| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 48301 | 2004-08-19 06:42:00 | OT: Weather | mr_rix (5375) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 263240 | 2004-08-20 00:28:00 | I appologise for bad taste, sorry. | Terry Porritt (14) | ||
| 263241 | 2004-08-20 00:58:00 | As with most people, I really feel for those affected up in Masterton . I also agree with Murray P regards a lot of responsibility for the effects of these severe weather conditions . Is it really the amount of water that fell, that is the real problem? Or is it the Local Councils, Regional Councils, Power Industries, etc, who tamper with the natural flow of rivers that exacerbate disasters . A river will always eventually find its own route again, may take a few years but will happen . We are all being encouraged to speak maori, governments are returning land [rightfully] to the maori etc . Fine, I agree with that . But, why is the Government not emphasising and encouraging one of the best aspects of Maori culture, that is respect for the land and its waterways . I just hope that Councils will one day put people at the top of the list, and use them for guidelines - not the big industries, pressure groups etc . regards, Marg . |
pulling hair out (4493) | ||
| 263242 | 2004-08-20 02:40:00 | My sympathies too for the people in Masterton and elsewhere who have suffered from devastating flooding over the past 6 weeks . Here in Southland we have had our fair share of this kind of misery in the past and my heart goes out to you all . |
Winston001 (3612) | ||
| 263243 | 2004-08-20 03:00:00 | To pick up on SbOh and other's comments, we really don't know much about climate . Our science and records are only about 100 years old world-wide . These so-called cataclysmic events are no more than the normal weather pattern for the planet . There are two differences from the past: 1 We can now measure and record events 2 The human population is approx 6 billion today . In the past, populations were much smaller, more sparse, and scattered . Thus a hurricane may kill a dozen but few other people learned of the tragedy . Because we now live in crowded populations, today hundreds are killed by the same event and through instant television, the world knows of the horror . The sun, in a typical solar flare, puts out more energy than we release into our environment in a year . Mans efforts are pretty puny . Straightening rivers, insisting on building on flood-plains, and on unstable ground all contribute far more to our current tragedies than the myth of global warming . Unfortunately, politicians find it much easier to blame the bogey-man of global warming, than to tell communities to face up to the realities of nature . Just my 2c (or tuppence) ;) |
Winston001 (3612) | ||
| 263244 | 2004-08-20 04:24:00 | > Just my 2c (or tuppence) ;) :D nice one Winston - did you add this to the other thread? |
andrew93 (249) | ||
| 263245 | 2004-08-20 06:21:00 | Seriously, do you honestly believe that the fact there are more human beings alive now than have ever been born previously in the whole of Earth's history has no bearing on the rather extreme weather events we have been experiencing in the last 25 years. | zqwerty (97) | ||
| 263246 | 2004-08-20 07:49:00 | Do I believe it? Yes. Do I know? No. In the 1960s scientists considered Earth was entering another ice-age. Today, the common currency is the planet is warming up. We simply don't know. In the face of that, logic suggests applying Occams Razor - the most simple solution is also the most likely. Thus the weather we experience has normal extremes but we exaggerate it. Because there are simply more of us being affected. Man certainly affects the surface of the planet through the distribution of poisons. Heavy metals, some heavy isotopes, long-chain polymers in plastics and sprays. These are far more lethal than weather events which may only be the natural changes due to an impending ice-age. Nobody really knows. So its worth debating because what might initially seem obvious, is less certain on detailed consideration. I'm no scientist - I just read about this stuff. Other views are welcome. ;) |
Winston001 (3612) | ||
| 263247 | 2004-08-20 11:22:00 | Winnie, you say that one of the reasons scientists have come up with a theory on global warming is that they now have the ability to measure the weather, I would add to that by saying more accurately now than ever before . In fact the weather can now be measured historically and measurements compiled for millions upon millions of years of weather patterns . Not a day by day postcast sure but, that is not what is required when trying to acertain trends and precedent for the type of events we are experiencing now . On a histroical basis the weather is changing more rapidly than ever before without the assistance of a catastropic event such as large scale volacinic activity or asteroid strike . Something is going on, that's for sure . We need to understand these changes and, although by no means a gimme, the global warming theory is the best one we have thus far in the absence of any plausible alternatives . What we don't need to do is clamber back down the evolutionary chain, and crawl back into our caves, to solve the challenges that are andoubtedly facing the earth and its inhabitants . IMO, we have to think it out then act in a considered way . In the meantime we have to ensure the best possible chance for the survival of people and to me, that means putting a priority on addressing issues here in NZ while not ignoring what is happening in the wider world . One thing about the perceived increased severity of the flooding now than in the past . I don't believe that it is true that that perception is soley derived from the fact that there is now a much larger population and someone to record the event . Ask a farmer in a flood prone area what happens to rivers after their catchment area has been denuded of trees . During a wet period and in particular during a storm, vast amounts of the soil from the catchment is washed down and raises the beds of the rivers on the plains . The next wet you have will not have to be as severe as the previous to cause the same amount of flooding and so on . Some rivers in NZ are now so altered they will never go back to their former state but they will eventually find a natural balance, just at a cost to those that are near them . That's my 2 cents worth, we're building up a bit of a kitty ;) now what could we do with that . Cheers Murray P |
Murray P (44) | ||
| 263248 | 2004-08-20 11:44:00 | Yes humans have an impact on the environment . . . . is it the root cause of all weather issues as the media would have us believe?? No I don't think so . The atmosphere is a very complex and chaotic system and there are a huge number of possible interactions between compounds both natural and man-made . As an example look at the ozone hole . . . . it could very well be a naturally occurring atmospheric phenomenon yet because we now know it is there and it has grown larger over the past 20 years it MUST be because of human intervention . Come on 20 years, 50 years, 100 years . . . . the earth is millions of years old and we are looking at a tiny portion of that, the truth is we don't have the observations to back the theory up . Yes we have proof that certain chemicals and pollutants can change the composition of the atmosphere and we should try to minimise this . Yes we should be more responsible with our treatment of the environment . But be assured there will be more storms, there will be more chaos and it may just be a normal occurance and something we can do very little about . |
Sb0h (3744) | ||
| 263249 | 2004-08-20 13:11:00 | This is great. I agree completely with SbOh and partially with Murray. Well expressed views guys. Murray - we have macro data about the earth's weather from ice-cores etc. But not micro daylong events. Not possible to find. But I certainly agree we shouldn't shrug and ignore Mother Earth. We need to modify our behaviour in terms of pollution, and treasure the ecology. Again on a micro level, removal of trees causes floods. And possibly less rain too. But that has nothing to do with global warming. Consider what we live under. The atmosphere is 40,000m thick. Plus the troposphere. It sounds a lot but it's actually very thin. About the same as a sheet of paper wrapped around a tennis ball. What is the greatest influence on the atmosphere? The Sun. Only 93 million miles away, close in solar terms and slamming inconcievable numbers of photons, neutrinos, electrons and other particles against us every second. Honestly, our efforts are feeble beside that. |
Winston001 (3612) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 | |||||