I don't bother with VG anymore. He's a lost cause when it comes to any kind of debate. I think there is a lot to say. In my opinion climate change is the most pressing issue this planet faces, so I think it is ridiculous to say that there is nothing to say. I am not accusing people of not caring. I am accusing them of failing to engage with the content of the article I posted.
Within twenty years commercial fishing will become impossible, there won't be enough fish left to make it worthwhile. Within fifty years every wild land animal much larger than a dog will either be extinct or only exist in zoos. The insects are dying, the birds are dying, the plants are dying and, already, human fertility has dropped along with IQs, and the exact scope of the disaster we are facing is suddenly becoming more clear, but without drastic changes in every way imaginable, we won't even have enough food to go around in another fifty years and we'll all be dying from toxic chemicals. Just the amount of inert plastic in the environment today, is enough to kill us all and we have to clean it up sooner rather than later. We require a theory of everything, just to be able to save the planet, while over a trillion dollars was invested in AI research last year alone. All my life I had hoped someone else would write the book I'm writing, which is why mother nature gave me the job.
It's hard to reply sensibly to someone who takes that stance. You've already made up your mind on very limited data and no real truth-seeking. If you want to learn, it's "we know climate has changed since the beginning of time as we know it, and it's still changing. We can't fool mother nature. What I want to know is whether there's some cataclysmic event on the horizon or not. Much evidence points to NOT and that it appears to be a fear tactic used to promote behavior change to a world which appears to move faster than we can think." Or something like that. Scott Adams tried for a year to answer the question of whether we're headed for doom due to man's contribution to climate change. He looked at every argument for and against he could find and determined that there's no solid evidence to prove nor disprove we're headed for disaster - despite adamant emotional pleas on both sides of the issue based on selected scientific data. He didn't consider arguments based on feelings and opinions, obviously, just scientific arguments.
Great thread. Yes the Ecocycles are paying the price On the continual warming of the planet. Records have been broken. heat records that is
Most of the record highs I've seen are 1900-1930. I check it daily and comment jokingly that must have been the earlier global warming crisis which brought on the great depression. I think we may have made new record highs a couple times in the last few years, but rarely.
Fuck it Instead of enduring this extended unnatural warm period, we ought to be donning our Eskimo suits with brass monkey weather. It's a pain in the arse. That little girl might sort it all out though. Get rid of all the emissions, make ourselves skint paying carbon taxes, get rid of vehicles and we'll soon have the ice age that we crave.
It’s a shame teachers have all these kids scared out of their wits with their Chicken Little tales. The hysteria seems to be hitting a wall. There’s nowhere for it to go from here.
Do all that and find the climate still changes. Oh well... We should pay them more for taking the alarmist side on the issue instead of being neutral and objective.
Wow, I usually think woolee is looney tunes but the first 2/3 of that post is dead on Josh, how many years before the only mammals left on the planet are humans and the ones we eat or keep as pets. Humans, cows, pigs, sheep, dogs and cats...and thats it, they are the only mammals left, well a couple billion rats too Whats it going to be 500 years, 100 years? All the insects and birds disappearing as well And everyones still protesting going on about "their government should do more" evil oil companies that sell them the shit they use to get to the protests The climate strike, what was the actual clearly defined message? What solutions were clearly layed out. Catchy phrases on homemade signs, people taking selfies to put on facebook. Why not at least have everyone that day ride a pushbike into where they have to get to, show the rest of us how its done. The Climate Strike protests, what did they friggin do? What did they accomplish? Except hammering home you can still just blame your government instead of taking personal responsibility A tiger gets out of its shitty cage, one of the 5000 tigers left in the world gets shot dead in case it eats one of the 7 billion humans on the planet. That kind of stuff is what has to change. Why cant we have at least one large island on the planet or fence off some huge area on a continent where humans arent allowed to go What if we do have our priorities all wrong? What if biodiversity and toxins in the water supply do end up being a far more serious thing than CO2 or sea level rises 500 years from now, animal species are withered down to humans, rats, chickens, sheep, pigs, cows, dogs, cats, honeybees, ants. One pathogen makes one of them inedible for a couple months, 2 billion people starve to death Antartica isnt going to melt, even if the worlds temp goes up another 2 degrees, 99% of that continent is still below zero for the whole year
Also; I'm old enough to remember a time when you couldnt go easily buy cheap stuff that doesnt actually need replacing from your Walmarts, Tescos, Ikeas. They made tables and chairs out of wood, which is renewable, built to last, the first TV set my parents ever brought lasted 30 years. Planned obsolescence wasnt even a thing The rate we replace crap we dont really need to replace has grown exponentially in the same time frame where we are all supposedly more educated on the environment
No, actually having a levee worth a spit would have saved New Orleans. Those kids were as pig ignorant of their situation as most Americans, which is why its illegal to vote for Mickey Mouse in Maryland. Spouting stupid crap never saved anyone on the battlefield. You either know who you are fighting for, or you are about to become over-cooked toxic waste, unfit for even making soylent green. Everything has to change, as fast as possible, including the entire world economy and manufacturing production lines, or we're all screwed within fifty years at most, and I estimate no matter what anybody does, we are looking at two billion or more people suddenly dying. We need the theory of everything that can make it all possible, what some call the singularity, where the machines save us from our own madness, but its not really about the machines, its about us.
"Heads of state from around the world, including French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Angela Merkel, have descended on the Big Apple this week to make new pledges to curb global-warming emissions. Ms Thunberg accused them of ignoring 30 years of “crystal clear” science behind the climate crisis, saying: “We are in the beginning of a mass extinction and all you can talk about is money and fairy tales of eternal economic growth — how dare you.” I think Thunberg herself is cool, the Joan of Arc of climate activists. But you know, if she turned around and started barking at her followers on the sacrifices they should be making, you know what would happen
I don't think anything can be done in time to stop what is already in progress; I've just accepted it. However, I find comfort in the certain knowledge that Earth's biosphere will survive. Earth has already seen five mass extinctions in the last 4 billion years or so. Maybe this is the sixth. In the blink of a geologic eye it will be over and new species will take the place of the old. Perhaps Homo Sapiens will leave descendants that will look out at a new kind of Earth just as beautiful as the one that existed before. The big five mass extinctions | Cosmos