[extropy-chat] warmer weather = better wine

[Harvey Newstrom]

Spike wrote,
> Harvey I recognize that there are mutually exclusive
> theories on this topic.  I do not subscribe to both.

Good.

> Ive always believed in global warming in a sense:
> I also believe in motherhood and apple pie, I like both.
> 
> The part I have a lotta trouble believing is the
> notion that global warming will happen quickly or
> that it will cause major problems.  I regret that
> I am not likely to live to see the benefits of global warming, unless 
> cryonics works out, or the singularity people are successful.

I don't think anybody is seriously arguing that it will happen quickly.
Remember that the images of the statue of liberty with her torch poking out
of the sea come from Hollywood sci-fi movies.  These are not good sources
for reference because they are always exaggerated.

However, it still can be a disaster even if it occurs slowly.  If half of my
home state disappears, it would be disastrous.  If major cities like Miami
go away, or major retirements investments like all of Boca Raton disappear,
it would destroy a generation of wealth.  If the insurance companies had to
pay replacement costs for just the outer 1% of the U.S. coastline, it would
destroy the industry.  If all our major ports have to go away and be rebuild
further inland, the costs to maintain infrastructure would be disastrous.  

> As for runaway greenhouse effect, another Venus,
> nah, I don't buy that.

Again, this is science fiction.  I think serious scientists are predicting
the slow rise in temperatures and sea-levels that you are.  They simply see
more ramifications than you have acknowledged.  It doesn't have to go
outside the life-sustaining range to cause economic ruin to civilization.
Little effects like the dot-com bubble, accounting fraud, or a single 9/11
terrorist attacks have long-term side-effects.  What you are describing is
much, much bigger than any of these.

> Penguins will have trouble, yes.
> But we can modify them genetically, or simply select a
> subspecies that can survive on Canada's and Alaska's thawed 
> northern shores.  And walruses, well, I wouldn't want to be 
> them.  But plenty of other species will thrive, such as 
> humans.  We are *Africans* fer evolutions sake!  

Now you seem to have strayed from serious argument to humor.  If this entire
posting was a joke, please disregard my comments above.

> We are a smart species, we can move cities, we can
> move nations.  We can build cities on stilts.  We can sequester water 
> inland.  We can reclaim a great deal of land that is currently 
> useless, under ice most or all of the time.  We can reclaim a lot of 
> fresh water that is currently wasted, by creating new rivers and
> reservoirs, eliminating useless deserts.  The Sahara
> and Siberia both have bright futures, whereas now
> they are nearly useless.

Perhaps, but we can't do it now.  We can't even maintain our roads right
now.  I believe that technology in the future will grow dramatically.  But
if we don't have the solution now, and we agree that your slow global
warming is occurring, then we are literally in a race to create the
technologies you describe before the slow disasters you describe.

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com>