sadbrownsfan Posted March 25, 2015 Report Share Posted March 25, 2015 It's probably a lot easier to keep the conversation to whether or not global warming even exists. WSS Here is how that conversation usually plays out, we post charts and graphs, from credible sources all from the the 97% of scientists that agree that humans have played a part in the global rise of temperatures.... you or cal will post a link to one of the 3% who disagrees.... What to do? Invest in alternative fuel research, more nuke\solar\wind power plants, try to encourage new means of transportation that does not produce as much CO2(electric\high speed rails) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted March 25, 2015 Report Share Posted March 25, 2015 Here is how that conversation usually plays out, we post charts and graphs, from credible sources all from the the 97% of scientists that agree that humans have played a part in the global rise of temperatures.... you or cal will post a link to one of the 3% who disagrees.... ME???? Sad I have never once disputed the idea that climate change is happening nor that mankind has some effect on it. Come on sir, you are an intelligent fellow. Where would you get a statement like that? What to do? Invest in alternative fuel research, more nuke\solar\wind power plants, try to encourage new means of transportation that does not produce as much CO2(electric\high speed rails) Sure any of those things will make a minute difference. Unfortunate that difference, given the time limitations and the severity of the reports over the last two decades, will be slightly more significant than prayer. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadbrownsfan Posted March 25, 2015 Report Share Posted March 25, 2015 Sure any of those things will make a minute difference. Unfortunate that difference, given the time limitations and the severity of the reports over the last two decades, will be slightly more significant than prayer. WSS Sorry Steve, you are correct. You have not disputed climate change that I can recall. Better to do something, than nothing at all imo. Its very hard to make huge drastic changes in our way of life without effecting jobs\production. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted March 25, 2015 Report Share Posted March 25, 2015 Sorry Steve, you are correct. You have not disputed climate change that I can recall. Better to do something, than nothing at all imo. Its very hard to make huge drastic changes in our way of life without effecting jobs\production. Oh sure, why not? let's just stay focused on how much good any of our little efforts will make. Kinda like making sure you are wearing clean underwear when you go to the gas chamber. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted March 25, 2015 Report Share Posted March 25, 2015 Steve has never disputed man made climate change. He just goes down the "we can't do anything, no one will do anything, its all pointless, etc etc etc" route. And apparently ignoring past posts that are a response to his question, so he can keep asking the question in a "gotcha" manner, is also his thing... I've responded to this before. I've given some suggestions on what we can look into, much like Sad just did. No, I don't have a perfect answer to solve the issue, no one does. No, just because we probably can't reverse everything doesn't mean we shouldn't attempt to mitigate the problem. In the end, and I know this isn't you, the more time we as a country have to spend debating the issue even exists, the less time gets spent on a solution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted March 25, 2015 Report Share Posted March 25, 2015 This was Cyskos question this time. And why would you expect a different response when you [or anybody] make the same claim? Woody if you think recycling your beer cans, flushing the toilet every other time and turning off the lights at night will save the world great. Thank you for your service. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted March 25, 2015 Report Share Posted March 25, 2015 I don't believe I ever said that. I guess fabricating things I've said goes hand and hand with ignoring things I've said... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted March 25, 2015 Report Share Posted March 25, 2015 The science is rightfully ignored because it is irrelevant. Nothing would change if all Co2 emissions on the planet would cease today. If all co2 emissions ceased? Well, for a start all the plant-life would die, and as a result the food chain would be destroyed. But I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you meant man-made co2. There's plenty of evidence on the contribution of man to the amount of co2 in the atmosphere and the effects of it. Antarctica is the largest continent on earth isn't it? And completely uninhabited to boot. Settling it could solve a lot of problems at least until other planets are colonized. It's pretty inhospitable - feel free to settle it for yourself first Maybe ancient civilizations even? The land there was once part of the great single continent, so fossils and things sure, but not likely to be ancient civilisations. It's probably a lot easier to keep the conversation to whether or not global warming even exists. WSS It does. Not even the deniers (outside of Stuart, evidently) deny the existence of climate change, just the main causes. Yet you're not answering the question. Your question here has been 'what do we do about it?' from what I can gather? Depends on who you mean by we. At an individual level, not a great deal. Recycle, use less electricity, etc. sure, but it doesn't have a huge effect. The largest impact imo is from things like solar panels. Currently excess energy is sold back to the national grid at a not-great rate; with the new baterry coming from Tesla, one would be able to store the electricity generated for a rainy day (literally). We as a civilisation can reduce/eliminate carbon emissions to a sufficient level so as to slow/halt/reverse the emissions. For example, Costa Rica has used no fossil fuels this year. Solar power in europe survived the solar eclipse last week. Most countries are indeed lowering carbon emission - even China's emissions have stalled, in part due to an economic turn down over the last 18 months. As an example, to power the entire world from solar power alone (and so ignoring geothermal, hydro, wind and other clean energies) would require an area about 450-miles by 450-miles - which would be a lot if it were all in one place, but could very easily be distributed around the world. An area about a third the size of that is destroyed in rain forest every year, for example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted March 25, 2015 Report Share Posted March 25, 2015 I most definitely agree that man made climate change is legit. I just know that the biggest users of fossil fuels are the emerging markets (India, China, etc.) and they certainly do not care about the environment. The rest of the world would be in the position of having to pay them off so as not to continue dumping carbon emissions into the atmosphere. Otherwise, why would these emerging economies stop? They are only concerned with generating wealth and catching up to the Western countries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted March 25, 2015 Report Share Posted March 25, 2015 I don't believe I ever said that. I guess fabricating things I've said goes hand and hand with ignoring things I've said... So (just to be clear) you do not believe any of those things would be a step in the right direction? WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted March 25, 2015 Report Share Posted March 25, 2015 I most definitely agree that man made climate change is legit. I just know that the biggest users of fossil fuels are the emerging markets (India, China, etc.) and they certainly do not care about the environment. The rest of the world would be in the position of having to pay them off so as not to continue dumping carbon emissions into the atmosphere. Otherwise, why would these emerging economies stop? They are only concerned with generating wealth and catching up to the Western countries. If you believe that the emerging markets don't care about the environment (I'll give you India but others have shown at least vague responsibility), then the rest of the world needs to show that it's possible to attain the economic growth to which they aspire without burning endless fossil fuels. At the very least, I'm sure India is running some shockingly dirty power plants that could be improved. The standard response from your line of thinking "well they're not going to so why should we?" - so what? What if the developed world builds a clean economy that counters the inevitable running out of fossil fuels and gives us cleaner air for no good reason? Heavens, what a terrible thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted March 25, 2015 Report Share Posted March 25, 2015 Solar panels require fossil fuels to produce, for instance. Our bodies produce Co2 and we're reproducing at an exponential rate. It's not economically viable to get everyone in electric cars. I drive 70 miles one way to the office and then I'm likely to put another 100 miles of service miles in and then another 70 home. Tesla is useless to me. It might be ok for paper pushers that drive 50 miles a day. The point is that almost all industry relies on fossil fuels and produces Co2 at some stage. We can't do enough to reverse it in the limited time we apparently have before the sea rises up to swallow all the coastal areas whole. And even if america and the old money Europeon countries moved to solar and wind energy good luck to the human race getting the burgeoning economies to invest in it. I live on two acres out in the country with no close neighbors. On either side of me are farmers' fields and behind me is a wildlife area. I'd be a great candidate for wind power if it didn't cost $70,000 dollars to erect a windmill. .. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadbrownsfan Posted March 25, 2015 Report Share Posted March 25, 2015 Solar panels require fossil fuels to produce, for instance. Our bodies produce Co2 and we're reproducing at an exponential rate. It's not economically viable to get everyone in electric cars. I drive 70 miles one way to the office and then I'm likely to put another 100 miles of service miles in and then another 70 home. Tesla is useless to me. It might be ok for paper pushers that drive 50 miles a day. The point is that almost all industry relies on fossil fuels and produces Co2 at some stage. We can't do enough to reverse it in the limited time we apparently have before the sea rises up to swallow all the coastal areas whole. And even if america and the old money Europeon countries moved to solar and wind energy good luck to the human race getting the burgeoning economies to invest in it. I live on two acres out in the country with no close neighbors. On either side of me are farmers' fields and behind me is a wildlife area. I'd be a great candidate for wind power if it didn't cost $70,000 dollars to erect a windmill. .. The new model of Tesla gets up to 270miles(which is pushing your roughly 240m/day) so maybe in a few years? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted March 25, 2015 Report Share Posted March 25, 2015 Well if it becomes viable ill go for it. I Like technology. It has to be able to get that milage while carrying several hundred pounds of tools and materials too, though. If there were more recharging stations around it would be a lot more convenient. I know of only a few places in cleveland where there are semi public recharging stations Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted March 25, 2015 Report Share Posted March 25, 2015 If your main sticking point with solar panels is the carbon used in producing them think of it as an investment. It takes around 3-4 years to offset the carbon emitted in producing solar panels - plenty of time left for it to start making a difference. Your main problem with electric cars is what, the range? Not entirely sure of your point. You've given a total of 240 miles per day to drive? THe new tesla roadster charge (coming out next year) has a range of 400 miles. I've spoken about the emerging market previously - just because they *might* not get as into it as us, why should that stop us? We're not 10 year olds in the playground being told off by teacher, we're not playing "but he started it" or "but mum, he's still picking on me." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted March 25, 2015 Report Share Posted March 25, 2015 The standard response from your line of thinking "well they're not going to so why should we?" - so what? What if the developed world builds a clean economy that counters the inevitable running out of fossil fuels and gives us cleaner air for no good reason? Heavens, what a terrible thought. Those things would not address the damage that these emerging markets are doing to the air quality of the world. So until the western countries can talk them into doing something about environmental regulations, everyone else will still be dealing with the damage they continue to cause. We would be using solar energy while building flood walls to deal with rising oceans caused by countries thousands of miles away who could give a shit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadbrownsfan Posted March 25, 2015 Report Share Posted March 25, 2015 Well if it becomes viable ill go for it. I Like technology. It has to be able to get that milage while carrying several hundred pounds of tools and materials too, though. If there were more recharging stations around it would be a lot more convenient. I know of only a few places in cleveland where there are semi public recharging stations When they built our new building for work, they added recharge stations in the parking deck. But its not something that would as profitable as a gas station pump. If they ever made a Wrangle electric I would jump on it as soon as I could afford it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted March 25, 2015 Report Share Posted March 25, 2015 Those things would not address the damage that these emerging markets are doing to the air quality of the world. So until the western countries can talk them into doing something about environmental regulations, everyone else will still be dealing with the damage they continue to cause. We would be using solar energy while building flood walls to deal with rising oceans caused by countries thousands of miles away who could give a shit. You think the air is the same everywhere? Don't you believe it for a second. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted March 25, 2015 Report Share Posted March 25, 2015 "According to a new U.N. report, the global warming outlook is much worse than originally predicted. Which is pretty bad when they originally predicted it would destroy the planet." --Jay Leno "Experts say this global warming is serious, and they are predicting now that by the year 2050, we will be out of party ice." --David Letterman "Former Vice President Al Gore starring in a new documentary about global warming. I believe it's called [Leno snores]. ... The film actually features Al Gore and explores his journey on how he first got interested in temperature change. It started back when he was vice president. He noticed how the temperature would change, like whenever Bill would walk into the room, it would get warm and whenever Hillary walked into the room, it got cold." --Jay Leno "Arnold Schwarzenegger is blaming man for global warming. And today, Al Gore agreed with him. That's so typical. Two cyborgs, 'Oh, let's blame the humans.'" --Jay Leno "According to Time magazine, global warming is 33% worse than we thought. You know what that means? Al Gore is one-third more annoying than we thought." --Jay Leno "They say if the warming trend continues, by 2015 Hillary Clinton might actually thaw out." --Jay Leno, on global warming "Al Gore announced he is finishing up a new book about global warming and the environment. Yeah, the first chapter talks about how you shouldn't chop down trees to make a book that no one will read." --Conan O'Brien "At a press conference yesterday NASA announced that 2005 was the hottest year on record. It is so hot, and global warming is so bad, if the presidential election were held today, Al Gore would still lose." --Jay Leno "Yesterday, a group of scientists warned that because of global warming, sea levels will rise so much that parts of New Jersey will be under water. The bad news? Parts of New Jersey won't be under water." --Conan O'Brien "Al Gore said over the weekend that global warming is more serious than terrorism. Unless the terrorist is on your plane, then that extra half a degree doesn't bother you so much." --Jay Leno "Governor Schwarzenegger spoke about the dangers of global warming. Schwarzenegger's exact words were: fire, hot, bad." --Conan O'Brien "NASA just released their new report on global warming or, as President Bush, calls it -- Spring." --Jay Leno Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted March 25, 2015 Report Share Posted March 25, 2015 http://www.newsmax.com/MKTNews/global-warming-hoax-facts/2014/10/17/id/601458/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted March 25, 2015 Report Share Posted March 25, 2015 https://youtu.be/CmyzXlhsUIE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted March 26, 2015 Report Share Posted March 26, 2015 So (just to be clear) you do not believe any of those things would be a step in the right direction? WSS No... where did I say that? I am not sure why you feel the need to put words in my mouth, one way or another, in an attempt to discredit me.... Recycling does not solve all of our issues. Recycling is a step in the right direction. Recycling on an individual level will make hardly any dent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted March 26, 2015 Report Share Posted March 26, 2015 No... where did I say that? I am not sure why you feel the need to put words in my mouth, one way or another, in an attempt to discredit me... Try reading it again. Maybe you didn't realize it was a question. So the answer is No? WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted March 26, 2015 Report Share Posted March 26, 2015 Try reading my post again... I did Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted March 26, 2015 Report Share Posted March 26, 2015 Try reading my post again... I did Yeah it wasn't clear.(seriously) No you don't believe that or or No thats not what you think? WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted March 26, 2015 Report Share Posted March 26, 2015 I honestly have no idea why you are confused. You tried to use two extremes and put words in my mouth to make a point. I responded to all of that. What are you asking now? Try asking again, minus the normal Steve word games Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted March 26, 2015 Report Share Posted March 26, 2015 Steve - woody is saying that individual recycling and energy ssaving is like bailing out a sinking boat with a red cup. Sure, less water in the boat is a good thing but unless you fix the holes you're not going to achieve much. About fair, woody? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted March 26, 2015 Report Share Posted March 26, 2015 I honestly have no idea why you are confused. You tried to use two extremes and put words in my mouth to make a point. I responded to all of that. What are you asking now? Try asking again, minus the normal Steve word games Well it really was simple. And if you think its a word game then I would say it's a pretty damn easy game and nothing you should be intimidated about. we've really gone through this dozens of times, not just you but others on both sides. The dire warnings are always the same as is the unfortunate reality. My position has not changed. those who predict Armageddon are purposely exaggerating the data for political and profit reasons. The Solutions that would make even a tiny difference are beyond what we are willing, or able, to do. So if the Doomsday crowd is correct we are fucked. If they are talking out their collective ass then the slow natural progressive steps we are making will be fine and there will be no Armageddon. But that has been and will be my response every time the subject is repeated. If you think I'm wrong oh well. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted March 26, 2015 Report Share Posted March 26, 2015 https://youtu.be/jBD9EkOLgiI This was 10 years ago and no where near the beginning of the man made global warming hysteria. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted March 26, 2015 Report Share Posted March 26, 2015 I never denied politicians would use it for their own gain. Of course entertainers, movies, etc will too. Why anyone equates this to reputable experts is beyond me. Even doing the little things can help, but it wont solve the issue. It is more of a mindset thing. Big change will happen through the means many on here have already described. Investment in new technology, reform, rules, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.