|
repent (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2018 11:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 11:16 |
|
|
this broken hill posted:then you'll know what it means to fear the lord God isn't as real or present as climate change.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2018 12:33
|
|
|
mdemone posted:Arctic permafrost thawing decades ahead of schedule, check. Arctic permanent sea-ice breaks for the first time, check. Well the jet stream over Canada/artic was acting all funky this year, and there was the study that suggested that was one of the things that in the past caused some major Atlantic current/pressure system to effectively shut down within a decade resulting in horrible winters for England/europe Basically it’s tough to say but everything’s getting pretty wobbly
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2018 18:45
|
|
|
Potato Salad posted:God isn't as real or present as climate change.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2018 10:56
|
|
|
JUNEAU, Alaska (AP) — Global climate projections have drastically underestimated carbon emissions from thawing permafrost in the Arctic, a new study suggests. The study published in the peer-reviewed journal Nature Communications indicated that permafrost emissions could be more than double what has been projected because of the methane from thermokarst lakes, which form in permafrost, Alaska’s Energy Desk reported Monday. Scientists have previously projected that the Arctic could absorb as much or more carbon than emitted partly because of additional plant growth from warmer temperatures. Taking into account the thermokarst lakes, the projections of permafrost emissions in the later part of this century could increase by 118 percent, according to the study. “If we take into account these lakes, we realize, ’Oh, we actually have a pretty significant source of permafrost carbon this century,’” said Katey Walter Anthony, the study’s lead author and associate professor at University of Alaska Fairbanks. The permafrost emissions could match emissions from land use change, like forest clearing and burning — the second-largest human source of emissions. If more carbon from permafrost is emitted, it could lead to greater warming. “The models that we’ve used to construct these carbon budgets of how much CO2 we can emit and stay below a certain temperature threshold that we say is the edge of where things go from bad to really bad — those carbon budgets are probably made with models that are incomplete and may, in many ways, be very optimistic,” said Charlie Koven, a scientist who works on climate models at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in California. https://apnews.com/c1b6e3ce70a448ab88df66965c420ee4
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2018 18:06
|
|
|
incidentally, this year's bushfire season in southeastern australia started in the middle of winter
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2018 19:11
|
|
|
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/aug/25/veganism-intensively-farmed-meat-dairy-soya-maizequote:Much has been made of the methane emissions of livestock, but these are lower in biodiverse pasture systems that include wild plants such as angelica, common fumitory, shepherd’s purse and bird’s-foot trefoil because they contain fumaric acid – a compound that, when added to the diet of lambs at the Rowett Institute in Aberdeen, reduced emissions of methane by 70%.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2018 08:39
|
|
|
It is unlikely that there is a  large enough.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2018 10:41
|
|
|
Flowers For Algeria posted:It is unlikely that there is a What's the counterargument though?
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2018 11:08
|
|
|
Well the counter argument to these paragraphs is that guess what, the extension of cultivated surfaces - especially those that are overworked - is largely caused by the growing of feed for animals. Don’t go around blaming vegans for it. Yeah I know, the posh landowner with 14 square kilometers of Sussex pasture who makes her living producing 75 tons of meat a year can say her hands are clean and she is contributing to the development of biodiversity, but let’s not kid ourselves. That’s not how meat, dairy and poultry are produced in this day and age. Ploughing produces so little carbon when compared to the rest of industrial activities that these paragraphs are easily dismissed as concern trolling by a woman whose life work is antithetical to a vegan lifestyle. For reference, on a similar surface, one could produce 75 thousand tons of beans. Per crop. Flowers For Algeria fucked around with this message at 11:42 on Aug 25, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2018 11:33
|
|
|
If this livestock farmer had some actual self awareness, their totally-sincere belief that cultivation is a problem in a vacuum, they'd have to make the admission that the first place to look for cutting cultivation area is for livestock feed. That article is, well Flowers puts it well, concern trolling that only serves to muddy the truth, not inform.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2018 11:45
|
|
|
Flowers For Algeria posted:Well the counter argument to these paragraphs is that guess what, the extension of cultivated surfaces - especially those that are overworked - is largely caused by the growing of feed for animals. Don’t go around blaming vegans for it. Yeah I know, the posh landowner with 14 square kilometers of Sussex pasture who makes her living producing 75 tons of meat a year can say her hands are clean and she is contributing to the development of biodiversity, but let’s not kid ourselves. That’s not how meat, dairy and poultry are produced in this day and age. I mean the argument was that while it's a good idea to mostly go vegan, small groups of cattle can help lock carbon into the soil especially if they forage instead of being fed, and that it's on the other hand easy to overlook the carbon cost of farming. I don't have a dog in this fight, I don't know if this is correct. In my neighborhood they're trying to restore a peat bog (on public land) and as part of that they let loose a herd of free roaming cattle who forage for food.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2018 12:14
|
|
|
Yeah cattle is cool for stuff like that, I’m not gonna argue otherwise, and easier to handle than wildlife. Vegans would argue that you don’t need to slaughter them in the end.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2018 12:22
|
|
|
Low level cattle herding is indeed important for maintaining, how should I put it, historical environments? That is, those that have been decimated by industrial agriculture in the last hundred years. But it's perverse that we're so hung up on livestock that we don't really have any ideas how to support those environments with wild mammals. My local nature reserve also has cattle herds all summer to maintain the meadows that support breeding birds
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2018 12:31
|
|
|
Shibawanko posted:What's the counterargument though? ctrl-f gigaton 0/0 StabbinHobo fucked around with this message at 16:28 on Aug 25, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2018 13:59
|
|
|
VideoGameVet posted:JUNEAU, Alaska (AP) — Global climate projections have drastically underestimated carbon emissions from thawing permafrost in the Arctic, a new study suggests. Next time someone wants to come in and post for dozens of pages about how X source of emissions won't be THAT bad, please keep in mind that the trend for these studies is the scientific community continuing to discover that things are likely going to be a lot worse than we previously thought.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2018 20:32
|
|
|
The Belgian TGV I was on had frayed seats. Turns out that a 250+kmh fully electric transport system's been around longer than I've been alive Death is certain
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2018 22:48
|
|
|
Eddy-Baby posted:Death is certain
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2018 10:23
|
|
|
Eddy-Baby posted:The Belgian TGV I was on had frayed seats. Turns out that a 250+kmh fully electric transport system's been around longer than I've been alive It’s also mostly nuclear powered.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2018 15:20
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=paf2pJtaXYE On the Chesapeake, A Precarious Future of Rising Seas and High Tides This shows some of the demonstrable sea level rise that has happened over the course of this past century: forests dying, land underwater where people once lived, homes facing encroaching waters, etc. The location shows how inescapable it is - it's in Maryland.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2018 15:47
|
|
|
Evil_Greven posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=paf2pJtaXYE This is a good video, it’s helpful to see the change that’s happened over the past sixty years instead of always trying to visualize what will happen over the next sixty years. Seeing how much farmland and real estate is going to be lost is scary.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2018 17:15
|
|
|
its really sad watching people try to dig in, hoping things will go less-badly than predicted, knowing things will be substantially worse. those berms are pure folly. edit: its amazing how specific we can be now... anyone who buys this property with a 30 year mortgage is hosed: https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/1848-Saint-Thomas-Church-Rd-Toddville-MD-21672/60865774_zpid/?fullpage=true like this 45k is just pure dead capital: https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/Goose-Creek-Rd-Toddville-MD-21672/2088071266_zpid/?fullpage=true its on someones books somewhere, but not for long. StabbinHobo fucked around with this message at 17:44 on Aug 26, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2018 17:34
|
|
|
They just need to make 5 meter tall berms on the entire coastline.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2018 17:40
|
|
|
There’s a certain absurdity watching somebody jack up their house and stick a seven foot foundation under it. It’s like... you have the resources to do that, and the knowledge that the sea levels are rising, loving sell the house and move somewhere else. That guy is essentially trying to delay the coming catastrophe to the next generation rather than moving to a place where his son and his family have a better shot. And what’s the loving point of having your house if the rest of the neighborhood is underwater? If not everybody can afford these absurd solutions, it’s going to destroy property values all the same. This is a storm that cannot be weathered.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2018 18:06
|
|
|
i would bet there is some kind of debt/lien that makes a sale impossible and even if not, i'm sure the money they could get for a sale wouldn't be half what it would take to establish or buy a similar sized farm in a better location. what you're looking at there is not a rational economic actor, its a trapped animal.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2018 18:23
|
|
|
The same argument can be made in northern BC right now. A whole lot of property up there which has been sitting on the market at $500k for years is currently being turned into a blasted wasteland. Well, except for these guys, they built pretty smart: https://www.kijiji.ca/v-house-for-s...gationFlag=true Rime fucked around with this message at 22:27 on Aug 26, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2018 21:47
|
|
|
I mean I know people who would literally die for their children if given the choice, but are seemingly unwilling to accept any level of inconvenience in order to stave off the problems that their children/grandkids will almost certainly face. It boggles the mind.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 04:06
|
|
|
Dying is easy.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 06:17
|
|
|
Mazzagatti2Hotty posted:I mean I know people who would literally die for their children if given the choice, but are seemingly unwilling to accept any level of inconvenience in order to stave off the problems that their children/grandkids will almost certainly face. It boggles the mind. Not sure if serious. I have some suggestions to rationalize inaction. Social Loafing: CC is everyone's responsibility. I'll let others handle it. Availability Bias: The worst effects of CC are not here yet, so they don't feel real to me, even though I understand them in theory. Saliency Bias: I have bigger problems to worry about right now. Don't bother me with this CC stuff. Black Swan Fallacy: Catastrophic CC has never happened before in human history, so it can't be happening now. Optimism: CC will be easy to solve with technology. Also, I could open and run a profitable sports bar. Pessimism: CC can't be stopped because of X insurmountable challenge. Nihilism: CC will resolve itself by killing many humans. I do my part merely by dying. Accelerationism: Only when CC gets existentially bad will people change their habits. Lets make that happen. Helplessness: I can't personally affect CC so it would be a waste of effort to try. Other-ism: If only X race/country/group didn't do Y activity; there would be no CC. The real issue is making X stop Y. Aversion: The thought of CC is so distressing that I avoid thinking about it. FYGM: CC won't hurt me much in my lifetime, and at least my kids will be better off than some. Spite: I'm gonna love watching X race/country suffer from drought/famine/war. Opportunist: I'll sell tanks to Pakistan and bombs to India, delivered via the Northwest Passage Entitlement: Every generation cleans up the messes of the previous; it's only fair I get my turn. Persecution: CC is a conspiracy invented by X group to attack me, my group and my lifestyle. X is really mean! Virtue Signalling: My footprint is smaller than yours. Stop killing the planet, everyone else. Token Penance: I recycle cans and bike to work. I feel like a climate hero. Tragedy of the Commons: I will take care of the Earth only when everyone else does it, too. Armchair Martyr: CC could be easily solved if everyone agreed to my plan, but they won't. Denial: CC isn't happening. That's a relief; it sounds like it would suck. Experiment until you find some that you like. Just because CC is bad doesn't mean you can't twist it in a gratifying way.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 06:29
|
|
|
Preen Dog posted:Not sure if serious. I have some suggestions to rationalize inaction. This is a good post.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 07:36
|
|
|
yeah that's a nice list right there
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 07:37
|
|
|
In fact, put it in the OP as a list of poo poo this thread has already heard and doesn't need more of.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 08:11
|
|
|
tag urself i'm da martyr
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 13:46
|
|
|
Preen Dog posted:Not sure if serious. I have some suggestions to rationalize inaction. Yeap I'll get anything from "people can't change nature" to "volcanoes will start cooling the planet once it gets hot enough" to "we will just adapt and/or develop new technologies." And this is from late 30s-early 40s, mostly liberal people. I expect that the boomers are a lost cause who should be herded into camps immediately, but to hear so much denialism from people my age has been a shock for sure.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 13:56
|
|
|
What did you expect? Society has conditioned people to have an aversion towards thinking about bad potentialities. Try talking to most people about preparing for a minor disruption in food & water supply, as could happen with any natural disaster, and they'll look at you like you're crazy. Hell, try talking about how wages are declining, working conditions are getting worse, health care is getting worse, etc and you'll just be waved off as a "Debbie Downer". Nobody in the west will be willing to think about or rationally discuss the ramifications of climate change until it is already destroying their lives personally, and even then they'll try and find a way to downplay how bad things are. We live in a society of the desperately ignorant.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 14:32
|
|
|
Did you come up with that list yourself or did you have an inspiration It's good
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 15:23
|
|
|
StabbinHobo posted:tag urself i'm da martyr I'm nihilism if you tack on Eat Arby's.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 17:23
|
|
|
Preen Dog posted:Not sure if serious. I have some suggestions to rationalize inaction. Escapism: climate change doesn't matter because we can all escape to Mars or whatever
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 18:14
|
|
|
Shibawanko posted:Escapism: climate change doesn't matter because we can all escape to Mars or whatever "We'll discover a technological/magical solution" is already covered under optimism. See also: the rapture. All of these are already a form of escapism.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 18:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 11:16 |
|
|
Shibawanko posted:Escapism: climate change doesn't matter because we can all escape to Mars or whatever Ooh, that's a good one, though it might be 'magical thinking', an extreme form of optimism. Escapism would be occupying oneself with drugs and animes, also good. Nice piece of fish posted:In fact, put it in the OP as a list of poo poo this thread has already heard and doesn't need more of. Agreed. It's tiresome to reiterate. Rationalization is a clear obstacle, but most of the discourse here just talks around it, and posters revel in it. I claim it forms the big question of climate change mitigation. quote:How can the solutions to climate change (with cooperation across racial and ideological divides, political, industrial and lifestyle changes, and perceived austerity) be made more attractive to people than their rationalizations for the status quo? Without an answer to this question, tech and projections mean nothing. My humble estimate is that only a severe warming with a massive population crash will be enough. How bad did the Thames get before it was cleaned up? It was just one river, just one government. How many raptors were left before DDT was banned? It was just one easily regulated chemical. We're talking about convincing your racist dad to eat less beef, cube his pickup, and move into a flat so that future Africans don't spontaneously combust. For the hopefuls, a place to start would be past examples where large-scale crises had been headed off by proactive cooperation. Yes, it's the 'nothing matters' argument, but I think it's pretty solid. Pessimist-nihilist, and a little virtuous (I can have hot showers because multi-unit dwelling and no car  )
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 20:53
|
|