T 2.0

watfly said:
How do humans reverse global warming? If you believe the doom and gloom predictions (most of the short term predictions have not come to fruition), the green energy proposals are trivial and akin to "rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic". If man can truly change the climate the only meaningful way to do it is limit and/or reduce the population by restricting births. Are people really going to support getting rid of the NFL and the NBA?

I'm a strong supporter of protections or actions for clean water and air (which we've had great success with), but trying to change climate seems like a fools errand.
Click to expand...
Obviously, humans are not going to do anything, there's no imminent threat, so no need to bother - I thought I made that clear. The Earth will heat up and future generations will be impacted. Some of that will be natural, and some will have been impacted by the actions of current and past generations (mostly the last 100-150 years).

We don't need to restrict population. We can comfortably feed everyone and there is more than enough room on the planet for the current population and many more billions. We don't obviously do that, but that's not the point, we could if we (collectively) wanted.

No idea how climate change has anything to do with the NFL or NBA!

Weirdly, the covid lockdown climate change experiment had some interesting results
  • Major cities saw air pollution drop 20–60%, especially NO₂ and PM2.5 (fine particulate matter).
  • Delhi, Beijing, Los Angeles, and Milan recorded their cleanest air in decades.
  • Global CO₂ emissions fell by ~7% in 2020, the largest annual drop on record (source: Global Carbon Project).
  • Wild animals were spotted more frequently in cities: Coyotes in San Francisco, Deer in Japan and London suburbs, Dolphins near ports with less ship traffic
  • Noise pollution dropped significantly in urban and rural areas.
  • Birds changed their singing behavior—some sang more softly, others were heard in new places.
  • Ocean sound levels dropped due to reduced ship traffic, likely benefiting marine mammals like whales and dolphins.
  • Breeding patterns improved in some areas due to quieter environments (e.g., sea turtles nesting on less crowded beaches).

That showed that the Earth will comfortably survive, I suppose. It also showed that you can have a large impact in a short period of time, although the planet will still heat up, so why bother.
 
Desert Hound said:
The graph shows the world was much warmer without so called runaway global warming. We have millions of years of hotter, colder, etc and the world did just fine. The theory is this time it will be different if the earth gets warmer?

Arable land, water, etc has changed constantly over the life of the earth. Barring some asteroid hitting us, we will adapt to those changes and be fine.
Click to expand...
It will be different for us - we weren't here for those hundreds of millions of years. That's the point. The planet will be fine with or without us. It doesn't need us ... we need it.

The planet is going through a heating period, and we are contributing to that to some degree. We can do things to negate our impact, but won't. We also won't think of the impacts down the road, 50, 100, 200 years from now because we don't care.

I don't doubt that we will adapt, albeit I expect that adaptation will be a combination of drought, starvation, mass deaths, war, and pestilence. It would be nice to think we're (the human race) better than that, but a quick look around and ... nope, we are not.
 
whatithink said:
The graph isn't new. Maybe more relevant might be that conditions on Earth were ideal to allow humans to evolve in the last 2-3 million years, so discount 483M of the graph. Then modern humans evolved maybe 300,000 years ago, so discard 484.7M years of the graph. Then, realistically its only since the last ice age, i.e. in the last 11,700 years where we have started to populate the Earth.

Speaking of which, 1000 years ago, there were maybe 300M humans; 100 years ago, there was about 1.7B humans; now there is 8B+ humans.

The rate of temp increase will impact many things, over time. The biggest impacts will be sea level rises, bread baskets of the world will move north (51st state & Greenland anyone?); sea will increase in temp impacting fish; access to water etc.. As the graph clearly demonstrates the Earth will be fine as a few centuries is nothing in the greater scheme of things.

It'll take many decades and even centuries, so our generation is fine; all good. 👊
Click to expand...
Good to see you are onboard!
 
whatithink said:
It will be different for us - we weren't here for those hundreds of millions of years. That's the point. The planet will be fine with or without us. It doesn't need us ... we need it.

The planet is going through a heating period, and we are contributing to that to some degree. We can do things to negate our impact, but won't. We also won't think of the impacts down the road, 50, 100, 200 years from now because we don't care.

I don't doubt that we will adapt, albeit I expect that adaptation will be a combination of drought, starvation, mass deaths, war, and pestilence. It would be nice to think we're (the human race) better than that, but a quick look around and ... nope, we are not.
Click to expand...
Actually we are in a cooling period. The trend has been going down temp wise. In that trend there have been some rises, but the overall trend is down.
 
whatithink said:
Obviously, humans are not going to do anything, there's no imminent threat, so no need to bother - I thought I made that clear. The Earth will heat up and future generations will be impacted. Some of that will be natural, and some will have been impacted by the actions of current and past generations (mostly the last 100-150 years).

We don't need to restrict population. We can comfortably feed everyone and there is more than enough room on the planet for the current population and many more billions. We don't obviously do that, but that's not the point, we could if we (collectively) wanted.

No idea how climate change has anything to do with the NFL or NBA!

Weirdly, the covid lockdown climate change experiment had some interesting results
  • Major cities saw air pollution drop 20–60%, especially NO₂ and PM2.5 (fine particulate matter).
  • Delhi, Beijing, Los Angeles, and Milan recorded their cleanest air in decades.
  • Global CO₂ emissions fell by ~7% in 2020, the largest annual drop on record (source: Global Carbon Project).
  • Wild animals were spotted more frequently in cities: Coyotes in San Francisco, Deer in Japan and London suburbs, Dolphins near ports with less ship traffic
  • Noise pollution dropped significantly in urban and rural areas.
  • Birds changed their singing behavior—some sang more softly, others were heard in new places.
  • Ocean sound levels dropped due to reduced ship traffic, likely benefiting marine mammals like whales and dolphins.
  • Breeding patterns improved in some areas due to quieter environments (e.g., sea turtles nesting on less crowded beaches).

That showed that the Earth will comfortably survive, I suppose. It also showed that you can have a large impact in a short period of time, although the planet will still heat up, so why bother.
Click to expand...
Is China still part of earth? Have you not seen how many new coal plants they are building? It’s a scam to extract money - period.

If only the wild animals supported the businesses downtown, we’d be golden. Wilderness encroaches when civilization departs.
 
kickingandscreaming said:
Is China still part of earth? Have you not seen how many new coal plants they are building? It’s a scam to extract money - period.

If only the wild animals supported the businesses downtown, we’d be golden. Wilderness encroaches when civilization departs.
Click to expand...
When I say "we" I mean the human race, its not nationalistic. Nationalism (fed by capitalism) is the barrier to a "we" type solution or approach to deal with the consequences.
 
Desert Hound said:
Actually we are in a cooling period. The trend has been going down temp wise. In that trend there have been some rises, but the overall trend is down.
Click to expand...
Its hard to tell, looks like its going up on the graph. Are we focusing in on the 0.06% of the graph that relates to the 300,000 years we've been about or the 0.002% of the graph that relates to the 11,700 we've been going at it hammer & thongs since the last ice age?
 
watfly said:
I don't know how what he did with the California budget isn't disqualifying in itself. He's not polling very well with Democrats, but we all know things can change dramatically.
Click to expand...
“California's 2025-26 budget is balanced. The governor's budget proposal projects a small surplus of $363 million, with revenues estimated to exceed expenditures, according to the Legislative Analyst's Office. This is a significant turnaround after facing budget deficits in the previous two years. The budget addresses a projected deficit for the 2025-26 fiscal year, which was estimated to be $27.6 billion initially, and $28.4 billion after accounting for previous legislative actions.”
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top