• Welcome to Life In The Wilderness

    You are currently viewing the site as a guest and some content may not be available to you.

    Registration is quick and easy and will give you full access to the site and allow you to ask questions or make comments and join in on the conversation. If you would like to join then please Register

Keith

Very Addicted
Messages
1,630
Points
780
Age
73
Has anyone noticed the rise in frequency of environmental disasters of late? Earthquakes, cyclones, now there is a volcano about to erupt in Bali. The frequency of these disasters is making me wonder if this is anything to do with climate change. Here we are getting early bushfires due to unprecedented heat. This is spring & yet some places the temperature is up in the 40s!!! The fire service is warning everyone to prepare for the worst. This heat & these fires can certainly be blamed on climate change. It will be interesting to see what winter brings to the Northern Hemisphere!
Keith.
 

lonewolf

Neo Luddite Prepared Survivalist.
Messages
7,964
Points
1,180
I think its got more to do with NK's nuclear tests, mother nature is fighting back.
 

38thfoot

Very Addicted
Messages
1,464
Points
1,130
I read an article by a environmental scientist yesterday who commented on the mainstream media's linking of recent hurricanes with climate change and basically said it was rubbish.

He stated that whilst he was an advocate that climate change had and continues to take place the willingness of the media to link everything up was just them chasing headlines. He (as a scientist) backed this up with actual empirical evidence to show that severe hurricanes were not more common now, nor were they any more severe than in the past; it was just the media selling tomorrows chip wrappers.

38
 

lonewolf

Neo Luddite Prepared Survivalist.
Messages
7,964
Points
1,180
probably about right, now we have 24 hour news they have to fill it with something.
 

Ystranc

Moderator
Messages
6,931
Points
1,710
I was under the impression that the accepted scientific theory/opinion was that a small increase in the sea's temperature had led to an intensification of the effects of this recent spate of hurricanes leading to (record breaking) higher winds and greater rainfall.
It is important to bear in mind though that most of what we think of as scientific fact is still only a theory or working hypothesis that explains and fits with all available information.
 

greenbear

Extremely Addicted
Messages
2,581
Points
960
I read an article by a environmental scientist yesterday who commented on the mainstream media's linking of recent hurricanes with climate change and basically said it was rubbish.

He stated that whilst he was an advocate that climate change had and continues to take place the willingness of the media to link everything up was just them chasing headlines. He (as a scientist) backed this up with actual empirical evidence to show that severe hurricanes were not more common now, nor were they any more severe than in the past; it was just the media selling tomorrows chip wrappers.

38

Spot on m8 - that's what I got from an environment science degree - these things are happening all the time, we just hear about them more these days
 

greenbear

Extremely Addicted
Messages
2,581
Points
960
I was under the impression that the accepted scientific theory/opinion was that a small increase in the sea's temperature had led to an intensification of the effects of this recent spate of hurricanes leading to (record breaking) higher winds and greater rainfall.
It is important to bear in mind though that most of what we think of as scientific fact is still only a theory or working hypothesis that explains and fits with all available information.

The hypothesis seems to be correct, but only in certain parts of the world. It is the strength of the weather effects that may be increasing. The simple fact, however, is that the weather has only been accurately recorded for a couple of hundred years which, in geological terms, is the blink of an eye, so far too soon to tell for sure.
 

38thfoot

Very Addicted
Messages
1,464
Points
1,130
The hypothesis seems to be correct, but only in certain parts of the world. It is the strength of the weather effects that may be increasing. The simple fact, however, is that the weather has only been accurately recorded for a couple of hundred years which, in geological terms, is the blink of an eye, so far too soon to tell for sure.

But even in the last hundred or so years we have been recording there has been no increase in quantity or intensity of hurricane type events and that there had been periods (on the 50s I believe) which saw higher levels of activity.

38
 

lonewolf

Neo Luddite Prepared Survivalist.
Messages
7,964
Points
1,180
there is nothing we as individuals can do about any of these events, what is important is what we do about the consequences of these events and how we prepare to survive such happenings.
which is why I have never bothered too much about what CAUSED this or that event, but I prepare to survive what comes afterwards.
 
Last edited:

greenbear

Extremely Addicted
Messages
2,581
Points
960
But even in the last hundred or so years we have been recording there has been no increase in quantity or intensity of hurricane type events and that there had been periods (on the 50s I believe) which saw higher levels of activity.

38

But again, we can only hypothesise, could the higher levels of activity be part of a longer cycle? Nobody knows and won't do for a long time yet. The father figure of modern meteorology was Fitzroy, who was captain of The Beagle, the boat in which Darwin sailed. So were are looking at a science that started as recently as the Victorian age.
 

Ystranc

Moderator
Messages
6,931
Points
1,710
Another reason that we can't say definitively what is causing these disasters could be that we're not looking at just one set of effects. Astronomical, geological, chemical, weather, flora and fauna...each and every system (each discipline) is complicated enough in its own right but combined their interactions and co-dependence are simply much to complicated to be comprehended. Everything effects everything else.
If there are cycles they're too complicated to be fully understood without the benefit of hindsight. By the time the evidence is collected, compiled and understood it's usually too late.
 

greenbear

Extremely Addicted
Messages
2,581
Points
960
True, however the scientific consensus is that climate is happening and is linked to weather events (no surprise there really, for example, hurricanes are a product of warm seas. Warmer seas therefore equal more hurricane events). But you are absolutely right in saying that we can only know with hindsight.

I have a pet theory that as the population grows we will hear more about weather events as they affect more people and, therefore, there will be a greater financial effect. Have you ever noticed that whenever there is a disaster it is always reckoned in "millions" lost not in the damage to peoples' lives?
 

Ystranc

Moderator
Messages
6,931
Points
1,710
Have you ever noticed that whenever there is a disaster it is always reckoned in "millions" lost not in the damage to peoples' lives?

Sad indictment of our society really, especially when the term "£ millions" has lost a lot of its impact. It's just counters.
Money is like a shared dream, it only has any value because we agree that it can be used as a convenient unit of exchange, governments love it because they can control you with it and it's easier to tax. (Harder to tax direct exchanges or bartering)

It's pretty obscene that the number of lives lost or the misery caused is ever thought of as secondary to the financial cost of an event.
 

Keith

Very Addicted
Messages
1,630
Points
780
Age
73
Sad indictment of our society really, especially when the term "£ millions" has lost a lot of its impact. It's just counters.
Money is like a shared dream, it only has any value because we agree that it can be used as a convenient unit of exchange, governments love it because they can control you with it and it's easier to tax. (Harder to tax direct exchanges or bartering)

It's pretty obscene that the number of lives lost or the misery caused is ever thought of as secondary to the financial cost of an event.
Agreed, I don't think there ever was an accurate account of how many lives were lost in cyclone Tracey in 74. Australia has a large transit society, & they say that if you are in Darwin for any length of time, sooner or later you will see everyone you have known. I know for a fact that some people were sucked up & carried out to sea, other people heard their cries. I myself was very lucky to have survived.
Keith.
 

greenbear

Extremely Addicted
Messages
2,581
Points
960
Sad indictment of our society really, especially when the term "£ millions" has lost a lot of its impact. It's just counters.
Money is like a shared dream, it only has any value because we agree that it can be used as a convenient unit of exchange, governments love it because they can control you with it and it's easier to tax. (Harder to tax direct exchanges or bartering)

It's pretty obscene that the number of lives lost or the misery caused is ever thought of as secondary to the financial cost of an event.

So true
 
Top