Slashdot Mirror
Global Warming Has Made the Weather Better For Most In US -- For Now (latimes.com)
An anonymous reader shares an article on LA Times: Since Americans first heard the term global warming in the 1970s, the weather has actually improved for most people living in the U.S.. But it won't always be that way, according to a new study. Research shows Americans typically -- and perhaps unsurprisingly -- like warmer winters and dislike hot, humid summers. And they reveal their weather preferences by moving to areas with conditions they like best. A new study in the journal Nature has found that 80% of the U.S. population lives in counties experiencing more pleasant weather than they did 40 years ago. "Virtually all Americans are now experiencing the much milder winters that they typically prefer, and these mild winters have not been offset by markedly more uncomfortable summers or other negative changes," writes Patrick Egan, a political scientist at New York University, and Megan Mullin, professor of environmental politics at Duke University. However, if greenhouse gas emissions continue unchecked, 88% of the current population will live in areas where the weather is less pleasant than it was before. The paper does not predict how changing weather patterns will influence migration patterns over the coming century.
No, no one is saying that, you stupid troll.
Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
so the crappy pre-global warming weather we had is what we need to go back to? back when i was in the army all the guys i knew from the midwest talked about their normal winters of -20 with the wind chill
Just curious... But why do you expect a country boy (or girl) from Iowa to care about someone on the other side of the planet?
Serious question... Because you're asking that person to change their lifestyle and pay more money, to help people they don't know and will never meet.
how did people live in central asia and siberia thousands of years ago if it's supposed to be a frozen tundra? how did the mongols cross it along with the huns? maybe this is normal weather?
It's what Russia has been saying for years: "Warming? In Russia? How is that bad? It's usually f8cking cold here!"
Table-ized A.I.
Man's influence on global warming comes from pollution. The lion's share of pollution does not come from first-world consumer waste. It overwhelmingly comes from third-world industrial waste. The third world countries are struggling to compete in the global market, and can't afford environmentally-friendly production technologies. So, rather than starve to death, they pollute. A lot.
I could link sources, but I don't have any on hand and am too lazy to search for them. If you are actually interested, you can google it yourself.
So anyway, there really is no reason why someone living in Iowa should care...they aren't the problem.
No, no one is saying that, you stupid troll.
It's not the best way of saying it, but the essense of it, I believe, is correct. The average person (pedants: as defined for the entire population, not just Slashdotters, so hush your mouth!) doesn't grok 'climate science' any better than they understand 'rocket science' enough to fabricate and launch a satellite into geosynchronous orbit, so when someone talks about 'global warming', what do they do? They look outside the window at what's going on, or maybe look at the weather forecast; the average person is not the most forward-looking person you'll ever meet, they're more concerned about tomorrow, or next week, or maybe as far as next month, but 10, 20, 50, 100 years from now? Usually, not so much. If the weather has been nice where they are, they're not going to get very disturbed by the abstract ideas of some news report that says in 10, 20, 50, 100 years from now, things won't be pleasant, and similarly, they find it difficult to get too upset by the fact that people they don't know in some country they'd be hard-pressed to find on a map is experiencing what is for them bizarre and destructive weather patterns. If you want to see the majority of U.S. citizens being forefront-of-their-thoughts concerned about 'global warming', you'll likely have to wait until they're being seriously inconvenienced by it, which of course will be way, way too late to do anything about it. Which is why scientists and others who do understand the implications of global warming keep amplifying their reports on it -- which of course just causes the deniers of global warming to amplify their claims that they're just spreading fear, uncertainty, and doubt. Then the religious types chime in to muddy the intellectual waters even further, confusing the faithful with passages from the Bible that aren't even necessarily relevant.
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
They deliver that oil out of the goodness of their hearts? No? Well you're just a fuckwit than.
Trade is for mutual benefit. Our it wouldn't happen.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
It's because you cherry-pick your facts and you don't permit the possibility that facts are additive, not exclusive.
I haven't cherry picked a single thing. I've seen global warming advocated cherry pick around the evaporation data. It's not convenient because the results are in stark contradiction with several global warming claims. Oh it's flat from 1950 to 2010 so it can't show any global warming, all while totally ignoring that it did go up and follow the last solar cycle along with the Rain following the same solar cycle pattern. But no I must be cherry picking by Including data and you can't be cherry picking by excluding data.
If the weather has been nice where they are, they're not going to get very disturbed by the abstract ideas of some news report that says in 10, 20, 50, 100 years from now, things won't be pleasant, and similarly, they find it difficult to get too upset by the fact that people they don't know in some country they'd be hard-pressed to find on a map is experiencing what is for them bizarre and destructive weather patterns.
Quoted for truth...
The average person out in the world simply doesn't pay this nearly as much attention as people who post on message boards about it. Even my wife, who has to listen to me talk about this from time to time, doesn't really care all that much.
Oh sure, if you say "do you care about the Earth's environment for your children", she'll say "yes, of course, we should keep it clean". Then if you follow up and say, "So are you ok to give up your nice big truck and get a small car, and watch clothes by hand, and have no air conditioning?", she will say: "Are you nuts? No!"
If you were to push her on it, she'll probably say something like, "Even if I give all that up, nothing will change and other nations will keep polluting".
No, what I am saying is that heavy polluters (such as the Americans) should be forced to reduce their emissions
Ahh yes, your "one world government"...
Who exactly is going to force Americans to do this? You and what Army?
You might think that response is flip, but I challenge you to walk among average Americans, as a foreigner, and tell them that you think Americans should be "forced" by someone else to do anything.
You'll quickly get reminded that we have the most powerful military in the world, and if you'd like a demonstration, you're welcome to try.
while the low polluters (such as the Africans) should be forced not to raise theirs too much.
Raise? You really haven't done the math, have you? They can't raise, they need to cut. Everyone needs to cut. The whole planet, on average, needs to cut 80% of the CO2 output by 2050, or we're in a pile of trouble.
The irony is that I fully get that, I just don't think it is going to happen. To cut world-wide by 80% would require the US to cut by 90%, we'd go to war to prevent it.
Of course, I am not against trade, so the African should have a right to lease his emission rights to the highest bidder.
Right, again we find the real interest... wealth transfer... What you REALLY want is money, which is why COP21 didn't really accomplish anything, because the poor nations won't shut up about money.