Nothing really has changed on the basic science he is talking about since then, just the accuracy of the predictions is better.
These days in congress agenda driven cunts like Rand Paul wouldn't let him speak uninterrupted for more than a minute!
(3 votes)
Comments
(Old Spike)
Accuracy of the predictions is better? So is it global warming or global cooling? Is it manmade or is it caused by solar cycles? Do we plant more trees or cut them down and bury them? Should the wealthiest proponents of climate change be buying beachfront properties or actually consider rising tides? Is it 8 years before the end of the world or 100?
Is it really Rand Paul that has some kind of agenda you can't explain? Or the Club of Rome that has a clearly explainable agenda incubated in the 1970's to keep you in fear of boogy men while reducing the quality of your life?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Durenberger
Interesting. Does anyone here know what to look for?
There is lots, but here let me help.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thousand_points_of_light
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_C._Clarke
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_S._Burroughs
The deeper you go the more you find.
(Old Spike)
To answer your questions, in accordance with current research:
So is it global warming or global cooling? The latter.
Is it manmade or is it caused by solar cycles? The predominent contributor is the former (Solar cycles are actually included in the climate models, Sagan even explains why solar cycles have little to do with it and why the greenhouse effect mostly just swallows their influence).
(Old Spike)
And how would that explain other time periods in the distant past where co2 comparitively was off the charts and we had the richest bio diversity of all time that argueably paved the evolutionary path of mankind?
The Jurassic and triassic periods sound pretty awesome and prosperous with the exception of no real tools to deal with such large carnivors.
(Old Spike)
Here is a nice summary of climate events. I also recommend the yt video series by potholer on the topic.
(Old Spike)
I read it.
My thoughts are everything hinges on guessing games.
Here is what's not a guessing game.
We are headed for the worst financial crises in recorded history paired with a catastrophic food crises.
Reducing energy is going to make those worse, and create a different kind of extinction event.
You need energy output to increase production to pull out of a financial crises. No way around that.
Now. How do we address environmental concerns properly without screwing everything else up?
You must have a 100% reliable energy infrastructure ready to go that matches our current reliability and output, if not larger to accomodate future energy demands.
You don't shut a single thing off until the whole thing works, and there are no unforseen problems. So wind and solar arn't going to cut it. Too volitile, dependant, and fragile, too much monopoly on the rare materials required.
I'm all about Geo thermal, Thorium looks promising. Nuclear is fine. Expand hydro electricty. Amonia fuels for cars look good too.