"Anthropogenic Climate Change"

Posted by fivedollargold 12 years, 1 month ago to Science
7 comments | Share | Flag

First, it was "global cooling." Then it was "global warming." Next came "climate change." Now we see the term "anthropogenic" meaning "man-made." BTW, this organization bills itself as seeking causes that do the most good for the most people. Leaving that aside, it is interesting that their "shallow" research (their term, not mine) on this topic fails to consider sources in opposition to their anthropogenic assumption. Perhaps, they take President Obama at his word when he said the the SOTU speech that the climate change debate is settled.

All Comments

  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Hiraghm 12 years, 1 month ago in reply to this comment.
    "geo-engineering" = "Terraforming".

    Stupid to experiment with Terraforming on the only habitable planet we have.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by khalling 12 years, 1 month ago
    I did some checking and its as I thought. They are partnered with organizations actively promoting contraception and "female training." in third world countries. Often these organizations are looking to reduce the world's population. Ultimately believing that the earth can't sustain current levels.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ johnrobert2 12 years, 1 month ago
    It's a slow creeping alien invasion to kill off the human population and leave the Earth as a blank slate for their own use. (Makes as much sense as anything else those folks do.)
    Reply | Permalink  
  • -1
    Posted by CircuitGuy 12 years, 1 month ago
    They say anthropogenic because about a third or so would happen without human activities. It's just the normal cycle of glaciation and deglaciation. Two thirds of it caused by human activities and will probably be very costly.

    There's no debate about that until new evidence appears. The "debate" is just wishful thinking.

    Interventions #1 and #2 in the article are all we have now, but I'm afraid they'll turn out to be a drop in the bucket. Ultimately the solution will be #4, geo-engineering, I think.

    The notion of simply wishing away the problem is laughable. Right now economic activity depends on burning stuff, which gives us value now at the expense of future people who will have to clean up the mess. It makes you want to wish the problem away. The solution, at least in my guess, will come from engineering.
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo