Jump to content

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Gissie said:

So you want to "do what it takes" then come up with some kumbaya homily that will achieve fuck all.

:lol: Such brilliance.

'do what it takes' doesn't achieve fk all? what is that some more fucked up, right-wing alternate reality shit or something?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 218
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

2 minute of your time:; Nature Is Speaking – Julia Roberts is Mother Nature | Conservation International (CI) - YouTube

When I was a kid in the 60's I collected empty bottles - all glass and heavy. 2 cents for the small ones an d 5 cents for the big ones.. Coca Cola foisted plastic bottles upon us. We did not ask

Posted Images

1 minute ago, 3to1 said:

'do what it takes' doesn't achieve fk all? what is that some more fucked up, right-wing alternate reality shit or something?

Do what it takes involves all countries doing what it takes. This is not happening and is unlikely to in the next couple of decades. So your "do what it takes" is going to achieve fuck all.

Unless your answer is to invade China and India and force them to do what you want.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, 3to1 said:

hey jizzo, do you even give a shit about the planet you live on like you give a shit about your next meal or drink?

Yes, but I can see no action that will stop Steamers extinction event that it seems is already happening.

You also seem to see no action that would work, apart from "do what it takes", but like to pretend things can be changed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Gissie said:

Yes, but I can see no action that will stop Steamers extinction event that it seems is already happening.

You also seem to see no action that would work, apart from "do what it takes", but like to pretend things can be changed.

fair enough, but how much do you think your own personal skepticism actually matters as it relates to problems of this next-level magnitude? means less than a fart in the wind.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, 3to1 said:

fair enough, but how much you think your own personal skepticism actually matters as it relates to problems of this next-level magnitude? means less than a fart in the wind.

Much like your misplaced optimism. Still I guess you need something to believe in now that religion has been deep sixed. A pity you aren't mentally strong enough to face the future without such a crutch.

As for the fart in the wind, an apt description of what all the bleating about electric this, wind power this plans.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Gissie said:

Much like your misplaced optimism. Still I guess you need something to believe in now that religion has been deep sixed. A pity you aren't mentally strong enough to face the future without such a crutch.

As for the fart in the wind, an apt description of what all the bleating about electric this, wind power this plans.

that's some great presumptuous shit, helluva' flail. you ain't gettin the last word mutherfucker, not here.

hold up, I'm going to go have me a shit.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, 3to1 said:

that's some great presumptuous shit, helluva' flail. you ain't gettin the last word motherfucker, not here.

:lol: No problem, I will let you do one more. Likely the first time you have been a winner in decades. Still not as long as it has been since you had an original thought.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Gissie said:

:lol: No problem, I will let you do one more. Likely the first time you have been a winner in decades. Still not as long as it has been since you had an original thought.

hey shithead, you want to have a bad day with me, then I'll have one with you, because I suspect you're all too familiar with it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, 3to1 said:

hey shithead, you want to have a bad day with me, then I'll have one with you, I suspect you're all too familiar with it.

Who is having a bad day? Not me, I just asked a simple question and am yet to get a simple answer. No big deal as it is fairly standard reaction from self proclaimed bright boys like yourself. Pontificate all day with like minded idiots, all congratulating each other on the masterful hand action displayed while masturbating your baby weiner. Then, the moment a dissenting opinion turns up, unleashing the verbal diarrhea of insults you learn at idiot school.

So maybe you are having a bad day, but me? Nah. Just enjoying the knots plonkers like you turn yourselves into to try and defend something you don't even understand.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Gissie said:

Who is having a bad day? Not me, I just asked a simple question and am yet to get a simple answer. No big deal as it is fairly standard reaction from self proclaimed bright boys like yourself. Pontificate all day with like minded idiots, all congratulating each other on the masterful hand action displayed while masturbating your baby weiner. Then, the moment a dissenting opinion turns up, unleashing the verbal diarrhea of insults you learn at idiot school.

So maybe you are having a bad day, but me? Nah. Just enjoying the knots plonkers like you turn yourselves into to try and defend something you don't even understand.

I understand it completely you disingenuous retard, the science, the socioeconomics, especially the moral parts, and I care deeply about it. and there's a reason you're always going head to head with people here in PA, you're a relative anomaly, you're actually quite stupid.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, 3to1 said:

I understand it completely you disingenuous retard, the science, the socioeconomics, especially the moral parts. there's a reason you're always going head to head with people here, you're a relative anomaly.

So all the science, the socioeconomics, with the moral parts as well, is yet to come up with a plan based in reality.

Much like you. :lol:

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Gissie said:

Do what it takes involves all countries doing what it takes. This is not happening and is unlikely to in the next couple of decades. So your "do what it takes" is going to achieve fuck all.

I suspect that you do not know Jack Squat about how international accords are reached . . 

Look into how the Child Soldiers, Land Mine, and Chem/Bio treaties were put together. 

But you will not put in the minimal work required to do that, will you ?? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, AJ Oliver said:

I suspect that you do not know Jack Squat about how international accords are reached . . 

Look into how the Child Soldiers, Land Mine, and Chem/Bio treaties were put together. 

But you will not put in the minimal work required to do that, will you ?? 

I don't think he wants to know, it might not be convenient.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, AJ Oliver said:

I suspect that you do not know Jack Squat about how international accords are reached . . 

Look into how the Child Soldiers, Land Mine, and Chem/Bio treaties were put together. 

But you will not put in the minimal work required to do that, will you ?? 

Oh dear, the professor has arrived with yet more erudite claims. Talking about treaties that have no big economic impact on those involved, yet comparing it to getting China and India joining in the save the world. All within the next ten years. Or thirty, depending on which scientist you listen to.

Especially when China is looking at the advantage they are getting by pushing their development ahead as fast as possible. Still you will fall for their wolf policy because you want to believe in the goodness of mankind. They just love gullible folk like you.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Gissie said:

Oh dear, the professor has arrived with yet more erudite claims.

Since you never offer citations or sources, you cannot be taken with any seriousness. 

You merely waste electrons and embarrass Northland.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, AJ Oliver said:

Since you never offer citations or sources, you cannot be taken with any seriousness. 

You merely waste electrons and embarrass Northland.  

So what is the answer oh fount of all knowledge, on the realistic understanding China and India are not involved, in fact boosting their outputs.

Or do you have cites to the contrary, because I would be happy to be mistaken on their obstinacy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Gissie said:

So what is the answer oh fount of all knowledge, on the realistic understanding China and India are not involved, in fact boosting their outputs.

Or do you have cites to the contrary, because I would be happy to be mistaken on their obstinacy.

'not involved', currently. the inertia the facts carry could very well change that, you one-trick dipshit. they need to be brought onboard, plenty of thought is being applied to that. lay down.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, AJ Oliver said:

Do some homework and then we can talk. 

Right now, you only spout 

So nothing. You could easily do your own homework on how China is expanding its coal plants, or even how India calls the whole 2050 thing a pie in the sky.

Oh, but you are the standard know all professor who knows it all already. The biggest figjam on campus. Also the laughing stock of his students.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, 3to1 said:

'not involved', currently. the inertia the facts carry could very well change that, you one-trick dipshit. they need to be brought onboard, plenty of thought is being applied to that.

Plenty of thought is being applied. :lol: China is happily playing for time and idiots like you think they are serious.

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Gissie said:

Yet nature has produced covid to help out and you moan about the death rate. You should be embrace it.

Total deaths from Covid so far equal less than 2 weeks growth in world population.

It's a fart in a hurricane.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, AJ Oliver said:

I suspect that you do not know Jack Squat about how international accords are reached . . 

Look into how the Child Soldiers, Land Mine, and Chem/Bio treaties were put together. 

But you will not put in the minimal work required to do that, will you ?? 

Would that be like the accord banning all nuclear weapons?

You know, the one signed by countries that don't have any, and ignored by all those countries that do?

That sort of accord?

FKT

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Gissie said:

So what is the answer oh fount of all knowledge, on the realistic understanding China and India are not involved, in fact boosting their outputs.

Or do you have cites to the contrary, because I would be happy to be mistaken on their obstinacy.

There are a couple of things that could be done, but they're difficult, expensive in both money and energy and possible not successful regardless.

Cut off China's and India's access to raw materials outside their own borders for example.

But this would be an act of war and both countries have nuclear weapons.

Perhaps after AJ's precious treaty is fully implemented and all countries surrender their nukes, agreeing not to build more, this could be attempted.

Pity that the heat death of the universe will arrive first.

FKT

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

Fuck that what'll Australia do for income?

the fokwit from marketing can say a prayer

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Mid said:

the fokwit from marketing can say a prayer

Yeah. That'll probably work as well as Rudd's resources super profits tax did, really.

It's a pity we can't combine the right wing of the ALP with the left wing of the Lib/Nats and boot the others into the Greens and No Notion respectively.

Still pissed about this whole global warming/sea level rise fiasco anyway. I should have had a deep waterfront by now. And some new archipelagos to sail in.

FKT

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 3to1 said:

I understand it completely you disingenuous retard, the science, the socioeconomics, especially the moral parts, and I care deeply about it. and there's a reason you're always going head to head with people here in PA, you're a relative anomaly, you're actually quite stupid.

You're not one bit open to discussion. You just want to shout at the moon and call people names. Go super glue your face to a bridge or something.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Mid said:

price fossil fuel at it's real cost to the environment . 

Treating this a bit more seriously, how?

Are you proposing a tariff/tax on all Chinese, Indian and other non-complying countries equivalent to the cost of removing their CO2 emissions?

Even if this could be done, for the sake of argument, other than *possibly* reducing consumption/emissions, how do you propose to remove the emitted CO2 from the atmosphere?

This last is the crux of the problem IMO. If there was a feasible way to do this, pretty much regardless of the cost, we'd have a better basis for action.

FKT

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

Treating this a bit more seriously, how?

have the boffins calculated the real cost and charge it at the point of sale , tbh i had liquid fossil fuels in mind predominantly .

IF , yes I know biggest word in the language , fuel was the correct price , then the alternatives would come oh so much quicker .

start with jumping in the car to run to the cnr shop ,IF you knew that was going to cost you say $50 you'd probably find out just where that pushbike was ...

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, 00seven said:

You're not one bit open to discussion. You just want to shout at the moon and call people names. Go super glue your face to a bridge or something.

so you keep saying, poppit. I'll glue my face to a bridge after you leap from one, then I won't. deal?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, 3to1 said:

so you keep saying, poppit. I'll glue my face to a bridge after you leap from one, then I won't. deal?

So grown up. What are you doing other than calling names and screaming at the moon?

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Mid said:

plant trees

Won't work unless you also stop people from cutting them down and re-releasing the CO2. Good luck with that outside First World countries.

I own over 600 acres of mostly forest. It's CO2 neutral because it's pretty much in balance. What dies & rots is replaced by new growth. If your suggestion worked I'd personally have carte blanche to do what I wanted; the rest of you could just freeze in the dark.

One way growing trees would help (not actually solve the problem but help) might be to grow them then drop them suitably encased into the deep ocean subduction zones. But the volume....

FKT

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Mid said:

have the boffins calculated the real cost and charge it at the point of sale , tbh i had liquid fossil fuels in mind predominantly .

IF , yes I know biggest word in the language , fuel was the correct price , then the alternatives would come oh so much quicker .

start with jumping in the car to run to the cnr shop ,IF you knew that was going to cost you say $50 you'd probably find out just where that pushbike was ...

 

Nope I'd have stuff delivered.

This is sort-of getting there with EV's. But we need a lot more electricity generation. Mass installation of PV panels helps.

FKT

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

If your suggestion worked I'd personally have carte blanche to do what I wanted; the rest of you could just freeze in the dark.

nope , we need giga hectares of em , be a good gig for all the ex miners .

Im well aware that we are too selfish for meaningful change to happen any time soon , the legacy we leave the future gens ain't one to be proud of

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Mid said:

nope , we need giga hectares of em , be a good gig for all the ex miners .

Not enough land and water then regardless of availability of miners.

And as I said it's only a temporary fix unless you can stop them dying & decaying, or at least decaying.

FKT

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

E-bikes or electric drones.

electricity will reflect the proper cost of generating it

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Mid said:

electricity will reflect the proper cost of generating it

Cool, then as I live in Tasmania mine will be pretty much free and you'll be paying a metric shitload. I'm good with that.

WRT reforestation, not going to happen. Not unless you either figure out how to grow food some other way on other land or cut the population down to a lot smaller carrying capacity.

I'm good with the latter, it's already happening in the First World anyway.

Otherwise, shrug, we've burnt so much coal in such a geologically short period that growing trees won't help worth a damn.

Happy to be wrong, show me some numbers. But those numbers will also have to address the issue of how to STOP those trees rotting and re-releasing the CO2.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:
8 hours ago, Excoded Tom said:

Now that you mention it, 14.

I need a CNC lathe and VMC.

FKT

My friend who needed a Cowmaran had a similar need. He bought a cool CNC machine and put it in his shop.

Turns out, its computer doesn't like the climate here. Now it has its own tent with air conditioning ducted into it.

CnCTent.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

Cool, then as I live in Tasmania mine will be pretty much free and you'll be paying a metric shitload. I'm good with that.

WRT reforestation, not going to happen. Not unless you either figure out how to grow food some other way on other land or cut the population down to a lot smaller carrying capacity.

I'm good with the latter, it's already happening in the First World anyway.

Otherwise, shrug, we've burnt so much coal in such a geologically short period that growing trees won't help worth a damn.

Happy to be wrong, show me some numbers. But those numbers will also have to address the issue of how to STOP those trees rotting and re-releasing the CO2.

don't worry I'm as good as you in identifying the why nots , that's our collective problem .

looks as if it'll need to get a good deal warmer before it gets joe public's attention .

don't expect much satisfaction will be gained from I told you so .

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Mid said:

don't worry I'm as good as you in identifying the why nots , that's our collective problem .

looks as if it'll need to get a good deal warmer before it gets joe public's attention .

don't expect much satisfaction will be gained from I told you so .

Oh, I don't. I've been following this for over 30 years now, closer to 40. In fact now I think of what my next birthday's magic number is, might be 40+ years.

The problem so far is, first too many people still think there's no problem, second of the remainder a large majority still believe in the equivalent of fairies at the bottom of the garden rather than science/engineering. I've absolutely no time for pursuing failure and chucking time/money/effort down rat-holes that CANNOT work.

If you eliminate those there's a better chance of concentrating on things that might work. That's where I want the effort put, not that I just want to ignore it. All jokes about rising sea levels & deep waterfronts aside.

And we're not going to even stabilise CO2 levels without China & India, plus to a lesser extent Africa and South America switching over to carbon-neutral economies. If that doesn't happen, it doesn't matter a *damn* what the rest of us do WRT global impacts, CO2 percentage will keep rising.

Nobody is really taking this seriously yet, at any level.

FKT

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Mid said:

agreed

so do I (though based on my actions every once in a while, I doubt if I take seriously enough). that's one reason I can personally get worked up about it even though I realize it's not productive. the environmental stuff bothers me, more than pretty much any social, political, etc issues. 

it's not really in the public's discourse, people don't talk about it at the watercolor, so when those that do bring it up, it can almost feel a little anti-social, as absurd as that is.

sure it's all very daunting and causes a shitload of self-reaction, but this head in the sand shit sure won't cut it.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, 3to1 said:

so do I (though based on my actions every once in a while, I doubt if I take seriously enough). that's one reason I can personally get worked up about it even though I realize it's not productive. the environmental stuff bothers me, more than pretty much any social, political, etc issues. 

it's not really in the public's discourse, people don't talk about it at the watercolor, so when those that do bring it up, it can almost feel a little anti-social, as absurd as that is.

sure it's all very daunting and causes a shitload of self-reflection, but this head in the sand shit sure won't cut it.

edited

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Mid said:

don't worry I'm as good as you in identifying the why nots , that's our collective problem .

looks as if it'll need to get a good deal warmer before it gets joe public's attention .

don't expect much satisfaction will be gained from I told you so .

good deal warmer? that likely means some more super fucked up, unusually intense wildfires, for example, in the places they've been occurring the past few years. that's a bloody high toll, and nature takes it, by far, the hardest.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

And we're not going to even stabilise CO2 levels without China & India, plus to a lesser extent Africa and South America switching over to carbon-neutral economies. If that doesn't happen, it doesn't matter a *damn* what the rest of us do WRT global impacts, CO2 percentage will keep rising.

Nobody is really taking this seriously yet, at any level.

FKT

This is the real problem. Without those two involved we are going nowhere and one is mouthing small platitudes while building more coal power plants, the other claims it is a pie in the sky dream.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Gissie said:

This is the real problem. Without those two involved we are going nowhere and one is mouthing small platitudes while building more coal power plants, the other claims it is a pie in the sky dream.

to say this is the most profoundly critical set of issues that is possible wouldn't be overstating things. don't ya think, that just maybe, that sobering reality just might ultimately cause those two cuntrys, and others, to ultimately choose to become responsible citizens of this world virtually by default?

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, 3to1 said:

to say this is the most profoundly critical set of issues that is possible wouldn't be overstating things. don't ya think, that just maybe, that sobering reality just might ultimately cause those two cuntrys, and others, to ultimately choose to become responsible citizens of this world virtually by default?

China become a responsible country in the world. Shit, you come up with some good ones, but this takes the cake. :lol:

They will be happy to expand any way they can while watch the west expend resources trying to save the world. A loss of millions will be of no consequence to them as long as they come out on top. Even a fucked up world won't bother them, they live in one already.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

Oh, I don't. I've been following this for over 30 years now, closer to 40. In fact now I think of what my next birthday's magic number is, might be 40+ years.

The problem so far is, first too many people still think there's no problem, second of the remainder a large majority still believe in the equivalent of fairies at the bottom of the garden rather than science/engineering. I've absolutely no time for pursuing failure and chucking time/money/effort down rat-holes that CANNOT work.

If you eliminate those there's a better chance of concentrating on things that might work. That's where I want the effort put, not that I just want to ignore it. All jokes about rising sea levels & deep waterfronts aside.

And we're not going to even stabilise CO2 levels without China & India, plus to a lesser extent Africa and South America switching over to carbon-neutral economies. If that doesn't happen, it doesn't matter a *damn* what the rest of us do WRT global impacts, CO2 percentage will keep rising.

Nobody is really taking this seriously yet, at any level.

FKT

At what point do a few nukes do less damage to the environment than letting India and China continue?

How to persuade the Gissies of the world that it's better to make a serious effort to hit the brakes than to Thelma And Louise right over the old cliff?

DSK

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Steam Flyer said:

At what point do a few nukes do less damage to the environment than letting India and China continue?

How to persuade the Gissies of the world that it's better to make a serious effort to hit the brakes than to Thelma And Louise right over the old cliff?

DSK

How do you restrict nukes to 'a few'? Would you be prepared to see Los Angeles, San Francisco and Seattle hit with nukes if that's what it was going to take to stop Chinese CO2 emissions?

Nuclear winter would be one way of addressing global warming all right. Living in one of the few countries where nukes have actually been detonated, I'm not real anxious for more, even if one was targeted on Canberra.

I think Gissie is in pretty much the same mind as I am. There's lots of angst and lots of noise but damn few actual practical suggestions that have any chance of working. There isn't yet agreement on the broad brush issues like what level of technology we should be planning to maintain. Not to mention population control & stabilisation which I regard as absolutely essential.

FKT

Link to post
Share on other sites

I tend to believe that there are probably ways to mitigate most of this, and I'm not only referring to climate dysfunction. I suspect we have many sufficient technologies and processes (natural and man-made combined), but global will and urgency is the magic catalyst that doesn't seem to be there in sufficient amounts.

we need to wake the fk up, because we're dozing when it comes to the welfare of the natural world.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:

 

How to persuade the Gissies of the world that it's better to make a serious effort to hit the brakes than to Thelma And Louise right over the old cliff?

DSK

that's where jizzo has just lost the plot if he ever had it. it's 'peculiar'.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

How do you restrict nukes to 'a few'? Would you be prepared to see Los Angeles, San Francisco and Seattle hit with nukes if that's what it was going to take to stop Chinese CO2 emissions?

Nuclear winter would be one way of addressing global warming all right. Living in one of the few countries where nukes have actually been detonated, I'm not real anxious for more, even if one was targeted on Canberra.

I think Gissie is in pretty much the same mind as I am. There's lots of angst and lots of noise but damn few actual practical suggestions that have any chance of working. There isn't yet agreement on the broad brush issues like what level of technology we should be planning to maintain. Not to mention population control & stabilisation which I regard as absolutely essential.

FKT

-if- we achieve a sustainable planetary environment, human population will sort itself out.

It would be nice to think we can work out the details at least somewhat cooperatively.But I will say that if we can stave off extinction, then it's going to favor the cooperative rather than the selfish/stupid.

DSK

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

How do you restrict nukes to 'a few'? Would you be prepared to see Los Angeles, San Francisco and Seattle hit with nukes if that's what it was going to take to stop Chinese CO2 emissions?

Nuclear winter would be one way of addressing global warming all right. Living in one of the few countries where nukes have actually been detonated, I'm not real anxious for more, even if one was targeted on Canberra.

I think Gissie is in pretty much the same mind as I am. There's lots of angst and lots of noise but damn few actual practical suggestions that have any chance of working. There isn't yet agreement on the broad brush issues like what level of technology we should be planning to maintain. Not to mention population control & stabilisation which I regard as absolutely essential.

FKT

True about my feelings. Now we even have 'nuke those not helping' as some sort of serious answer. :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:

-if- we achieve a sustainable planetary environment, human population will sort itself out.

It would be nice to think we can work out the details at least somewhat cooperatively.But I will say that if we can stave off extinction, then it's going to favor the cooperative rather than the selfish/stupid.

DSK

So the winners of this coming shit fight will be those cooperating and playing nice. Much more likely, if you look at any history books, the winner will be the group with the most guns and a willingness to use them. An advantage will also be to have a large population that the leaders are happy to sacrifice.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:

-if- we achieve a sustainable planetary environment, human population will sort itself out.

It would be nice to think we can work out the details at least somewhat cooperatively.But I will say that if we can stave off extinction, then it's going to favor the cooperative rather than the selfish/stupid.

DSK

So, I take it that's a 'no' to sacrificing US cities if that's the price of stopping Chinese CO2?

As to your first, I'd reverse it. If we had a stable & sustainable population, the environment would sort itself out.

And none of you seem to want to think about what level of tech you think you'd be prepared to live with. That's one of the reasons I regard all the doomsayers as simply pontificating clowns. You can't separate out the tech level and the population size from the environmental targets. The 3 things are inextricably linked.

Any votes for a return to 18C rural bucolic life? You know, the time when population growth was minimal, serfs & peons were ubiquitous, infant mortality was sky high and life expectancy was in the 40's...

.... and rivers like the Thames were *still* too polluted to drink.

FKT

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

So, I take it that's a 'no' to sacrificing US cities if that's the price of stopping Chinese CO2?

As to your first, I'd reverse it. If we had a stable & sustainable population, the environment would sort itself out.

And none of you seem to want to think about what level of tech you think you'd be prepared to live with. That's one of the reasons I regard all the doomsayers as simply pontificating clowns. You can't separate out the tech level and the population size from the environmental targets. The 3 things are inextricably linked.

Any votes for a return to 18C rural bucolic life? You know, the time when population growth was minimal, serfs & peons were ubiquitous, infant mortality was sky high and life expectancy was in the 40's...

.... and rivers like the Thames were *still* too polluted to drink.

FKT

Good answer... make up some shit I didn't say and declare how wrong it is.

Personally I would not drink from the Thames now, nor any time since about 900 AD, given a reasonable alternative.

A return to 18C technology would mean a quick return to 18C population levels... humans,not everything we've almost killed off. Not the answer IMHO

DSK

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Steam Flyer said:

Good answer... make up some shit I didn't say and declare how wrong it is.

Ummm - *you* were the one who introdiced nukes to the discussion.

I asked if you'd be prepared to see LA, San Francisco and Seattle nuked if that was the price of stopping China's CO2 emissions.

You replied to this question with a non-answer.

So I assumed that your answer was 'no'.

Can't see how that's making up shit you didn't say. You'll have to explain it to me.

FKT

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

You can't separate out the tech level and the population size from the environmental targets. The 3 things are inextricably linked.

 

if you suggest you have some answers regarding the correlation between tech and population dynamics at this point in the game, you're pontificating out your high and mighty bung hole. that, you have a real grasp on.

'less' can be more, to say we can't survive, and even thrive without obscene and destructive levels of energy consumption is mostly bullshit. we use too much, we take too much, it's dysfunctional.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, 3to1 said:

if you suggest you have some answers regarding the correlation between tech and population dynamics at this point in the game, you're pontificating out your high and mighty bung hole. that, you have a real grasp on.

'less' can be more, to say we can't survive, and even thrive without obscene and destructive levels of energy consumption is mostly bullshit. we use too much, we take too much, it's dysfunctional.

How many of your air conditioners & heaters have you disconnected?

Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, 00seven said:

How many of your air conditioners & heaters have you disconnected?

none, why the fk would I disconnect them when I sparingly use them to regulate indoor temps; max 62F winter, max 78-81F summer. are you calling me a hypocrite? isn't that fkn' cute..

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, 3to1 said:

none, why the fk would I disconnect them when I sparingly use them to regulate indoor temps; 62F winter, max 78-81F summer. are you calling me a hypocrite? isn't that fkn' cute..

I wasn't but now I can. You are a hypocrite. I live in the tropics, we have 2 seasons, wet and dry. That's it. I have no ACs & no heating. None.

How cute is that you energy sucking hypocrite? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, 00seven said:

I wasn't but now I can. You are a hypocrite. I live in the tropics, we have 2 seasons, wet an dry. That's it. I have no ACs & no heating. None.

How cute is that you energy sucking hypocrite? 

but you sure as fk wouldn't be keeping your shit at 62F in the winter like I do if you lived in the cold.

shut up, you fkn' bitch.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, 3to1 said:

but you sure as fk wouldn't be keeping your shit at 62F in the winter like I do if you lived in the cold.

shut up, you fkn' bitch.

My mango trees don't blossom until we have 3 consecutive nights at 18C or below. We generally have 2 crops per season. We had an overnight low of 13.9c on the 25th

Still no heaters. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, 00seven said:

My mango trees don't blossom until we have 3 consecutive nights at 18C or below. We generally have 2 crops per season. We had an overnight low of 13.9c on the 25th

Still no heaters. 

those aren't cold, but moderate temps, heating would be excess.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Randro said:

With the rate of climate change you are going to cook soon. 

NTTAWT

Everyone I know who lives in the tropics and has no AC suffers.  Unless you are Black and acclimatised.

I'm not black and spent a couple of decades in those areas with no aircon.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Zooming out of the macro debate for a tic.

time460.gif.28c7ad3b35cce25f351f854d00533fa1.gif

My daughters biology class assignment decided the 'First modern man' contribution to the evolutionary clock should be changed to read 'First plastic microbes'. Ouch.  

Its kinda like the pennies and pounds thing. Look after the oceans micro organisms and we will all survive and get along for a few more millennia. The major impacts to life on earth has all stemmed from the collapse of the bio food chain. Not only were these catastrophic it also took millions of years to recover.

So CO2 needs to be maintained at optimal levels to ensure that our food chain survives? Ergo: it has to be done and it may take honey first and brickbats later, but it wont go away. Some people call for CO2 to be removed which is stupid, an absence of CO2 will cause another ice age and kill as quickly as having too much. 

A comment from the Royal Society and Yale co-authoring a recent report; 

The direct effects of an asteroid impact, like massive tsunamis or widespread fires, would have lasted only for a relatively short time,” said co-author Donald Penman, a postdoctoral associate at Yale. “However, the loss of ecologically important groups of organisms following impact caused changes to the global carbon cycle that took millions of years to recover. This could be seen as a warning for our future: We need to be careful not to drive key functional organisms to extinction, or we could be feeling the effects for a very long time.”

 

   

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I started this, I guess for earth day, The fact of the matter most people don't care, Everyone is walking around saying/ doing . It's what I want not what they need. They want their 1000's $$ rat dogs , They want there fancy tattoo's, they want there high power pickup trucks to haul grocery's  from Publix's? and the list goes on . and saying what's global warming ? Climate change ," It's just an extra warm summer" . if this Covid thing was a test, we as a species got a D, what's the next test going to bring ? 

Love the earth clock, we only have less then a second to go

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, 3to1 said:

those aren't cold, but moderate temps, heating would be excess.

Inversely, your hot would be nothing to me and wouldn't warrant ACs. My home was designed around the conditions here, sure it cost a bit more but it will pay off in the long run.

Troppo architects, look 'em up.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, 00seven said:

Inversely, your hot would be nothing to me and wouldn't warrant ACs. My home was designed around the conditions here, sure it cost a bit more but it will pay off in the long run.

Troppo architects, look 'em up.

 

I hear what you're saying, live with it routinely and it becomes no big deal, you acclimate and adjust. more people should try it in these modern times.

interesting architecture.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Randro said:

Been there done that.  Built to similar specs 20 years ago and still here.

Did 'reverse brick veneer' with lightweight cladding on the ourside and brick inside for thermal mass.

Worked fine for a few years till the number of days a year with extreme heat increased year on year.  After 7 years reluctantly installed aircon with matching solar capacity.

When it's +40C outside all day, there is only so long the 'design' can cope.

Oh shut up wanker. Just go away.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Randro said:

Been there done that.  Built to similar specs 20 years ago and still here.

Did 'reverse brick veneer' with lightweight cladding on the ourside and brick inside for thermal mass.

Worked fine for a few years till the number of days a year with extreme heat increased year on year.  After 7 years reluctantly installed aircon with matching solar capacity.

When it's +40C outside all day, there is only so long the 'design' can cope.

sounds like you're alluding to a tipping point, and it's a rather fine line.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Randro said:

 

But after all that, it gets too fucking hot for a week or two a year for us.

Harden up soft cock. It's sth east Queersland. It isn't that hot.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice graph. x being 110 years y being 3 degrees. So an average of 1 degree (+/-) shift nationally renders your design to BS over the  20 years? Really?

Stop with the stupidity.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites