Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,108
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    Elarey7
    Newest Member
    Elarey7
    Joined

Occasional Thoughts on Climate Change


donsutherland1
 Share

Recommended Posts

We are well and truly screwed....

 

I got a 3C rise by 2100 as the most likely scenario from the graphs I looked at.....that would mean that it hasn't been this warm since over 3 million years ago, before a single human roamed the earth?  Those were the days of Australopithecus and Lucy living in eastern Africa (Tanzania/Kenya.)

Just as a point of reference, Don, how hot was it when the dinosaurs roamed the earth in the Cretaceous and flowering plants did not (could not) exist?  This doesn't even mention the massive mass extinction event humanity has caused which is killing off many species vital to our existence (read pollinators.)

Once again, we are well and truly screwed.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

We are well and truly screwed....

 

I got a 3C rise by 2100 as the most likely scenario from the graphs I looked at.....that would mean that it hasn't been this warm since over 3 million years ago, before a single human roamed the earth?  Those were the days of Australopithecus and Lucy living in eastern Africa (Tanzania/Kenya.)

Just as a point of reference, Don, how hot was it when the dinosaurs roamed the earth in the Cretaceous and flowering plants did not (could not) exist?  This doesn't even mention the massive mass extinction event humanity has caused which is killing off many species vital to our existence (read pollinators.)

Once again, we are well and truly screwed.....

Here’s a good link:

https://www.climate.gov/news-features/climate-qa/whats-hottest-earths-ever-been

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, donsutherland1 said:

Don, this is just one piece of a much larger puzzle, but I wanted to point out in vivid detail what the real problem is.  How we function as an unsustainable society.

https://twitter.com/i/events/1424716123728236545

 

Below is an example, of how in the same country, indigenous people sustainably log and still make enough money to support themselves vs what crazy capitalists who don't care about anything but profit do.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Civilization is a one-way street to a specific kind of outcome. People always blame the boomers and yes they are accelerators on a bad situation.

However fundamentally this way of life has lost it's appeal and the focus has shifted from mitigating climate change to mitigating civilization and by association slavery.

If you don't feel the same way then put simply you are part of the problem which includes people from all generations and walks of life.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, LibertyBell said:

I love seeing Gen Z taking over and telling the oldies who messed everything up to step aside.

 

 

 

3 hours ago, donsutherland1 said:

They’re right. 

 

25 minutes ago, Vice-Regent said:

Civilization is a one-way street to a specific kind of outcome. People always blame the boomers and yes they are accelerators on a bad situation.

However fundamentally this way of life has lost it's appeal and the focus has shifted from mitigating climate change to mitigating civilization and by association slavery.

If you don't feel the same way then put simply you are part of the problem which includes people from all generations and walks of life.

“He that troubleth his own house shall inherit the wind” …… “and the answer my friends is blowing in ……… As always …….

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/9/2021 at 11:26 AM, wxtrix said:

what in that link is non-fact-based hyperbole?

"...there likely is/are aspects of import there."

And, CNN does engage in rhetoric shock-jock headlines to bate clicks - yes they do... so, knowing that - it's up to the reader to keep that in mind. 

That's all - 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Typhoon Tip said:

"...there likely is/are aspects of import there."

And, CNN does engage in rhetoric shock-jock headlines to bate clicks - yes they do... so, knowing that - it's up to the reader to keep that in mind. 

That's all - 

so then you posted something that isn’t fact-based.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, donsutherland1 said:

They’re right. 

Yes and the fact is our brand of "capitalism" is unsustainable.  It amazes me that some people are so dumb they still don't see it.  They have money on the brain. All politicians who take any amount of money from these sordid cartels should be given one month to give it all back and if they don't they should unceremoniously be kicked out of office and all lobbyists for these corporations should either be imprisoned along with the heads of these cartels or be barred from ever being allowed to talk to any politicians, much less give them any money.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, LibertyBell said:

 

Good morning Liberty. I wonder when ice mining and melt capture will become profitable in still glacial covered land masses. I guess that will depend on technology and the needs of drought impacted agricultural areas. It will be interesting to see how fast technology develops to move water for $$. As always ….

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, rclab said:

Good morning Liberty. I wonder when ice mining and melt capture will become profitable in still glacial covered land masses. I guess that will depend on technology and the needs of drought impacted agricultural areas. It will be interesting to see how fast technology develops to move water for $$. As always ….

ice harvesting on an industrial scale was a thing in the not too distant past and probably will be again

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, rclab said:

Good morning Liberty. I wonder when ice mining and melt capture will become profitable in still glacial covered land masses. I guess that will depend on technology and the needs of drought impacted agricultural areas. It will be interesting to see how fast technology develops to move water for $$. As always ….

The world will not be as we know it.  It could be like it was millions of years ago, and that world would not be inhabitable by humans, at least on a technological scale.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, LibertyBell said:

READ THIS LOUD AND CLEAR

CAPITALISM IS UNSUSTAINABLE BECAUSE IT IS BASED ON SELFISHNESS AND GREED AND THAT WILL ALWAYS LEAD TO A DEAD END OUTCOME

 

This is the worst possible route you can take in an effort to fix this problem right here.

You try to sell this and most people will check out. 

Carbon capture and sequestration is the only solution we have to negate the carbon already in the atmosphere and the additional carbon already in the pipeline. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Jonger said:

This is the worst possible route you can take in an effort to fix this problem right here.

You try to sell this and most people will check out. 

Carbon capture and sequestration is the only solution we have to negate the carbon already in the atmosphere and the additional carbon already in the pipeline. 

They see the extremes, I would argue for what I call collectivism.  It's a more social responsibility route where companies are answerable to society and the environment, not just their shareholders.  Some companies (like Dan One) are already doing this.  Companies like this sign a social responsibility contract and agree to abide by its terms in order to do business.  It's a win/win/win for everyone.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

They see the extremes, I would argue for what I call collectivism.  It's a more social responsibility route where companies are answerable to society and the environment, not just their shareholders.  Some companies (like Dan One) are already doing this.  Companies like this sign a social responsibility contract and agree to abide by its terms in order to do business.  It's a win/win/win for everyone.

 

But it's not going to happen. We need someone to figure out a proper way to pull down the current Co2 levels from any location on earth. Unless China or India suffered direct pain, it won't happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Jonger said:

But it's not going to happen. We need someone to figure out a proper way to pull down the current Co2 levels from any location on earth. Unless China or India suffered direct pain, it won't happen.

China's time table is 2060, which is way too late.  There definitely needs to be strong economic pressure applied to both countries, and others like Brazil who are destroying their forests.  We also need sequestration methods, because we're already at higher levels than we can tolerate.  We'll be at +1.5 C within 5 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

China's time table is 2060, which is way too late.  There definitely needs to be strong economic pressure applied to both countries, and others like Brazil who are destroying their forests.  We also need sequestration methods, because we're already at higher levels than we can tolerate.  We'll be at +1.5 C within 5 years.

In the grand scheme of things.... none of this will matter LONG term.

150 years isn't shit. Humans and other animals can live with higher temps, new coast lines and more co2 in the atmosphere. We want to avoid TOO much extinction and damage to flora/fauna.

Technology is moving us in the right direction, but we can head all this off with carbon sequestration. It's the easy option for all of this and also reduces ocean acidification too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, LibertyBell said:

READ THIS LOUD AND CLEAR

CAPITALISM IS UNSUSTAINABLE BECAUSE IT IS BASED ON SELFISHNESS AND GREED AND THAT WILL ALWAYS LEAD TO A DEAD END OUTCOME

 

Some selfishness is good remember if you optimize yourself individually we would seek the result we want. The drive is to be selfish for the right reasons.

You run the risk of causing reactionary thinking like communism etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Vice-Regent said:

Some selfishness is good remember if you optimize yourself individually we would seek the result we want. The trick is to be selfish for the right reasons.

There needs to be a heavy financial penalty applied to them, for example force them to pay for the higher rates of disaster we now see.  Basically you can take them completely out of wrecking the environment if it no longer holds a financial gain for them.  At the same time you can set up some carrots to make adoption of renewable energy much quicker.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Jonger said:

This is the worst possible route you can take in an effort to fix this problem right here.

You try to sell this and most people will check out. 

Carbon capture and sequestration is the only solution we have to negate the carbon already in the atmosphere and the additional carbon already in the pipeline. 

Technological solutions are like a pandora's box. We should cut our losses now while we have the chance. If you are investor you know about loss mitigation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Jonger said:

In the grand scheme of things.... none of this will matter LONG term.

150 years isn't shit. Humans and other animals can live with higher temps, new coast lines and more co2 in the atmosphere. We want to avoid TOO much extinction and damage to flora/fauna.

Technology is moving us in the right direction, but we can head all this off with carbon sequestration. It's the easy option for all of this and also reduces ocean acidification too.

definitely need to stop coral reef bleaching too.  The entire food cycle getting disrupted and the mass extinction event currently underway need to be halted before 2100

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Vice-Regent said:

Some selfishness is good remember if you optimize yourself individually we would seek the result we want. The drive is to be selfish for the right reasons.

You run the risk of causing reactionary thinking like communism etc.

collectivism is a better way that basically puts environment and society on an equal footing with shareholder profit

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Vice-Regent said:

Technological solutions are like a pandora's box. We should cut our losses now while we have the chance. If you are investor you know about loss mitigation.

People that opposed carbon sequestration don't care about climate, they have ulterior motives.

20 years of following this topic has solidified this opinion.

We don't destroy our way of life and the climate is saved until we develop 100% energy usage from the sun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...