General / Off-Topic Recycle or Die! (the elite environmental thread)

Dear Jason

Use half an hour of your precious life to read this article and try to understand it. You're far from stupid, so I know you can. Then ask youself: When you have a curve (Fig. 5) that has been a "straight line" (log plot) for 2000 years, and extrapolating it spells 100% certain disaster in a few decades, what do you think will happen, and how do you think it will influence you and your loved ones?

Thanks for the link, I'll get right to it. I'm grateful, because I'm 100% unaware of all the scientific literature on the topic.

I am curious how this relates directly to my concern for Patrick's personal well being (which he has already assured me was tip top). Perhaps spending a half hour of "my precious life" reading the article will bring clarity.
 
WeComeInPeace said:
@Zak Gordon
Most people on this planet live close to the sea. 80% live less than 100 km (60 miles) from a coast.

Regarding simple models: I honestly thought that those were necessary to make people wake up and understand. Now I'm slowly realizing that people are already awake and scared, so doing/showing them simple models just make it harder for them to look away and (not) talk about the weather. You can do that to anyone to a certain degree before they snap. It's like constantly being reminded of your mortality. Even though it's an important part of anyone's life, most people hate thinking and talking about it. I guess a potential extinction of Homo Sapiens pushes the same buttons.
Yes, our (humans) mostly living so close to the coast is one of the reasons i post as many of the studies and topics that deal with sea level rises. Decades ago my mother told me to never buy property near the sea, as in the future it would become valueless (due to our acceleration of sea level rises), and i think we're about a few decades away now of that being proven correct for many people!

In terms of graphs i'm all for them :) The point i was making (and failing at it seems) is that it is VERY EASY to become interested in the topic of AGW, then study it at an academic level and then using that process end up in a position where you find you can see no future (say beyond the next 300-400 years) for humanity as a whole.

Personally that is not (totally) why I became interested in the topics of this thread and why i want to give them greater public viewing etc. Partially it might be down to personality types ( I am an optimist in general) but i am also someone that has had the good fortune to be able to spend time traveling the world and living with many different peoples (often what we would call 'primitive' , but i learned to understand as often the most wise and best of humanity), and from that got to understand the amazing range of the natural world and the ability of people to live 'with it' (out of respect and care) rather than 'against it' (for greed and profit). So while we can study in detail various aspects of the problems around AGW, it is such a complex subject (as the totality of the natural world and the web of life we have on this amazing planet) that it can maybe be a form of our own arrogance that we think we understand everything.

Absolutely 100% of the vast majority of people today whose 'normal' life choices have all contributed to AGW (from the Stock Market seller to the White Diesel Van driver, and very much the top richest people (and families) that have shaped that structure) are going to have a very 'hard landing' when the real effects of AGW start to hit. Much of that shock is already lined up and can not be avoided as we have already put it into the natural systems (our very high CO2 levels etc), so yes in that i'm 100% with you on the Human Race is going to have a hard time and soon (TM) ;)

I stop at being able to conclude we are all doomed though, i just don't think that takes into account natures own ability to absorb and adjust in surprising ways or humanities own abilities to adapt and change. The only thing i can conclude is if we don't change how we run the world soon (maybe the next 50 years in particular) then we may well hit numerous hidden tipping points in the natural worlds systems (from run-away permafrost melts (releasing more CO2) to the Atlantic Conveyor flipping 'off' and most of the modern western world becoming 'Arctic' etc) that would make any kind of recognizable world of modern mankind unlikely. So while i see great cause for concern, and a great need for all of us to understand just 'how on the brink' we really are, i don't think we are beyond saving (as a species) or beyond redemption (as people). We still have the opportunity to have a future in short.

-------------------

Anyway another attempt to clean up some of that plastic island in the pacific is underway:

'Great Pacific garbage patch: giant plastic trap put to sea again':


We need more actions like this imho, across the whole range of AGW and environmental concerns.
 
Dear Jason

Use half an hour of your precious life to read this article and try to understand it. You're far from stupid, so I know you can. Then ask youself: When you have a curve (Fig. 5) that has been a "straight line" (log plot) for 2000 years, and extrapolating it spells 100% certain disaster in a few decades, what do you think will happen, and how do you think it will influence you and your loved ones?

Hyperboles such as 'The current massive discharge is rapidly driving the earth from a biosphere teeming with life and supporting a highly developed human civilization toward a barren moonscape' question these studies credibility. Probably the same scientist look for life on all celestial objects such as Enceladus.

I understand the somewhat stupid description of Earth (which is spelled earth in the article, further questioning its quality) as a 'chemical battery', but all current studies show that we will have severe climate problems way sooner than we can deplete all fossil fuels (and reserve estimations fluctuate a lot), i.e. the primary problem to solve is not assuring energy but how to limit climate change's effects.

Obviously population is the key driver of the emissions, whose growth fortunately starts to even out, i.e. births remain only high in Africa, elsewhere the growth is mostly driven by longer life expectancy. So there is that as silver lining.
I have no doubt climate change will have severe effects, will make next generations life 'less comfortable', but I think/hope humankind will make it in better shape than the article suggested (back to hunter/gatherer lifestyle) - and I'm definitely certain that life will rebound whatever happens.
 
And all this has to stop ASAP:

'G20 nations triple coal power subsidies despite climate crisis':

Honey production should be "catastrophic" because of the climate.

"The bees harvest nothing!". On Tuesday was alarmed Henri Clément, the spokesman and secretary-general of the National Union of French beekeeping. French honey producers are predicting "catastrophic" honey production this year due to disastrous weather conditions in recent weeks.

"In the hives, there is no food, beekeepers are forced to feed them with syrup because they may die of hunger."

"Since some times, we are alarmed by the climate change that has a big impact on the productions."

:(
 
Last edited:
Without the human, it would be even better for the planet and the others species.
The planet is not a person, it cannot give a flying biowaste whether we or anything walks on it. :)

As about the biosphere, humans are so far the best chance for its long term survival, as most of life's story has been already written (i.e. there is much less time left from Earth's capability of carry life than what has passed).

BTW I presume you don't have children, otherwise you wouldn't post anything like that.
 
BTW I presume you don't have children, otherwise you wouldn't post anything like that.
We can also talk about the millions of millions of parents who pollute the planet with their big cars, their motorcycles, and their overproductions and their over-consumption of the merchandise of all kinds in the supermarkets , without worrying about the future of their children ...

They are indifferent to the future of their children and are primarily responsible for the disaster.
 
We can also talk about the millions of millions of parents who pollute the planet with their big cars, their motorcycles, and their overproductions and their over-consumption of the merchandise of all kinds in the supermarkets , without worrying about the future of their children ...

They are indifferent to the future of their children and are primarily responsible for the disaster.
A lot of people are misinformed and ignorant, but that is not the same as wishing for the end of humanity. And I presume you are from a rich first world country, which by default makes you well within the top 10% polluter of this planet too.

sorry, what???



ah, you mean human life. yeah, earth doesn't care. we should. but we are sooooo smart ...
As the Sun is ageing, it gets hotter - current estimates show that in 500 million years complex life will disappear from the surface. By contrast life is about 4 (?) billion years with complex life about 1 (?) billion years old.
We like to think Earth is eternal, but it isn't.
 
As the Sun is ageing, it gets hotter - current estimates show that in 500 million years complex life will disappear from the surface. By contrast life is about 4 (?) billion years with complex life about 1 (?) billion years old.
oh, yeah, i'm aware, it's just easy to loose perspective with those numbers.
time to file a rma, i guess ...
 
Top Bottom