases (SnowBall Earth, or conversely the climatic conditions of the carboniferous with 7000 ppm of CO2. ..)!
But there, the problem is absolutely not the Earth, but the human societies which live there ... These will not get out of it, it is inevitable.
0 x
"I am a big brute, but I rarely mistaken ..."
-
Christophe
- Moderator
- posts: 79323
- Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
- Location: Greenhouse planet
- x 11042
Bucheron is quite what I repeated above ... the earth, as a planet, could survive without problem a dozen near-term terminators ... What about life (even that at the bottom of oceans could survive a major disaster) and especially biodiversity?
Today this book has a title which can be considered as misleading and tendentious in the sense that it can be understood as: do nothing especially nothing because the weather system will "heal itself" ... and that is not good for the general public.
Today this book has a title which can be considered as misleading and tendentious in the sense that it can be understood as: do nothing especially nothing because the weather system will "heal itself" ... and that is not good for the general public.
Last edited by Christophe the 18 / 06 / 08, 16: 35, 2 edited once.
0 x
Do a image search or an text search - Netiquette of forum
-
Woodcutter
- Econologue expert
- posts: 4731
- Registration: 07/11/05, 10:45
- Location: Mountain ... (Trièves)
- x 2
Christophe wrote: we must distinguish 2 things in the problem of warming:
a) its causes
b) its consequences
If the point a) can be the subject of controversies or countervailing (more or less become sterile since the time), the point b) seems to him indisputable: lThe planet is getting hotter ... and the CO2, if it is not the trigger, can only AGREE the situation.
The point a) does not seem to have become so sterile as that, the sun would have entered the cycle # 24, cycle seems well gone to be the most intense since 400 years.
See article
[off topic] Small sentence from the article: to meditate.
Hathaway modestly acknowledges that he “doesn't know why it works.” The underlying physical mechanisms are still a mystery “But it works”.
0 x
"Thinking should not it be taught in school rather than to make learning by heart the facts that are not all proven?"
"It's not because they are likely to be wrong they are right!" (Coluche)
"It's not because they are likely to be wrong they are right!" (Coluche)
After 60 years, homo erectus are more and more fragile during heat waves and ozone peaks. The "natural" selection in a way ...
Mr. CABROL surely considers that man is not responsible for the ozone peaks and the "smogs" which float above the big metropolises ...
Recently I read that in certain regions of the world (American studies), the nebulosities due to the planes represented up to 20% of the cloud cover ... (in particular in very dry States like California).
0 x
Back to "Climate Change: CO2, warming, greenhouse effect ..."
Who is online ?
Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 236 guests