Comments On: It’s Time to Freak Out About Climate Change by Jonathan Golob http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/its-time-to-freak-out-about-climate-change/Content?oid=14657581 Comments On: It’s Time to Freak Out About Climate Change by Jonathan Golob en-us Copyright 2013 The Stranger. All rights reserved. This RSS file is offered to individuals, The Stranger readers, and non-commercial organizations only. Any commercial websites wishing to use this RSS file, please contact The Stranger. webmaster@thestranger.com (The Stranger Webmaster) Sat, 25 May 2013 00:00:01 -0700 Sat, 25 May 2013 19:00:00 -0700 Foundation http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss <![CDATA[Re: It’s Time to Freak Out About Climate Change]]> Posted by fgH]]> Sun, 12 May 2013 22:13:29 -0700 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: It’s Time to Freak Out About Climate Change]]> Posted by boarderbro]]> Fri, 07 Dec 2012 14:56:05 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: It’s Time to Freak Out About Climate Change]]> Romney / Ryan: Just Say NO!!
Posted by auntie grizelda]]> Sat, 15 Sep 2012 16:18:11 -0700 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: It’s Time to Freak Out About Climate Change]]>
If you want to know the real reason the 'Fertile Crescent' is a desert nowadays it's because of Monoculture of crops. Yes, acres and acres of wheat or corn (nowadays) eventually kills the soil off, when the plants all die the rain will no longer come. Monoculture is not a naturally occuring thing throughout nature. That is why we are in risk from starvation. Check out Permaculture for a real solution.

I too, look forward to a future without the need for gas guzzling cars. Cars used to run on Alcohol until the Big Oil interests took care of that problem. ;)

In closing, please remember that many very Rich people who (who favor Corporatism/Fascism and Plutocracy) think they know what's best for us (and would like us all to live in Third World conditions) (Ever hear of Neo-Feudalism?) fund the climate change researchers on both sides of this game. You can't lose if you control both sides of the game. So, the next time you're squabbling to be taxed for the very air you breathe, you might consider what these rich men had to say years ago at The Club of Rome (look it up for yourself):

"It would seem that humans need a common motivation, namely a common adversary, to organize and act together in the vacuum; such a motivation must be found to bring the divided nations together to face an outside enemy, either a real one or else one invented for the purpose.

New enemies therefore have to be identified.
New strategies imagined, new weapons devised.

The common enemy of humanity is man.

In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then, is humanity itself.

The old democracies have functioned reasonably well over the last 200 years, but they appear now to be in a phase of complacent stagnation with little evidence of real leadership and innovation

Democracy is not a panacea. It cannot organize everything and it is unaware of its own limits. These facts must be faced squarely. Sacrilegious though this may sound, democracy is no longer well suited for the tasks ahead. The complexity and the technical nature of many of today’s problems do not always allow elected representatives to make competent decisions at the right time.”
Posted by Misc.]]> Fri, 14 Sep 2012 04:33:47 -0700 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: It’s Time to Freak Out About Climate Change]]> Posted by woof]]> Wed, 12 Sep 2012 14:45:22 -0700 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: It’s Time to Freak Out About Climate Change]]> Why not = the Holocaust?
Some people have no sense of proportion, or shame.
Posted by tuttiquanti]]> Wed, 12 Sep 2012 13:58:46 -0700 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: It’s Time to Freak Out About Climate Change]]>
I rarely bother to read the comments, but this collection is truely instructive.
Posted by StephN]]> Wed, 12 Sep 2012 12:49:37 -0700 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: It’s Time to Freak Out About Climate Change]]>
Climate models all rely on various "multiplier effects" in the form of clouds, etc., that conjecture positive feedback will greatly enhance the warming effect of CO2. Let me be clear: no one, not even the IPCC, disputes that the effect of CO2 alone will be fairly minimal. For warming to be a real problem, we need big multiplier effects to exist.

There isn't any good evidence for large multiplier effects. Go back and look at modeled predictions from 15 or 20 years ago. They predict higher temperatures than exist now. This is because of incorrectly stated multiplier effects. These multiplier effects remain the fundamental basis for all dire predictions that concern citizens of our fair nation today. But these multiplier effects are largely unknown (and to the extent relied upon by previous catastrophic models, simply incorrect). Dire predictions all rely on positive multipliers, but negative multipliers also exist (e.g., increase CO2 uptake into the oceans and biosphere).

While CO2 affects climate, its impact isn’t nearly as large as many think. Current temperatures are entirely within natural variation—the only difference is that we have more CO2 from mankind. What looks likely is that CO2 may raise temps slightly (e.g., 1 or 2C over 100 years.) Predictions of 3C (or insane predictions like 6C or 7C) of warming are simply unsupportable conjecture. There is no good science to support the notion that CATASTROPHIC climate change will occur. Please wipe the flecked spittle from your face, outraged reader—a computer model that makes a future prediction for 75 years from now aren’t science. These models all rely on totally unproven multiplier effects. Remember, doubling CO2 alone (which will take a LONG time) will only increase temps about 1C! And it could be even less if multiplier effects are negative, for which there is reasonable evidence (e.g. increase carbon uptake in the biosphere).

Alternative energy research should continue, as should climate research. But let's not destroy our economy and infrastructure based on rank speculation from Chicken Littles. Shouting that the sky is falling doesn't make it so. One hot summer (or a cold winter) also doesn’t mean that life as we know it is ending. We have much bigger fish to fry on this planet—combatting pollution, disease, hunger, poverty--than fighting the non-existent spectre of catastrophic manmade climate change.

So, stop freaking about 1C of warming over the next hundred years.
Posted by unclezeke]]> Wed, 12 Sep 2012 07:52:31 -0700 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: It’s Time to Freak Out About Climate Change]]>
CO2 definitely affects climate, but not nearly as much as many claim. Current temperatures are entirely within natural variation--the only difference is we have more CO2 from mankind. If this raises temps slightly (e.g., 1 or 2C over 100 years), so what?

Alternative energy research should continue, but let's not destroy our economy and infrastructure based on rank speculation from chicken littles. There is NO science to support the notion that CATASTROPHIC climate change will occur. In fact, recent flattening of temps indicates such theories are flat out wrong. Shouting that the sky is falling doesn't mean that it is. We have much bigger fish to fry--pollution, disease, hunger, poverty--than the idiocy of non-existent catastrophic manmade climate change.

Posted by unclezeke]]> Wed, 12 Sep 2012 07:14:23 -0700 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: It’s Time to Freak Out About Climate Change]]> Posted by sfguy]]> Wed, 12 Sep 2012 07:04:12 -0700 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: It’s Time to Freak Out About Climate Change]]> Posted by AudreyH84]]> Tue, 11 Sep 2012 23:18:38 -0700 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: It’s Time to Freak Out About Climate Change]]> Posted by Karyn B]]> Tue, 11 Sep 2012 16:03:45 -0700 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: It’s Time to Freak Out About Climate Change]]>
If youre looking clearly at the way things are going to develop, we should either be doing what we can as individuals to build life-boats, or just relaxing and enjoying what we've got, prepared to starve gracefully when the time comes. Or maybe a little bit of both.
Posted by s1]]> Tue, 11 Sep 2012 15:47:39 -0700 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: It’s Time to Freak Out About Climate Change]]>
I guess I am not narrow minded, or mean spirited enough to be as leftist as you are.

But keep hating so, it makes the Right, and Center, laugh.
Posted by Slam1263]]> Tue, 11 Sep 2012 15:02:45 -0700 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: It’s Time to Freak Out About Climate Change]]>
I see no particular reason for hope in the longer horizon, though.

Since the basic problem is overtaxed habitat in the first place, it would seem pretty illogical to advertise my own personal response.

But here are a few more vague suggestions:

1. Pretty much all problems come back to too many people. So stop breeding. Breeding should become a heavily taxed and licensed activity. Why do you need a license to cut hair but not make people? Heavily subsidize and promote population reduction initiatives abroad. We can let the air out of the balloon in a controlled way, or it will happen on Gaia's terms. Either way. I realize it's unconstitutional to do these things, but, well, so what. At one point, the Constitution said most blacks were 3/5th of a person. It can be changed if the collective brain changes.

2. Along those lines, start teaching children that growth is the enemy of their future. (Try selling that to the Chamber of Commerce!) We suffer from the baby boomer mantra disease - you can have it all, baby. Actually, no you can't. We get to be the first that has less. Get over it.

2. Protect geographical lifeboats, like here in the Northwest.

-Local/regional food self-sufficiency. That means agriculture, for the benefit of those Walter Mitty Rambos that hallucinate about fleeing the city for some piece of forest with their bug-out bag, to live under a tarp and snare squirrels, at some unspecified moment in the multi-generational downslope we're probably facing.

- Transition to a localized economy. It's fun to know the guy who grew you food, made your clothes, and brews your beer, anyway.

- Build community resilience. Buzzphrase alert, but that basically means thinking about how to stand on our own two feet when the magic container vans full of stuff stop showing up.

-Not advocating for militias just yet, but it's probably a good idea to start thinking about how we maintain security since things don't have to go very far downhill to find ourselves in a world where the cops don't come running the second you pick up the phone. If you've spent time in various places in Africa or Central Asia you already know what that looks like.

I realize that this is still pretty vague, and that's because it's a philosophy more than a series of policy moves. But you get the idea.

We have a model: what happens when a highly globalized centralized economy starts to collapse under its own weight over a long time horizon? That's what happened to Rome, and there are lots of parallels.

We should start looking for the stuff that worked then, hopefully with a plan for keeping around the stuff that would be nice to keep that we have now(like the internet and health care). Because, really, who wants to be a Dark Ages peasant that dies at 35 of an infected hangnail.

Not me, so I guess I don't really want it for my genetic descendants.


Posted by Upriver Joe]]> Tue, 11 Sep 2012 14:41:26 -0700 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: It’s Time to Freak Out About Climate Change]]> Posted by Screeve]]> Tue, 11 Sep 2012 11:57:59 -0700 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: It’s Time to Freak Out About Climate Change]]>
This forces them to invest more in alternative energy.
Posted by Will in Seattle]]> Tue, 11 Sep 2012 10:59:33 -0700 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: It’s Time to Freak Out About Climate Change]]>
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency estimates that there are more than 100 million exit signs in use today in the U.S., consuming 30–35 billion kilowatt-hours (kWh) of electricity annually. That’s the output of five or six 1,000 MW power plants, and it costs us $2-3 billion per year. Individual buildings may have thousands of exit signs in operation.

http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/…
Posted by internet_jen]]> Tue, 11 Sep 2012 10:16:15 -0700 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: It’s Time to Freak Out About Climate Change]]>
In other words, tell the Me Generation that their shit has got to go.

Posted by Upriver Joe]]> Tue, 11 Sep 2012 09:44:46 -0700 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: It’s Time to Freak Out About Climate Change]]>
"A nation that destroys its soil, destroys itself." - F.D.R
Posted by heavyhebrew]]> Mon, 10 Sep 2012 21:25:58 -0700 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: It’s Time to Freak Out About Climate Change]]>
A law allowing forced sterilization of his ilk...now that would be cause for hope.


Posted by Upriver Joe]]> Mon, 10 Sep 2012 17:32:28 -0700 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: It’s Time to Freak Out About Climate Change]]>
Thanks Mother Nature, for releasing CO2, and your other assorted gases, or is you're from the south, vapors, on a scale that humans cannot compete with.

Thanks Mr. Sun, for entering the warming part of your natural solar cycle.

Thanks Environuts, for the laughs.

And remember to waste pure drinking water to rinse your recylables, that will be tossed into the regular landfill as nobody wants it.
Posted by Slam1263]]> Mon, 10 Sep 2012 14:48:34 -0700 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: It’s Time to Freak Out About Climate Change]]>
(Never mind the CO2, it's the nanobots that will get us in the end.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/articl…).
Posted by Paula C.]]> Mon, 10 Sep 2012 13:46:34 -0700 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: It’s Time to Freak Out About Climate Change]]>
You are of course right theoretically, but in reality it seems like your hope for change is unfounded.

1. Whenever there have been major changes in the atmosphere and temperature it correlates with mass extinction. End of the Permian etc.

2. We are clearly experiencing major changes in the atmosphere and temperature. When it will manifest itself, and how, remains uncertain.

3. The human brain evolved specifically to deal with immediate, clear and present problems. Humans are essentially incapable of reacting to inchoate future threats when their scope and impact are uncertain. (Give me an example and I'll happily be proven wrong.)

4. There's a time lag of perhaps three decades from the behavior to the problem.

5. Any meaningful response will require letting go of the idea of permanent growth, economic and otherwise. This is the principal foundation of our civilization, so it isn't going to happen very easily.

6. Only a handful of people in our society are even talking about this. Over half the country still believes in some version of being snatched up to heaven by God as a sort of contingency plan.

So I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just saying it probably isn't going to happen.


Posted by Upriver Joe]]> Mon, 10 Sep 2012 13:29:12 -0700 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: It’s Time to Freak Out About Climate Change]]>
Another thing that folks can do is to lobby their representatives for a carbon tax. Citizens Climate Lobby (CCL) is working on this at a national level (they have a Seattle chapter). Their proposal would levy an annually rising fee on all carbon-based fuels at the source, pushing the market toward clean alternatives. The revenue would be returned to consumers to offset the rising price of fossil fuels, allowing them to choose whether to spend the money on carbon or non-carbon sources. Over time this will push the energy sector away from greenhouse-gas-producing fuels. Jim McDermott’s Managed Carbon Price Act and Pete Stark’s Save Our Climate Act both incorporate elements of this proposal, though they use some revenue for debt reduction.

Political pressure is indispensable for making the large-scale changes needed. True, climate change is already happening, but we can still act to prevent more, and worse. True, there is lots of ignorance, denial, and self-serving obstructionism, but there is also a large and growing body of people who realize action is needed, not just on the left. One virtue of the CCL proposal is that it appeals to conservatives with its revenue-neutral approach (i.e. no new money for big bad government) and progressives (offseting the regressive effects of a consumption tax).

And, yes, our industrial lifestyle is not sustainable in thelong run, as Upriver Joe keeps pointing out. But that does not mean that action within the political system is pointless, as a way to guide the change rather than just waiting for the collapse. It’s impossible to be hopeful about politicians or the system, but if the people themselves don’t have the power to effect change, why do they keep spending so much time and money to try to bamboozle us?

Davis Oldham


Posted by Screeve]]> Mon, 10 Sep 2012 11:00:26 -0700 The Stranger