Enyar
Dork
3/2/18 1:15 p.m.
aircooled said:
In reply to red_stapler :
If we do somehow do enough damage, the earth will shake us off like fleas from a dog, and the next step in the evolution of life will begin, with or without us, just as it has from the beginning of time. Just like it did when the asteroid killed the dinosaurs, just like the other 5 mass extinctions I can't remember the names of that took out 90% of life on earth.
I don't think anyone disagrees with that but that's certainly not the life I want leave my grandchildren
GameboyRMH said:
If he really bought carbon offsets for all that then we shouldn't hold it against him, even though it looks bad. We should also include pics of the reforestation those offsets bought, alongside the private jet and helicopter.
True but even without it I think it could be rationalized. He's raising awareness/$$ for the cause so in the end it's a net gain. Just like how the immediate effect of a fisherman/hunter killing for fun is bad for the environment. In the end these fisherman and hunters are some of the greatest stewards of the environment and we really need them for protection.
I guess DeCaprio should have been flying around in his electric/solar powered jet and helicopter to make sure he doesn't add to his carbon footprint?
I always laugh at the "earth has a cyclical climate, so it's nothing we're doing" argument. Yes, the earth's NATURAL cycle is created by the NATURAL release of CO2 in to the atmosphere. So what do you think would happen if we sped the process up by releasing CO2 in to the atmosphere at a very high, UNNATURAL rate? So that point ends up reinforcing the man-made global warming argument.
It's the equivalent of saying that driving my car always results in me having to refill my gas tank, so I might as well drive like a maniac and not care about gas mileage because I have to refill the tank anyway.
In reply to alfadriver :
The dollars are always the strongest argument when it comes to affecting real change. When solar is actually cheaper (should be real soon - crosses fingers), the production will flip really fast.
I'm guessing our massive oil pipelines will be shut down in less than 15 years not because of 'green' legislation, but rather because they are no longer making any money...
Robbie said:
In reply to alfadriver :
The dollars are always the strongest argument when it comes to affecting real change. When solar is actually cheaper (should be real soon - crosses fingers), the production will flip really fast.
I'm guessing our massive oil pipelines will be shut down in less than 15 years not because of 'green' legislation, but rather because they are no longer making any money...
No, it won't. Coal is not the top dog by any means right now, and look at them kicking and screaming. They are very much making the clean power plant rules their boogyman even though the clear truth for their downfall is natural gas.
Given the relative strength of the oil industry, I don't see them making a willing change any time soon- especially since solar will be 100% about installation. It's easy to convince people to not spend $1B on a solar plant even if it saves $5B in fuel costs in a $0.5B gas plant.
Besides, some kind of combustion system will likely be needed to make up for down times with solar and wind (unless someone finds a magical energy storage system).
DiCaprio got himself laughed out of Calgary when he was shooting that "Bear eats man" movie. He experienced a Chinook, which is a mid winter thaw caused by warm Pacific air coming over the mountains or something sciency like that. He took it as proof of global warming, but Chinooks have been the friend of Albertans since way long before Alberta was a word.
Having said that, I'm a believer. I don't see a solution, barring a really good pandemic, so we need to work on getting by in a warmer world. As an example, next time New Orleans drowns, bulldoze the rest of the city and move everyone north. As with almost everything else, if its bad for the mainstream, its great for Saskatchewan. Move here.
T.J.
MegaDork
3/2/18 3:21 p.m.
In reply to GameboyRMH :
Thanks. I'll check out the link. I'm guessing it doesn't involve the several examples of the supposed scientists adjusting the data to fit their hypothesis, but I'll read it.
A scientist told me that human caused climate change was a real tbreat supported by all the evidence, but then a louder person told me it wasn't. So I don't know what to think.
alfadriver said:
Besides, some kind of combustion system will likely be needed to make up for down times with solar and wind (unless someone finds a magical energy storage system).
Hydro dam, used EV batteries (like the big new system in Australia), thermal energy storage...
Streetwiseguy said:
DiCaprio got himself laughed out of Calgary when he was shooting that "Bear eats man" movie. He experienced a Chinook, which is a mid winter thaw caused by warm Pacific air coming over the mountains or something sciency like that. He took it as proof of global warming, but Chinooks have been the friend of Albertans since way long before Alberta was a word.
Having said that, I'm a believer. I don't see a solution, barring a really good pandemic, so we need to work on getting by in a warmer world. As an example, next time New Orleans drowns, bulldoze the rest of the city and move everyone north. As with almost everything else, if its bad for the mainstream, its great for Saskatchewan. Move here.
Maybe Ted Kaczynski was right all along, well except the whole bombing people thing.
Streetwiseguy said:
As with almost everything else, if its bad for the mainstream, its great for Saskatchewan. Move here.
A dark future indeed 
(But seriously, even the places that stand to benefit individually won't profit overall).
Rev Rico clearly was channeling his inner George Carlin. It isn't about the earth, it's about our habitat. And we've been so busy fouling our Cage that we forgot it's the only cage we have (for now).
That said, all our efforts are simply whizzing into the wind unless and until we (as a species) can get out population under control. Right now we're ADDING 200,000 humans to the global load every single day.
That's a medium sized city plopped down every day. Gone in the other direction it would be cataclysmic if a city the size of Lexington got annihilated every day. But because everyone loves babies we celebrate this unsustainable situation.
tldr: stop breeding before we smother in our own stew
I have been on this earth for a very long time during which I experienced periods of "climate change" . So it leaves me with some skepticism . This seems to be more serious. I question how much is caused by man and how much is just earth doing it's thing like it has done from the ice age.
KyAllroad (Jeremy) said:
Rev Rico clearly was channeling his inner George Carlin. It isn't about the earth, it's about our habitat. And we've been so busy fouling our Cage that we forgot it's the only cage we have (for now).
Possibly forever, or at least until we start putting digitized human minds in robot bodies. The laws of physics seem to be saying that nobody's ever warping anywhere, and our planet and solar system only have the resources to build a very limited number of generation ships. Plus, no other known habitable planets have been found so far. One potential candidate 4LY away was found to be a radiation-blasted hellscape just in the last week or two. I'm not a big fan of the "interstellar plague of locusts" future for humanity anyway, one that Stephen Hawking and Newt Gingrich agree on, oddly enough.
Enyar said:
o include pics of the reforestation those offsets bought, alongside the private jet and helicopter.
True but even without it I think it could be rationalized. He's raising awareness/$$ for the cause so in the end it's a net gain. Just like how the immediate effect of a fisherman/hunter killing for fun is bad for the environment. In the end these fisherman and hunters are some of the greatest stewards of the environment and we really need them for protection.
Sorry, but that totally reminds me of this:
Why not get ahead of the coming change and work on alternate energy sources? Easily accessible fossil fuels will be exhausted sooner or later and we'll be in the position where extracting what's left gets more and more expensive, driving the economics to favour renewable sources anyway.
Also, whether or not you believe in climate change, burning fossil fuels creates pollution, which is harmful and I don't think anyone is really arguing that it isn't.
RX8driver said:
Why not get ahead of the coming change and work on alternate energy sources? Easily accessible fossil fuels will be exhausted sooner or later and we'll be in the position where extracting what's left gets more and more expensive, driving the economics to favour renewable sources anyway.
Also, whether or not you believe in climate change, burning fossil fuels creates pollution, which is harmful and I don't think anyone is really arguing that it isn't.
I agree with you and with your permission I’d like to take your point one step further.
As we transition away from fossil fuel, we should cap off wells and place large monoliths other them inscribed with something to the effect of:
Those of us from the past developed a state of technology that allowed for clean energy production…we have left this easily accessible resource in the ground as a gift to you to be used in the event of an emergency.
Oh, and here’s a dilithium crystal with Planet of the Apes coded into it…this would probably be a good time for you guys to watch it.
