Green Building Bible, Fourth Edition |
These two books are the perfect starting place to help you get to grips with one of the most vitally important aspects of our society - our homes and living environment. PLEASE NOTE: A download link for Volume 1 will be sent to you by email and Volume 2 will be sent to you by post as a book. |
Vanilla 1.0.3 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.
Posted By: owlmanPersonally, I think we've already passed the point of no return. There is no appetite to make the huge changes that need to be made at whatever level,---sadly.There will be when it is bad enough. The resent flash floods and the unseasonal hot days do help get the message across. It just takes a generation or 3.
Posted By: fostertomIf the curve is that clear, how come there's so much scope for sceptics to point to figures that show next to no apparent rise, or even reversal?Because they choose to look at very short periods (a decades or a bit more) when natural variation dominates. You don't see much argument over longer periods because even they can work out they'll look silly trying it.
Posted By: SteamyTeaall your scepticism about science and scientistsYou seriously misunderstand - I respect science greatly, and what scientists do - until some of them so inclined shelter behind science as a rigid doctrinaire religion, in which they are the priests and the rest of us are supposed to shut up and wait to be told. I also claim a right to hold multiple, even contradictory, hypotheses (not as beliefs/thruths) simultaneouly - while Science is a great refuge for those who can't stand such uncertainty.
Posted By: SteamyTeayour hope of a new economyWhatever right Scientists may have to know best about Science, that doesn't apply to Economics, which is not a science (even though it uses sophisticated numerics etc). In no other 'science' could Marx, Keynes, Friedman and Eisenstein use the same body of knowledge, same techniques, and come up with such radically contradictory conclusions, which don't supercede each other as scientific paradigms do, but co-exist and actually go to war with each other forever. Economics, like History and Politics, are not sciences, but vehicles for differing socio-political beliefs, which anybody can play in. There's no such thing as an Economics 'expert', any more than Teresa May is a political 'expert'.
Posted By: CX23882But playing devil's advocate; isn't this graphic guilty of the inverse by ignoring the short periods? It's not a linear time scale, so due to the compression of the historic periods (for which we don't have actual data), how do we know that there weren't peaks and troughs, which have been smoothed out?
Posted By: CX23882It's not a linear time scaleIt is!
Posted By: gravelldMaybe there were enormous temperature swings before thenYou mean non-catastrophic ones?
Posted By: gravelldI suppose you could say xkcd are still cherry picking dates by choosing 20,000BC. Maybe there were enormous temperature swings before then.
how come there's so much scope for sceptics to point to figures that show next to no apparent rise
Posted By: fostertomIf the curve is that clear, how come there's so much scope for sceptics to point to figures that show next to no apparent rise, or even reversal?
Posted By: fostertomYou mean non-catastrophic ones?Who says there haven't been catastrophic ones even within that 22'000 year history? Not globally catastrophic, of course, but certainly so for people in certain areas. E.g., the formation of the Sahara and the drying out of southern Africa in the mid Holocene. Maybe the drying of the Sahara contributed to kicking off ancient Egyptian civilization in the Nile valley (dunno, I'm not sure if that's an extrapolation too far) so in the long run maybe was good for humanity but at the time it must have been a bit of a hassle for those who found their hunting and gathering not working well on empty sand dunes.
1 to 24 of 24