|
Global energy consumption and output is going to increase within the foreseeable future. Considering the impact that current heat output is having on the Earth, is an increase desirable?
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2015 04:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 06:54 |
|
|
Hi, I'm in Soyuz 11. Everything is going fine, we have a small issue of losing oxygen, but I know a little positive thinking will sort it out. Technology is amazing isn't it? Things are getting better all time, yup.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2015 04:41
|
|
|
Salt Fish posted:This is a common misconception. Efficiency, as currently deployed, doesn't reduce energy use. It instead moves energy use to other applications. As a society we say "oh, we saved a TJ of energy here, we can now use it to do something else". No, there's actually a downward trend in energy use, diffusion of technologies is just a long process.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2015 04:43
|
|
|
Hi, I'm on Easter Island. Haven't seen any animals for a while and it seems that there are only a few trees left. Oh well, I'm sure its fine, after all, God has a plan for me, so it'll work out.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2015 04:56
|
|
Brannock posted:Global energy consumption and output is going to increase within the foreseeable future. Considering the impact that current heat output is having on the Earth, is an increase desirable? Okay, so let's assume a middle-of-the-road increase in population, a (total) 150% increase in energy per capita yearly, and everyone living this lifestyle. That's about a 10x increase in energy output, meaning an overall 8 MJ/m^2 emitted from human energy production. Converted to watts, this is 2.5e-1 W/m^2, or about a third of what global warming has already created in energy deficit. But that's total overall, not the change. Equaling what global warming has done so far would require a 500% increase in energy consumption on average. By comparison, per capita energy consumption for the world from 1820 to the present increased by 300%, so this would be essentially two more industrial revolutions. This is without noting that energy consumption per capita is holding steady in the developed world, (and, sadly, sub-Saharan Africa) and extrapolating from that. Salt Fish posted:Hi, I'm on Easter Island. Haven't seen any animals for a while and it seems that there are only a few trees left. Oh well, I'm sure its fine, after all, God has a plan for me, so it'll work out. Funnily enough, Jared Diamond was wrong about that too. http://www.pnas.org/content/112/4/1025.abstract Nice condescending liberal racism, tho. Effectronica fucked around with this message at 05:06 on Jun 19, 2015 |
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2015 05:03
|
|
|
the catholic pope is the voice of reason the world is hosed
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2015 05:12
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:Okay, so let's assume a middle-of-the-road increase in population, a (total) 150% increase in energy per capita yearly, and everyone living this lifestyle. That's about a 10x increase in energy output, meaning an overall 8 MJ/m^2 emitted from human energy production. Converted to watts, this is 2.5e-1 W/m^2, or about a third of what global warming has already created in energy deficit. But that's total overall, not the change. Equaling what global warming has done so far would require a 500% increase in energy consumption on average. By comparison, per capita energy consumption for the world from 1820 to the present increased by 300%, so this would be essentially two more industrial revolutions. Ah, the good ol' dump a link without reading it strategy. Pretty good posting going on over here. quote:This analysis confirms that the intensity of land use decreased substantially in some areas of the island before European contact.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2015 05:28
|
|
Salt Fish posted:Ah, the good ol' dump a link without reading it strategy. Pretty good posting going on over here. Ah, the "cherry picker". A n00bish move. Let me quote the entire thing: quote:Significance The specific argument, which you can spend ten dollars to read for yourself, is that "collapse" is a misleading (note that when someone says "misleading" in a scientific paper they mean "wrong") way to understand the shifts in Rapa Nui's population and land use prior to European contact, that it reflected shifting with environmental conditions as opposed to the racist middlebrow cracker interpretation where they hosed themselves over.... just like us! wooooooooo~ and died off because of their environmental ignorance. Please sterilize yourself today.
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2015 05:34
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:Okay, so let's assume a middle-of-the-road increase in population, a (total) 150% increase in energy per capita yearly, and everyone living this lifestyle. That's about a 10x increase in energy output, meaning an overall 8 MJ/m^2 emitted from human energy production. Converted to watts, this is 2.5e-1 W/m^2, or about a third of what global warming has already created in energy deficit. But that's total overall, not the change. Equaling what global warming has done so far would require a 500% increase in energy consumption on average. Thanks for crunching the numbers. I don't expect the situation in SSA to hold out for long -- sooner or later the corporations are going to recognize development and growth opportunities there despite the social instability present.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2015 05:42
|
|
|
Some more numbers- running this with the assumption that the entire world lives a German lifestyle in terms of energy consumption gives us 0.1 W/m^2 and current energy production gives us 0.03 W/m^2 in terms of energy deficit. So this is an area where encouraging changes in lifestyles has some promise, but it's doubtful you could get the world to the German average quite so easily. Of course, anything aimed at directly mitigating warming cycles can be used to fix this deficit too, which gives us some more wiggle room.
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2015 05:51
|
|
|
Moridin920 posted:the catholic pope is the voice of reason
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2015 08:32
|
|
|
Moridin920 posted:the catholic pope is the voice of reason
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2015 09:03
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:Ah, the "cherry picker". A n00bish move. Let me quote the entire thing: You didn't quote the entire thing, just the abstract because you haven't read the paper and lack the technical background to understand and assess its arguments so maybe you shouldn't get all 
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2015 10:57
|
|
|
rudatron posted:I'm not unhappy the pope's doing this, but I'm fairly certain this wouldn't be happening without the shadow of child abuse cases and the negative PR resulting from that. But maybe that's just me being cynical.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2015 11:18
|
|
|
Get ready for Rick Santorum, the Anti-Pope.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2015 11:27
|
|
|
rudatron posted:I'm not unhappy the pope's doing this, but I'm fairly certain this wouldn't be happening without the shadow of child abuse cases and the negative PR resulting from that. But maybe that's just me being cynical. Let's hope this trend can continueto prevent all of the Siberian/clathrate methane escaping, because that is going to suck major balls.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2015 11:37
|
|
|
Forgall posted:Get ready for Rick Santorum, the Anti-Pope. I heard snippets where reporters asked Rick and Jeb! (tm) about this, and they basically said, that they follow the Pope on spiritual matters, not economic ones.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2015 13:29
|
|
|
Brannock posted:Global energy consumption and output is going to increase within the foreseeable future. Considering the impact that current heat output is having on the Earth, is an increase desirable? Now, I could be wrong, but I think the problem is our carbon dioxide output, not our heat output.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2015 13:37
|
|
|
The whole argument about the world being overpopulated or not is beside the point in the context of climate change. We need to make systematic changes to the way we live right now, not wait for the population to peak and decline in 50 years. The nature of C02 emissions means that we're only feeling the effects today of what we put into the atmosphere 20 years ago. It's easy to say that we should make changes to how we live, and that we need to re-organize our economic thinking to do so. Harder to actually do it. But I think the conversation needs to advance beyond those facts. Are we willing to do whatever it takes to keep the Earth's average global temperature below 2 degrees C? It's as much an ethical issue as it is a scientific one. If not, are we willing to enforce that ban no matter who decides to go ahead and try to geoengineer anyway?
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2015 13:40
|
|
|
PowerBuilder3 posted:I heard snippets where reporters asked Rick and Jeb! (tm) about this, and they basically said, that they follow the Pope on spiritual matters, not economic ones.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2015 13:54
|
|
|
Forgall posted:Yeah, because lives and deaths of billions are not a moral question. It's a statistical question, really.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2015 14:00
|
|
The Insect Court posted:You didn't quote the entire thing, just the abstract because you haven't read the paper and lack the technical background to understand and assess its arguments so maybe you shouldn't get all Oh really? Where did you do your doctorate in anthropology, and what was the topic of your dissertation? If you are unwilling to reveal these things, maybe you should stop jacking off in this thread.
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2015 14:27
|
|
|
PowerBuilder3 posted:I heard snippets where reporters asked Rick and Jeb! (tm) about this, and they basically said, that they follow the Pope on spiritual matters, not economic ones. Lol? I guess they are hoping people don't read it. The pope doesn't issue economic directives. Maybe someone will call them out on this, maybe.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2015 17:39
|
|
|
The right wing catholic (and protestant) tears over this loving own
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2015 17:43
|
|
|
I am so stoked for when Francis speaks before Congress.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2015 18:25
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:Oh really? Where did you do your doctorate in anthropology, and what was the topic of your dissertation? If you are unwilling to reveal these things, maybe you should stop jacking off in this thread. Can we see yours? Since you seem to be an authority on the subject.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2015 18:28
|
|
Radbot posted:Can we see yours? Since you seem to be an authority on the subject. I never claimed to be an authority on the subject, while The Insect Court has, by implication, done so. If you want that lazy argument to be close at hand for your own use, that is fine and well, just as my wanting people who use it to have their arms broken is equally fine and well. EDIT: This is an interestingly surreal argument- either people are really invested in Rapa Nui having collapsed due to environmental mismanagement, or there's some ulterior motive at work. Effectronica fucked around with this message at 18:34 on Jun 19, 2015 |
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2015 18:32
|
|
|
If the Pope were here right now he'd tell everyone to chill, stop arguing about abstract hypothetical scenarios and irrelevant historical tidbits, and focus on our present material reality. Then he'd wash some feet.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2015 18:41
|
|
|
Willie Tomg posted:I am so stoked for when Francis speaks before Congress. "More and more, this house resembles a pile of filth."
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2015 18:47
|
|
|
rudatron posted:I'm not unhappy the pope's doing this, but I'm fairly certain this wouldn't be happening without the shadow of child abuse cases and the negative PR resulting from that. But maybe that's just me being cynical. Let's hope this trend can continueto prevent all of the Siberian/clathrate methane escaping, because that is going to suck major balls. Can somebody more knowledgeable than me explain why the Pope has not or cannot solve the child abuse problem with a single stroke, by simply saying something along the lines of, "I, the Pope, am hereby speaking ex cathedra as literally the voice of God Almighty on Earth and I hereby decree that any Catholic official who abused his power and authority by having sexual contact with a child, or who helped cover up such crimes is officially excommunicated, this includes retroactively for the past thousand years" and then there's all kinds of badass biker angels with tattoos and Harleys throwing pedophile priests out of heaven and more importantly that poo poo stops happening on Earth pronto?
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 01:57
|
|
|
Because God hasn't actually told him that and being a lifelong true believer in the faith that's not something he's going to gently caress around with. There's also a lot of institutional inertia in any organization as large and old as the Catholic church and the Pope only has dictatorial powers as long as the other powerful men surrounding him support his legitimacy. Change is happening and, frankly, it's happening extremely rapidly when you consider the context.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 02:35
|
|
|
God probably hasn't called for a cultural revolution to destroy capitalism either. I just figure as a direct response to the pedophilia scandal it would be more effective to specifically address that problem. He's already rocking the boat big time with the statements in the OP. Unfortunately, in our time and in my country at least, we've gotten to the point that "global warming exists and humans have to deal with it" and "pollution is a serious problem that is humanity's fault" are controversial statements thanks to Overton Window bullshit. "Pedophiles can't be in God's Cool Dudes Club" is not a statement that right-wing lobbyists are going to immediately spend a billion dollars in the next week to counter. Fox News isn't going to run editorials about "actually what the Pope meant by that was...", they are going to agree with it and blame "liberals" as usual.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 03:16
|
|
|
Network Pesci posted:Can somebody more knowledgeable than me explain why the Pope has not or cannot solve the child abuse problem with a single stroke, by simply saying something along the lines of, "I, the Pope, am hereby speaking ex cathedra as literally the voice of God Almighty on Earth and I hereby decree that any Catholic official who abused his power and authority by having sexual contact with a child, or who helped cover up such crimes is officially excommunicated, this includes retroactively for the past thousand years" and then there's all kinds of badass biker angels with tattoos and Harleys throwing pedophile priests out of heaven and more importantly that poo poo stops happening on Earth pronto? He's done a ton of stuff. He admitted fault in the church and promised to change it. Then he made a bunch of people vanish, told everyone else to stop loving kids and apologized profusely. These are all huge changes for the Church, he absolutely has not ignored it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 04:02
|
|
|
I'm not saying he's ignored it, I know he's the most comparatively progressive Pope in forever and he's apologized for it and said it wouldn't happen again. But that's something that's happened a thousand times, even if it's usually insincere. Lots of politicians or corporate PR guys have apologized for bad things. As Pope, Francis has the unique ability to invoke divine power and make a ruling that could stand potentially for millenia, to say the final word on a Catholic problem that's a cliche, a punchline. Goddamn, having read that letter now, he's really NOT afraid to court controversy. He literally says "stop worshiping the stock market it is not God" and "technology is supposed to be a tool, not a goal". Maybe "No more pedophiles" isn't controversial enough for him to bother with.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 05:02
|
|
|
Network Pesci posted:Can somebody more knowledgeable than me explain why the Pope has not or cannot solve the child abuse problem with a single stroke, by simply saying something along the lines of, "I, the Pope, am hereby speaking ex cathedra as literally the voice of God Almighty on Earth and I hereby decree that any Catholic official who abused his power and authority by having sexual contact with a child, or who helped cover up such crimes is officially excommunicated, this includes retroactively for the past thousand years" and then there's all kinds of badass biker angels with tattoos and Harleys throwing pedophile priests out of heaven and more importantly that poo poo stops happening on Earth pronto? It isn't just the Pope putting on his biggest hat and saying "Y'all fuckers listen up now!"
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 09:02
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:I never claimed to be an authority on the subject, while The Insect Court has, by implication, done so. If you want that lazy argument to be close at hand for your own use, that is fine and well, just as my wanting people who use it to have their arms broken is equally fine and well. You slide into the thread, squeeze out a post impying that Jared Diamond is a lying racist monster by linking to an abstract of a single paper you haven't actually read and wouldn't have the background to understand anyway, and then whine about how the people calling you out on your pretentious idiocy just hate the browns. Which is tbh pretty standard Effectronicaposting. PowerBuilder3 posted:I heard snippets where reporters asked Rick and Jeb! (tm) about this, and they basically said, that they follow the Pope on spiritual matters, not economic ones. The Pope's vigorous stance on climate change may help, but it's going to be mitigated in the US where it's needed most because the USCCB is full of reactionary assholes more interested in trying to deny communion to pro-marriage and pro-choice politicians and defending their right to sweet child rape cases under the rug. Without the bishops of major cities showing a willingness to publicly engage with this topic and make it a subject of sustained criticism there isn't going to be too much pressure on even Catholics in the GOP.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 09:42
|
|
|
Rent-A-Cop posted:It isn't just the Pope putting on his biggest hat and saying "Y'all fuckers listen up now!" Is it the triregnum? Or the big mitre? Or does he have an even bigger hat somewhere, possibly with fruit incorporated?
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 12:02
|
|
|
talking ex cathedra is enormously problematic on a very basic theological level, and generally people like to pretend that it isn't a Thing
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 12:19
|
|
|
Ex cathedra is pretty much only used to define dogma. The last time it was used was in 1950 to define the Assumption of Mary as dogma. Priests who commit child abuse (which we should distinguish from "being pedophiles", which means only inclination), like anyone else who commits child abuse, could be argued to have committed a mortal sin and thereby separated themselves from God and damned themselves to Hell. However, if they confess all of their known mortal sins in the sacrament of Penance then they are absolved of the mortal consequences of their sin and only retain temporal punishment, i.e. time spent in Purgatory. This temporal punishment can itself be alleviated through various penitential behaviors such as prayer, fasting, almsgiving, and the gaining of indulgences. If they were to repeat a mortal sin then they would again be condemned until they confessed it again, ad infinitum. However, whether it's a mortal sin is questionable. There are three criteria for mortal sin: the sin must be of "grave matter," it must be done with full will, and also with full knowledge. But "grave matter" includes such relatively common things as masturbation, fornication and drunkenness. Full knowledge is a yes in this case, but generally people try to declare that people don't have "full will" to do the sin unless they are actually trying to spite God, rather than engaging in a behavior they resist and regret. A sin which does not qualify as mortal is called a venial sin, venial meaning "forgiveable", and does not result in damnation but does incur metaphorical time in Purgatory. I should also clarify that this only counts if a person has been baptized. A person who has not yet been baptized is presumed doomed to Hell due to original sin, except for in the case of "baptism of desire" (i.e. a person dies while on the path to baptism) and "baptism of blood" (an unbaptized and repentant person is martyred for Christ), or if God is otherwise merciful for reasons unknown to us. Kyrie eleison fucked around with this message at 13:18 on Jun 20, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 12:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 06:54 |
|
|
Go away, kyrie. You can't even tell the difference between Catholic and Protestant doctrine.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 12:55
|
|
