Argue with me about something.

[Snarky]

Current scientific thinking tells us that there has been climate change previously and clearly not influenced by man. Why then can climate change not be natural? (not that I am saying it is in the present case). Because "it's natural" is not enough and there must be a force behind it.

It can be natural, of course. It's just that saying "it's natural" isn't an explanation. It just means "not caused by humans." It doesn't tell us anything about what is causing it. An explanation would have to identify (and provide evidence for) a cause.

But it does not mean that there must be "a force" behind it, if by that you mean a guiding intelligence.

[Calin Leafshade]

However, "it's natural" still is not enough for me for earthquakes or the universe itself. Even the mechanics of tectonic plate shift or the effect of volcanic eruptions do not go far enough (by which I mean they explain what is happening but not why) and I stick with Calin's logical process (although he did not apply it as I am doing and I am not suggesting that he did) to ask what is behind these things bringing about changes such as the origin of the universe. There must be a force doing/having done it.

Re: Earthquakes

We have a very good understanding of why and how earthquakes happen. The how is the plate tectonics part and why is the heat in the core of the earth. Any geologically active planet would have the same thing. It's really no mystery.

Current scientific thinking tells us that there has been climate change previously and clearly not influenced by man. Why then can climate change not be natural? (not that I am saying it is in the present case). Because "it's natural" is not enough and there must be a force behind it.

The earth climate is regulated by the amount of heat coming in and the amount going out. If you mess with either of those values the climate will change.

In this case we are trapping more heat in with CO2

[Intense Degree]

@ Snarky

Yes, and this is why I say it is not enough and that there must be a cause/force whether Human or otherwise.

In terms of the word force, I used it to mean "external influencing factor" in the way I assumed (although perhaps incorrectly) Calin had used it.

@ Calin

Earthquakes: Yes, the mechanics of it are reasonably clear, but not the how and why of how they (the mechanics) came to be.

Climate: Agree and I should underline I am not denying climate change or disagreeing that it is overwhelmingly likely to be caused/contributed to by man currently.

[Calin Leafshade]

/quote]

depends how broadly you're talking here. If by "the mechanics" you means "all of the physical universe" then fine.

[Intense Degree]

In the first part of the sentence I was referring to Earthquakes specifically, although the second part of the sentence, and the main point really I suppose, does indeed refer to all of the physical universe (obviously including earthquakes!)

[Anian]

So are you done with work, Calin? I'm getting kind of bored.

[SpacePirateCaine]

Earthquakes happen because the earth's crust is very thin and the major landmasses that once made up Pangaea are on free-floating chunks of rock that are constantly moving due to the flow of our consistently spinning molten core. The spinning is caused by angular momentum caused by the Earth's orbit around our sun, which is a matter of gravity, physics and all sorts of very complex mathematical stuff that is way over my head. The simplest explanation is it's all gravity's fault, though I'm sure someone with a more scientific background could discredit that statement easily enough.

Einstein's theory of general relativity gives some pretty decent reasons for these phenomena - mostly the interaction of massive objects upon one another in the "fabric of space-time".

Now, on the subject of Earthquakes - whatever the reason, they certainly happen, and can suck quite a bit. Even so, it's quite the sight to behold when you get to be one of the few that can experience something that awe-inspiringly destructive firsthand.

I think I got a little off-topic, or just explained something that didn't really need explanation. Were we talking about creationism here? I'm a little out of touch. Carry on.

[Monsieur OUXX]

A very intersting quesiton has been raised then dropped : "Whether or not climate change has been caused by humans, should we try to fix it?"

The answer is totally YES, because an increase of only a few degrees completely messes with the ecosphere :
 1. it causes mass extinctions (it starts slowly but then gets worse and worse, the food chain being broken -- and when I say "food chain", don't only think of cute pandas, but also of microorganisms such as bacterias, virus, etc.)
 2. it completely disturbs the mechanics of air streams and oceans streams, at a planetary scale, causing disasters such as violent climate changes (storms, etc.), earthquakes, drought, etc. This also starts very slowly until it reaches some sort of threshold and becomes very serious.

Consequences of point 1 are that it might become hotter and hotter for our asses on this planet when the microorganisms start mutating faster and faster to adapt. Think of very agressive viruses popping out faster than we can cure them...

Consequences of point 2 are obvious: Nobody wants to live on a planet with summer like Sahara and Winter like Siberia, with Earthquakes inbetween.

Considering it's most likely our fault, it's a matter of responsibility to fix it, for future generations.

[WHAM]

I want to argue too!  8)

Global warming

Yes we humans have had an effect on global temperature and climate.
No it is not a destructive "Oh noez, the world will be ruined" sort of effect.

Before industrialization, before humans began to alter the climate with pollution and else, there have been warmer times, there have been ice ages and there have and will be "mood swings" on a planetary scale. Species have lived and died and the world has, and will adjust and recover, changed and altered, but it will recover. Species will and should become extinct, as this is what created new openings in the animal population of our planet to evolve new forms of creatures in. You know: breaking eggs to make an omelet sort of thing.

Will these changes cause human population to decrease? Hopefully yes, or humanity must decrease population by itself (World War 3 etc).

Can humankind stop the climate change: no and we should not. It will happen one way or the other, instead of trying to stop it, we should put our resources towards researching ways to ensure at least some of us survive the big changes. Change is good and should be encouraged to keep evolution going planetwide.

[Monsieur OUXX]

Can humankind stop the climate change: no and we should not. It will happen one way or the other

Why do you say that? This morning again I was reading the upper limit of CO2 megatons that shouldn't be reached by 2030 in order to limit the climate change to "only" 2 degrees.

[WHAM]

It has happened before, there should be no reason for it to not happen again. Unless we expected that humankind's appearance and spread across the world somehow meant that the world climate would STOP changing because we're just such dandy fellows.

[Dualnames]

There's nothing better, than trolling. So there is my amazing attempt at it.

[Atelier]

i might have a drink of apple juice.

Well I saved up a butt load of Tropicana 'pure premium' juice (100% squeezed) codes.

But it seems you no longer need them so, I incinerated them.

[Khris]

It has happened before, there should be no reason for it to not happen again.

Actually, man-made global climate change hasn't happened before. Tons of species dying out, yes.

As an outside observer I could very well say that "yeah, it's just evolution, humans messed up, but they'll die and earth will live on, and eventually other species will rise".

However, as a part of the human race, we have an obligation not so much towards "Gaia", if you will, but our children and their children. It's irresponsible and egotistical to shrug off a catastrophe the might be preventable by pointing to "the natural course of life" or something like that.
Real people are going to die by the thousands if not millions if we decide to sit back and watch.

Again, I understand the reasoning behind "over 99,9% of all species died out, now it's our turn", but I strongly disagree with not even trying to fix things.

Also, trolls, GTFO.

[Monsieur OUXX]

It has happened before, there should be no reason for it to not happen again.

Actually, man-made global climate change hasn't happened before. Tons of species dying out, yes.

As an outside observer I could very well say that "yeah, it's just evolution, humans messed up, but they'll die and earth will live on, and eventually other species will rise".

However, as a part of the human race, we have an obligation not so much towards "Gaia", if you will, but our children and their children.

Yeah that's pretty much my opinion too and what I developped a few posts ago : this time we're in the middle of it and we'll have our children pay for it... So it's rather different from previous mass extinctions, unless you have no empathy at all?!?

[Bror_Jon]

However, as a part of the human race, we have an obligation not so much towards "Gaia", if you will, but our children and their children. It's irresponsible and egotistical to shrug off a catastrophe the might be preventable by pointing to "the natural course of life" or something like that.
Real people are going to die by the thousands if not millions if we decide to sit back and watch.

Isn't it the same kind of shrugging off we do towards bad shit in general?

I strongly believe that we can fix this world for the better, stop mass-starvation, corruption, greed and so on. But we keep on shrugging with complacency.

[Khris]

You're right of course, the daily grind doesn't leave much space to join idealistic causes and actually change something.

A cynical realist (and I tend to be one to be honest) would say that they alone can't do anything anyway so why even try. And they have a point, but at least they acknowledge that their inaction is part of the problem.

And of course we won't solve anything by discussing it in an adventure forum. But I think it's mainly about raising consciousness.

[Anian]

You're right of course, the daily grind doesn't leave much space to join idealistic causes and actually change something.

A cynical realist (and I tend to be one to be honest) would say that they alone can't do anything anyway so why even try. And they have a point, but at least they acknowledge that their inaction is part of the problem.

And of course we won't solve anything by discussing it in an adventure forum. But I think it's mainly about raising consciousness.

I think we need a kind of a reboot of the whole civilization anyway.

[Khris]

Well fifty or so years from now, when most religions have died out, this is going to happen anyway

[monkey0506]

Let me be the existential one here and say that regardless of morals or ethics or empathy or anything of that sort, barring the validity of creationism or some other similar concept, it doesn't matter what we do. If we caused some massive climate change that brought about the end of all life on this planet, or hell, even the entire universe, none of it would really matter would it? The process would start over, and life would go on. None of it makes any difference at all.

That's a pretty cynical way of looking at things, but we all know that the universe is going to ultimately end up as nothing more than a fancy gimmick for an overrated restaurant.

As human beings we're rather emotional creatures, and nothing is more irrational than human emotion. I'm not saying that it's wrong to care about your fellow man, but let's be realistic. We're never going to achieve utopia because people are too selfish and greedy to allow it to happen. We understand that we're mortal, but we spend our entire lives trying to get over on one another instead of trying to actually change things for the better. When one individual does actually make a difference it's all well and good for a while, but 50 years after they're dead all we care to remember is, "Yeah, that Mother Teresa was a pretty nice lady." We're too caught up in our own lives to give the time of day to anybody who isn't going to give us something in return. We all understand this cycle and anyone who says I'm wrong is just trying to make themselves feel better because they can't cope with the reality that people really are just absolutely horrible to each other.

I'm far from an exception to this rule, as much as I wish I could say that I was. I'm as screwed up as the rest of you. I don't understand it, despite a desperate yearning to be able to change myself. Maybe one day I'll figure it out. Unfortunately, as one of my favorite bands once said, "...and here at twenty-three it's the same old me..." That song actually ties in reasonably well with what I'm saying, although it's a bit less cynical about it.

Oh, and for the record, I don't believe any of what I said about none of it mattering.