Wow.

OT: Merry Christmas?

j razz

Save your global warming preach for another forum.

Sheesh!

Some folks sound mighty testy about this... maybe they know they'll be getting lumps of coal in their stockings this year? (..and then burning them -- just out of spite -- making the climate change problem worse, I suppose).

As it only affects every living thing on the planet and there's none of them in this forum it is indeed irrelevant.

This response was generated by automated forum responder VK8341765.

Maybe the initial response was a bit harsh....but come on...if the guy wants to push his feelings on global warming there are thousands of places on the web to do so. A Vegas Vidoe forum on a Sony website ain't one of'em.

Maybe I should encourage everyone to go out and film people in wheelchairs? There is currently a ban on stem cell research and many of the afflictions causing these disabilities could likely be cured by stem cell research. We need to make the public aware of all the good that can come from this currently banned research. It is our duty as video editors. (?)

Come on....this wasn't relevant to anything...

Like the picture, cool doga and beautiful scenery

Well let me explain my position.
12 months ago I thought all the talk of global warming was simply bad science and more than a few agreed, the alarm bells were being raised well before the hard scientific evidence was available.
I think evidence to hand in the last 12 months now makes this hard science, there's still the odd unkown factors in the climate change models but not much room left to argue that something isn't happening.
Even the most moderate predictions make anything that's come before in recorded history pale into insignificance, including the plague.
The call to go out and record the current state of our planet for posterity isn't that irrelevant to all of us here regardless of our views on whether this problem is real or not or how we should deal with it. My views on how we should deal with it aren't very green, I think the 'greens' don't get it either. Keep in mind that the most optimistic predictions assuming we take drastic action very quickly is that 30% of the species alive today are committed to extinction. That means there's nothing we can do to save them, bears, penguins, whales are doomed, we might as well declare open season on them all, better that than they starve to death.
If you've seen March of The Penguins you might not be aware that this season most of the penguins didn't make it, there's probably only a few seasons left before that movie is the only remaining record that they ever existed.
Of course global warming aside, many things are causing a dramatic change in the state of humanity and I do feel we all should make an effort to preserve records of what will very soon be gone for posterity, just look to Victor Milt's latest venture.

As for your suggestion to go film people in wheelchairs, good suggestion except I think there's unfortunately going to be people in wheelchairs for a long time to come, global warming or not.

Bob.

Bob, why didn't the penguins make it this year?

SOAP BOX WARNING: I know there's been discussions in the past on when it is appropriate to make OT posts. Personally, I don't mind the few OT posts that show up here because we all share a common interest in video and in many cases the OT posts are also interesting. Sure, lable the subject OT by all means. But I must say that the rebukes that appeared here bothered me much more than this topic ever would - it just seemed out of character for this group who are generally pretty upbeat and supportive. After all, there was a video element to it, albeit slim, and I don't believe the poster to be a random drive by spammer. No disprespect to the rebukers (I've flamed in the past) but can't we give each other the benefit of the doubt, take a moment to think about the words we use and save the jabs for when they're really deserved?

Now how about that President Bush?

Bob, has the news about the Ross Ice Shelf been making news down under?? We could have a iceberg the size of France break off from Antartica.

I, personally, am of the opinion our earth's greenhouse is too massive for us to affect it much. I'm pretty sure we're just going through normal phases of warming and cooling. Some say we have global warming every 1500 years. However, I think my norwegian cousin, Tor, came up with a reasonable idea. Here in Minnesota it's definitely been warmer (and much more pleasant in the winter) since the 80s. Something's happening. We just may not agree on the cause.

Paul, the scientific consensus is moving pretty solidly that we are affecting the earth's greenhouse. Every time the same organizations look at the issue, the consensus grows stronger.

This Wikipedia article is good overview of where climate scientists stand on this issue. The IPCC is the big organization dedicated to look at this. I believe the US government or at least the National Academies on Sciences has endorsed the findings of the IPCC

The scientific consensus is that there are cyclic variations with wavelengths of many centuries, but that the global warming problem is outside any known cyclic variation.

Scientific consensus means that the vast majority of scientists (99.9%) agree. It is of course always possible to find some rabble rouser who disagrees just on principle, regardless of available facts.

It is conceivable (but not likely) that the problem is already so big that we can't stop it no matter what we do. Scientists say that this won't be in our lifetime though, and that even in this scenario we can delay it by quite a bit, perhaps giving us time to acquire oceanfront real estate on Mars :O).

UK Government scientists stated as their official conclusion on this issue recently that it was a matter of cost.

How?

They said that what could be done for 1% of GNP today, would cost something like 25% of GNP (please help me with the exact number, I don't have the report here) if delayed significantly.

Now that's a very serious economic impact if delayed. Something every true conservative should take to heart. Pay a little now, or a lot later, for a must-have, that should be a total no-brainer.

I also see that greenhouse gas reduction equipment will generate A LOT of U.S. jobs very quickly. If we act now.

Of course if we just stick our heads in the sand and hope the problem will go away, those damn Norwegians and other crafty people in Europe and Asia will take the lead, and then when the realization finally hits here, we have to go cap in hand and ask for licenses and "the best prices you can give us."

Of course a few here can make docos about this and sell to PBS...

I believe the US government or at least the National Academies on Sciences has endorsed the findings of the IPCC

With all due respect, I think that is an excellent reason that their findings are suspect.

The pengiuns didn't fare very well because the ice shelf has moved,
very large numbers became trapped in cravasses. When one of the pair fails in their mission the other mate and the chick die as well.
It's a pretty good example of what a fine knifes edge many species live on, climate change, man made or not can have a dramatic impact on many species.

Many species relying on the timing of certain events to survive, it's the seemingly insignificant changes in say when a desert plant blooms that cause havoc for migratory birds.

Bob.

whoa people! let's slow down for a second. the negativity is not needed. i think that if we all re-read the post and leave out the ONE sentence that mentions global warming, we'd realize that this isn't a "wake up everybody and stop global warming" post. at least i didn't get that out of it.
i'm only 25, but i have noticed a significant change in the winters and summers over the past few years (even though i live in florida & have always worn shorts at christmas). the point is...who knows what our grandkids are going to be faced with. i'm sure the world is a lot different now than it was for our grandparents. why not document it? at least from a historical perspective.
after all it gives us video junkies another excuse to play with our toys.

LOL -- Ask the folks in Colorado what they think about global warming! ;o)

Coursedesign, I think 99.9% would be on the high side of consensus, but I'm using the way it's used in this article
In its most recent assessment, IPCC states unequivocally that the consensus of scientific opinion is that Earth's climate is being affected by human activities

Jay, in addition the IPCC and the NAS we have The American Meteorological Society (6), the American Geophysical Union (7), and the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) all have issued statements in recent years concluding that the evidence for human modification of climate is compelling.

I don't know if it's 99.9%, but it's hard to find a peer-reviewed work by a climate scientist that challenges this. The article also notes that scientific consensus could be wrong.

What I don't understand is:

Why are people so adamantly AGAINST doing anything to curb pollution, conserve resources, respect and preserve the natural wonders of this planet?

Regardless of whether you think global warming is real, or if the activities of human society has an effect on the global state, I just don't get why so many people get angry at the suggestion that we, as stewards of the planet, should try to minimize the damage we might do. (Don't give me that tired line of Would you rather save a salamander than provide a livelihood for a logger. The same people that make that argument think nothing about subsidizing huge agribusinesses that drive the farmers onto the street, or allow entire job sectors to be shipped overseas.)

(I understand that "third world" countries, those poverty-stricken nations struggling to survive have more immediate things to worry about. I'm talking about countries that can do something about it...China, Japan, U.S., Europe, etc.)

What's even sillier is the approach of the West doesn't even make economic sense. This country is riding a huge resources boom at the moment, we seem to have leap to being the wealthiest nation in under 12 months. However the odd thing is we've done it without shipping any more product, demand has forced the price up so we're rolling in cash without digging anything more out of the ground.
Now that sounds like a good thing to me, just sayin to those who want what we have to sell they're in effect going to have to pay more for it. But instead of tryin to keep the status quo we're madly rushing to ramp up production, i.e. spend those dollars we earned on plant. Problem is then the price per unit goes down and the economic indication is we'll end up poorer as a result.
This isn't even good business sense, we're being blinded by greed not driven by economic rationalism.
Of course countries like China are becoming very environmentally aware, admittedly they're coming off an appallingly bad base but they're catching up very quickly. When I was there around 5 years ago I was amazed to see there was hardly a rooftop not covered with solar water heaters, even back then I saw wind farms as big as the ones in California and these are being expanded along with PV power stations.
Bob.

What is really comical (or would be if it wasn't for the sheer stupidity and for the health problems caused), the worst and most polluted kinds of particle board (used for a lot of furniture and home construction today) can now only be sold in the U.S.

Even China rejects them, on the grounds that the chemicals they contain are a disaster for public health.

So they're shipped to the U.S., where they are used to build up healthy short term profits, at the expense of a healthy population.

Presumably the idea is that a liberal immigration policy can then be used to replenish the consumers, as they die off prematurely, or are sent off to convalescent homes when they are unable to consume in a timely manner.

Feed them Soylent Green...