Global Warming Hysteria
05-08-2007, 06:54 PM
#21
Administrator
Joined APC: May 2006
Position: C-172
Posts: 8,024
A moment with ... Dr. Richard Leakey
Typical of me, I'm going to miss this as it is happening right now at the University of Washington. Below is an excerpted interview with Dr. Leakey.
Richard Leakey will speak at 7:30 p.m. Tuesday on "Climate Change and the Future of Life on Earth" at the University of Washington's Meany Hall, sponsored by the Burke Museum.
For tickets or more information, call 800-733-1789 or visit focusonplanetearth.com.
Dan DeLong / P-I
Richard Leakey discusses his views on aid to Africa and climate change during an interview Monday at a University District hotel.
Tickets are $40 general, $35 for museum members and $20 for students.
For more information about Leakey, go to leakeyfoundation.org
Richard Leakey's life sounds like one of those wild African adventure movies.
Given all of the things he's accomplished and experienced, this is perhaps the simplest way to describe Leakey. The world-renowned and controversial Kenyan paleontologist, whose discoveries have contributed to the grand story of human origins, learned his science as a son of the equally famed fossil hunters Louis and Mary Leakey.
Also an ardent conservationist, Leakey in 1989 was made head of the Kenyan wildlife conservation department by Kenyan President Daniel Arap Moi. One of his methods, which proved successful but also created enemies, was to instruct his men to simply shoot poachers on sight. In 1993, he survived a plane crash -- in which sabotage was suspected -- but lost both of his legs below the knees.
In 1995, Leakey formed a new Kenyan political party, the Safina Party, to challenge Moi's political dominance. Supporters of Moi routinely harassed Leakey and even beat him up once in an effort to discourage the movement. The scientist-conservationist eventually was appointed to serve in various government positions (at the urging of international donors) and remains active, though unofficially, in Kenyan politics and civic movements. He was recently named chairman of Transparency International, an anti-corruption organization.
Leakey is now directing his damn-the-torpedoes approach to the issue of climate change. The Seattle P-I caught up with him at his hotel Monday.
Before we get to the issue of global warming, your story indicates that trying to do good in Africa can get you killed. For many Americans, aid to Africa often seems like a waste of money -- because of corruption, entrenched dysfunction and so on. How do you see it?
"I see it very differently. If I may say so, a lot of the current crises and poor governance that pervades our political systems in Africa are direct results of the Cold War -- the struggle between the West and the Soviet Union. We don't necessarily want you to help us fix things now. Africa's problems can only be solved by Africans. The way Europe and the U.S. could help would be to actually stop interfering, take more of a hands-off approach, and just support those who want to help themselves -- rather than always try to run the show."
You've had a bit of an eclectic approach to life -- doing cutting-edge paleontology, pursuing poachers at gunpoint, getting thumped in politics and now taking on climate change. Why climate change?
"All the critical stages of evolution, and in the paleontological record, have been brought about by climate change. The disappearance of the dinosaurs, the development of our large brains, the expansion of agriculture and civilizations, all have been due to major changes in climate. When people say it's happened before, damn right it has. And the climate change that's happening now has all the hallmarks of being another massive change."
But losing the dinosaurs, getting bigger brains and starting agriculture sound like benefits. Isn't it possible climate change won't be that bad?
"It's true that some areas, such as in the temperate regions, may see some short-term benefits. The negative impacts will be more likely in the tropical and subtropical regions. But what's happening now is happening at a speed that's unprecedented. The decline in species is astounding. When you lose 60 to 70 percent of all life forms, there will be consequences."
What can people do to prevent this?
"Well, it's really too late to hope this won't happen. It's happening. Mount Kilimanjaro has had ice on top for the last 12,000 years and, within the next 10 years or so, there will be no ice left. This isn't rocket science. If people care about wildlife, we need a strategy to deal with this now. Many of these animals already have nowhere else to go. I'm speaking out about climate change because it's a far bigger threat than poachers or anything else to the survival of species -- to life as we know it, really."
Richard Leakey will speak at 7:30 p.m. Tuesday on "Climate Change and the Future of Life on Earth" at the University of Washington's Meany Hall, sponsored by the Burke Museum.
For tickets or more information, call 800-733-1789 or visit focusonplanetearth.com.
Dan DeLong / P-I
Richard Leakey discusses his views on aid to Africa and climate change during an interview Monday at a University District hotel.
Tickets are $40 general, $35 for museum members and $20 for students.
For more information about Leakey, go to leakeyfoundation.org
Richard Leakey's life sounds like one of those wild African adventure movies.
Given all of the things he's accomplished and experienced, this is perhaps the simplest way to describe Leakey. The world-renowned and controversial Kenyan paleontologist, whose discoveries have contributed to the grand story of human origins, learned his science as a son of the equally famed fossil hunters Louis and Mary Leakey.
Also an ardent conservationist, Leakey in 1989 was made head of the Kenyan wildlife conservation department by Kenyan President Daniel Arap Moi. One of his methods, which proved successful but also created enemies, was to instruct his men to simply shoot poachers on sight. In 1993, he survived a plane crash -- in which sabotage was suspected -- but lost both of his legs below the knees.
In 1995, Leakey formed a new Kenyan political party, the Safina Party, to challenge Moi's political dominance. Supporters of Moi routinely harassed Leakey and even beat him up once in an effort to discourage the movement. The scientist-conservationist eventually was appointed to serve in various government positions (at the urging of international donors) and remains active, though unofficially, in Kenyan politics and civic movements. He was recently named chairman of Transparency International, an anti-corruption organization.
Leakey is now directing his damn-the-torpedoes approach to the issue of climate change. The Seattle P-I caught up with him at his hotel Monday.
Before we get to the issue of global warming, your story indicates that trying to do good in Africa can get you killed. For many Americans, aid to Africa often seems like a waste of money -- because of corruption, entrenched dysfunction and so on. How do you see it?
"I see it very differently. If I may say so, a lot of the current crises and poor governance that pervades our political systems in Africa are direct results of the Cold War -- the struggle between the West and the Soviet Union. We don't necessarily want you to help us fix things now. Africa's problems can only be solved by Africans. The way Europe and the U.S. could help would be to actually stop interfering, take more of a hands-off approach, and just support those who want to help themselves -- rather than always try to run the show."
You've had a bit of an eclectic approach to life -- doing cutting-edge paleontology, pursuing poachers at gunpoint, getting thumped in politics and now taking on climate change. Why climate change?
"All the critical stages of evolution, and in the paleontological record, have been brought about by climate change. The disappearance of the dinosaurs, the development of our large brains, the expansion of agriculture and civilizations, all have been due to major changes in climate. When people say it's happened before, damn right it has. And the climate change that's happening now has all the hallmarks of being another massive change."
But losing the dinosaurs, getting bigger brains and starting agriculture sound like benefits. Isn't it possible climate change won't be that bad?
"It's true that some areas, such as in the temperate regions, may see some short-term benefits. The negative impacts will be more likely in the tropical and subtropical regions. But what's happening now is happening at a speed that's unprecedented. The decline in species is astounding. When you lose 60 to 70 percent of all life forms, there will be consequences."
What can people do to prevent this?
"Well, it's really too late to hope this won't happen. It's happening. Mount Kilimanjaro has had ice on top for the last 12,000 years and, within the next 10 years or so, there will be no ice left. This isn't rocket science. If people care about wildlife, we need a strategy to deal with this now. Many of these animals already have nowhere else to go. I'm speaking out about climate change because it's a far bigger threat than poachers or anything else to the survival of species -- to life as we know it, really."
05-08-2007, 07:28 PM
#22
Line Holder
Joined APC: Mar 2007
Position: SWA/FO
Posts: 36
Global warming is in fact happening, but the debate is about the cause. I have a great deal of respect for Dr Leakey, but he is a "world-renowned and controversial Kenyan paleontologist", not a climatologist or an expert in atmospheric physics. His is very qualified to make the statements he does about historical temperature changes based on fossile records. This does not make him an expert on the causes of global warming.
"In 1995, Leakey formed a new Kenyan political party"
Dr Leakey is clearly as much a politician as a scientist. Again the real debate is whether or not the current warming is due to natural causes or by human activity. Dr Leakey has no expertise in that area and his political leanings make me question whether or not he has based his conclusions on real science or policy/politics. There are many scientists that think human contribution to greenhouse effect is negligable and the models used to predict future climate are seriously flawed and incomplete. Just because someone has a PhD, doesn't mean they are an expert in anything other than their own discipline.
"In 1995, Leakey formed a new Kenyan political party"
Dr Leakey is clearly as much a politician as a scientist. Again the real debate is whether or not the current warming is due to natural causes or by human activity. Dr Leakey has no expertise in that area and his political leanings make me question whether or not he has based his conclusions on real science or policy/politics. There are many scientists that think human contribution to greenhouse effect is negligable and the models used to predict future climate are seriously flawed and incomplete. Just because someone has a PhD, doesn't mean they are an expert in anything other than their own discipline.
05-08-2007, 07:55 PM
#23
With The Resistance
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Burning the Agitprop of the Apparat
Posts: 6,191
To those who would say that the climate has always changed, and the latest warming cycle is just another such change, Dr. Leakey says, "The world's climate has indeed changed, and there's some very good records of these changes, but it's never changed when there's a human population of eight or nine billion individuals." That is the number predicted to populate the Earth by mid-century.
Everyone has their agenda and the halls of academia are no exception. The changes have always been there, the human presence has not. Much of Leakey's message concerns the evils of civilization and agriculture, the concept of MMGW is frosting on the cake.
One may easily examine actual temperatures over time, there has been no dramatic rise during the last 200 years. Unless you consider 0.5 degrees C dramatic. I include this chart to show "projections". The problem here is that better measurements from space have shown this chart to be inaccurate with regard to the rise in the last 20 or so years, in fact they negate it entirely. The projections are really the crux of what I am questioning. How exactly did they arrive at this estimate? If they prove to be accurate is a
1.5 Degree C rise going to lead to the effects many claim? Why does the recent UN study allow for a 700% variance in expected outcomes? It had a lot to do with how they construct their model. Remember last year's Hurricane predictions?
Everyone has their agenda and the halls of academia are no exception. The changes have always been there, the human presence has not. Much of Leakey's message concerns the evils of civilization and agriculture, the concept of MMGW is frosting on the cake.
One may easily examine actual temperatures over time, there has been no dramatic rise during the last 200 years. Unless you consider 0.5 degrees C dramatic. I include this chart to show "projections". The problem here is that better measurements from space have shown this chart to be inaccurate with regard to the rise in the last 20 or so years, in fact they negate it entirely. The projections are really the crux of what I am questioning. How exactly did they arrive at this estimate? If they prove to be accurate is a
1.5 Degree C rise going to lead to the effects many claim? Why does the recent UN study allow for a 700% variance in expected outcomes? It had a lot to do with how they construct their model. Remember last year's Hurricane predictions?
Last edited by jungle; 08-17-2007 at 05:25 AM.
05-08-2007, 08:40 PM
#24
Swearing at the FMA
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: MD-88 FO
Posts: 902
The weather and climate has been crazy since the beginning of the world. It swings, it changes...and it will never stop doing so. For one to assume that we're going to heat up until the Earth completely liquidates is absurd. While we may be in a short-term warming cycle (and by short-term I mean the hundred or so years that people keep pointing to, saying we're warming up), this won't continue for the next thousand.
Weather/climate is a cycle. I asked our weather mod meteorologist shortly after Katrina why the U.S. didn't load up C-130's full of seeding agent to go out and "kill/seed down" such catastrophes. His response was that if we were to do such things, it would thoroughly throw things off balance, climatologically speaking. Point being...extreme occurrences are just a part of the natural cycle of how the world works...and just when you think you have it all figured out, the pendulum will swing the other direction.
I like the Earth too, but one needs to make sure that any solutions that are reached make sense. For example, there is no doubt that catalytic converters on cars, designed to prevent excessive exhaust emissions, cause an efficiency problem, and, as a result, one has to use MORE GAS! Not smart. The same holds true for emissions restrictions in states such as California and Colorado. Other get all excited about side-loading wash machines, which supposedly cut water use by 50%. Unfortunately, they also drop capacity by 50%, meaning you use the same amount of water but use the wash machine twice as much, using MORE POWER!
I do indeed hope that the U.S. can figure out some sort of alternative fuel that works, and soon. Gas is ridiculously expensive, and we haven't even seen the beginning of it. The cost of fuel is destroying bottomlines in this industry, which in turn affects our QOL. In fact, without any evidence to support it, I'll go out on a limb and say that I believe profits would be back at pre 9/11 levels were it not for the insane expense of fuel.
Lots of disjointed thoughts...hope that wasn't too confusing...good night.
Weather/climate is a cycle. I asked our weather mod meteorologist shortly after Katrina why the U.S. didn't load up C-130's full of seeding agent to go out and "kill/seed down" such catastrophes. His response was that if we were to do such things, it would thoroughly throw things off balance, climatologically speaking. Point being...extreme occurrences are just a part of the natural cycle of how the world works...and just when you think you have it all figured out, the pendulum will swing the other direction.
I like the Earth too, but one needs to make sure that any solutions that are reached make sense. For example, there is no doubt that catalytic converters on cars, designed to prevent excessive exhaust emissions, cause an efficiency problem, and, as a result, one has to use MORE GAS! Not smart. The same holds true for emissions restrictions in states such as California and Colorado. Other get all excited about side-loading wash machines, which supposedly cut water use by 50%. Unfortunately, they also drop capacity by 50%, meaning you use the same amount of water but use the wash machine twice as much, using MORE POWER!
I do indeed hope that the U.S. can figure out some sort of alternative fuel that works, and soon. Gas is ridiculously expensive, and we haven't even seen the beginning of it. The cost of fuel is destroying bottomlines in this industry, which in turn affects our QOL. In fact, without any evidence to support it, I'll go out on a limb and say that I believe profits would be back at pre 9/11 levels were it not for the insane expense of fuel.
Lots of disjointed thoughts...hope that wasn't too confusing...good night.
05-08-2007, 08:49 PM
#25
With The Resistance
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Burning the Agitprop of the Apparat
Posts: 6,191
There are problems with both sets of data, but here is the NASA chart for the recent period. Now tell us which is valid and why. You will be astounded to find the wide number of charts, methodologies, and outright fudging of the numbers that goes on depending largely on source and agenda. You can pull up studies to support either point of view.
So which is it? Can we stop burning Carbon fuels? Will it have the desired effect? Is this warming a cycle or primarily man made? Not so simple in recognition or solution.
So which is it? Can we stop burning Carbon fuels? Will it have the desired effect? Is this warming a cycle or primarily man made? Not so simple in recognition or solution.
Last edited by jungle; 08-17-2007 at 05:25 AM.
05-09-2007, 05:18 AM
#26
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Position: FO, looking left
Posts: 1,057
Here's a link to a good thread I would like everyone to scroll through. You don't even have to read it, just skim through.
http://www.airlinepilotforums.com/sh...ad.php?t=11187
I happen to live here. Sorry for those of you who live in the middle of nowhere who have no respect for the environment/outdoors. I really wished you lived somewhere like California. Maybe you'd understand.
Ya, that is smog. Mostly from cars. Even if you refuse to believe global warming, you have to know that humans are hurting the environment. I could post millions of these types of pictures, but I simply don't have the time.
http://www.airlinepilotforums.com/sh...ad.php?t=11187
I happen to live here. Sorry for those of you who live in the middle of nowhere who have no respect for the environment/outdoors. I really wished you lived somewhere like California. Maybe you'd understand.
Ya, that is smog. Mostly from cars. Even if you refuse to believe global warming, you have to know that humans are hurting the environment. I could post millions of these types of pictures, but I simply don't have the time.
05-09-2007, 05:18 AM
#27
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Position: 767 FO
Posts: 8,047
Originally Posted by vagabond
"But what's happening now is happening at a speed that's unprecedented. The decline in species is astounding. When you lose 60 to 70 percent of all life forms, there will be consequences."
05-09-2007, 05:23 AM
#28
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Position: 767 FO
Posts: 8,047
Originally Posted by ryane946
I happen to live here. Sorry for those of you who live in the middle of nowhere who have no respect for the environment/outdoors. I really wished you lived somewhere like California. Maybe you'd understand.
For the record there are parts of the US that are nice besides Califonia. From where I sit I can see a cute little red fox playing in the woods. Smart sucker too, he has the range of a 22 nailed.
05-09-2007, 05:47 AM
#29
With The Resistance
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Burning the Agitprop of the Apparat
Posts: 6,191
[QUOTE=ryane946;162649
I happen to live here. Sorry for those of you who live in the middle of nowhere who have no respect for the environment/outdoors. I really wished you lived somewhere like California. Maybe you'd understand.
QUOTE]
I think your heart is in the right place and that is why I am going to tell you this. Don't ever assume that geographic location instills a special ability to think.
When a grown man makes statements like that he is going to get his ass handed to him on a daily basis in ways he will never understand. Study logic, study rhetoric, read and construct an argument you can be proud of and one that will hold water.
Best wishes for your future endeavors.
I happen to live here. Sorry for those of you who live in the middle of nowhere who have no respect for the environment/outdoors. I really wished you lived somewhere like California. Maybe you'd understand.
QUOTE]
I think your heart is in the right place and that is why I am going to tell you this. Don't ever assume that geographic location instills a special ability to think.
When a grown man makes statements like that he is going to get his ass handed to him on a daily basis in ways he will never understand. Study logic, study rhetoric, read and construct an argument you can be proud of and one that will hold water.
Best wishes for your future endeavors.
05-09-2007, 05:51 AM
#30
Line Holder
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Posts: 63
Originally Posted by ryane946
You are right. Global warming will affect the airlines. In fact it already has:
Remember that snowstorm that Denver had right before Christmas. Got 3 feet of snow and closed Denver International Airport for 3 days. What do you think that cost United?? The world's second largest airline, at their second largest hub, on just a few days before Christmas (one of the busiest travel periods of the year). FOR THREE DAYS!! How about Frontier? How about EVERY other airline that flies into Denver. I talked with people who lived in Colorado for 60 years, and they had never seen a winter as funny as this year. And the airlines paid for it.
How about all those storms back east in February. How much did that cost the airlines? American, United, Delta, Continental, Jetblue... I have seen the most abysmal ontime rates and completion factors in quite a while. Do you think weather has something to do with this??????
WEATHER has a phenominal affect on the airline industry. Cloudly/foggy, windy, rain, snow, ice, thunderstorms, hurricanes... what does all this do to air travel. Holding patterns, diverts, delays, delays, more delays...
Remember, $3 TRILLION dollars of our economy is dependent upon the weather! If global warming continues, airlines will suffer.
Remember that snowstorm that Denver had right before Christmas. Got 3 feet of snow and closed Denver International Airport for 3 days. What do you think that cost United?? The world's second largest airline, at their second largest hub, on just a few days before Christmas (one of the busiest travel periods of the year). FOR THREE DAYS!! How about Frontier? How about EVERY other airline that flies into Denver. I talked with people who lived in Colorado for 60 years, and they had never seen a winter as funny as this year. And the airlines paid for it.
How about all those storms back east in February. How much did that cost the airlines? American, United, Delta, Continental, Jetblue... I have seen the most abysmal ontime rates and completion factors in quite a while. Do you think weather has something to do with this??????
WEATHER has a phenominal affect on the airline industry. Cloudly/foggy, windy, rain, snow, ice, thunderstorms, hurricanes... what does all this do to air travel. Holding patterns, diverts, delays, delays, more delays...
Remember, $3 TRILLION dollars of our economy is dependent upon the weather! If global warming continues, airlines will suffer.
Last night at around 9:30pm the thickest fog came in the area. Vision was limited to only about 100 ft if not less. I could barely see the apartment building across the street from me.
But here's a question: Obviously planes shouldn't be allowed to take off in fog, but it wasn't that high. About a minute or so after take off, you'd be in clear skies. Would that be an exception?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
