The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
Why is global warming even such a big deal?
Poast new message in this thread
Date: May 8th, 2013 11:11 AM Author: Cocky vivacious marketing idea Isn't the majority of the world's dry landmass in the north (Canada and Russia primarily)? If the world gets a little warmer, won't it open up all this tundra to farming and other uses? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2250448&forum_id=2#23157083) |
Date: May 8th, 2013 11:12 AM Author: excitant volcanic crater the official russian political position on global warming is GOOD! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2250448&forum_id=2#23157089) |
 |
Date: May 8th, 2013 11:15 AM Author: Cocky vivacious marketing idea It would be pretty good for Russia, wouldn't it? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2250448&forum_id=2#23157102) |
|
Date: May 8th, 2013 11:17 AM Author: at-the-ready comical boiling water right now human settlement is based on rivers and oceans and shit. and we cordoned off some of the key forests of the world and productive agricultural land.
let's say all rain patterns change and rivers are diverted and oceans creep in. if that happens too quickly, it will cause conflict, the need for mass population migrations, famine, environmental destruction, etc.
to me that is really the problem. if we inherited a slightly warmer world to begin with, i don't think it would be that big of deal. |
|
Date: May 8th, 2013 11:20 AM Author: Titillating menage ratface Whatever might actually happen, there is nothing we can do to avert it. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2250448&forum_id=2#23157124) |
|
Date: May 8th, 2013 11:22 AM Author: Cocky vivacious marketing idea Ok, so the problem with global warming is basically that people would have to migrate. Am I getting this right?
Why is this a bad thing in the long term? |
|
Date: May 8th, 2013 11:23 AM Author: Stirring rehab More to the point: Because the trigger for the migration will happen over 100 years (i.e. we arent going to wakeup tomorrow with the earth being 5 degrees warmer) whatever hassle involved will be minor. We already demolish and rebuild our buildings and infrastructure every 50 years or so. This goes doubly so for poorer countries that don't even have so much infrastructure and what they do have has an even shorter lifespan. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2250448&forum_id=2#23157145) |
|
Date: May 8th, 2013 11:36 AM Author: at-the-ready comical boiling water what if the rain that used to rain on the rain forest and the north american great plains instead starts raining on the sahara dessert or like the ancient soil of australia--we would lose so much and gain nothing. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2250448&forum_id=2#23157218) |
|
Date: May 8th, 2013 11:37 AM Author: Cocky vivacious marketing idea Wouldn't this result in a saharan rain forest or something similar? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2250448&forum_id=2#23157223) |
|
Date: May 8th, 2013 11:41 AM Author: at-the-ready comical boiling water sure, after maybe 10 million years (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2250448&forum_id=2#23157238) |
|
Date: May 8th, 2013 11:43 AM Author: Cocky vivacious marketing idea Ok, yeah, that's fair. But wouldn't the Sahara and other previously useless land become arable at least? That's a pretty good thing, no? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2250448&forum_id=2#23157248) |
|
Date: May 8th, 2013 11:47 AM Author: at-the-ready comical boiling water i'm guessing it depends on if there is like nutrients in the soil or if it is really just sand. i don't know how long it would take for a sandy desert to become fertile. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2250448&forum_id=2#23157272) |
|
Date: May 8th, 2013 11:48 AM Author: Cocky vivacious marketing idea But it's not like GW happens overnight either, you know? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2250448&forum_id=2#23157275) |
|
Date: May 8th, 2013 11:51 AM Author: Slap-happy station depressive you're also assuming the technology of growing things is static
by the time global warming really kicks in we might be growing everything hydoponically, (or probably some better way that I don't even know to conceive of) |
|
Date: May 8th, 2013 11:22 AM Author: Stirring rehab There are problems, as discussed above, but there are also a ton a benefits. Its not really clear one way or the other whether temps rising 4 degrees is on net a good or bad thing for humans. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2250448&forum_id=2#23157139) |
|
Date: May 8th, 2013 11:33 AM Author: carmine useless sanctuary Global cooling would be unambiguously much worse. The worst periods of the Dark Ages correlate when the earth was coolest. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2250448&forum_id=2#23157191) |
|
Date: June 12th, 2013 7:18 PM Author: thirsty aromatic water buffalo this (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2250448&forum_id=2#23382807) |
|
Date: May 8th, 2013 11:32 AM Author: carmine useless sanctuary If it gets really nasty we can always invade and annex Canada.
I'm half serious. If it's 2075 and we're sweating like mofos down here, with dying crops, and Canada is sitting up there with nice weather and booming harvests, it won't be too hard to come up with some pretext to conquer them. |
|
Date: May 8th, 2013 11:47 AM Author: Slap-happy station depressive why do you assume that you and your decendent are tied to this paticular plot of land/governmental entity?
wouldn't it be easier to just immigrate to Canada and live under whatever governance is there, than hope your governmental overlords violently annex it? |
|
Date: May 8th, 2013 12:00 PM Author: Stirring rehab His post, similar to the other pumo above in the subthread with you, illustrates a fundamental flaw in how the GW hysteria crowd treats the issue. Namely, they implicitly think (assume), that the increases in temperature will happen overnight. That is how the pumo jumps to the conclusion that an invasion might be in the cards. If you step back and realize that the 4 degree increase is going to be over 100+ years, it quickly becomes apparent that people in southern California would just get up and move north, eventually into Canada. No invasion would occur because a quarter of Canada would be, at that point, able to trace its roots back to America. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2250448&forum_id=2#23157356) |
|
Date: May 8th, 2013 11:58 AM Author: Cerebral ivory locus Its just a cover for liberals to push pet projects forward. Carbon tax, driving tax, high speed rail, solar, wind, mass transit, etc.
Basically to modify the behavior of citizens in a way they deem is best
If they were at all serious about it they'd have embraced nuclear power years ago |
|
Date: June 12th, 2013 7:16 PM Author: aqua deep potus box office (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2250448&forum_id=2#23382785) |