"Global Warming"

[Bruce Wayne]

Go on then, name just one crop that was bio engineered in the 1800's please. (bio engineered - DNA profiled and structured to be resistant to whatever was the issue back in the day)

We didn't have the ability to change things gene by gene back then, but it doesn't mean we didn't do extensive manipulation of crops via breeding to ensure they met out needs. It's like saying a battery farm is a natural place just because they have chickens in them

Do we look to prevent/tackle global warming or adapt to anticipated changes?

You have 100 billion pound, all of which has to be spend on either preventative measures or on ways in which we could adapt to anticipated changes. What would you go for?

As said in my answer, I'd forget climate change and spend the money on other environmental issues of greater importance, that just so happen to do both prevent/adapt, whilst being far easier to sell to the population than the hornets nest of climate change.

 

[HirsuteBlue]

Anticipated changes is why nuclear arsenals are kept and maintained.
Not enough sides agree on the problems for a unilateral decision on preventative measures. As though any Government can actually be trusted to keep to its word.
So what actually happens is Tofu and Swampy get militant for a few hours at a time around the G8 summit and trash a McDonalds and brag about 'anti capitalism maaaan'.
The west can't lecture developing countries looking to industrialise having industrialised themselves and reeped the rewards, so what can we do, we could burn all the endangered species as fuel and kill two birds (red kites!) with one stone - we dont have to hear about the endangered list anymore and we get so leccy out of the deal.
France lead the world in hydropower technology and implementation, but that is nice for them they have the geography - the Dutch don't. France are world leaders in the Nuclear industry, but Iran isn't allowed that.
Why not let every country decide for itself, and if it F**ks up and costs the rest of the world one moment of harm, then all the citizens are killed off and used to stoke the power stations. 3 birds 1 stone situation, great message not to make a mess to everyone else, and we get some more leccy, and the world population falls meaning less usage.

Aside from taking the p!ss, no one strategy can cope with the issue, renewable isn't producing enough, fossil fuels mean getting shafted on price and they still run out, nuclear is cleaner but mistakes cost more than with fossil fuels, efficiency doesn't work because of laziness.
Easiest way of solving all the problems is to cut demand drastically, and the easiest way to do that is in the first line.

 

[HirsuteBlue]

We didn't have the ability to change things gene by gene back then, but it doesn't mean we didn't do extensive manipulation of crops via breeding to ensure they met out needs. It's like saying a battery farm is a natural place just because they have chickens in them

1800's please. :Wink:

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Erm, fertilisers were invented in the 19th century. Does that count?

You mentioned the 19th century so I can't mention the introduction of selective breeding in the 18th century to effectively manipulate the genetic traits of crops and livestock through breeding

 

[HirsuteBlue]

Erm, fertilisers were invented in the 19th century. Does that count?

You mentioned the 19th century so I can't mention the introduction of selective breeding in the 18th century to effectively manipulate the genetic traits of crops and livestock through breeding

Erm sorry matey, that is evolution being recognised. Strongest survive etc. And the best fertilizers then was the muck from the beasts, that is, ironically the situation you overpay for today for 'organic' food stuffs.