|
History has seem to shown that Command economies are good in the short run but are unsustainable as a long term solution. So, the same as every other seemingly magical solution to problems.
|
#
¿
Jul 28, 2016 14:33
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 09:49 |
|
|
TildeATH posted:Anyone else getting sick and tired of the bipolar naiveté? One minute people are talking about how human beings are going to be vaporized when the climate changes to bees and the next minute we "only have to build twenty thousand desalination plants in India" or "full communism now". It's just this kind of childishness that lead us here. The unwillingness for adults to deal with a situation in a rational manner, and instead let it devolve into slogans and magical thinking. It really makes me hate you people. You sort of deserve all this poo poo. There's honestly nothing left to discuss. Virtually everyone agrees that yes climate change exists and yes it's a big deal and yes severe changes have to happen in order to at least attempt to live with climate change. Everything beyond that is either Arkane trolling or some variety of "what if a meteor hit the Himalayas, then we'd be doubly hosed!" fear mongering. It really should be locked.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 29, 2016 05:34
|
|
|
Tenacious J posted:Well, it seems that news reports are frequently coming out that are changing the timeframe on things. I, for one, have been especially startled by the recent discussion of methane leaks. Maybe there's nothing left to discuss, but maybe someone could give me an estimate on how long I have to live. I've been having a bit of an existential crisis the last couple of days. It's hard to care about my job or future plans. If you're in a developed nation it's highly unlikely your lifespan will be shortened due to climate change.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 29, 2016 05:42
|
|
|
Salt Fish posted:When a conversation is difficult or a problem intractable, that can be a sign of its importance. The conversation isn't difficult though, it's very very simple. That's why people get bored and start posting their weird apocalypse fantasies.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 30, 2016 05:06
|
|
|
In the timescale we're discussing, trees are pretty much carbon neutral. The bad news is that you can't really count them for sequestration. The good news is that burning them doesn't really matter that much.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 4, 2016 15:14
|
|
|
Not saying there aren't concerns about climate change, but dude whose company is literally defined by electric cars and storage might not be the best source to draw from.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 31, 2016 15:14
|
|
|
parcs posted:That makes no sense. I wouldn't trust T. Boone Pickens trying to sell me on wind power either.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 31, 2016 15:23
|
|
|
Uncle Jam posted:Profits have been declining because of over supply, which has been intentional to hurt certain producers. Once the price rises again the profits will come back. Sort of. Renewables are reaching a point where it's very economical to switch to them, so the prices can't rise too much. That's honestly probably the major reason why there's over supply - the Saudis would rather have most of a lower margin market than some of a higher margin one.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 1, 2016 01:31
|
|
|
Paradoxish posted:I'm open to being proven wrong, but I'm not sure that there's any evidence that renewables are having much of an impact on oil prices in general. There are a ton of fundamental reasons for the low prices like collapsing Chinese demand. US supply has also shot through the roof over the last few years and basically everyone is doing balls to the wall pumping. Meanwhile, coal is just being destroyed by another fossil fuel. It's not directly related. Prices are low in order to smother the US supply. Prices won't get too high because then non-fossil fuels are more economical (and that's a ticking time bomb anyway). Important to note that coal is not petrol either.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 1, 2016 04:31
|
|
|
AceOfFlames posted:I am saving for retirement (if only since if things get really bad I can use that money for some wild and crazy fun ride or something). However, I am deliberately staying away from relationships because I don't want anyone to care for me or anyone to "have to" defend in case things go bad. Is that a bad approach? The dumb macho survivalist narrative that's parroted in these post-apocalypse movies will get you killed faster than if you have an existing support structure.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 1, 2016 14:35
|
|
|
schmuckfeatures posted:Well yes, but isn't it a little odd that a forum called "Debate & Discussion" doesn't discuss the fact that every month for the last sixteen months has been the hottest month on record? I kinda think it's time we talked about mitigation (which is probably hopeless at this point) or adaptation (the more realistic alternative). We have, it generally leads into prepper talk and how eating bugs is the only way to survive. Bonus if you get into totally not racist means of forced sterilization to control population.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 23, 2016 15:08
|
|
|
call to action posted:I'd literally die to try to sabotage any attempt at chemtrailing us into an acid rain hellscape just so China doesn't have to give up its coal plants. Yeah, it's the dastardly Chinese that are keeping Big Coal afloat.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2016 21:49
|
|
|
shrike82 posted:LOL, yeah those climatologists are always overstating things Climatologists generally aren't saying "everything is hosed, go commit suicide right now".
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2016 01:13
|
|
|
shrike82 posted:Man James Hansen saying 2C is too much is certainly equivalent to "go commit suicide right now" You saying "we need population control and nuclear exchanges" is equivalent to that.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2016 01:16
|
|
|
shrike82 posted:Looking at Syria, I think we're already in the midst of GCC-driven conflict so too late. So nuking Syria would prevent climate change, good to know.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2016 01:19
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:It is weird to see this "inaction alliance" between climate deniers and pessimists who disagree on if climate is real but both agree that if it is we should "enjoy the ride" and not try and change anything. It's the natural evolution of a denialist. It isn't happening -> Maybe it is happening but it's totally a natural process -> Well maybe humans did do some stuff but can't change it now.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2016 17:58
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:He's saying that anyone who doesn't share his (wrong and stupid) opinion is a bad person. If we are bad people for our views, it makes him easy to ignore them as a valid alternative because he's not a bad person. Ignorance is bliss. It's easy to ignore you when you're literally saying "poo poo's hosed, may as well ignore it".
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2016 18:44
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:That's actually not what I'm saying NewForumSoftware posted:
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2016 18:51
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:Based on what? quote:Now, a growing number of studies are raising the possibility that as those ice sheets melt, sea levels could rise by six feet this century I think you're confused as to what a "meter" is.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2016 19:21
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:Read the entire article and then the second paper. quote:Turning their model to the future, DeConto and Pollard project more than three feet of sea level rise from Antarctica alone by 2100 — assuming growing greenhouse gas emissions that boost the planet’s temperature by about 4 degrees C (7 degrees F). That is far more than the last IPCC estimate in 2013, which projected less than eight inches of sea level rise from a melting Antarctic by 2100, with a possibility for inches more from the dramatic collapse of Antarctic glaciers. So again, 3 feet in a 4C scenario from Antarctica (by 2100, not 2050), tell me where the remaining 30 feet of sea level is going to come from.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2016 19:25
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2016 19:35
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:I wish your posts were long enough for me to just read the first sentence and ignore the rest. I'm guessing this post is an admission that the words got to be too much about half way through the first link and you just gave up? You're having a strange meltdown over your own papers contradicting you.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2016 19:42
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:
So why link it? Seems very irresponsible of you.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2016 19:47
|
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:BattleMoose coming into the thread arguing for optimism, proposing a wild target as a real possibility and reason to have hope, and then being unable to even explain how it would result in a situation that wasnt hosed up or really do anything at all but by us more time before the inevitable collapse is probablu the single most depressing and demoralizing thing I have read in this thread of depressing and demoralizing things. You can't typically convince the clinically depressed using logic.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 18, 2016 16:53
|
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:And the relevance that has to anything I said is...? Many occupants of this thread fall under that definition.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 18, 2016 17:01
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 09:49 |
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:If it's depressing to hear me say you should stop caring about the planet and start worrying about your local community so be it. Oh no that's not depression, that tends towards nationalism and fascism.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 18, 2016 17:06
|
|