[geeks] Global Warming causes...

[Shannon Hendrix]

On Dec 2, 2007, at 11:00 AM, der Mouse wrote:

> I nevertheless support attempts to do things like reduce clearcutting
> and carbon dioxide release, though.

I agree, but not just for concern with global warming, but other  
problems.

One thing we do know quite well is that forests generate oxygen for us  
to breathe, reduce pollution, and are the rest of the genetic frenzy  
on our planet seems to like them quite a bit too.

Also, there are other things to consider: coal mining and use  
generates large amounts of radioactive nuclear material, much of which  
is pumped into the atmosphere or captured.

Coal plants put more radioactive into our daily environment than any  
nuclear plant does.

Of course, since almost none of the general public even knows coal is  
radioactive...

> The climate will be jumping around
> "randomly", yes, but if we push it around, it could very well head  
> over
> to a completely different area of the state space and rattle around
> there, and if that area is a climate we have trouble living in, it
> won't be too nice for us.  (A combination of catastrophe theory and
> chaos theory, sort of.)

> Since we evolved to fit the current climate,
> more or less, pretty much anywhere significantly different from what
> we've got is likely to be uncomfortable for humans.

Um, no.

Humans have evolved during long time periods of rather massive change,  
and we currently occupy huge temperature differentials.

What is more likely to hurt us is the fact that we now build cities  
where none used to be, and we depend on things which are adversely  
affected by temperature swings.

At the same time though, we have adapted over tens of thousands of  
years to massive disruptions in nearly every aspect of our lives.

I think we'll survive, just possibly not with the kind of life most  
people are used to.

Just for one thing: we really need to stop building cities on things  
we know are temporary.

I mean really, that's a no brainer.

Or, perhaps at least learn to deal with the idea that "your" piece of  
land could easily disappear.

Our society is too hung up on specific ownership, which coming natural  
disasters are going to disrupt rather thoroughly.

We need to learn to be more flexible and build structures, cities, and  
infrastructure that isn't so heavily dependent on location, and with  
plenty of redundancy.

> That's why I think
> minimizing our effects is a good idea - with luck, it'll stay in more
> or less the orbits it's been in for the last several millennia, the
> ones we know we can tolerate.

We also learn a lot by trying to be more efficient.

-- 
"Where some they sell their dreams for small desires."