Half of nation outraged by new Michael Moore film

[Cassiel]

To be fair, he has and does put his money where his mouth is - gives a lot of money to charities to support those without access to medical care, and even - in a rather beautiful little stunt - gave $10,000 for the medical care of the wife of one of his fiercest critics.

So you may not like his work, but he's probably a better person than you or, indeed, me.

[ç i p h é r]

Maybe he is a real champion of the people or maybe that's just a facade to build credibility/make headlines. Maybe he's trying to make money so he can help more people or maybe he's doing it so he can make lots of money for himself. Who can say, but there is no denying that he is making these films to make money.

Nevertheless, I'd consider his work if he was objective and sincerely interested in discovering the truth. Barring such, I think it's just propaganda.

[NickD]

By solution, do you mean STOP global warming? Achieve some sort of harmonious equilibrium in nature? You understand that our very existence is a contributing factor. We eat. We breathe. We give off energy. We emit Carbon Dioxide (and other gases). This isn't just about petroleum. I think our chances of preventing the earth from warming (and then some day freezing) are probably next to nil and remaking the world to simply slow down the inevitable is probably not very practical.

Anyone who has been to LA must have noticed the smog. It's much worse than in other cities that are more densely packed. Why is that? Perhaps it has to do with the excessive use of cars in that city...?

Saying that global warming is inevitable so we shouldn't do anything is like saying that death is inevitable, so we might as well just eat nothing but McDonalds, drink nothing but beer, smoke 3 packs of cigarettes a day and don't do anything more strenuous than sitting on the couch and watching TV all day.

[ç i p h é r]

But ending the smog problem doesn't stop global warming. The reason we should be concerned about smog is because it's bad for our health and it's a much stronger case against petroleum consumption IMO than anything to do with the temperature of the planet.

I think saying we should do something to stop global warming is like saying we should do something to stop death. It's likely never going to happen and if we ever managed to do it, there will probably be a whole lot of unintended consequences that follow.

[Zakharra]

Whether man made or not, it is one of the largest issues facing the world today. Even if man is 100% blameless for the planet heating up (with the amount of crap we pump into the atmosphere, i cannot believe anyone can think that we are not part of the problem) we still need to find a solution rather than sitting back and going "She'll be right"

If man is 100% blameless, then what could we do to stop or slow global warming?

[Nekulor]

Of the roughly 300 Gigatons of carbon produced a year by nature, most of it is without human influence. It is the 70 gigatons we produce that are tipping a very heavy balanced scale into the unbalanced region.

Found all this info on newscientist.com

[NickD]

But ending the smog problem doesn't stop global warming. The reason we should be concerned about smog is because it's bad for our health and it's a much stronger case against petroleum consumption IMO than anything to do with the temperature of the planet.

I think saying we should do something to stop global warming is like saying we should do something to stop death. It's likely never going to happen and if we ever managed to do it, there will probably be a whole lot of unintended consequences that follow.

The smog is made of greenhouse gases. Greenhouse gases traps heat, making it warmer. Hence global warming. I presented it as a small example of industry contributing far more to global warming/greenhouse gases than humans breathing and farting.

You are arguing semantics. Doing something to stop death is likely to help prevent its early onset. At least in the attempts you are improving your health, and saying that's a waste of time is frankly baffleling.

[mxlm]

I think saying we should do something to stop global warming is like saying we should do something to stop death

I think you're revealing your lack of knowledge on the subject.

[Mulu]

We could stop global warming, and need to if we want to continue to prosper. Unlike death, it is not inevitable. In fact, we need to start sheparding the planet better if we wish it to remain inhabitable by humans. For the vast majority of its history, it has not been inhabitable.

We would have to take actions that would only reduce global economic growth by 2% to stop global warming. Not stopping it will reduce global econonic growth a *lot* more in the long run.

[NickD]

We could stop global warming, and need to if we want to continue to prosper. Unlike death, it is not inevitable.

I'm not entirely sure that is correct. The planet's temperature does change without our assistance, and we are currently in an ice age. However, rapidly increasing the temperature of the planet is probably not a very good idea. The slower the warm up, the more time we have to adapt to it.

That and it is theorised that the biggest extinction level event in history was caused by global warming...

[Zakharra]

We could stop global warming, and need to if we want to continue to prosper. Unlike death, it is not inevitable. In fact, we need to start sheparding the planet better if we wish it to remain inhabitable by humans. For the vast majority of its history, it has not been inhabitable.

We would have to take actions that would only reduce global economic growth by 2% to stop global warming. Not stopping it will reduce global econonic growth a *lot* more in the long run.

So we can stop global warming? What if it's also the sun's temperature increasing? That we can't stop. Can we alter the weather too? How do we do it?

All of that will put the planet's temperature back where it's supposed to be? Isn't the climate constantly changing? Getting warmer and colder at times?

[mxlm]

What if you don't know what you're talking about?

Some uncertainty remains about the role of natural variations in causing climate change. Solar variability certainly plays a minor role, but it looks like only a quarter of the recent variations can be attributed to the Sun. At most. During the initial discovery period of global warming, the magnitude of the influence of increased activity on the Sun was not well determined.


Solar irradiance changes have been measured reliably by satellites for only 30 years. These precise observations show changes of a few tenths of a percent that depend on the level of activity in the 11-year solar cycle. Changes over longer periods must be inferred from other sources. Estimates of earlier variations are important for calibrating the climate models. While a component of recent global warming may have been caused by the increased solar activity of the last solar cycle, that component was very small compared to the effects of additional greenhouse gases. According to a NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) press release, "...the solar increases do not have the ability to cause large global temperature increases...greenhouse gases are indeed playing the dominant role..." The Sun is once again less bright as we approach solar minimum, yet global warming continues.

http://solar-center.stanford.edu/sun-on-earth/FAQ1.html

[NickD]

So we can stop global warming? What if it's also the sun's temperature increasing? That we can't stop. Can we alter the weather too? How do we do it?

Space tugboats!

[ç i p h é r]

I think you're revealing your lack of knowledge on the subject.

Are you a climatologist?

[Zakharra]

So we can stop global warming? What if it's also the sun's temperature increasing? That we can't stop. Can we alter the weather too? How do we do it?

Space tugboats!

Turn the Sun off instead of letting it burn all night?