Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Recommended Posts

On 12/16/2019 at 8:19 AM, dialamah said:

I suppose if we'd bothered ourselves to address what we've known for decades, we wouldn't be getting these increasingly dire scenarios of what we'll have to do or accept as a result of our inaction. 

But the seniors on this forum can afford to be dismissive, as its our children and grandchildren who will have to take action.  Perhaps the boomers will be remembered in history with even more contempt than Nazis.  At least Nazis only saw to the annihilation of a few million Jews; boomers are on track to assure the annihilation of billions.

What are you doing exactly?  Does it involve some serious suffering?  Good job comparing not having a Prius to being a tower guard at Bergen Belsen.

7 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

They're already starting to face open contempt in many circles.

Baby boom politics has served that generation well, but others not so much.  The Laffler Curve idea from the Reagan era wasn't supposed to be used to hoard and deny young people the same privileges they had.

I might be a dismissive senior, but it's only because I've yet to hear of an actual plan to deal with it.

By all means let's see the open contempt, but could you at least accompany it with something concrete that we can do?  That we will, actually, do?

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 140
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Keep adding billions to the population and nothing one does matters one bit. What's worse...too many already.

I also have contempt for future generations and don't like taking personal responsibility for anything.

What are you doing exactly?  Does it involve some serious suffering?  Good job comparing not having a Prius to being a tower guard at Bergen Belsen. I might be a dismissive senior, but it's onl

Posted Images

13 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

They're already starting to face open contempt in many circles.

Baby boom politics has served that generation well, but others not so much.  The Laffler Curve idea from the Reagan era wasn't supposed to be used to hoard and deny young people the same privileges they had.

Maybe in your sad circle.   No one is hoarding or denying anyone anything, except the hysterics and doomers who would ave us on rationing and a pass card with carbon credits so the gov't can track what we do.   The carbon tax which does nothing to stop climate change only increases the cost of food etc., so far nothing humans do can change the earth's changes.   Sure, we have to stop polluting and go greener where possible but what we should be doing is building infrastructure and homes or whatever it takes to adapt to whatever is coming.    Scaring the beejeesus  out of young kids with apocalyptic predictions, none of which made previously have happened, doesn't help anything.    

I bet not one person on here denigrating seniors has given up their car, given up heating and cooling their homes and still purchase all the necessary oil based products to survive.  

 

Edited by scribblet
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, scribblet said:

I bet not one person on here denigrating seniors has given up their car, given up heating and cooling their homes and still purchase all the necessary oil based products to survive.  

We've given up the second car, and have reduced the average temperature of my home - we use warm sweaters and blankets instead of heating.  We cut the use of AC by about 75% last year, by using other means of cooling our home. We've also cut back on meat eating, buy local whenever possible and use transit.  I am sure we can do more and equally sure we'll continue to make small changes to gradually reduce our carbon footprint.

Nobody is asking people to give up everything all at once - except climate change deniers.  All that is being asked for at this time is to make some relatively small changes - enough people doing that will help.

But you refuse to do anything at all.  You laugh at the idea of eating less meat, whine endlessly about a couple extra dollars at the pump, lie about how effective carbon pricing is, and arrogantly demand that people whose carbon footprint is much smaller than yours should "do more" before you should be asked to do anything. 

If these things we could do voluntarily become government mandated, it will be because of the do-nothing lobby.  

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/4/2019 at 2:49 AM, scribblet said:

Before you think that I’ve gone off my rocker, read to the very end….  

 

 

 

The Arctic Ocean is warming up, icebergs are growing scarcer and in some places the seals are finding the water too hot according to a report to the Commerce Department yesterday from the Consulate at Bergen, Norway.

Reports from fishermen, seal hunters and explorers all point to a radical change in climate conditions and hitherto unheard of temperatures in the Arctic zone.

Exploration expeditions report that scarcely any ice has been met as far north as 81 degrees 29 minutes.

Soundings to a depth of 3,100 meters showed the gulf stream still very warm.

Great masses of ice have been replaced by moraines of earth and
 stones, the report continued, while at many points well known glaciers have entirely disappeared.

Very few seals and no white fish are found in the eastern Arctic, while vast shoals of herring and smelts which have never before ventured so far north, are being encountered in the old seal fishing grounds.

Within a few years it is predicted that due to the ice melt the sea will rise and make most coast cities uninhabitable.

Oh, sorry ... I owe all you readers an apology ....

 

 

 

I neglected to mention that this report was from November 2 , 1922. It was reported by the AP and published in The  Washington Post 96 years ago.

 

 

 

... The 1922 panic must have been caused by all of the Model T Ford's exhausts ... or possibly horse and cattle farts?

 

...or all the coal being burned.

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Iceni warrior said:

...or all the coal being burned.

Typical response - designed to convince people who have no clue whatsoever.  Kind of like pointing to the fact that it's snowing out.

 

Of course, coming up with these communication strategies takes cleverness, and The Heartland Institute and those PR companies make sure to hire the cleverest folks money can buy.  It's a marvel how well democracy and money can work together to achieve certain goals, isn't it ?  All it takes is people without scruples...

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, dialamah said:

We've given up the second car, and have reduced the average temperature of my home - we use warm sweaters and blankets instead of heating.  We cut the use of AC by about 75% last year, by using other means of cooling our home. We've also cut back on meat eating, buy local whenever possible and use transit.  I am sure we can do more and equally sure we'll continue to make small changes to gradually reduce our carbon footprint.

Nobody is asking people to give up everything all at once - except climate change deniers.  All that is being asked for at this time is to make some relatively small changes - enough people doing that will help.

But you refuse to do anything at all.  You laugh at the idea of eating less meat, whine endlessly about a couple extra dollars at the pump, lie about how effective carbon pricing is, and arrogantly demand that people whose carbon footprint is much smaller than yours should "do more" before you should be asked to do anything. 

If these things we could do voluntarily become government mandated, it will be because of the do-nothing lobby.  

 

I  don't have an AC.  I don't eat meat at home.  I always buy local whenever possible.  I do like guacamole and central Alberta doesn't have many avocado farms so it's not always achievable.  The point is, it doesn't matter.  It won't make any difference to climate change.  Not even if we all did.

Now, if you were willing to do without a car at all, reduce the heating in your home to zero, never use the AC, never eat meat, etc, that wouldn't help climate change either.  And you're not willing to do that.  Fair enough, no-one is. 

Everyone is willing to do what they are willing to do, and unwilling to do what they are not.  None of it makes any difference whatsoever.  Those who do nothing at all are having the same effect on AGW as you and I are.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, bcsapper said:

The point is, it doesn't matter.  It won't make any difference to climate change.  Not even if we all did.

When injury stops, healing begins.  You are right in that we're so far gone that some effect is inevitable, but wrong in thinking its pointless to do anything.  Recently, I've heard of two examples where ecological systems recovered more quickly than expected, once the areas were protected.  

10 hours ago, bcsapper said:

Now, if you were willing to do without a car at all, reduce the heating in your home to zero, never use the AC, never eat meat, etc, that wouldn't help climate change either.  And you're not willing to do that. 

Given where I live, all of that is possible for me, save for temperature control on days of extreme cold or extreme heat, since those can kill.  I have lived without a car in the past, and rarely use the one we have (strictly speaking, it's not mine).  For me, meatless is the ultimate goal - already tried going cold turkey, failed and now trying a more gradual approach.  It's not only better for the planet, but also my health.  

10 hours ago, bcsapper said:

Everyone is willing to do what they are willing to do, and unwilling to do what they are not.  None of it makes any difference whatsoever.  Those who do nothing at all are having the same effect on AGW as you and I are.

Everyone doing something would certainly make a difference.  Doing things voluntarily is better than being forced.  Giving oneself time to work into the kinds of changes that will help is better than being forced to do so all at once.  Mitigation is better than nothing, and mitigation is what we're talking about.  The current projected death toll is 6 billion people; perhaps we'd be able to keep it from rising to 8 or 10 billion, if everyone were willing to mitigate now.  

Edited by dialamah
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, dialamah said:

When injury stops, healing begins.  You are right in that we're so far gone that some effect is inevitable, but wrong in thinking its pointless to do anything.  Recently, I've heard of two examples where ecological systems recovered more quickly than expected, once the areas were protected.  

Yes, the argument is one of degrees.  "Some effect" is open to a vast interpretation.  I never put much faith in the infallibility of models.  They've been shown to be wrong too many times.  So I really don't know whether we will be at 2 degrees above normal with a 3 metre sea level rise and a 50% die off of species by 2060, or a 2.5 degrees above normal with a 4 metre seal level rise with a 70% die off of species by 2100, or whatever.  That's always been one of the problems.  No-0ne actually knows, and they can only accurately talk in probabilities.  It is pointless to do anything if it won't have any effect.  That's actually the definition of pointless.  That's not to say don't do it.  But in terms of AGW, it is pointless.

 

2 hours ago, dialamah said:

Given where I live, all of that is possible for me, save for temperature control on days of extreme cold or extreme heat, since those can kill.  I have lived without a car in the past, and rarely use the one we have (strictly speaking, it's not mine).  For me, meatless is the ultimate goal - already tried going cold turkey, failed and now trying a more gradual approach.  It's not only better for the planet, but also my health.  

Once again, it's laudable, but unless you can get everyone to do it, it's pointless.  It's the same with the pipelines and the oil sands.  If we cancelled all the pipelines and shut in the oil sands right now it wouldn't effect climate change.  Someone would make up the difference. 

 

2 hours ago, dialamah said:

Everyone doing something would certainly make a difference.  Doing things voluntarily is better than being forced.  Giving oneself time to work into the kinds of changes that will help is better than being forced to do so all at once.  Mitigation is better than nothing, and mitigation is what we're talking about.  The current projected death toll is 6 billion people; perhaps we'd be able to keep it from rising to 8 or 10 billion, if everyone were willing to mitigate now.  

Everyone doing something certainly would make a difference.  We've been trying to get everyone on the same page since Kyoto and we haven't even come close.  The recent failure in Madrid is evidence of our utter failure to achieve anything near the level of worldwide cooperation required to solve what is definitely a worldwide problem.  If you look at what we have done so far, with all the solar panels and the windmills, carbon capture technology innovations, cap and trade schemes, taxes, etc, and then look at the rise in the concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, it doesn't really appear to have had any effect.  I don't know about the death toll.  I haven't seen those numbers.  It might be that such disatrous figures are what is required to spur us into action.  I assume I won't be around to see it, though.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Isn't the core problem that we have lost the ideals of sacrifice, compromise, and morality. Maybe it's the death of religion.

No, the core problem is one of scale.  What we are seeing now is the result of 250 years of industrialization with a concomitant population increase from 1 billion to almost 8 billion.  All this on a planet of finite size with finite resources.  The notion that we can turn that around at will is preposterous.  Don't take my word for it, though.  Just look at the evidence.  As I said to Dialamah, above, everything we've done so far, which has been considerable in terms of invention and engineering alone, hasn't changed a thing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

  As I said to Dialamah, above, everything we've done so far, which has been considerable in terms of invention and engineering alone, hasn't changed a thing.

You can't know that.

If not one single solar panel or wind generator had ever been built then more fossil fuel would have been used. Not to mention all the improvements in insulation, efficiency etc.

Agreed, ''not as bad as it could be'' is faint praise indeed but it is still an improvement on ''carry on as before''.

Edited by Iceni warrior
Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Iceni warrior said:

You can't know that.

If not one single solar panel or wind generator had ever been built then more fossil fuel would have been used.

Agreed, ''not as bad as it could be'' is faint praise indeed but it is still an improvement on ''carry on as before''.

There's an old saying:  Every little helps, said the monkey as he pissed into the sea. 

Sure, mathematically, if you go to enough places to the right of the decimal point, everything helps.  But nothing we've done so far has "actually" helped.  As I said above, what we have done, notwithstanding its negligible effect on greenhouse gas levels in the atmosphere, has been considerable.  Those levels are still rising though.  That tells me that demand for fossil fuel use is outstripping our efforts at reduction.  Or at least keeping pace.  And we can't get the right people to care.

Edited by bcsapper
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/18/2019 at 12:24 PM, dialamah said:

.....But you refuse to do anything at all.  You laugh at the idea of eating less meat, whine endlessly about a couple extra dollars at the pump, lie about how effective carbon pricing is, and arrogantly demand that people whose carbon footprint is much smaller than yours should "do more" before you should be asked to do anything. 

If these things we could do voluntarily become government mandated, it will be because of the do-nothing lobby.  

 

Not so, I've never refused or said we should do nothing at all, and we should continue to clean up our act and improve infrastructure etc. etc.   We do pretty much the same as you, we've always kept the heat at 68 daytime and 63 at night, I have to turn it up when company comes, public transit is not an option, there isn't any and there is nothing withing walking distance.    Getting down to one car won't make much difference, you just drive the one car more often so unless you use shanks mare all the time or ride a bike, there's no difference.    Keeping the heat and A/C low even if everyone did it wouldn't make any difference either, unless we quit using it all together, but of course we live in Canada so it's that or freeze to death, in the dark.

Nothing we do will change the weather or stop climate change, it's going to happen no matter what, the earth has cycled in and out of ice ages many times.  As I said, we should be preparing for change through infrastructure etc. 

Meanwhile, our Dear Leader has jetted off to Costa Rica - what 'global warming' says he

and

30 ft banks of global warming in Iceland. Icelander: 'We've never before had snow on this scale.' Climate Alarmist’  circa 2000:  'Children just won't know what snow is.'

 

https://www.sott.net/article/425891-Up-to-30-FEET-deep-snow-banks-in-Iceland-We-ve-never-before-had-snow-on-this-scale

 

 

Edited by scribblet
Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, scribblet said:

30 ft banks of global warming in Iceland. Icelander: 'We've never before had snow on this scale.' Climate Alarmist’  circa 2000:  'Children just won't know what snow is.'

 

 

 

https://www.sott.net/article/425891-Up-to-30-FEET-deep-snow-banks-in-Iceland-We-ve-never-before-had-snow-on-this-scale

 

 

 

Warmer climate leads to more moisture in the air. More moisture in the air leads to more precipitation.

More precipitation leads to 30' snowbanks in Iceland. Simples.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, scribblet said:

We do pretty much the same as you, we've always kept the heat at 68 daytime and 63 at night, I have to turn it up when company comes, public transit is not an option, there isn't any and there is nothing withing walking distance.    Getting down to one car won't make much difference, you just drive the one car more often so unless you use shanks mare all the time or ride a bike, there's no difference.    Keeping the heat and A/C low even if everyone did it wouldn't make any difference either, unless we quit using it all together, but of course we live in Canada so it's that or freeze to death, in the dark.

Thats really good to know.  I agree with you that freezing to death or dying from heatstroke isn't a realistic option, and that I am fortunate to live where transit or car-sharing is an option.  

 

1 hour ago, scribblet said:

Nothing we do will change the weather or stop climate change, it's going to happen no matter what, the earth has cycled in and out of ice ages many times.  As I said, we should be preparing for change through infrastructure etc. 

The cycling of hotter and colder throughout earth's history is true, and its also true that in this time period, human activity has accelerated it.  If you support mitigation through infrastructure, would you accept extra taxation for the government to administer the kind of infrastructure needed?  As much as the government is unwieldy and often wasteful, I n.v elieve they are still the best option to get things done on a national scale.  Do you agree or disagee?

Weather is not climate, so a dump of snow somewhere or a heatwave somewhere else does not prove or disprove climate change.  Planet-wide trends over time define changes in climate.  It can be 25 below for a week somewhere, and the overall temperature of the earth will still have increased over a decade (or two or three).  

Its like a retail business: they don't define their year's sales by Christmas time, they average it over the year.  Annual earnings may go up (or down) over time, regardless of what happens on any particular Christmas, or even any particular year. 

Its the aversge over time that matters, not single event.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Who in their right mind would deliberately start fires in Queensland, well, a few idiots would.

https://amp.brisbanetimes.com.au/national/queensland/dozens-of-firebugs-blamed-for-destructive-queensland-fires-20191220-p53m1i.html?__twitter_impression=true

Almost 100 firebugs have deliberately started blazes across Queensland that have destroyed homes and consumed thousands of hectares of bushland.

Some 65 fires continued to burn across the state on Friday, jumping from 55 reported on Thursday, as the fire threat deepened heading into the weekend.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/10/2019 at 7:44 AM, dialamah said:

I don't suppose humans will cease to exist really, but I think it'll be catastrophic enough that civilization as we know it will be gone.  

Meaning human emissions of CO2 will finally start going down.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/10/2019 at 10:37 AM, Shady said:

Anyways, what do you think about China’s coal output?  Why aren’t they taking our example?  What gives man?

They are following our example - clearly they don't give a shit either.

Edited by eyeball
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/12/2019 at 7:11 AM, scribblet said:

Imagine living without all our amenities, imagine trying to heat your home in the winter without the fuels.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/04/06/what-would-life-be-like-without-fossil-fuels-such-as-gas-and-oil/

 

I imagine that will just make it easier for the fittest to take what they need to survive from the unfit. They'll be too weak and cold to resist.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/2/2020 at 6:13 AM, scribblet said:

Now they are going after toilet paper - gimme a break, what are supposed to use - the neighbour's cat

Toilet paper was only "invented" for commercial use in 1857.  Before that we used newspaper, pages from books and magazines, leaves, grass, ferns, corn cobs, maize, fruit skins, seashells, stone, clay, sand, snow, water.  Europeans used their hand -Islamic cultures used their left hand.  

There are lots of options, if toilet paper ever does become outlawed.  

Source: toiletpaperhistory.net.

Link to post
Share on other sites



  • Tell a friend

    Love Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...