Lomborg’s a real Nowhere Man 3

Comments View as Flat

1. 

   Delay And Deny Posted 10:10 am
   17 Sep 2007

   Jeremy...Hillary...Boob ----- F.U.D !!!
   
   Nice FUD.
   But all I can see is a reasonable guy, Lomborg, trying to present an outcome that makes sense in terms of the known data.
   Whereas you propound things like "take no action anytime soon, then the amplifying feedbacks kick in".   Man, that sounds like some dialogue from "Gears of War"!
   
   John Bailo
   
   
   Sutext:

   Permalink

2. 

   Sam Wells Posted 10:48 am
   17 Sep 2007

   Hadley CellA lot of the predictions about extreme drought in the Southwest are predicated on an expanded model of the Hadley Cell, which predicts that Global Warming will expand poleward.  This is a hypothesis, and I mean this aa a side comment on the discussion initiated by our whacko friend, Bjorn.  
   At the same time we predict a strong Hadley cell, which would expand the deserts into populous areas such as lower California, Texas, and maybe even Alabama (wow), at the same time Global Warming theorists like to say we'll get more hurricanes, massive flooding, and general mayhem.  The idea is that when oceans are heated, more evaporation will occur and hot ascending air causes rain.  Hey wait, that conflicts with the Hadley Cell hypothesis, doesn't it?  
   My hunch is that that the sub-tropical jet, which flows from the Baja northeastward, is strongly dependent on El Nino and the resulting monsoons never really get to replenish the aquifers fast enough - because the huge populations of Phoenix, Las Vegas, LA, and Imperial Valley are sucking it dry too fast.  This has been a chronic problem for well over 50 years - why should it get any BETTER?
   Sorry for the "no-duh" moment here, but please consider new kinds of droughts in unlikely places like the Northeast ... that drought in the Southwest was entirely predictable.  That area is not affected by the Hadley Cell in the least.  /sam
   
   Onward through the fog

   Permalink

3. 

   GreyFlcn Posted 1:41 am
   18 Sep 2007

   It's like Russian RouletteEither you spend less than 1% of 1 years's GDP to deal with the problem or you don't.
   _
   Kinda like 50/50 odds with Russian Roulette.  If you win, you get 1% of one year's salary.  If you lose, you get shot in the head.
   And while that 1% certainly could be invested wisely, the risk certainly isn't worth it.
   Which also makes the assumption that that 1% wouldn't just be squandered anyways on unhealthy vices ;D

   Permalink