<html><head><style type="text/css"><!-- DIV {margin:0px;} --></style></head><body><div style="font-family:verdana, helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:12pt"><DIV>I was merely responding to the "bring civilization to its knees" comment made earlier. And I do not mean to make light of the fact that any disruption in ecosystems might cause suffering -- to humans and non-humans. But my point was more that such disruptions have happened before and ask why this alledged one is different and needs special attention? (I use "alleged" because there's much uncertainty here -- and the doom and gloom predictions have often not panned out. This is even leaving aside the "climategate" scandal.)</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Let's turn this around: What do you think is the case here? What do think will happen? What do you think should be done?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Regards,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Dan</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: verdana, helvetica, sans-serif"><BR>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif"><FONT face=Tahoma size=2><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">From:</SPAN></B> Christopher Luebcke <cluebcke@yahoo.com><BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">To:</SPAN></B> ExI chat list <extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org><BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Sent:</SPAN></B> Tue, March 2, 2010 3:10:35 PM<BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Subject:</SPAN></B> Re: [ExI] Phil Jones acknowledging that climate science isn'tsettled<BR></FONT><BR>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: times, serif">
<DIV>I don't know of anybody who seriously contents that global warming is a threat to the survival of the species.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>But significant disruptions to ecosystems tend to cause a lot of suffering. That's where my concern lies.</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: bookman old style, new york, times, serif"><BR>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: bookman old style, new york, times, serif"><FONT face=Tahoma size=2><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">From:</SPAN></B> Dan <dan_ust@yahoo.com><BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">To:</SPAN></B> ExI chat list <extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org><BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Sent:</SPAN></B> Tue, March 2, 2010 6:48:05 AM<BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Subject:</SPAN></B> Re: [ExI] Phil Jones acknowledging that climate science isn'tsettled<BR></FONT><BR>If we look at the long course of human civilization and even humans before civilization, both human civilization and humans have gone through lots of drastic changes in climate. So, like you, I don't see the big deal for adapting. I suppose food production might have to change over decades to adapt to different conditions -- maybe by changing the ranges and times for crops or by changing the types of crops grown.<BR><BR>Also, if we just
look at the last two or three centuries, we see a huge shift in where and how people live and how they get their food. This shift hasn't taken place as much in the Third World -- but that's mostly because of bad policies that can easily be changed. (How? Simply turn over policy makers and enforcers to me for re-education.)<BR><BR>This is, of course, assuming that global warming has merit and that at least some of the projected climatic shifts will take place.<BR><BR>Regards,<BR><BR>Dan<BR><BR>----- Original Message ----<BR>From: spike <<A href="mailto:spike66@att.net" target=_blank rel=nofollow ymailto="mailto:spike66@att.net">spike66@att.net</A>><BR>To: ExI chat list <<A href="mailto:extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org" target=_blank rel=nofollow ymailto="mailto:extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org">extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org</A>><BR>Sent: Tue, March 2, 2010 12:39:28 AM<BR>Subject: Re: [ExI] Phil Jones acknowledging that climate science
isn'tsettled<BR><BR>> ...On Behalf Of Mike Dougherty<BR>... <BR>> science isn'tsettled<BR>> <BR>> On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 10:45 PM, spike <<A href="mailto:spike66@att.net" target=_blank rel=nofollow ymailto="mailto:spike66@att.net">spike66@att.net</A>> wrote:<BR>> > I often see stuff like this, but it is always puzzling. <BR>> Can someone <BR>> > explain why the average temperature increasing by a degree <BR>> or two or <BR>> > half a degree in a human lifetime would bring civilization to its <BR>> > knees? Are we really that delicate and non-adaptable?<BR>> <BR>> My theory supposes linear growth of 1 degree per year <BR>> wouldn't be so bad if not for the anecdote about boiling a <BR>> frog to death... Conversely at >1 degree per year as input to my weather <BR>> model... The observation of <1 degree per year of temperature increase <BR>> to this weather
model...Mike<BR><BR>Mike's post makes my point better than I did. We are so very accustomed to<BR>thinking of something per year, a few percent a year, another birthday per<BR>year and so forth. The climatologists are offering numbers that look like a<BR>degree per century. We just are not used talking about anything per<BR>century, so confusion results. A lot of teens somehow jump to the<BR>stunningly illogical conclusion that this two degree change we are trying to<BR>stop will show up in a few years or any day now since the Copenhagen flop.<BR><BR>This causes what I call the Russians vs Germans effect. During WW2, the<BR>Germans had better technology, so in the summers when the days were long and<BR>warm, they beat back their foes and drove deep into Russia, but when the<BR>vicious November storms hit, the German tanks were ill suited to the cold,<BR>the tracks were glued to the ground in the freezing mud, the engines
guzzled<BR>fuel since they had to be left running to prevent freezing etc. So in the<BR>winter the Russians had the clear advantage, and drove the Germans all the<BR>way back. <BR><BR>In the global warming debate, the proposed change is very slow, but human<BR>lifetimes are very short. We end up with the global warming people, like<BR>the Germans, having the advantage in the summer, but every winter, they give<BR>up the ground they gained because people still die from the cold. Then the<BR>global warming ridiculers, like the Russians, regain lost ground. The<BR>battle surges back and forth every year, with tragic results.<BR><BR>spike</DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></div><br>
</body></html>