TOPICS:
JUL 29, 2009 08:08 AM
gdarklighter said:
Vermin said:
I love that some people genuinely blame this shit on farting cows.
Uh, you do realize that rearing livestock produces more greenhouse gas than transportation, right? It was reported in a pretty well-known UN study.
i think her point was that it's not really cow activity that's the cause. cattle populations are large--large enough to have a serious environmental impact--because humans keep them that way. generally, when people say "well, cow farts have a bigger impact on the environment than cars do", they're trying to show that the amount of greenhouse gasses being released into the atmosphere is 'natural' and therefore okay. i think Vermin was, among other things, pointing out that it's neither.
JUL 29, 2009 08:23 AM
arbutus said:
s5 said:
Global warming is obviously happening. The evidence is overwhelming, and the only "disagreement" is among the cable news chattering class. The effects are happening now, not in thousands of years from now, and we can see them getting worse with each passing year. Entire island nations of people are already having to evacuate and find new land to resettle. That's only a preview - what if it was all of America's east coast that needed to be resettled? That would be ... fun.
But let's say we're still just not sure about this global warming thing. What should we do?
Well, there are essentially two choices: do nothing, or take the recommended steps to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. This gives us a simple decision matrix:
If we do nothing and global warming is false, then nothing changes.
If we do nothing and global warming is true, then civilization collapses. People die, coastal land becomes flooded, the food supply becomes decimated, countries go to war over dwindling resources, mass extinctions, etc.
If we do something and global warming is false, then we will have just spent the next few decades upgrading the world's energy and transportation sectors, creating new technologies, new investment opportunities, new employment, and all around creating one of the biggest periods of economic expansion in history as we go about the project of rethinking and rebuilding how civilization uses energy and land. In the process, we will put an end to our support of dictators of oil exporting nations, economies will no longer be tied to wildly erratic swings in oil prices, and we'll solve other broadly agreed on environmental problems, like deforestation, mountain top removal, water supply pollution, and so on.
If we do something and global warming is true, then we'll have done all of that and saved civilization from killing itself.
To me, this is a no-brainer, and it's very much a "what the fuck are we waiting for?" moment. Let's face it, America and the rest of the Western world isn't doing a single thing right now other than licking its wounds after the banking meltdown and dealing with the mess from Bush's pointless war. If we want a sustained economic recovery, then starting work on a broad, ambitious project would be exactly the right thing to do.
This video really sums it up perfectly. Whether you believe in climate change/global warming as a natural cycle, a human-caused event, or merely a human-enhanced event, the risk of DOING NOTHING is WAAAAAY more dangerous than making some necessary sacrifices that could either seriously reduce the amount of change we'll have to deal with, slow the process enough that humans can better adjust to it, or simply cause us to live in a world where we think a lot harder about how we impact the planet because we nearly had a global catastrophe & we don't want that to actually come to bear.
As mankind makes more progress into space and extraterrestrial colonization (which is an argument for a different day!) we need to think like this in case we eventually find more Earth-like planets or develop technology to make Earth-similar planets more habitable.
I'm willing to buckle down personally on a large part of my quality of life/habits if it means I could keep at least my corner of Earth fairly nice for my sisters' kids & my future clones. ![]()
JUL 29, 2009 10:33 AM
DeviantDissident said:
The Mayans predicted it thousands of years before Al Gore, he's just trying to profit from all their hard work and research. His movie was practically a rip-off of the stelaes of Uaxactun. Really I think we all know the vast majority of humanity will die on December 21, 2012 from a global cataclysmic disaster.
Please read this.
/miss Flux.
JUL 29, 2009 01:21 PM
Weatherpunk said:
This video really sums it up perfectly. Whether you believe in climate change/global warming as a natural cycle, a human-caused event, or merely a human-enhanced event, the risk of DOING NOTHING is WAAAAAY more dangerous than making some necessary sacrifices that could either seriously reduce the amount of change we'll have to deal with, slow the process enough that humans can better adjust to it, or simply cause us to live in a world where we think a lot harder about how we impact the planet because we nearly had a global catastrophe & we don't want that to actually come to bear.
I mostly agree, though I don't really look it at as making sacrifices. Since switching to solar energy, my electric bills dropped by 90%, and after I stopped commuting daily by car, my quality of life has significantly improved. Many of the changes are just different, not really worse or sacrificey, and in some cases, will save you money and give you more time in the day.
And as a bonus! We might even get to avoid catastrophic extinction! Not bad!
JUL 29, 2009 04:54 PM
s5 said:
Weatherpunk said:
This video really sums it up perfectly. Whether you believe in climate change/global warming as a natural cycle, a human-caused event, or merely a human-enhanced event, the risk of DOING NOTHING is WAAAAAY more dangerous than making some necessary sacrifices that could either seriously reduce the amount of change we'll have to deal with, slow the process enough that humans can better adjust to it, or simply cause us to live in a world where we think a lot harder about how we impact the planet because we nearly had a global catastrophe & we don't want that to actually come to bear.
I mostly agree, though I don't really look it at as making sacrifices. Since switching to solar energy, my electric bills dropped by 90%, and after I stopped commuting daily by car, my quality of life has significantly improved. Many of the changes are just different, not really worse or sacrificey, and in some cases, will save you money and give you more time in the day.
And as a bonus! We might even get to avoid catastrophic extinction! Not bad!
Out of curiosity, what sort of transportation do you use instead, and what are the main improvements in quality of life that you've experienced?
JUL 29, 2009 06:31 PM
Otoki said:
Out of curiosity, what sort of transportation do you use instead, and what are the main improvements in quality of life that you've experienced?
Mostly I work at home, so my commute consists of walking down the stairs. I realize that not everyone can do this, but there is something to be said for working close to where you live, even if it can't be your home. Not only is it better for the environment, but it gives you back all those hours in your week that you would have spent in transit. Even working five minutes away or within a close bike ride to where you live is way better than sitting in traffic for an hour each way. It's nice to have that extra time to sleep or do anything else.
When I do need transportation, I take trains and busses around the city, or I walk, or ride my bike, or I drive a car that runs off biodiesel (a VW Jetta TDI). This is one of the benefits of living in a city, where you can quickly get to where you need to go, and have a variety of transportation options available. Some people like car sharing programs like Zipcar, others have a bike and take cabs when they need to pick up groceries.
And of course, not everyone wants to live in cities, and luckily there are plenty of small towns and suburbs with smart city planning and walkable town centers. What doesn't work, I would say, is the model of giant sprawling suburbs with long commute times and no services or local businesses within walking (or biking) distance to where people actually live. Not only is that an environmental disaster, but you spend more time in your car and more money on gas.
JUL 29, 2009 08:42 PM
That four quadrant decision matrix makes sense, but many contrary voices go in another direction.
Rush Limbaugh once said,
As this relates to alternative fuels, oil is the most plentiful energy source we have. It's the most efficient. But while oil is being used, and while it is being exploited, the United States taxpayer, ladies and gentlemen, already spends billions of dollars on alternative energy research — and you can bet that the private sector is investing in it, too, and do you know why?
Because we are a growing country and everybody needs energy! We're not going to stay the United States if we start reducing energy usage. Conservation is not the answer.So because a free market's percolating and gurgling and burbling out there, somewhere in this mix will come the magical alternative fuel source. It may not be for a hundred years, it may not be for 50, but it will happen, and it will happen all by itself ... if we stay free.
Our modern age would not exist without affordable and plentiful energy, and if we desire this way of life to continue then energy must remain abundant and cheap. Rush is correct.
Unfortunately, most everything else he said is factually incorrect (coal, not oil, is more plentiful in the US), or, italics are mine, ignominiously wrong headed.
There is nothing wrong in using energy conservatively! Developing clean energy sources (so less environmental remediation is required) and using less of it is a sound business decision.
If you run a factory, and can make twenty more gizbatches than your competition while using the same amount of energy (and producing fewer toxins in the process) then you will remain in business, and the nitwits down the street who, perhaps, have taken Rush's words to heart, may end up looking for other jobs.
JUL 29, 2009 09:14 PM
Gizbatches are so last year. Anyone who's anyone is using the iGizbatch app on their cracked iPhone. ![]()
I don't believe that the conservative (key word!) Republican party can be so against conservation of resources & therefore an economic bulwark against the coming Resource Rush in North America.
JUL 29, 2009 09:29 PM
mydogfarted said:
ENFORCER99 said:
What about the people who believe global warming is real, and still dont give a shit?
If your neighbor beats his kids, do it make it ok for you to do it?
of course not, but my neighbor beating my kid isint affecting the world, and that neighbor could be stopped. This wont be stopped and it affects everyone. Hence i dont give a shit
JUL 29, 2009 09:31 PM
Hunkpapa said:
ENFORCER99 said:
"Population: 307,212,123 (July 2009 est.) 4th in the world"
what makes everyone so positive that if we change our ways here the rest of the world will?? If were only 4th on the list for population and way below on land mass theres other countries, and continents for that matter that are affecting the ozone way more.
In 2004 the US produced 22% of global CO2 emissions from burning fossil fuels. Doesn't that seem like a significant amount to you?
ENFORCER99 said:
but if im gonna be dead long before it starts.........
You're not. It has.
the horrible things posted by FTR have not happened yet...... the earths temp has raised a couple degrees, not enough to bother my life yet
JUL 29, 2009 09:34 PM
Anyone who's anyone is using the iGizbatch app on their cracked iPhone.
(hangs head in shame)
Never could understand their position on this issue ... it's in their name, dammit!
JUL 29, 2009 09:42 PM
gdarklighter said:
Vermin said:
I love that some people genuinely blame this shit on farting cows.
Uh, you do realize that rearing livestock produces more greenhouse gas than transportation, right? It was reported in a pretty well-known UN study.
This article is not quite what it seems on first glance. That figure is for the totality of the livestock industry, not just what the animals pump out. A good overview can be found at New Scientist.
Agriculture represents about 40% of methane production and about 12.5% of overall greenhouse gas ouput by sector
The FAO report has become a primary source for fascist vegetarians to wave at people when they scream everyone should be vego, even though the authors of the FAO report specificalyl state this is not an option and point out that vego production is not necessarily environmentally friendly either.
Generally one ofthe problems with climate change is that every green ratbag under the sun has found an excuse to push their bandwagon using it. Hence all the carry one about animals when in the grand scheme of things they are only a small part of the probnlem. Another is the way that the greens are still opposed to nuclear power even when distinguished environmentalists like James Lovelock are arguing it is the only option available to prevent catastrophic climate change.
If the ratbag greenies would stop trying to use climate change as all their christmasses come at once to get every fascist policy their wetdreams have produced it would not be so easy for the rightwing ratbags to confuse the issue in order to protect their vested interests in fossil fuels.
JUL 29, 2009 10:11 PM
ENFORCER99 said:
mydogfarted said:
ENFORCER99 said:
What about the people who believe global warming is real, and still dont give a shit?
If your neighbor beats his kids, do it make it ok for you to do it?
of course not, but my neighbor beating my kid isint affecting the world, and that neighbor could be stopped. This wont be stopped and it affects everyone. Hence i dont give a shit
What about the people who believe global warming is real, and still don't give a shit?"
'Useless' is the least inflammatory pejorative that comes to mind.
... my neighbor beating my kid isn't affecting the world, and that neighbor could be stopped. This won't be stopped and it affects everyone. Hence i don't give a shit.
Your understanding of how people interact isn't necessarily the case.
At the root of all social action is individual action, and this ripples outward into the larger realm of family, community, town, county, state, country, and world.
Get enough individuals doing a thing in common purpose, and change is the result. To abdicate your personal responsibility in this chain ... what would you call it?
JUL 30, 2009 12:38 AM
rcrosse said:
What's most awesome is that a "comedian" is writing articles about global warming. I don't know if it exists or not. I am not that smart. But I do know that you don not win arguments by simply telling the opposition they are idiots, even if they happen to be. That's elementary school tactics that don't make your argument credible, just bias banter geared toward people who already believe what you do, and in that case makes your article both long winded and worthless. Try a different approach next time, maybe you'll make a believer out of me.
People who don't believe in global warming at this point are basically a religion, so there is no reason to attempt to "convince" you with a reasoned argument. People like you have been ignoring overwhelming facts for years, hence the idiot remarks.
Maybe you missed the part in the article where I wrote about my degree.
JUL 30, 2009 01:48 AM
What, you want us to believe, you are intelligent and funny at the same time? What are you some kind of mutant?????
JUL 30, 2009 05:22 AM
Have they found new evidence on what's causing colony collapse disorder in bees? Last I heard the most likely culprit was a pathogen, with climate change as a possible indirect contributor (as, upon close reading, is stated in the OP).
JUL 30, 2009 07:03 AM
You don't have to be all lovey-dovey with Mother Nature & hug every single tree you pass to just GIVE A DAMN about what happens to the planet once you're gone.
True, you may not have children in your life. Odds are, someone you care about may. Do it for them.
Maybe you don't really like people. Fine. We'll extend this to animals/plants too. There has to be something about life you enjoy. Beer, paintball, YouTube, sleeping in.....To the best of our knowledge, it was all invented solely on Planet Earth. Why not keep a good thing rolling?
If you're just a flat out nihilist who despises everything about existence including yourself & your ability to philosophize about the futility of it all? Well, what's the point of draggin' your feet on this, then? You could ironically support environmental reform or find some other way to take yourself out of the human population & save us the resources it takes up to let you be apathetic 24/7.
Not advocating a mass suicide, but that WOULD make a hell of a dent in our carbon footprint......![]()
JUL 30, 2009 03:46 PM
Oh, news just showed the next one:
Jellyfishes are among the winners of global warming and are terrorizing southern europes coasts. ![]()
The overfishing is partially responcible, too, but the warmer water (Oceam temperature, that is clima, not the weather behind my window) clearly helps their population too, as can be shown by the fact that Portuguese man o' war travel as far north as UK now (despide the name they are actually supposed live around Australia, in the Pacific and Indian Ocean).
JUL 30, 2009 06:15 PM
s5 said:
Global warming is obviously happening. The evidence is overwhelming, and the only "disagreement" is among the cable news chattering class. The effects are happening now, not in thousands of years from now, and we can see them getting worse with each passing year. Entire island nations of people are already having to evacuate and find new land to resettle. That's only a preview - what if it was all of America's east coast that needed to be resettled? That would be ... fun.
But let's say we're still just not sure about this global warming thing. What should we do?
Well, there are essentially two choices: do nothing, or take the recommended steps to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. This gives us a simple decision matrix:
If we do nothing and global warming is false, then nothing changes.
If we do nothing and global warming is true, then civilization collapses. People die, coastal land becomes flooded, the food supply becomes decimated, countries go to war over dwindling resources, mass extinctions, etc.
If we do something and global warming is false, then we will have just spent the next few decades upgrading the world's energy and transportation sectors, creating new technologies, new investment opportunities, new employment, and all around creating one of the biggest periods of economic expansion in history as we go about the project of rethinking and rebuilding how civilization uses energy and land. In the process, we will put an end to our support of dictators of oil exporting nations, economies will no longer be tied to wildly erratic swings in oil prices, and we'll solve other broadly agreed on environmental problems, like deforestation, mountain top removal, water supply pollution, and so on.
If we do something and global warming is true, then we'll have done all of that and saved civilization from killing itself.
To me, this is a no-brainer, and it's very much a "what the fuck are we waiting for?" moment. Let's face it, America and the rest of the Western world isn't doing a single thing right now other than licking its wounds after the banking meltdown and dealing with the mess from Bush's pointless war. If we want a sustained economic recovery, then starting work on a broad, ambitious project would be exactly the right thing to do.
Not only that, but a lot of the things we need to do to address global climate change are in fact things that we need to be doing whatever may be coming down the road. Things like finding ways of replacing oil both as energy source and as a building block in material goods - climate change or no climate change, oil is running out.













WyldeSage
I'm lost
June 2008
JUL 29, 2009 07:28 AM