Re: Economist Bjorn Lomborg: Global warming is not a priority

[anoniab]

I trust you are not aware that there are plenty of mosquitos in Alaska that go after the reindeer herds in the fall and that they have had malaria in Siberia and the US before?

[janegirlcqs]

Intriguing point, but do you know that mosquitoes tend to die off in the winter?

[Alephantiasis]

Finally, as it was said before me, Kyoto will cost an awful lot of money... It's worse for financial stability than global warming. And it does not provide a great help by the way.

3/2

And suddenly, Global Warming is not a top priority anymore. It was a nice try. Many of the Copenhagen guys were Nobel Prize laureates, you know...

[janegirlcqs]

Global warming may not be a priority for the US right now, but that does not mean that it is not important or that it is not important to other nations.

[ajsharkmaniac07]

I think you are confused about what Lomborg was saying. He is suggesting that we could pour $50 billion into global warming and perhaps buy ourselves 5-10 years longer without the effects that will happen anyway vs putting that money into AIDS prevention or sanitation, we could likely wipe out AIDS and bring basic necessities to the worlds poorest people. Until an economically viable solution to global warming comes along, global warming will not be solved and we should put our money elsewhere.

[Alephantiasis]

Fourthly : HIV/AIDS is one of the most important pandemic disease of our time and it's not at all influenced by climate. (unless you pretend that people will make love more often if the Eart is hotter, without protecting themselves. Not much scientific evidence for that.) Again, fallacy. 3/2

[janegirlcqs]

I am happy to agree that AIDS is an important problem, but as people in Africa may tell you, why worry about something that will kill you in twenty years when there are things that could kill you tomorrow.

[janegirlcqs]

If the people die from drought caused by global warming or from malaria whose spread is worsened by global warming then they will not be alive to care.

[Alephantiasis]

Thirdly : Global warming, mainly caused by CO2 emission, won't provoke desertification at all. In fact, it's the exact opposite that will happen. Excess of CO2 favours the development of plants. Elementary school biology. 3/3

[janegirlcqs]

OK, here's an easy one. Climate change causes changes in rainfall patterns. Plants like CO2, but they also like having enough water to drink.

Changes in rainfall patterns by definition mean that rain will increase in some places and ddecrease in others.

[janegirlcqs]

If I pull out the foundation from under your house you can add as many bricks on top as you want, but it won't solve the foundation problem.

[Alephantiasis]

You did't refute anything.

First : you neglect the fact that the resolution of some problems (in fact, most problems) will have an effect on global warming. Education, for instance.

Secondly : Adding climate change to you list of "affected by global warming" is nothing but fallacy. You can't pretend that a problem has an effect upon itself. You should avoid self-reference. Already your lists are quantitatively nearly the same 3/4

[janegirlcqs]

They're saying that these things are important and that global warming is not. Obviously if they are affected significantly by global warming then gloabl warming is important.

You're right that global warming is climate change, but if you listen then you'll notice that I said that. I'm trying to explain what the Copenhagen Consensus says, i.e. "climate change" among other things.

[janegirlcqs]

Putting climate change is over the top and it's supposed to be. How much more obvious can it get than a tautology?

[benande]

You miss out on a very good intro point Bjorn has. Kyoto costs $150Billion/yr.

Cutting Malaria in half would cost 75Billion.

So your list about global warming causing increase in mosquitoes is targeting a small problem in 100 yrs, instead of the bigger problem today.

Prioritize the solutions!

[janegirlcqs]

You have to concede at least that no one really knows how much kyoto will cost. Also, the problems are here now, not just in 100 years.

[benande]

Please tell me how many people died in 2007 of global warming. (In comparison to Malaria.)

I don't even know how you could compare the two in today's terms. But please help me understand where you're coming from.

[janegirlcqs]

Add the number of Malaria deaths, Cholera deaths, Lyme disease deaths, heat stroke deaths, drought deaths, , and hurricane deaths. You will start to see what we are facing.

[benande]

I won't see anything unless you help me out.

You stated that I should concede that no one really knows the cost of Kyoto. At the same time you are implying the costs right (here and)now are high if we don't do anything.

You should be willing to provide those figures if you're going to make that point.

What do you believe are the correct figures?

How do you think they'd change if Kyoto were implemented?

[anoniab]

Mosquito borne diseases can be easily controlled with DDT; Cholera is due to poor sanitation. There has not been an increase in hurricanes. There has not been an increase in drought either. Warmer temps are likely to add more water to the pricipitation cycle (cold air does not hold as much humidity)

[janegirlcqs]

Tell me you did not use the words easily controlled and DDT in the same sentence.

[Animalll2003lll]

hey dude, you had 50 years to solve that problem. now it's time so save the spaceship. global warming and oil shortages are going to affect us much more that malaria. in fact malaria and many other new diseases are going to reach northern regions. major migrations, wars etc. people dying in hunger. I don't want to sound apocalyptic here but global warm+oil shortages is a big threat. as I said elsewhere we better save the titanic than give poor passengers better seats. need to move away from oil.

[janegirlcqs]

I think you're missing what I'm saying. Global warming is a big threat and malaria is one of the things it will make worse.

Lomborg wants to treat symptoms, but skip the disease. I say we need to work on the disaese if we want to get symptoms under control.

[Animalll2003lll]

malaria (and many other new diseases) is going to reach northern regions. wars, hunger major migrations, etc. glob warm and oil shortages are indeed real threats if they happen. as I said under lomborg's talk, we better save the titanic than give poor passengers better seats. the solution is to move away from oil--everyone knows that. the problem is we don't have any immediate incentives to do that. And that's the problem people don't understand.

[bluethinggg]

On the flip side, by investing in education we will find more technical solutions to global warming. When solar, wind and thermal power is more price competitive than fossil fuels, then CO2 emissions will naturally subside. Education will bring these solutions.

[AgnesBojaxhiu2000]

according to the national geographic magazine, disease-causing chytrid fungus Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis is the bullet killing frogs, but climate change is pulling the trigger ... global warming is wreaking havoc on amphibians and causing staggering losses of biodiversity ... often used to gauge the health of an ecosystem ... but could the same or similar thing be happening to the lowly honey bee ... and other lowly forms of life deemed uneeded