A different kind of tipping point...?

Question

Any that knows me on here will know that I accept AGW, and am pretty convinced.

I had an interesting thought today though , that merits airing.

I think we have gone past a tipping point.

We have no reached the stage where it almost impossible for AGW to ever be false. Not because the science is concrete or 100% correct. But because if IF someone finally proved that AGW was incorrect( unlikely), the governments would be unable to go back.There would be riots et al, and a collapse of faith in democracy ( IMO). No-one would trust a word to come from them again. SO no matter what new science comes to light , the governments will stick with AGW.

NOW this is not to say whether AGW is correct or incorrect- and it implies neither so lets have none of that.

But do you agree ?

Answer 1

And to think that at the height of the ice age there was probably something thinking that they were past the tipping point, that the earth would only get colder.

If we have passed the tipping point as you suggest, wouldn't you think that nature would find a way to correct itself?  Or do we end up like Venus?

To answer your question:  no, don't agree.

Answer 2

No, politicians will drop global warming and label it as bad science the minute that supporting global warming threatens their political power. If global  temperatures continue decline over the next decade, politicians will deny the fact that they ever really supported it.

Answer 3

I don't think so, because the relatively few political changes to address global warming have been based on the scientific evidence and consensus.  If some bizarre evidence comes to light which disproves AGW, the fault doesn't lie with the politicians.  If anything it lies with the scientists.

Perhaps if we entered a period where we were sacrificing economic stability for the sake of addressing climate change, then politicians might bear the public's wrath if the theory turns out to be wrong.  Even then they can make the argument "we were just following the experts' advice".

As it stands now, we've done so little that I don't agree we've reached a political tipping point.

Answer 4

I think one of your assumptions is incorrect - that people ever had faith in a democracy (or any other governmental system). You would probably find widespread doubt that government really has our best interests in mind. We’ve all seen politicians flip-flop on issues before, and while it breeds mistrust, it’s not unexpected. As long as there is money to made, taxes to be gathered, the facts don’t really matter.

Answer 5

That is exactly what Al Gore says. I have heard him use the term "tipping point" in fact. He thinks we are at a tipping point where the political will to cut back on fossil fuel use is overwhelming everything else. So we are definitely at a political tipping point. And it was Al Gore who gave it that final push with his movie. He is pretty happy about that, getting a Nobel prize and all.

Answer 6

For some governments, yes. Most though have not put any political weight behind the science of climate change for fear of scaring populace and being forced to act in a resposible manner which they fear might damage the economy.

Er, Dover, One of the first scientists to raise the AGW theory died recently, he worked it out in '56. and then someone proved it in the late 60's methinks, which, in part, gave rise to Greenpeace. Without the science there would never have been any need for the politics. A few people have worked very hard to get the politics where it is at the moment. Gore not being one of them.

Answer 7

Despite the large body of evidence which disputes the CO2 model for global warming, you hear very little about it in the media.  Public opinion is largely driven by what the media chooses to present as fact.  I would agree that we have passed a tipping point in public opinion.  The media has sucessfully filtered out the pertinent facts which could derail a politically and financially lucrative mobilization to head off global warming.  Unfortunately, the money and political capitol generated will be very exensive to the general public and will have no effect on global temperature whatsoever.  But you cant get rich off of fighting the changing solar output.  you have to find a demon you can fight.  CO2 is the red herring of the day.

Answer 8

I am pasting this answer from another question because it also applies here.

  There is not reason to by upset if global warming turns out to be a hoax (it is absolutely not a hoax politically motivated or economically motivated, those are ridiculous asumptions) or a mistake.

Here's why.

I personally believe that man is contributing to global warming and that it is a real threat.

Having said that, let's suppose that I am wrong and science proves that we are not causing global warming or worsening it.

I think it is more than clear that, in many other ways, man is doing serious damage to our environment.

We've been warning about this for 40 years or so. Very few really listened. The earth is in critical condition, even without global warming.

We talked about solar energy and such back then, but not until now have these technologies for the most part been developed enough to really be solutions to the environmental problem.

However there are so many things we could have been doing to aleviate our impact. For one, passive solar has been mostly ignored. How many millions of houses were built in the intervening years without any thought to passive solar and solar water heating which are very low tech and have been around for ages? What a waste. Houses aren't even sited with regard to angles of the sunlight etc. We also could have done better in conservation and recycling, although at least recycling is much better.

Every single measure being recommended now, to stop global warming is what we should be doing regardless of global warming. A lot more than carbon dioxide comes out of tailpipes and smoke stacks, chemical that are harmful to the environment and our health.

Attaining energy independence in itself is worth the change. Stopping the burning of fossil fuels is even more important just to stop polluting our environment to death.

We live in a chemical soup these days. National Geographic did an article last year on toxins in our bodies. They tested a man for something like 260 chemicals. He had 165 of them in his body, including dangerous levels of PCBs, Mercury, PHTs (I think they're called which are used as flame retardants and for softening plastics.) They tested him for 28 pesticides, he had 16 of them in his body, including DDT which has been banned for 30 years now. This man was an average American as far as lifestyle etc, never having worked in any industry where he would be exposed to high levels of these chemicals.

Our oceans are close to failing entirely. Fish stocks are down 90%, some whale species are at 1%. Just in California alone 39 of 67 native fish species are extinct or at risk of extinction.

90% of California wetlands have disapeared.

50 species of birds in S.F bay area in danger of going extinct.

Coral reefs which are necessary for the health of the entire ocean are in serious troulble worldwide.

These are just a few of what has to be thousands of such frightening statistics that demonstrate what we are doing to the environment.

It is obvious to any thinking person that we are greatly harming the ecosystems on earth. I doubt that there is a single ecosystem on earth that isn't in danger. And we are an integral part of those ecosystem, as they go, so we go. It is impossible to survive apart from them. Everything is interconnected and interdependent.

And all the measures recommended for ending global warming are absolutely necessary to stop this global destruction. Global warming or not.

Answer 9

I think this is an issue that is just as divisive as any other issue.  There are two clearly defined groups: though who think it is real and those of us us who think it is a hoax. Both sides provide proof that proves them right and ignored by the side who thinks they are right. Most of us will dead when in a hundred years the average temp goes up ONLY 1degree C or perhaps a whopping 2degC.  The tipping point will be when our economy is shut down by the UN with Credit rationing and people are out of work but hey the air is cleaner even though nothing has changed temp wise.