Rovicky dan banyak member lain menulis di Prol. Rovicky termasuk salah satu kampiun mengenai gempa di Indonesia.
Waktu itu si juspig masih plintat plintut gelonya, disatu saat morang maring dilain saat menjilat jilat ( maklum juga jebolan sastra bangtat apa yg bisa diketahui tentang bidang lain ). Akhirnya si anjing juspig beneran gelo setelah ngeh bahwa ketika adiknya modar gak ada yg melayat. Kasihannnn cuhhhhhhhhhhhh ----- Original Message ----- From: "rovicky" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, August 18, 2002 9:31 AM Subject: [proletar] Why Global Warming Would be Good for You Table 1-5 IPCC PREDICTED WARMING FOR 2100 Date of Prediction Best Estimate of Warming Published in 1990 5.8°F Published in 1992 4.5°F Published in 1995 3.6°F SOURCE: IPCC 1990; IPCC 1995d. Memang disinilah sulitnya, kalo melihat secara global dengan secara lokal (parsial), juga fraction temporal seperti tabel diatas, yang seolah-olah 'rate pemanasannya menurun (?)'. Dalam skala parsial ruang juga tidak sama di seantero bumi yg rapuh ini. Ego dari sebagian the super human kind di daerah yang diprediksi menurun kualitasnya (rusak?) sering mendominasi ketimbang yang akan mendapatkan keuntungan dari perubahan global ini. Siapa yang perlu diperhatikan kepentingannya ? Alinea dibawah aku ambil dari tulisan yang lain : --------- Senator Mitchell's forecast and his history are both wrong. Warmer periods bring benign rather than more violent weather. Milder temperatures will induce more evaporation from oceans and thus more rainfall-where it will fall we cannot be sure, but the earth as a whole should receive greater precipitation. Meteorologists now believe that any rise in sea levels over the next century will be at most a few feet, not 20 (NRC 1991, 24). In addition, Mitchell flunks history: around 6,000 years ago the earth sustained temperatures that were probably more than 4° Fahrenheit hotter than those of the 20th century, yet mankind flourished. The Sahara desert bloomed with plants, and water-loving animals, such as hippopotamuses, wallowed in rivers and lakes. Dense forests carpeted Europe from the Alps to Scandinavia. The Midwest of the United States was somewhat drier than it is today, similar to contemporary western Kansas or eastern Colorado; but Canada enjoyed a warmer climate and more rainfall. ================== Kenaikan muka air laut ada yg percaya hanya beberapa feet, ndak nyape 20. Jadi aku yakin secara engineering mungkin masih bisa diatasi (seperti teknologi bendungan lautnya di Belanda). Amerika mungkin sedikit menderita, tetapi Canada bisa lebih basah/"wetter". Spirit dari penelitian ini mungkin mengajak "kebersamaan" untuk mengerti perilaku alam yang semakin dimengerti perilakunya dan dapat diprediksi. Baik secara temporal mapun secara ruang parsial geografis. Ilmu pengetahuan/science memang banyak dipergunakan kalo bisa untuk 'mengontrol" perilaku alam atau paling tidak memprediksikannya seperti gempa, gunung meletus, banjiir bandang dsb yang ngga mungkin dikontrol tetapi masih mungkin diprediksi. Dalam skala lebih kecil (negara ngIndon misalnya) hal yang sama ketika berbicara penggusuran di daerah yang akan tergenang untuk waduk pengendali banjir .... siapa yang didahulukan kepentingannya. RDP --- In indonesia_damai@y..., "bethokaw" <bethokaw@o...> wrote: > Yeah, right..!!! coba argumen sana sama penduduk maldives dan kepulauan pasifik yang negaranya bakal tenggelem. Lagian penulis berbicara ttg bagaimana mahluk hidup bakal beradaptasi, tetapi kuncinya bukan pemanasannya tetapi seberapa cepat perubahan iklim itu, makin cepat peningkatan temperatur global (seperti yang terjadi dlm 300 thn terakhir (dan lebih cepat lagi sejak 50 thn terakhir)), semakin kecil kemungkinannya satu species untuk adaptasi. Mungkin mahluk spt nyamuk, kecoa, bakteri yang adaptasinya dan berkembang biaknya lebih cepat bisa survive. Manusia mungkin nggak lenyap, tetapi tetap saja terkena konsekwensinya dan karang laut yang nggak bisa kemana-mana dan hanya survive dalam range temperatur yang sempit, bakal musnah kali. > > > > --- In indonesia_damai@y..., "rovicky" <explore@c...> wrote: > > Ada sebuah artikel cukup bagus tentang Global Warming yang justru > > berarti positip bagi manusia ... Dikaji dari archeological phenomena > > sejak adanya manusia (the last interglacial, ~ 130,000 years ago) > > hingga saat ini. Dan ternyata ketika suhu global naik, maka life > > expectancy dan growth-nya cukup bagus. > > Jadi kenapa takut dengan Pemanasan Global ? > > > > rdp > > Ada juga tulisan dalam pdfnya (mau 1 MB ?) yg intinya jangan takut > > dengan perubahan (global warming period): > > http://www.stanford.edu/~moore/Climate_of_Fear.pdf > > > > Dibawah ini cuplikan summarynya ... > > ====== > > http://www.stanford.edu/~moore/Boon_To_Man.html > > ... > > ... > > Costs and Benefits of Efforts to Mitigate Warming > > If mankind had to choose between a warmer or a cooler climate, > > humans, most other animals and, after adjustment, most plants would > > be better off with higher temperatures. Not all animals or plants > > would prosper under these conditions; many are adapted to the current > > weather and might have difficulty making the transition. Society > > might wish to help natural systems and various species adapt to > > warmer temperatures (or cooler, should that occur). Whether the > > climate will warm is far from certain; that it will change is > > unquestionable. The weather has changed in the past and will no doubt > > continue to vary in the future. Human activity is likely to play only > > a small and uncertain role in climate change. The burning of fossil > > fuel may generate an enhanced greenhouse effect or the release into > > the atmosphere of particulates may cause cooling. It may also be > > simply hubris to believe that Homo Sapiens can affect temperatures, > > rainfall and winds. > > As noted, not all regions or all peoples benefit from a shift to a > > warmer climate. Some locales may become too dry or too wet; others > > may become too warm. Certain areas may be subject to high pressure > > systems which block storms and rains. Other parts may experience the > > reverse. On the whole, though, mankind should benefit from an upward > > tick in the thermometer. Warmer weather means longer growing seasons, > > more rainfall overall, and fewer and less violent storms. The optimal > > way to deal with potential climate change is not to strive to prevent > > it, a useless activity in any case, but to promote growth and > > prosperity so that people will have the resources to deal with any > > shift. > > ------------- Post message: [email protected] Subscribe : [email protected] Unsubscribe : [email protected] List owner : [email protected] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ------------------------------------ Post message: [email protected] Subscribe : [email protected] Unsubscribe : [email protected] List owner : [email protected] Homepage : http://proletar.8m.com/Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/proletar/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/proletar/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: [email protected] [email protected] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [email protected] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
