|
NewForumSoftware posted:Yeah I mean this is great and all and I am behind your plan 100% but it's not going to stop or slow down climate change. What you're talking about is basically putting civilization on overdrive. Nah pretty much the nuclear energy shift and reduction in animal agriculture would do it
|
# ? Nov 10, 2016 23:34 |
|
|
# ? May 15, 2024 03:31 |
|
Feral Integral posted:Nah pretty much the nuclear energy shift and reduction in animal agriculture would do it Now how do you plan to implement that on a global scale given the political realities we face today? Also, do you think the carbon in the atmosphere today will stop warming the atmosphere if we build nuclear plants? Because we already have more than enough in the atmosphere to start melting greenland and antarctica, not to mention the arctic. Any plan that doesn't involve carbon capture on a major scale(which doesn't exist in reality, so good luck) has no hope of stopping anything. You might be able to make the argument they could slow it down, but Obama sure didn't.
|
# ? Nov 10, 2016 23:35 |
|
NewForumSoftware, your redtext really says it all and I'm pretty sure your AV is actually you. Please stop derailing discussion on how to make climate change be less catastrophic than it could be by abusing the climate change thread as self-medication instead of taking anti-depressants.
|
# ? Nov 10, 2016 23:47 |
|
blowfish posted:Please stop derailing discussion on how to make climate change be less catastrophic than it could be that's actually exactly what I'm talking about, sorry I'm not waiting for politicians to save us
|
# ? Nov 10, 2016 23:49 |
|
NewForumSoftware posted:that's actually exactly what I'm talking about, sorry I'm not waiting for politicians to save us BOOTSTRAPS!
|
# ? Nov 10, 2016 23:50 |
|
blowfish posted:BOOTSTRAPS! Maybe you should make a thread called "Climate Change: Who's saving us?"
|
# ? Nov 10, 2016 23:52 |
|
What do you think science teachers in middle and high schools should be telling students about climate change?
|
# ? Nov 10, 2016 23:54 |
|
Arglebargle III posted:What do you think science teachers in middle and high schools should be telling students about climate change? nsf posted:go live in a farmhouse then drink bleach
|
# ? Nov 10, 2016 23:56 |
|
Climate change can't be stopped, but millions, maybe billions, of lives are still at stake. When I talk about or think about "acting on climate change" I'm not thinking about stopping it, I'm thinking about how to adapt human civilization to best weather the storm and minimize the chaos and suffering. A future where India and china can't feed them selves and they become failed states is not a future that's good for anyone on earth. Hundreds of millions of people migrating to more stable countries is going to make Europe's reaction to syrian refugees look humane. There's going to be massacres, genocides, wars, potentially nuclear wars. This is what I'd like to best avoid. The climate is changing, we hosed up bad, but there's still hope for survival, there's still hope to avoid or minimize the worst horrors to come.
|
# ? Nov 10, 2016 23:57 |
|
Arglebargle III posted:What do you think science teachers in middle and high schools should be telling students about climate change? The mechanics of how it works, why its happening and maybe some very broad stuff about the impacts. Kids shouldn't be burdened with this knowledge given the current state of affairs. Once they're older I'd explain that most of the media circus over preventing this stuff is way overblown, we've never done anything meaningful, never will, and couldn't even if we tried. Baronjutter posted:There's going to be massacres, genocides, wars, potentially nuclear wars. This is what I'd like to best avoid. I just don't see how anything offered as a solution by anyone does anything to stop this. The newest hailed "step in the right direction" is signing a plan to remove the cheapest HFC from use in India. How does that even begin to deal with things on the macroeconomic scale the sorts of consequences you're talking about operate on.
|
# ? Nov 10, 2016 23:58 |
|
Yawn.
|
# ? Nov 11, 2016 00:32 |
|
So how soon is the first world hosed? Until we see food shortages and violence? 2025? 2030?
|
# ? Nov 11, 2016 00:42 |
|
Telephones posted:So how soon is the first world hosed? Until we see food shortages and violence? 2025? 2030? Probably not within our lifetime, because we have the wealth and technological base to support our quite small populations easily, and are in climates which won't start seeing agricultural hard impacts for some time. Whether these nations will survive the internal strife caused by the inevitable decision to enforce borders with heavy weaponry, and a thermonuclear war with China and India as major players, is the better question.
|
# ? Nov 11, 2016 00:50 |
|
Telephones posted:So how soon is the first world hosed? Until we see food shortages and violence? 2025? 2030? Canonically? 2060. Guess I pull out of my rear end? ...2060 actually sounds kind of good, yeah.
|
# ? Nov 11, 2016 00:50 |
|
Rime posted:Probably not within our lifetime, because we have the wealth and technological base to support our quite small populations easily, and are in climates which won't start seeing agricultural hard impacts for some time. Uhh do you think the people in lower latitudes are just going to die peacefully? Also our climates are seeing agricultural impacts today and it's hard to imagine agriculture looking anything like it does now in 20 years. Telephones posted:So how soon is the first world hosed? Until we see food shortages and violence? 2025? 2030? This stuff is already happening. Just imagine that it never gets better and only gets worse. Honestly we're already there.
|
# ? Nov 11, 2016 00:52 |
|
The US produces an absurd amount of food and could produce significantly more, if you are a millenial American the worst you'll face is the Handi-Nurse Mk. II medical automaton marking you down as an unsalvageable and alerting an orderly to pull your feeding tube three years after you've turned into a dementia-addled vegetable. As for the lower latitudes, none of them have any force projection capability so they'll get awfully ornery but die on their own soil in the end.
|
# ? Nov 11, 2016 00:59 |
|
Potential BFF posted:The US produces an absurd amount of food and could produce significantly more, if you are a millenial American the worst you'll face is the Handi-Nurse Mk. II medical automaton marking you down as an unsalvageable and alerting an orderly to pull your feeding tube three years after you've turned into a dementia-addled vegetable. Turns out all the money the US spent on the military will be useful.
|
# ? Nov 11, 2016 01:14 |
|
Re: total caloric intake there's definitely enough food production domestically to buffer larger climate-change oriented issues, but everyone will have to get used to weird shortages of specific things. Remember when Limes/Avocados were hard to come by in recent years? More frequently, more diverse things will be unavailable. In a rare coincidence, NewForumSoftware is correct and this has already begun to happen. Timeline for like, legitimate caloric deficit food supply challenges? Outside of... the roughly 40 million Americans who live this way already? I'd give it 30-40 years. Of course who knows because we'll be rocketing through more potential feedback loops thanks to the pending idiocy of the Trump administration, so it'll be even more accelerated.
|
# ? Nov 11, 2016 01:35 |
|
NewForumSoftware posted:Uhh do you think the people in lower latitudes are just going to die peacefully? Also our climates are seeing agricultural impacts today and it's hard to imagine agriculture looking anything like it does now in 20 years. No, I stated quite bluntly that we'll end up killing them in large numbers. Because that is what humans have done throughout all of history when faced with a crisis of this nature, that is what the nations at the bottom of the food chain are already doing to their nearest competitors as things begin to break down, and that is what we will continue to do as this chain of events unfolds.
|
# ? Nov 11, 2016 02:02 |
|
Rime posted:No, I stated quite bluntly that we'll end up killing them in large numbers. Because that is what humans have done throughout all of history when faced with a crisis of this nature, that is what the nations at the bottom of the food chain are already doing to their nearest competitors as things begin to break down, and that is what we will continue to do as this chain of events unfolds. Alright honestly I can get behind that. I still think things are going to suck in the near term more than the short term. I guess we probably won't have wars or food shortages here for a while though. Here's to hoping global civilization collapses without a nuke going off (at least here). That's really what I'm hoping for at this point.
|
# ? Nov 11, 2016 02:11 |
|
Alex Steffen's response to the election (everybody should follow Alex Steffen on Twitter).quote:Dave’s likely right: 2şC is a vanished target now. But this isn’t a 2şC or bust fight. It’s a fight to limit consequences. It’s a fight for every 1/10 of a degree. If we fail to hold to 2şC, we have to fight for 2.1ş; failing that, we battle on for 2.2ş. With millennia of impacts at stake, we never get to give up, even if we end up in 4şC. For future generations, 4ş is still better than 4.1ş. Forever_Peace fucked around with this message at 13:50 on Nov 11, 2016 |
# ? Nov 11, 2016 13:48 |
|
Scientists say it could already be "game over" for climate change posted:Scientists are now saying it might already be too late to avoid a temperature rise of up to 7.36 degrees Celsius (13.25 degrees Fahrenheit) above pre-industrial levels by 2100. link: http://www.sciencealert.com/scientists-say-it-could-already-be-game-over-for-climate-change Mozi fucked around with this message at 16:11 on Nov 11, 2016 |
# ? Nov 11, 2016 15:25 |
|
Whelp, we're comically boned.
|
# ? Nov 11, 2016 15:52 |
|
Getting a 404 for that
|
# ? Nov 11, 2016 15:56 |
|
http://www.sciencealert.com/scientists-say-it-could-already-be-game-over-for-climate-change
|
# ? Nov 11, 2016 16:02 |
|
quote:Scientists are now saying it might already be too late to avoid a temperature rise of up to 7.36 degrees Celsius (13.25 degrees Fahrenheit) above pre-industrial levels by 2100. Isn't this a bit misleading? This doesn't seem be what the article really says. quote:The researchers also calculated there will be a "likely" temperature increase of between 4.78 and 7.36 degrees Celsius (8.6 and 13.25 degrees Fahrenheit) above pre-industrial levels over the next 85 years if greenhouse gas emissions continue at their current rate,. We're probably still screwed, but I don't think anyone who believes climate change exists thinks this ought to be a given.
|
# ? Nov 11, 2016 16:10 |
|
ModernMajorGeneral posted:Isn't this a bit misleading? This doesn't seem be what the article really says. Yeah, emissions rates are going to go up!
|
# ? Nov 11, 2016 16:10 |
|
The best part about trump winning is that well finally see some opposition to the eco-tyranny being pushed by the U.N. The peoples have spoken we don't want micro apartments we dont want to live in car free cities and we dont want to eat insects. Carbon taxes are a death sentence for the third world and trump might actually save millions of lives if he manages to sabotage the Paris agreement. This is a huge step forward for humanity. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
# ? Nov 11, 2016 16:51 |
|
I'm guessing, just a guess here, you are a climate change skeptic.
|
# ? Nov 11, 2016 16:54 |
|
smoke sumthin bitch posted:The best part about trump winning is that well finally see some opposition to the eco-tyranny being pushed by the U.N. The peoples have spoken we don't want micro apartments we dont want to live in car free cities and we dont want to eat insects. Carbon taxes are a death sentence for the third world and trump might actually save millions of lives if he manages to sabotage the Paris agreement. This is a huge step forward for humanity. pretty obvious troll
|
# ? Nov 11, 2016 16:59 |
|
smoke sumthin bitch posted:The best part about trump winning is that well finally see some opposition to the eco-tyranny being pushed by the U.N. The peoples have spoken we don't want micro apartments we dont want to live in car free cities and we dont want to eat insects. smoke sumthin bitch posted:Carbon taxes are a death sentence for the third world and trump might actually save millions of lives if he manages to sabotage the Paris agreement. This is a huge step forward for humanity. If we're worried about the third world getting more energy to improve their standard of living, we could subsidize carbon-free power. That could mean Americans employed in good paying jobs, spearheading an industry with a lot of potential. If from that, America becomes a leader in carbon-free energy, selling power plants (and the materials to construct them) on the international market would necessitate employing more people. All of this lines up with Trump's promises, but also combat's climate change, which if unchecked, will kill millions of Americans. They aren't mutually exclusive.
|
# ? Nov 11, 2016 17:12 |
|
Potato Salad posted:I'm guessing, just a guess here, you are a climate change skeptic. climate change is real i just dont believe its as dangerous as the alarmists say. Basically what we should do is try to empower and enrich third world nations so that if the poo poo really hits the fan and their surroundings become unlivable, they have the means to pack up and go somewhere cooler. I live in quebec and we have 2 carbon taxes (provincial and federal) even though every year since the beginning of times we emit a negative amount of co2 in the atmosphere. Were paying out the rear end to offset american and Chinese greenhouse gazes and all the funds are squandered/gifted to huge corporations. "Climate justice" is the biggest ponzi scheme of all time. Uranium Phoenix posted:stuff all that stuff is cool and good if its being done voluntarily and without subsidies. The problem arises when you force these policies onto the masses. smoke sumthin bitch fucked around with this message at 17:27 on Nov 11, 2016 |
# ? Nov 11, 2016 17:22 |
|
smoke sumthin bitch posted:climate change is real i just dont believe its as dangerous as the alarmists say. Basically what we should do is try to empower and enrich third world nations so that if the poo poo really hits the fan and their surroundings become unlivable, they have the means to pack up and go somewhere cooler. I live in quebec and we have 2 carbon taxes (provincial and federal) even though every year since the beginning of times we emit a negative amount of co2 in the atmosphere. Were paying out the rear end to offset american and Chinese greenhouse gazes and all the funds are squandered/gifted to huge corporations. "Climate justice" is the biggest ponzi scheme of all time. Jesus loving christ, get out of here, loving troll
|
# ? Nov 11, 2016 17:28 |
|
smoke sumthin bitch posted:climate change is real i just dont believe its as dangerous as the alarmists say. Basically what we should do is try to empower and enrich third world nations so that if the poo poo really hits the fan and their surroundings become unlivable, they have the means to pack up and go somewhere cooler. I live in quebec and we have 2 carbon taxes (provincial and federal) even though every year since the beginning of times we emit a negative amount of co2 in the atmosphere. Were paying out the rear end to offset american and Chinese greenhouse gazes and all the funds are squandered/gifted to huge corporations. "Climate justice" is the biggest ponzi scheme of all time. That's more nuanced than your first post and saved a lot of troublesome argument, I think. I'm going to debate you on some fronts, but at least it won't be full bore "oh god, its Arkane"
|
# ? Nov 11, 2016 17:29 |
|
smoke sumthin bitch posted:Basically what we should do is try to empower and enrich third world nations so that if the poo poo really hits the fan and their surroundings become unlivable, they have the means to pack up and go somewhere cooler. Morbidly curious how you envision this playing out.
|
# ? Nov 11, 2016 17:32 |
|
smoke sumthin bitch posted:climate change is real i just dont believe its as dangerous as the alarmists say. Basically what we should do is try to empower and enrich third world nations so that if the poo poo really hits the fan and their surroundings become unlivable, they have the means to pack up and go somewhere cooler. I live in quebec and we have 2 carbon taxes (provincial and federal) even though every year since the beginning of times we emit a negative amount of co2 in the atmosphere. Were paying out the rear end to offset american and Chinese greenhouse gazes and all the funds are squandered/gifted to huge corporations. "Climate justice" is the biggest ponzi scheme of all time. If your plan relies on entire national populations being able to "pack up and go somewhere cooler," you have no plan worth taking seriously.
|
# ? Nov 11, 2016 17:33 |
|
Inglonias posted:If your plan relies on entire national populations being able to "pack up and go somewhere cooler," you have no plan worth taking seriously. I'm sure mass migration in the time of ascending white nationalism will be an easier lift than solar panels though. Right?
|
# ? Nov 11, 2016 17:45 |
|
Potato Salad posted:That's more nuanced than your first post and saved a lot of troublesome argument, I think. He's a fool and you're an idiot for pretending anything he says has any basis in reality. Well-meaning dipshits like you trying to hug the dumb out of people are the reason we're in this situation.
|
# ? Nov 11, 2016 18:01 |
|
Potato Salad posted:That's more nuanced than your first post and saved a lot of troublesome argument, I think. but it's not nuanced at all, what the gently caress are you saying
|
# ? Nov 11, 2016 18:05 |
|
|
# ? May 15, 2024 03:31 |
|
im trying to invite the guy to continue to walk into any number of pitfalls, particularly on the subject of the third world like, based on his posting elsewhere, he's inches from stumbling across Rudyard Kipling grade poo poo
|
# ? Nov 11, 2016 18:16 |