Is Climate Change BAD?

[Guthrie]

Replying to Is Climate Change BAD?

Link

Report: Global warming causing drop in crop yield

Decline affects both food supply and production of biofuels

By Ian Hoffman, STAFF WRITER

Article Last Updated: 03/16/2007 02:29:46 AM PDT

[jbg]

I think it is absolutely asinine to think we can pollute the atmosphere and it has no permanent consequence.

And I think it is equally assisine to assume this in light of the fact that recent warming cycles have featured temperatures well above current levels, and climate has been constantly changing. I think that any politician is as likely to propose lowering his own people's standard of living as Gore is likely to give up his mansion or Suzuki his diesel-belching tour bus.

[Rue]

I think it is absolutely asinine to think we can pollute the atmosphere and it has no permanent consequence.

And I think it is equally assisine to assume this in light of the fact that recent warming cycles have featured temperatures well above current levels, and climate has been constantly changing. I think that any politician is as likely to propose lowering his own people's standard of living as Gore is likely to give up his mansion or Suzuki his diesel-belching tour bus.

Two things;

1-the relation of man-made activity to global warming has already been proven-the rise of temperature not associated to man made activities is not what we are talking about and the attempt to dismiss man made activities as not contributing to the warming by arguing its all natural is b.s., its not all natural, that is the point, if it was only natural, it would not have increased in such a dramatic and obvious manner

2-getting fat Al or anyone else to change their lifestyle is precisely the point and it is no more assinine to deal with that denial by the masses as it is dealing with an alcoholic or cigarette smoker who is deeply addicted and won't change their habits either-governments can and will have no choice in the coming years to enact laws curtailing consumption of energy and emissions of fossil fuels. Its already started.

(maybe we willall have to give up our suv's and stop farting, what can I say)

[Guthrie]

... to propose lowering his own people's standard of living ...

no one has proposed this, you are offering here, a baseless lie - the truth being, using the technology to clean up our world will raise standards of living, not lower them

the guys trying to lower the standards of living for middle class America are now in the Oval Office - you have things just exactly backwards

[JerrySeinfeld]

1-the relation of man-made activity to global warming has already been proven

This sounds suspiciously like flat-earth thinking.

The ruthless attempt to cut off debate not only has the hallmarks of flat-earth thinking, but is blatantly unscientific.

REAL science encourages debate, questions and challenges to theory.

[Charles Anthony]

Report: Global warming causing drop in crop yield

Decline affects both food supply and production of biofuels

That is not intuitively a bad thing. You will have to produce a better argument than that. We live in a world where states commonly pay farmers to NOT produce crops.

I think it is absolutely asinine to think we can pollute the atmosphere and it has no permanent consequence.

That is not the issue. The issue is whether global warming is bad.

Who is to say that global warming will not make uninhabitable regions of the world habitable in the future or expose fruitfully fertile lands?

People will move inland and along mountainsides.

[JerrySeinfeld]

Report: Global warming causing drop in crop yield

Decline affects both food supply and production of biofuels

That is not intuitively a bad thing. You will have to produce a better argument than that. We live in a world where states commonly pay farmers to NOT produce crops.

I think it is absolutely asinine to think we can pollute the atmosphere and it has no permanent consequence.

That is not the issue. The issue is whether global warming is bad.

Who is to say that global warming will not make uninhabitable regions of the world habitable in the future or expose fruitfully fertile lands?

People will move inland and along mountainsides.

Exactly. As well - some people have argued that climate change can cause MORE precipitation in some areas and LESS in others.

Question: who is to say that the INCREASED preciptation will only fall in undesired areas and the REDUCED precipitation will only be reduced in undesired areas?

Generally climate change is simply, well, CHANGE. I though this was something progressives emraced!

[sunsettommy]

Wow the answer is right there and you still miss it!

Thanks for avoiding the question

Well gosh you read the answer and yet it was missed!

LOL!

[Guthrie]

[b... We live in a world where states commonly pay farmers to NOT produce crops.

....

that might have been true in the 60's ---- arguing that failure of crops to grow is a GOOD THING, is now, nothing more than a pathetic dodge

[Charles Anthony]

that might have been true in the 60's ---- arguing that failure of crops to grow is a GOOD THING, is now, nothing more than a pathetic dodge

What am I dodging?

The onus is on YOU to prove that we will not be able to grow crops anywhere else.

[Guthrie]

that might have been true in the 60's ---- arguing that failure of crops to grow is a GOOD THING, is now, nothing more than a pathetic dodge

What am I dodging?

The onus is on YOU to prove that we will not be able to grow crops anywhere else.

as moronic a claim as I have heard in lo these many weeks ----

the onus is on you right wing clowns to show how reduced crop production is good -- or at least, show what govt agency is paying what farmers to NOT PRODUCE

and it would be great if you guys could stop torturing logic so horrendously

[Charles Anthony]

My ancestors lived in caves on the side of mountains and ate grubs, roots, mushrooms and bats.

One of them took the chance of being eaten by a wildcat by going down the hill and cultivating the lands. That ancestor CHANGED the natural habitat to suit his needs.

Many moons later, an other ancestor of mine decided to build a dam to harvest hydro-electric power. In the process, arable land was flooded.

the onus is on you right wing clowns to show how reduced crop production is good

Do you have any clue how YOU get the electricity you so enjoy?

[Guthrie]

My ancestors lived in caves on the side of mountains and ate grubs, roots, mushrooms and bats.

One of them took the chance of being eaten by a wildcat by going down the hill and cultivating the lands. That ancestor CHANGED the natural habitat to suit his needs.

Many moons later, an other ancestor of mine decided to build a dam to harvest hydro-electric power. In the process, arable land was flooded.

the onus is on you right wing clowns to show how reduced crop production is good

Do you have any clue how YOU get the electricity you so enjoy?

I do indeed know where my electricity comes from.

I also know when a right winger is dancing away from answering questions or (worse yet) defending previously made outrageous and moronic claims.

Do you intend to ever support your claim that reduced crop production is good? or are you off to the next dumbass claim in support of planet destruction by way of corporate greed?

[Charles Anthony]

I do indeed know where my electricity comes from.

Repeat after me: My electricity comes from the flooding of land.

I also know when a right winger is dancing away from answering questions or (worse yet) defending previously made outrageous and moronic claims.

Do you really?

Can you recognize when YOU twist an argument?

Do you intend to ever support your claim that reduced crop production is good? or are you off to the next dumbass claim in support of planet destruction by way of corporate greed?

I beg your pardon???!!??? Where did I claim that reduced crop production was good?

Just because crops are reduced does not mean that crops can not be grown elsewhere in the world. Climate change can possibly expose previously unused arable land.

Just in case the title is not more than obvious at the top of every page, permit me to re-align this thread.

The question happens to be: Is climate change BAD?

Evidence of reduced crop production does not substantiate the claim that it is BAD unless evidence can also be provided that crops can not be grown elsewhere in the world. The onus to provide proof is on the person who says climate change is BAD not the person who asks for proof.

[Guthrie]

I do indeed know where my electricity comes from.

Repeat after me: My electricity comes from the flooding of land.

I also know when a right winger is dancing away from answering questions or (worse yet) defending previously made outrageous and moronic claims.

Do you really?

Can you recognize when YOU twist an argument?

Do you intend to ever support your claim that reduced crop production is good? or are you off to the next dumbass claim in support of planet destruction by way of corporate greed?

I beg your pardon???!!??? Where did I claim that reduced crop production was good?

Just because crops are reduced does not mean that crops can not be grown elsewhere in the world. Climate change can possibly expose previously unused arable land.

Just in case the title is not more than obvious at the top of every page, permit me to re-align this thread.

The question happens to be: Is climate change BAD?

Evidence of reduced crop production does not substantiate the claim that it is BAD unless evidence can also be provided that crops can not be grown elsewhere in the world. The onus to provide proof is on the person who says climate change is BAD not the person who asks for proof.

why don't you show us all a map. One that shows where arable land has been exposed. and don't parse arguments with me, if I get pissed off I can rip out your lungs without raising a sweat. ----

but first, that map - where is this arable land? who declares it such?

finally, what studies support your claims that:

That is not intuitively a bad thing. You will have to produce a better argument than that. We live in a world where states commonly pay farmers to NOT produce crops.

[jbg]

Guthrie, play nice!!!

[Charles Anthony]

why don't you show us all a map. One that shows where arable land has been exposed.

Why should I? Let me remind you of the question again: Is Climate Change BAD?

You say it is but you have not proven it.

if I get pissed off I can rip out your lungs without raising a sweat. ----

I wonder how you would handle a radio interview instead.

but first, that map - where is this arable land? who declares it such?

What does that matter? I am suggesting a possibile different outcome. I could have simply said "Somebody will invent the roto-tiller and make production more efficient on the reduced lands that we have." or "Somebody will invent hydroponic farming." or better yet "After the artificial government-supported agriculture market crumbles, the free market will permit hydroponic farming to be profitable." or anything else. You are the one who says Climate Change is BAD without proof.

and don't parse arguments with me,

What is that supposed to mean?

Is that a different way of saying "Do not ask me to prove my belief that Climate Change is BAD" or "Do not show fallacies in my logic!"?

Even though the onus is not on my side of the debate to prove that Climate Change is GOOD, I will entertain your request here:

finally, what studies support your claims that:

That is not intuitively a bad thing. You will have to produce a better argument than that. We live in a world where states commonly pay farmers to NOT produce crops.

Here you go:

To deal with surpluses, the EU then subsidized product storage, exported surpluses or simply disposed of them. Further measures were implemented to curb the production of these commodities: compulsory set-asides where farmers keep a percentage of their land uncultivated, fixed quotas on milk production with penalties for exceeding the quotas, limits on the area of crops and numbers of animals for which farmers claim subsidies.

Since food shortages are no longer a major concern in the EU member states, the CAP is now geared toward the preservation and management of natural resources. Their central role currently involves "support for farmers' incomes while also encouraging them to produce high quality products demanded by the market and encouraging them to develop additional ways of improving their businesses in harmony with the environment."

Public Benefits of Payments to Farmers

The environmental goals have been integrated into the CAP since the 1980s. Increasingly, farmers are encouraged to take care of the countryside rather than to focus on production of foodstuff through a recent reform called "decoupling" (i.e., payments to farmers are unrelated to production, as they are "decoupled" from output). Decoupling was introduced so that farmers are free to produce any commodity they wish and unlike previous subsidies for production of certain commodities, direct payments are given as farm aids.

The Fiasco of the Common Agricultural Policy

Guthrie, I find it appalling, disingenuous and unbelievable that you would quote some article about crop production without having a single clue about farming quotas and marketing boards. I do not believe that you are ignorant.

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear Charles Anthony,

I do indeed know where my electricity comes from.

Repeat after me: My electricity comes from the flooding of land.

Here in Alberta, most electricity comes from the burning of coal. A lot in the east comes from the flooding of land, but only because it is the cheapest way to do it. I suppose one could ask 'what is the 'best way', but there are two different definitions of 'best'. The first one would be 'the most efficient with the least environmental impact', and the other 'best' is 'the most profitable'.

Just because crops are reduced does not mean that crops can not be grown elsewhere in the world. Climate change can possibly expose previously unused arable land.

It is possible, but history shows that massive change results in massive death. I suppose that is why many people in the area were opposed to the Great Whale Project. They could have been told to stay put, for it is possible that, over time, you may develop gills!

[Guthrie]

so, you can't support your claims -- better to give the short answer than obfuscate

[sunsettommy]

so, you can't support your claims -- better to give the short answer than obfuscate

When will YOU?

[Charles Anthony]

so, you can't support your claims -- better to give the short answer than obfuscate

Obfuscate? Quite the contrary: I have clarified my position.

Let me be blunt with the following short challenge to you: ignore EVERYTHING I said, discard EVERYTHING I said as being the ravings of a lunatic and prove that Climate Change is BAD.

Can you prove that Climate Change is BAD?

I bet you can not even meet my challenge to ignore everything I said.

Oh and before you try, I would like to remind you of the title of this thread: Is Climate Change is BAD?

Here in Alberta, most electricity comes from the burning of coal. A lot in the east comes from the flooding of land, but only because it is the cheapest way to do it.

Big deal. Those minute details are irrelevent to the principle at hand. I am suggesting that people always pick and choose what aspects of the environment to sacrifice and sometimes that involves destroying arable land. The onus is not on me to prove what changes are GOOD or BAD or BEST but rather on the politicians who insist on judging it to be only one way.

I was faced with "decreasing crops" as a feeble attempt to prove that Climate Change is BAD! when it is not automatically logical on a global scale.

It is possible, but history shows that massive change results in massive death.

In that case, what do you suggest we do in the face of Climate Change? unconditionally follow the orders of politicians who can not justify their commands???

[Guthrie]

so, you can't support your claims -- better to give the short answer than obfuscate

Obfuscate? Quite the contrary: I have clarified my position.

Let me be blunt with the following short challenge to you: ignore EVERYTHING I said, discard EVERYTHING I said as being the ravings of a lunatic and prove that Climate Change is BAD.

Can you prove that Climate Change is BAD?

I bet you can not even meet my challenge to ignore everything I said.

Oh and before you try, I would like to remind you of the title of this thread: Is Climate Change is BAD?

Here in Alberta, most electricity comes from the burning of coal. A lot in the east comes from the flooding of land, but only because it is the cheapest way to do it.

Big deal. Those minute details are irrelevent to the principle at hand. I am suggesting that people always pick and choose what aspects of the environment to sacrifice and sometimes that involves destroying arable land. The onus is not on me to prove what changes are GOOD or BAD or BEST but rather on the politicians who insist on judging it to be only one way.

I was faced with "decreasing crops" as a feeble attempt to prove that Climate Change is BAD! when it is not automatically logical on a global scale.

It is possible, but history shows that massive change results in massive death.

In that case, what do you suggest we do in the face of Climate Change? unconditionally follow the orders of politicians who can not justify their commands???

"Quite the contrary: I have clarified my position. " -- I didn't ask you to clarify your position, I asked you to defend it. You failed.

[Charles Anthony]

"Quite the contrary: I have clarified my position. " -- I didn't ask you to clarify your position, I asked you to defend it.

I defended it too. The thread speaks for itself.

You failed.

Thanks, Teach. Are you just going to give me an F or a chance to write a supplemental?

Neverththeless, I was right: you can NOT meet my challenge to ignore everything I said and prove that Climate Change is BAD.

I am reminded of this thread: Is Global Warming a Leftist Urban Legend? -- A Skeptical Litany

Just as a point of order: you repeated my entire post just to add a tiny response to one of my lines.

Check out these threads:

NEW RULE! - Trim Your Posts, Please take the time to remove the bulk of the post your quoting

Trim Your Posts and Quotes, Don't just hit "Reply"

Using the [ Quote ] Feature:, Avoid using more too many quotes!

[Guthrie]

I've already met your challenge. The headline proclaimed, ".Global warming causing drop in crop yield"

and no, you never supported your claim that arable land is being opened by global warming -- claiming to have supported it, is a lie

[Charles Anthony]

I've already met your challenge. The headline proclaimed, ".Global warming causing drop in crop yield"

What makes that BAD on a global scale?

That can only make sense if it is physically impossible to grow crops otherwise.

The North American automobile market is dropping too. Does that make it BAD on a global scale??? Your logic says it would.

and no, you never supported your claim that arable land is being opened by global warming -- claiming to have supported it, is a lie

That is not what I said. I said it is possible. That possibility alone is enough to make your association between crop yields and BAD to be wrong on a global scale.