Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,901
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    WichitaChiefSam
    Newest Member
    WichitaChiefSam
    Joined

April 2025 Discussion/Obs


Rjay
 Share

Recommended Posts

13 hours ago, MANDA said:

100% agree.  The planet is what about 4.5 billion years old, give or take a half billion.  Just when exactly was the climate not changing?

To think we're going to change anything by driving around in plug in cars and silencing cow farts is absurd.  Experiments to dim sunlight?

Yeah, that will end well.

In case anybody hasn't figured out, I am a conservative.  However, a simple graph indicates an anomalous increase in temperatures coinciding with the industrialization.  Since we can't predict weather 5 days in advance, there is no one model that can ever tell us conclusively that the global warming is or isn't a result of the emission of greenhouse gases.  Before it became fashionable to climb aboard the global warming train, there were a few scientists as early as the 1970s, modeling and theorizing that this was occurring.  While we cannot in practical terms eliminate fossil fuels immediately, there needs to be a long term energy plan, even if that means we risk flooding out most major coastal cities (from melting ice caps) to the point of massive population relocation, which will be extremely costly, and in the meantime, many deaths from increased flooding.  It won't be my problem, since I'll be long gone.  As for the cows, silly extremists haven't done the math to compare pre-European North America with its massive buffalo population.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Dark Star said:

In case anybody hasn't figured out, I am a conservative.  However, a simple graph indicates an anomalous increase in temperatures coinciding with the industrialization.  Since we can't predict weather 5 days in advance, there is no one model that can ever tell us conclusively that the global warming is or isn't a result of the emission of greenhouse gases.  Before it became fashionable to climb aboard the global warming train, there were a few scientists as early as the 1970s, modeling and theorizing that this was occurring.  While we cannot in practical terms eliminate fossil fuels immediately, there needs to be a long term energy plan, even if that means we risk flooding out most major coastal cities (from melting ice caps) to the point of massive population relocation, which will be extremely costly, and in the meantime, many deaths from increased flooding.  It won't be my problem, since I'll be long gone.  As for the cows, silly extremists haven't done the math to compare pre-European North America with its massive buffalo population.  

There is a solution for the cows, feed them lemongrass.  It's healthier for them and reduces methane emissions considerably.

We could all improve our diets, including the animals we raise.

Likely those buffalo you mentioned had a far better diet.  The artificial crap we consume isn't good for us as you can see an increase in various types of illnesses (cancer, autoimmune diseases, IBS, obesity, diabetes, food allergies, hyperactivity, etc.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Dark Star said:

In case anybody hasn't figured out, I am a conservative.  However, a simple graph indicates an anomalous increase in temperatures coinciding with the industrialization.  Since we can't predict weather 5 days in advance, there is no one model that can ever tell us conclusively that the global warming is or isn't a result of the emission of greenhouse gases.  Before it became fashionable to climb aboard the global warming train, there were a few scientists as early as the 1970s, modeling and theorizing that this was occurring.  While we cannot in practical terms eliminate fossil fuels immediately, there needs to be a long term energy plan, even if that means we risk flooding out most major coastal cities (from melting ice caps) to the point of massive population relocation, which will be extremely costly, and in the meantime, many deaths from increased flooding.  It won't be my problem, since I'll be long gone.  As for the cows, silly extremists haven't done the math to compare pre-European North America with its massive buffalo population.  

Industrialization is also a reason why we live longer lives.  The hockey stick charts that get posted all the time pretty much go hand in hand to the average lifespan for humans if you lay them on top of each other and also with the global population charts.  Maybe one day we will go back to the early 1800s where all those charts still line up almost perfectly, but we only live until age 30 and we are down to 1 billion people on Earth.    

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, FPizz said:

Industrialization is also a reason why we live longer lives.  The hockey stick charts that get posted all the time pretty much go hand in hand to the average lifespan for humans if you lay them on top of each other and also with the global population charts.  Maybe one day we will go back to the early 1800s where all those charts still line up almost perfectly, but we only live until age 30 and we are down to 1 billion people on Earth.    

1 billion would probably be far better for the high level of resource consumption we have.

At any rate, we'll have to cap population growth somewhere around 10-11 billion according to most studies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

1 billion would probably be far better for the high level of resource consumption we have.

At any rate, we'll have to cap population growth somewhere around 10-11 billion according to most studies.

Birth rate falling in most 1st world countries...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, FPizz said:

Industrialization is also a reason why we live longer lives.  The hockey stick charts that get posted all the time pretty much go hand in hand to the average lifespan for humans if you lay them on top of each other and also with the global population charts.  Maybe one day we will go back to the early 1800s where all those charts still line up almost perfectly, but we only live until age 30 and we are down to 1 billion people on Earth.    

We have actually been reducing that trend in the US. Overdose deaths in young people is one major factor, but the real catalyst has been life style. Many Americans are sedentary and have awful diets. 
Now global warming is rapidly accelerating and life expectancy is stagnant or decreasing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LibertyBell said:

I wonder how many people know that the planet was completely uninhabitable throughout most of its history.

Yeah.  Then cow farts and industry came along and changed everything.  This area was once covered in a glacier and it melted and receded. No humans or industry then.  To each his own I guess.

No denying planet has warmed over the past 20-30 years but not human induced.  Time will tell but most of us here today could welll be on the other side of the grass by then.

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Weenie 1
  • Crap 1
  • 100% 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, MANDA said:

Yeah.  Then cow farts and industry came along and changed everything.  This area was once covered in a glacier and it melted and receded. No humans or industry then.  To each his own I guess.

No denying planet has warmed over the past 20-30 years but not human induced.

No further comment on this from me.  Not going to derail the thread.

Thank you, good to see some maturity for once. We have a climate change thread. I, and others are happy to debate you over there. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, LongBeachSurfFreak said:

Thank you, good to see some maturity for once. We have a climate change thread. I, and others are happy to debate you over there. 

Sorry no.  I tend to not spend much time on things I have no control over.

As it is I do my part by living in NJ.  I am forced to carry bags into a grocery store and drink from paper straws.  That should help things a bit.

  • Haha 3
  • clap 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, MANDA said:

Yeah.  Then cow farts and industry came along and changed everything.  This area was once covered in a glacier and it melted and receded. No humans or industry then.  To each his own I guess.

No denying planet has warmed over the past 20-30 years but not human induced.  Time will tell but most of us here today could welll be on the other side of the grass by then.

 

do you really think it's not because we're putting large quantities of a gas that traps outgoing longwave radiation into the atmosphere

  • Weenie 1
  • Crap 1
  • 100% 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dark Star said:

In case anybody hasn't figured out, I am a conservative.  However, a simple graph indicates an anomalous increase in temperatures coinciding with the industrialization.  Since we can't predict weather 5 days in advance, there is no one model that can ever tell us conclusively that the global warming is or isn't a result of the emission of greenhouse gases.

There is a difference between statistical and deterministc models. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, MANDA said:

Yeah.  Then cow farts and industry came along and changed everything.  This area was once covered in a glacier and it melted and receded. No humans or industry then.  To each his own I guess.

No denying planet has warmed over the past 20-30 years but not human induced.  Time will tell but most of us here today could welll be on the other side of the grass by then.

 

 

Screen Shot 2025-04-24 at 11.29.15 AM.png

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, FPizz said:

Industrialization is also a reason why we live longer lives.  The hockey stick charts that get posted all the time pretty much go hand in hand to the average lifespan for humans if you lay them on top of each other and also with the global population charts.  Maybe one day we will go back to the early 1800s where all those charts still line up almost perfectly, but we only live until age 30 and we are down to 1 billion people on Earth.    

It's an interesting point.  There were constant severe and crippling famines prior to industrialization that wiped out entire cultures throughout millennia of human history.  Humans/homo sapiens tend to be less prosperous and less prolific during cold periods, and more prosperous during warm periods, and it's never been more the case than right now.  In fact, you could argue that the climate prior to industrialization was hostile to human prosperity, and that industrialization mitigated climate hostility to an extraordinary degree.  Humans have proved adaptable and resilient (there was a point in deep history where there supposedly less than 10K of our ancestors remained for example), so we will likely manage earths heating until the next Milankovitch cycle set to kick off in about 10 to 15 thousand years from now.  Ice ages tend to be killers, so that is a bigger threat to humanity vs. the CC now - nothing grows on ice.  Then we have about 500 to 750mm years to survive through until the earth becomes entirely uninhabitable by any life forms due to the sun's increasing size and radiance.  It will boil off the atmosphere and oceans, etc.  Life on earth will only span about 1/3 of it's history.  The only thing that will get mankind through these events is even more extraordinary technology - including interstellar type stuff.  None of the rocks within the Kuiper Belt will be options.   

So in terms of climate, the long term prospects for humans depend on getting through the forthcoming ice age cycles (there are dozens remaining before the curtain closes) and then getting off this rock.  By comparison, agio climate change affects are a mere river crossing.  It may be that industrialization and technology are the only way humans would ever stand a chance long term, so it's like a catch 22.  

Of course, any number of things can wipe us out in the meantime - disease, nuclear war, a space rock, incredible volcanism...I worry more about those esp. for within my lifetime, remote as some of them are. 

Good luck!

  • Thanks 1
  • 100% 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, forkyfork said:

do you really think it's not because we're putting large quantities of a gas that traps outgoing longwave radiation into the atmosphere

I don't get what is so hard to understand. 

1 hour ago, FPizz said:

Industrialization is also a reason why we live longer lives.  The hockey stick charts that get posted all the time pretty much go hand in hand to the average lifespan for humans if you lay them on top of each other and also with the global population charts.  Maybe one day we will go back to the early 1800s where all those charts still line up almost perfectly, but we only live until age 30 and we are down to 1 billion people on Earth.    

I don't like average lifespan being used because high infant mortality rate in the past dragged down their averages. if you made it past childhood you would easily make it into your 60s and 70s and even 80s, even in ancient times. 

The only difference industrialization made to our lifespans is give us hospitals and medicine so that babies don't die. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, forkyfork said:

do you really think it's not because we're putting large quantities of a gas that traps outgoing longwave radiation into the atmosphere

idk how its not blatantly obvious this is human induced. yes the climate has warmed previously to humankind... but look at any statistical measurement post industrialization to see how rapid the acceleration of global warming has become. its not a little cute coincidence 

  • Like 2
  • 100% 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Sundog said:

I don't get what is so hard to understand. 

I don't like average lifespan being used because high infant mortality rate in the past dragged down their averages. if you made it past childhood you would easily make it into your 60s and 70s and even 80s, even in ancient times. 

The only difference industrialization made to our lifespans is give us hospitals and medicine so that babies don't die. 

we're also much more diseased and unhealthy than we were before, in spite of our longer lifespans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Sundog said:

I don't get what is so hard to understand. 

I don't like average lifespan being used because high infant mortality rate in the past dragged down their averages. if you made it past childhood you would easily make it into your 60s and 70s and even 80s, even in ancient times. 

The only difference industrialization made to our lifespans is give us hospitals and medicine so that babies don't die. 

Modern agriculture and global transportation are huge factors,  You could argue industrialization began when humans began farming and genetically modify crops through selective breeding thousands of years ago.  Maybe a stretch, but populations started to take off then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

we're also much more diseased and unhealthy than we were before, in spite of our longer lifespans.

not even close.  We used to die of tooth infections and scratches.  A zit could kill you in the middle ages, nevermind poxes and malnutrition.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, cleetussnow said:

not even close.  We used to die of tooth infections and scratches.  A zit could kill you in the middle ages, nevermind poxes and malnutrition.  

We're not talking about childhood crap, we're talking about the raging diabetes epidemic, food allergies, rising cancer rates (especially among young people.)

None of those other things matter anymore, what we have to deal with now is much worse.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, cleetussnow said:

Modern agriculture and global transportation are huge factors,  You could argue industrialization began when humans began farming and genetically modify crops through selective breeding thousands of years ago.  Maybe a stretch, but populations started to take off then.

Yes and thats all unsustainable.  It was only supposed to be a stop gap measure.  Developing countries are switching back to organic farming because of how the so-called green revolution destroyed the nutrients in the soil via destructive fertilizers and pesticides are responsible for the mass extinction of pollinators.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...