Surprised at the lack of climate change deniers here, they're usually a vociferous section of any internet forum. Maybe some of our Brexiters?
General / Off-Topic The ice floe could have totally melted by summer, 2017
- Thread starter Patrick_68000
- Start date
I won't argue the point, but I will repeat the question,
What Exactly Do You Expect Any Of Us To Do About It?
Minonian
Banned
I'm not. We have a good mod team, and they take care of the idiots fast and clean. Blogs and FB? 90% of them is the worst kind of troll. No arguing only shooting. They don't deserve your attention or to waste a single world into them. And basically they killing any normal talking,
In there if they even face up, they can't do their thing w/o consequences. clears the air...
You as a man? In short, create less pollution. The rest is about the industry and policy make a good choice.
Last edited:
As individuals, there's not a great deal we can do about it. Walking instead of driving, waste reduction, turning vegetarian/vegan, etc. These things are good, and by all means do them, but the real responsibility lies with the rich and powerful. Perhaps the best thing we can do is spread awareness and reinforce the idea that global warming is a real problem, as there are a great number of people who doubt it (watch Merchants of Doubt) and so hinder change.
I'm not. We have a good mod team, and they take care of the idiots fast and clean. Blogs and FB? 90% of them is the worst kind of troll. No arguing only shooting. They don't deserve your attention or to waste a single world into them. And basically they killing any normal talking,
In there if they even face up, they can't do their thing w/o consequences. clears the air...
You as a man? In short, create less pollution. The rest is about the industry and policy make a good choice.
And how do I do that?
How do any of us do that?
Do you know what the principal sources of pollution are?
The sources of pollution are human made, or influenced in so many ways. From burning all forms of fuel, from coal to jet fuel. Deforestation. McDonald's beef producing cows. The lists go on and on.
We could boycott such things en-mass and destroy such industries, but it would mean the human race, accepting the fact, that basically, it will be going back 300 years and not using fire as it would create too much CO2.
dayrth
Volunteer Moderator
The ice of the Arctic is floating in the sea, so displaces the same amount whether frozen or liquid. Even if it all melts it will not change sea levels. The Antarctic on the other hand is on a continent. If that melts it will run in to the sea and the weight lifted from the continent will cause it to rise (slowly) displacing more water. Sea levels will rise significantly.
The problem with looking for results of cutting carbon emissions is that you don't get to see the benefit for 30-40 years. We should have taken the problem a lot more seriously a long time ago.
That is not really true, we could probably make a notable difference, the problem is, we are as a whole, choosing not to. And then some use that line to in part excuse it, not saying you are doing that but yeah.
Minonian
Banned
Last edited:
I find your black and white point of view disturbing Minonian.
I'm not arguing the point you make that anthropomorphic climate change is real.
The primary driver is increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide from combustion of fuels.
The simplest answer is "burn less fuel" or "stop burning fuels".
The simplest way for that to happen is to reduce demand.
The simplest way to reduce demand is to reduce the number of people needing energy.
The simplest way to reduce the number of people is for a full scale world war.
It may sound bleak or even comedic, but WWIII will end up devastating the world in the short term, but will be a benefit in the longer term.
I've been accused of being a nihilist before.
I'm not arguing the point you make that anthropomorphic climate change is real.
The primary driver is increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide from combustion of fuels.
The simplest answer is "burn less fuel" or "stop burning fuels".
The simplest way for that to happen is to reduce demand.
The simplest way to reduce demand is to reduce the number of people needing energy.
The simplest way to reduce the number of people is for a full scale world war.
It may sound bleak or even comedic, but WWIII will end up devastating the world in the short term, but will be a benefit in the longer term.
I've been accused of being a nihilist before.
Minonian
Banned
Last edited:
Thank you, I am well aware of the silly nature of these claims and equally aware of the preposterous claims that arctic and Antarctic ice is melting. I'm sorry to say it actually impossible.
Sadly, it will take 30 or 40 years before that can be demonstrated.
No, with respect, I think most of us have done huge amounts. I suggest most of us would do so much more. But the real problem is these things are scratching at the surface. The forests are being cut down by large companies, over which none of us have any control.
No-one can actually agree on what needs to be done. I raised the claim that was made in the 90s, about sea levels rising by a metre by 2012. That is the real issue. Loads of scare stories. No actual information.
Climate is changing. We need to stop fretting about why and start preparing for the consequences.
I have never owned a car and am happy to say that because of which, I don't contribute to that kind of pollution. Then I look up and see a 747 fly by and wonder if I have wasted my time; as one of those will cause more damage, in one tarns-Atlantic trip, than my lost life time of driving.Thank you, I am well aware of the silly nature of these claims and equally aware of the preposterous claims that arctic and Antarctic ice is melting. I'm sorry to say it actually impossible.
Sadly, it will take 30 or 40 years before that can be demonstrated.
No, with respect, I think most of us have done huge amounts. I suggest most of us would do so much more. But the real problem is these things are scratching at the surface. The forests are being cut down by large companies, over which none of us have any control.
No-one can actually agree on what needs to be done. I raised the claim that was made in the 90s, about sea levels rising by a metre by 2012. That is the real issue. Loads of scare stories. No actual information.
Climate is changing. We need to stop fretting about why and start preparing for the consequences.
Last edited:
Funny, NASA & PhysOrg tell me otherwise.
I don't believe we necessarily can't influence the climate or weather, but I agree; in my 32 years I've seen every sort of scenario proclaimed. One day, we're supposed to fear it cooling and another warming. For everything I don't know, I do know I have no reason to trust anyone who says the world is going to end tomorrow or the next decade, century, or millennia.
Sea levels have risen and shrunk long before Humans came around.
Forests of the size of Greenland have burned down putting more gas into the Air than Humans could manage.
And the Worlds still there.
Nature aint controllable. So brace for impact and go on.
I don't believe we necessarily can't influence the climate or weather, but I agree; in my 32 years I've seen every sort of scenario proclaimed. One day, we're supposed to fear it cooling and another warming. For everything I don't know, I do know I have no reason to trust anyone who says the world is going to end tomorrow or the next decade, century, or millennia.
Minonian
Banned
Are you sure?
The world what we know can end. And this is something what's already happening.
Even if global warming wasn't a problem (which I strongly don't believe is the case), where's the harm in combating pollution and protecting the environment anyway? We should look after the world regardless of what happens.
We don't have to go to such extremes as depopulation and war to solve the problem (which would be disgusting), but we could go to extremes such as forcing the following: No more personal vehicles (buses and trains only), products which last much longer, no more meat for anyone, etc. I could live with that.
We don't have to go to such extremes as depopulation and war to solve the problem (which would be disgusting), but we could go to extremes such as forcing the following: No more personal vehicles (buses and trains only), products which last much longer, no more meat for anyone, etc. I could live with that.
Last edited:
Things Supposedly Caused by Global Warming, Er. Climate Change
NASA Study: Mass Gains of Antarctic Ice Sheet Greater than Losses
Deserts 'Greening' from Rising CO2
Am I sure? That's the thing with reality, one must never be too sure. I for one am sure death is just another phase of existence and not so permanent, having experienced it first-hand, but it's not my place to decide for others.
Men have said that since the beginning of known history.
Your end goal may be different, but the methods not so much. Either be the change you want to be, or don't expect (or demand) change.
NASA Study: Mass Gains of Antarctic Ice Sheet Greater than Losses
Deserts 'Greening' from Rising CO2
Am I sure? That's the thing with reality, one must never be too sure. I for one am sure death is just another phase of existence and not so permanent, having experienced it first-hand, but it's not my place to decide for others.
Men have said that since the beginning of known history.
Your end goal may be different, but the methods not so much. Either be the change you want to be, or don't expect (or demand) change.
Since they faked the moon landings; I tend to take what NASA has to say, with a pinch of salt. What their study, does not take into account, is what is happening, under the ice, due to the warming of the water.
:O
I didn't know there were still people who made that ridiculous and long discredited claim.