Why people don't believe in climate science

Page 4 of 8 [ 113 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next

eric76
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,660
Location: In the heart of the dust bowl

18 Apr 2015, 4:42 pm

ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
eric76 wrote:
ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
Again it's about what kind of debt will you leave your descendants. You think in terms of money but it's this that is the true debt because you see, we can survive without money, we can't survive without food, water, air. It won't affect you so much as it will them so next time the far Right cries about debt their kids will have to pay back, better give some thought to what kind of environmental debt they will repay because of our denial now.


I'd much rather leave them with a more productive world that can feed them much better. And that means Global Warming.

Don't buy into the hysteria. Don't panic. It gets you nowhere.

If you really want to know what happens when the world gets warmer, look at history instead of just imagining the worst.

I am not panicking. I am just saying think in terms beyond monetary. Money is just a drop in the bucket. It's all this other stuff that is far worse than running out of money. We should all be supporting environmentalists NOT condemning them as enemies or liberals. These people have our back. They want your descendants to survive well into the future on land that can feed and care for them. Do not abuse land or water because that is our survival.


If you will kindly read that document, you will see there's more to this than meets the eye. Invasive species, for example. It's not the first thing one considers when thinking of climate change but it can cause the effects to be worse. It explains on page 3.


Why do you think that I am thinking only in terms of money? Far from it. I'm thinking in terms of a more productive Earth. That means, in an Earth that can produce more food to feed people comfortably instead of seeing them starve to death.

As far as the document, how many of the authors are legitimate scientists? A document about science written by and for politicians is hardly persuasive of anything.

Hmmm. More precipitation? That's what it says on page 3. More precipitation. Do you define drought to be the result of having more precipitation?

Growth of crops being stimulated? Must be that pesky too-much-water new age drought.



ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 18 Jun 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,265

18 Apr 2015, 4:46 pm

eric76 wrote:

Why do you think that I am thinking only in terms of money? Far from it. I'm thinking in terms of a more productive Earth. That means, in an Earth that can produce more food to feed people comfortably instead of seeing them starve to death.

As far as the document, how many of the authors are legitimate scientists? A document about science written by and for politicians is hardly persuasive of anything.

What little I looked at reads more like Chicken Little's "Sky is Falling".


This document is about water and crop quality which are pretty much everyone's bread and butter and this is at the heart of the Climate Change matter.



eric76
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,660
Location: In the heart of the dust bowl

18 Apr 2015, 4:52 pm

ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
eric76 wrote:

Why do you think that I am thinking only in terms of money? Far from it. I'm thinking in terms of a more productive Earth. That means, in an Earth that can produce more food to feed people comfortably instead of seeing them starve to death.

As far as the document, how many of the authors are legitimate scientists? A document about science written by and for politicians is hardly persuasive of anything.

What little I looked at reads more like Chicken Little's "Sky is Falling".


This document is about water and crop quality which are pretty much everyone's bread and butter and this is at the heart of the Climate Change matter.


Yeah, the sky is falling because of more precipitation and stimulated plant growth.

Why assume that the crops one grows on a piece of land today would not change with a change in climate? If you want to know what you will be growing when the temperature is a degree or two higher, then look at what crops are doing well where it is already so high.

Let's look at one example -- wheat. Here in Texas, we grow one wheat crop a year. In central Mexico where it is warmer, they can grow two wheat crops a year. Of course, we might need to grow different varieties of wheat, but it seems to me that we can expect to grow more wheat when it warms up, not less.



ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 18 Jun 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,265

18 Apr 2015, 4:52 pm

eric76 wrote:
ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
eric76 wrote:

Why do you think that I am thinking only in terms of money? Far from it. I'm thinking in terms of a more productive Earth. That means, in an Earth that can produce more food to feed people comfortably instead of seeing them starve to death.

As far as the document, how many of the authors are legitimate scientists? A document about science written by and for politicians is hardly persuasive of anything.

What little I looked at reads more like Chicken Little's "Sky is Falling".


This document is about water and crop quality which are pretty much everyone's bread and butter and this is at the heart of the Climate Change matter.


Yeah, the sky is falling because of more precipitation and stimulated plant growth.

Why assume that the crops one grows on a piece of land today would not change with a change in climate? If you want to know what you will be growing when the temperature is a degree or two higher, then look at what crops are doing well where it is already so high.

Let's look at one example -- wheat. Here in Texas, we grow one wheat crop a year. In central Mexico where it is warmer, they can grow two wheat crops a year. Of course, we might need to grow different varieties of wheat, but it seems to me that we can expect to grow more wheat when it warms up, not less.

Uh. That's not what that document says...

It is MUCH more complex than just saying to yourself, the season will be longer so it's a good thing, twice as many crops. It also says there will be more fires, floods, droughts, and problems with the amount of moisture in the soil. So the growing season will be longer but the chances whatever is growing will experience a wildfire are higher. \

Also says vulnerability to diseases and plagues will increase.



eric76
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,660
Location: In the heart of the dust bowl

18 Apr 2015, 5:00 pm

ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
eric76 wrote:
ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
eric76 wrote:

Why do you think that I am thinking only in terms of money? Far from it. I'm thinking in terms of a more productive Earth. That means, in an Earth that can produce more food to feed people comfortably instead of seeing them starve to death.

As far as the document, how many of the authors are legitimate scientists? A document about science written by and for politicians is hardly persuasive of anything.

What little I looked at reads more like Chicken Little's "Sky is Falling".


This document is about water and crop quality which are pretty much everyone's bread and butter and this is at the heart of the Climate Change matter.


Yeah, the sky is falling because of more precipitation and stimulated plant growth.

Why assume that the crops one grows on a piece of land today would not change with a change in climate? If you want to know what you will be growing when the temperature is a degree or two higher, then look at what crops are doing well where it is already so high.

Let's look at one example -- wheat. Here in Texas, we grow one wheat crop a year. In central Mexico where it is warmer, they can grow two wheat crops a year. Of course, we might need to grow different varieties of wheat, but it seems to me that we can expect to grow more wheat when it warms up, not less.

Uh. That's not what that document says...


From the document:
Quote:
Precipitation, streamflow, and stream temperatures are increasing in most of the continental United States.

...

The growth of many crops and weeds is being stimulated.



eric76
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,660
Location: In the heart of the dust bowl

18 Apr 2015, 5:07 pm

As I understand it, prior to when we entered the period known as "The Little Ice Age", the Desert Southwest was wet enough that those who we call the Ansazi were able to grow the food they needed to survive. While there is no general agreement of why they moved away, one very possible reason was because of the drought as temperatures began to cool off and changed the weather patterns.



Inventor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,014
Location: New Orleans

18 Apr 2015, 5:35 pm

ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
will@rd wrote:
Here's a look at the psychology of believers in Man Made Climate Change - they're being suckered by psuedo-science and faulty logic:

Michael Chrichton: Aliens Cause Global Warming-Environmentalism as Religion-The Case for Skepticism




GREENLAND

I would need more info than just

The other thing I will mention to you is that during the last 100 years, while the average temperature on the globe has increased just .3 degrees C, the magnetic field of the earth declined by 10%. This is a much larger effect than global warming and potentially far more serious to life on this planet. Our magnetic field is what deflects lethal radiation from space. A ten percent reduction of the earth’s magnetic field is extremely worrisome.

to go on. This is a very vague statement.


So keep up with Science News. The magnetic field we depend on is in decline, letting in raw radiation, and Cancer is the new disease of the last hundred years.

The decline of the magnetic field was predicted by Science. Records in the rocks show the polarity of Earth reverses on a fairly regular pattern. Further, the field weakens just as the reversal starts.

The Magnetic North Pole has always been moving, charts have to be kept up to show True North and Magnetic North. Mostly it was small movement. Recently Magnetic North started moving toward Russia, and instead of moving about a circle as before, it is moving in a straight line and picking up speed. The speed is progressive, 4 kilometers one year, 40 the next, and no recent reports, more of a news blackout.

1. The field collapses. There is a Null Point between reversals. All shielding is lost, it is like standing on the Moon.

2. Polarity reverses.

3. We have no idea how the magnetic field works. It seems to come from the solid core.

4. The reason there is such a good record, molten rock takes the magnetic field print as is becomes solid. During times of reversal there are many active cracks through the crust where magma flows to the surface.

5. There is speculation that the core rotates, causes cracks in the crust, as the flows of magma match the periods of reversal.

6. Geologic events, such as the formation of mountain ranges seem to be rare and sudden events. Some major and sudden force.

7. The East Coast has a recent Marine layer. It reaches to the top of the Appalachian Mountains, like the ocean came for a day, left a layer of marine life, then went back to the ocean. The Mid Atlantic Ridge is a very active and very long crack in the crust. It is expanding, and is where the magnetic reversals were documented. When they happen, the displacement can be miles wide, along a several thousand mile crack in the crust.

8. This is not something new that might happen and raise sea level five foot in 500 years, this is documented geology. We have known how and what for a while, now we are seeing it in action.

So how much danger are we in? People who fly a lot have higher Cancer rates. Just being five miles up has a proven effect. The loss of the magnetic field for just a few years would be a disaster.



ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 18 Jun 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,265

18 Apr 2015, 5:57 pm

eric76 wrote:

From the document:
Quote:
Precipitation, streamflow, and stream temperatures are increasing in most of the continental United States.

...

The growth of many crops and weeds is being stimulated.



You left out the honorable mentions...like how pests will also thrive in the new conditions, while water will be less plentiful and of poorer quality, contributors to crop failure so while the growing season is longer... it won't matter if crops fail due to not enough water or plagues of grasshoppers, locusts, or other crop eaters. Shorter growing season with optimal water and moisture in the soil with no invasive species and minimal, easier to control pest problems will create better crops than longer, warmer growing seasons with these problems.



ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 18 Jun 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,265

18 Apr 2015, 5:58 pm

Inventor wrote:
ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
will@rd wrote:
Here's a look at the psychology of believers in Man Made Climate Change - they're being suckered by psuedo-science and faulty logic:

Michael Chrichton: Aliens Cause Global Warming-Environmentalism as Religion-The Case for Skepticism




GREENLAND

I would need more info than just

The other thing I will mention to you is that during the last 100 years, while the average temperature on the globe has increased just .3 degrees C, the magnetic field of the earth declined by 10%. This is a much larger effect than global warming and potentially far more serious to life on this planet. Our magnetic field is what deflects lethal radiation from space. A ten percent reduction of the earth’s magnetic field is extremely worrisome.

to go on. This is a very vague statement.


So keep up with Science News. The magnetic field we depend on is in decline, letting in raw radiation, and Cancer is the new disease of the last hundred years.

The decline of the magnetic field was predicted by Science. Records in the rocks show the polarity of Earth reverses on a fairly regular pattern. Further, the field weakens just as the reversal starts.

The Magnetic North Pole has always been moving, charts have to be kept up to show True North and Magnetic North. Mostly it was small movement. Recently Magnetic North started moving toward Russia, and instead of moving about a circle as before, it is moving in a straight line and picking up speed. The speed is progressive, 4 kilometers one year, 40 the next, and no recent reports, more of a news blackout.

1. The field collapses. There is a Null Point between reversals. All shielding is lost, it is like standing on the Moon.

2. Polarity reverses.

3. We have no idea how the magnetic field works. It seems to come from the solid core.

4. The reason there is such a good record, molten rock takes the magnetic field print as is becomes solid. During times of reversal there are many active cracks through the crust where magma flows to the surface.

5. There is speculation that the core rotates, causes cracks in the crust, as the flows of magma match the periods of reversal.

6. Geologic events, such as the formation of mountain ranges seem to be rare and sudden events. Some major and sudden force.

7. The East Coast has a recent Marine layer. It reaches to the top of the Appalachian Mountains, like the ocean came for a day, left a layer of marine life, then went back to the ocean. The Mid Atlantic Ridge is a very active and very long crack in the crust. It is expanding, and is where the magnetic reversals were documented. When they happen, the displacement can be miles wide, along a several thousand mile crack in the crust.

8. This is not something new that might happen and raise sea level five foot in 500 years, this is documented geology. We have known how and what for a while, now we are seeing it in action.

So how much danger are we in? People who fly a lot have higher Cancer rates. Just being five miles up has a proven effect. The loss of the magnetic field for just a few years would be a disaster.



Well then, maybe we can add the reduction of the magnetic field to the list of problems? You cannot just omit one source and replace it with another. Chances are they will both work together to make the problem worse than originally predicted...



eric76
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,660
Location: In the heart of the dust bowl

18 Apr 2015, 6:12 pm

ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
eric76 wrote:

From the document:
Quote:
Precipitation, streamflow, and stream temperatures are increasing in most of the continental United States.

...

The growth of many crops and weeds is being stimulated.



You left out the honorable mentions...like how pests will also thrive in the new conditions, while water will be less plentiful and of poorer quality, contributors to crop failure so while the growing season is longer... it won't matter if crops fail due to not enough water or plagues of grasshoppers, locusts, or other crop eaters. Shorter growing season with optimal water and moisture in the soil with no invasive species and minimal, easier to control pest problems will create better crops than longer, warmer growing seasons with these problems.


This reminds me of the favorite saying of one girl I used to know (at least she said it more often than anything else):

When in trouble
Or in doubt
Run in circles
Scream and shout.

Insects are always a problem. Will they be worse under Global Warming? It's possible, but not definite. I don't know about other places, but around here a big factor in insect populations is how many survive the winter. Here, the big problem for that seems to be with CRP land where they winter with more cover and without being bothered. Fields near land that has been set aside under CRP seem to have worse insect problems.

But there are methods that help deal with that. Sometimes it takes insecticides. With Genetic Engineering, we may be able to engineer crops that are less susceptible to damage from their prey such as what we have done with Bt-corn.

As for not enough water, more precipitation should help that. While Global Warming will change precipitation patterns, it seems likely to increase the precipitation in general.

As for "shorter growing season with optimal water and moisture in the soil with no invasive species and minimal, easier to control pest problems will create better crops than longer, warmer growing seasons with these problems", that's just pure fantasy. You aren't going to find that. There's a saying that captures such fantasy perfectly: "if if's and buts were candy and nuts, we'd all have a merry Christmas."



eric76
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,660
Location: In the heart of the dust bowl

18 Apr 2015, 6:26 pm

Inventor wrote:
ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
will@rd wrote:
Here's a look at the psychology of believers in Man Made Climate Change - they're being suckered by psuedo-science and faulty logic:

Michael Chrichton: Aliens Cause Global Warming-Environmentalism as Religion-The Case for Skepticism




GREENLAND

I would need more info than just

The other thing I will mention to you is that during the last 100 years, while the average temperature on the globe has increased just .3 degrees C, the magnetic field of the earth declined by 10%. This is a much larger effect than global warming and potentially far more serious to life on this planet. Our magnetic field is what deflects lethal radiation from space. A ten percent reduction of the earth’s magnetic field is extremely worrisome.

to go on. This is a very vague statement.


So keep up with Science News. The magnetic field we depend on is in decline, letting in raw radiation, and Cancer is the new disease of the last hundred years.

The decline of the magnetic field was predicted by Science. Records in the rocks show the polarity of Earth reverses on a fairly regular pattern. Further, the field weakens just as the reversal starts.

The Magnetic North Pole has always been moving, charts have to be kept up to show True North and Magnetic North. Mostly it was small movement. Recently Magnetic North started moving toward Russia, and instead of moving about a circle as before, it is moving in a straight line and picking up speed. The speed is progressive, 4 kilometers one year, 40 the next, and no recent reports, more of a news blackout.

1. The field collapses. There is a Null Point between reversals. All shielding is lost, it is like standing on the Moon.


It seems to get weaker but not collapse.

Quote:
2. Polarity reverses.

3. We have no idea how the magnetic field works. It seems to come from the solid core.


If that was the case, it should be rather unlikely to reverse. Every possible explanation I have ever heard involves the flow of molten metals above the central core.

Quote:
4. The reason there is such a good record, molten rock takes the magnetic field print as is becomes solid. During times of reversal there are many active cracks through the crust where magma flows to the surface.
Huh?

Cites?

Quote:
5. There is speculation that the core rotates, causes cracks in the crust, as the flows of magma match the periods of reversal.


Speculation by who?

Quote:
6. Geologic events, such as the formation of mountain ranges seem to be rare and sudden events. Some major and sudden force.


Huh? Where did you find this?

Quote:
7. The East Coast has a recent Marine layer. It reaches to the top of the Appalachian Mountains, like the ocean came for a day, left a layer of marine life, then went back to the ocean. The Mid Atlantic Ridge is a very active and very long crack in the crust. It is expanding, and is where the magnetic reversals were documented. When they happen, the displacement can be miles wide, along a several thousand mile crack in the crust.


This keeps getting worse and worse.

Quote:
8. This is not something new that might happen and raise sea level five foot in 500 years, this is documented geology. We have known how and what for a while, now we are seeing it in action.


Cites to the documents, please?

Quote:
So how much danger are we in? People who fly a lot have higher Cancer rates. Just being five miles up has a proven effect. The loss of the magnetic field for just a few years would be a disaster.


Better stay out of doctor's offices. From what I understand, the additional exposure from very frequent flying (as in being an airline pilot, copilot, steward, or stewardess) in an airliner is on the order of one x-ray a year at the doctor's office.



ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 18 Jun 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,265

18 Apr 2015, 7:30 pm

eric76 wrote:

This reminds me of the favorite saying of one girl I used to know (at least she said it more often than anything else):

When in trouble
Or in doubt
Run in circles
Scream and shout.

Insects are always a problem. Will they be worse under Global Warming? It's possible, but not definite. I don't know about other places, but around here a big factor in insect populations is how many survive the winter. Here, the big problem for that seems to be with CRP land where they winter with more cover and without being bothered. Fields near land that has been set aside under CRP seem to have worse insect problems.

But there are methods that help deal with that. Sometimes it takes insecticides. With Genetic Engineering, we may be able to engineer crops that are less susceptible to damage from their prey such as what we have done with Bt-corn.

As for not enough water, more precipitation should help that. While Global Warming will change precipitation patterns, it seems likely to increase the precipitation in general.

As for "shorter growing season with optimal water and moisture in the soil with no invasive species and minimal, easier to control pest problems will create better crops than longer, warmer growing seasons with these problems", that's just pure fantasy. You aren't going to find that. There's a saying that captures such fantasy perfectly: "if if's and buts were candy and nuts, we'd all have a merry Christmas."

Why would you confuse a discourse about climate change with
When in trouble
Or in doubt
Run in circles
Scream and shout. :?:


Climate change might cause flooding which will destroy crops. It might cause water shortage in some areas, and dry soil where moist soil existed before, which will hinder crop production but I guess we can grow edible cactii in those areas and just eat that, huh?

And these other things that are supposedly happening...like reduction in magnetic field and other phenomena...will only complicate the results and could make them worse.

And if you read the document, it doesn't say it will increase precipitation in every climate on earth. It will in some, but in others, it will cause it to be unusually arid, so there could be a huge patch of arid soil that used to grow something like wheat or soybeans but now resembles what you would find in a desert, with prolonged drought.

So, the climate will change in various locations and could reduce the land that can grow crops and is adequate enough to maintain cattle in North America, or there could be severe floods that harm crops and live stock. The water quality won't be as good, either which means it could be more acidic or too warm.

The report says invasive species could mess up the nitrate cycle in the soil which can in turn create acidic streams.



eric76
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,660
Location: In the heart of the dust bowl

18 Apr 2015, 7:44 pm

ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
eric76 wrote:

This reminds me of the favorite saying of one girl I used to know (at least she said it more often than anything else):

When in trouble
Or in doubt
Run in circles
Scream and shout.

Insects are always a problem. Will they be worse under Global Warming? It's possible, but not definite. I don't know about other places, but around here a big factor in insect populations is how many survive the winter. Here, the big problem for that seems to be with CRP land where they winter with more cover and without being bothered. Fields near land that has been set aside under CRP seem to have worse insect problems.

But there are methods that help deal with that. Sometimes it takes insecticides. With Genetic Engineering, we may be able to engineer crops that are less susceptible to damage from their prey such as what we have done with Bt-corn.

As for not enough water, more precipitation should help that. While Global Warming will change precipitation patterns, it seems likely to increase the precipitation in general.

As for "shorter growing season with optimal water and moisture in the soil with no invasive species and minimal, easier to control pest problems will create better crops than longer, warmer growing seasons with these problems", that's just pure fantasy. You aren't going to find that. There's a saying that captures such fantasy perfectly: "if if's and buts were candy and nuts, we'd all have a merry Christmas."

Why would you confuse a discourse about climate change with
When in trouble
Or in doubt
Run in circles
Scream and shout. :?:


Climate change might cause flooding which will destroy crops. It might cause water shortage in some areas, and dry soil where moist soil existed before, which will hinder crop production but I guess we can grow edible cactii in those areas and just eat that, huh?

And these other things that are supposedly happening...like reduction in magnetic field and other phenomena...will only complicate the results and could make them worse.


It might do this. It might do that. Is there anything Global Warming doesn't do?

Ignore the fact that we can actually look back and see what it was like when it was warmer. Let's just scare ourselves to death with an overactive imagination instead.

By the way, what percentage of corn do you think is actually used for human consumption? I think it is less than 10%. The main two uses are for animal feed and for ethanol production.

As for the magnetic field reversal, it is scientifically interesting if (and when) it happens. Other than that, the most major effects that we would notice would likely be auroras in places where they are extemely rare. Like Global Warming, there is no need to panic about a magnetic pole reversal. The real danger from either is from irrational panic.



ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 18 Jun 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,265

18 Apr 2015, 8:01 pm

eric76 wrote:

It might do this. It might do that. Is there anything Global Warming doesn't do?

Ignore the fact that we can actually look back and see what it was like when it was warmer. Let's just scare ourselves to death with an overactive imagination instead.

By the way, what percentage of corn do you think is actually used for human consumption? I think it is less than 10%. The main two uses are for animal feed and for ethanol production.

As for the magnetic field reversal, it is scientifically interesting if (and when) it happens. Other than that, the most major effects that we would notice would likely be auroras in places where they are extemely rare. Like Global Warming, there is no need to panic about a magnetic pole reversal. The real danger from either is from irrational panic.


And furthermore, the report mentions the temperature will not be optimal for crop growth which could harm the quality and quantity of the crop. Climate Change in North America will be a crop and livestock oriented event and food and water could be where you notice the effects the most and you add to that Tar Sands pollution, magnetic field reduction, and population booms, you are just creating the perfect storm.



eric76
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,660
Location: In the heart of the dust bowl

18 Apr 2015, 8:10 pm

ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
eric76 wrote:

It might do this. It might do that. Is there anything Global Warming doesn't do?

Ignore the fact that we can actually look back and see what it was like when it was warmer. Let's just scare ourselves to death with an overactive imagination instead.

By the way, what percentage of corn do you think is actually used for human consumption? I think it is less than 10%. The main two uses are for animal feed and for ethanol production.

As for the magnetic field reversal, it is scientifically interesting if (and when) it happens. Other than that, the most major effects that we would notice would likely be auroras in places where they are extemely rare. Like Global Warming, there is no need to panic about a magnetic pole reversal. The real danger from either is from irrational panic.


And furthermore, the report mentions the temperature will not be optimal for crop growth which could harm the quality and quantity of the crop. Climate Change in North America will be a crop and livestock oriented event and food and water could be where you notice the effects the most and you add to that Tar Sands pollution, magnetic field reduction, and population booms, you are just creating the perfect storm.


Is there anything else you want to worry about or is that enough for now?



eric76
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,660
Location: In the heart of the dust bowl

18 Apr 2015, 8:11 pm

Perhaps we should tell the people in the tropics that it is useless to try to farm there because nothing could possibly grow in such a warm and inhospitable area.