{"id":3369,"date":"2009-12-16T12:11:35","date_gmt":"2009-12-16T12:11:35","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.gardenvisit.com\/blog\/?p=3369"},"modified":"2009-12-16T12:11:35","modified_gmt":"2009-12-16T12:11:35","slug":"global-warming-and-urban-design-sustainability","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.gardenvisit.com\/blog\/global-warming-and-urban-design-sustainability\/","title":{"rendered":"Effective policies re global warming, climate change, urban design, sustainability and landscape architecture"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"Scotland's<\/a>

Scotland's Old Red Sandstone was laid down in hot, dry, arid conditions - about 400 million years ago. Homo sapiens evolved about 4 million years ago and is not responsible for the climate change from hot arid desert to cold wet coast.<\/p><\/div>\n

The expert science behind the theory of global warming is unimpeachable and unchallengable: thermometers show temperatures are rising and <\/em>tape measures show glaciers are retreating. But several important questions have uncertain answers:<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. What percentage of global warming is caused by burning fossil fuels and felling rain forests?<\/li>\n
  2. What percentage difference would result from the measures advocated by reasonable scientists?<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    The answers to these questions would be useful. My guesses are (1) humans have caused only a small percentage of the global warming in the last 20,000 years (2) the measures currently under discussion, though I am in full support of them, would have next-to-no-effect on climate change. If we are serious about doing whatever little we can do to lessen climate change then we should consider the following moderate measures:-<\/p>\n