April 2025 Discussion/Obs

[Sundog]

 

7 minutes ago, cleetussnow said:

Then we have about 500 to 750K 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!

I think you mean 750 million years, not thousands. 

BTW ideally what we do is just keep the average climate we had over the last couple thousand years. We developed civilization during these years and our cities are all built on a coastline that needs to be maintained, because over a billion people live within a couple miles of the coast.

I think it would cost muuuuuuuuuuch more money dealing with moving massive cities and huge amounts of people rather than just maintaining the climate we had so that they don't get flooded out.  

[cleetussnow]

11 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

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.

 

except the population is growing in excess of 8 billion.  Yes we have new disease threats, and also ways to mitigate them, and increasingly so.  Flawed argument dude.  

[cleetussnow]

9 minutes ago, Sundog said:

 

I think you mean 750 million years, not thousands. 

BTW ideally what we do is just keep the average climate we had over the last couple thousand years. We developed civilization during these years and our cities are all built on a coastline that needs to be maintained, because over a billion people live within a couple miles of the coast.

I think it would cost muuuuuuuuuuch more money dealing with moving massive cities and huge amounts of people rather than just maintaining the climate we had so that they don't get flooded out.  

yeah millions  woops.  I'll edit my post

 

[cleetussnow]

12 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

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.

 

organic farming is about 30% productive vs. industrial farming.  Organic is wholly unsustainable for the global population.  Agree on the pollinators tho.  thats effed up and a threat.  the bugs are dying. 

[nycwinter]

starting to feel very uncomfortable walking in this bright sunshine not sure how long i will be able to wear a hoodie...

[LibertyBell]

20 minutes ago, cleetussnow said:

organic farming is about 30% productive vs. industrial farming.  Organic is wholly unsustainable for the global population.  Agree on the pollinators tho.  thats effed up and a threat.  the bugs are dying. 

The problem goes back to the population of course.  We never should have let it hit 8 billion.

But on a side note, I've been reading up about more efficient ways to do farming to where we can feed more people without damaging the environment.  It would have to be a transition of course.

It involves no till farming and advanced nutrient retention methods that limit runoff.

[LibertyBell]

10 minutes ago, nycwinter said:

starting to feel very uncomfortable walking in this bright sunshine not sure how long i will be able to wear a hoodie...

you're a vampire dude

why do you wear a hoodie?

do you have some sort of allergy to sunshine?

[LibertyBell]

24 minutes ago, cleetussnow said:

except the population is growing in excess of 8 billion.  Yes we have new disease threats, and also ways to mitigate them, and increasingly so.  Flawed argument dude.  

the population growing like that isn't a good thing though, it causes a bunch of other issues.  But it's more of a developing world problem rather than us since we've managed to balance out our population.

 

[Brian5671]

72 here and sunny-another beauty

[IrishRob17]

78/51 under a hot sun

[ForestHillWx]

What a read… Back to the weather; it’s perfect outside during my lunch break.

Too bad I’m headed back inside to keep grinding away in this annoying capitalist society propped up on electricity generated largely by the burning of natural gas and coal…but I digress. 

[Sundog]

32 minutes ago, ForestHillWx said:

What a read… Back to the weather; it’s perfect outside during my lunch break.

Too bad I’m headed back inside to keep grinding away in this annoying capitalist society propped up on electricity generated largely by the burning of natural gas and coal…but I digress. 

The truth is without fossil fuels we would not have our modern civilization. And capitalism is by far the best system humanity has ever conceived (with a realistic chance of being implemented) to help the most people overall. 

But now we really need to do something about fossil fuels' side effects. Burying our heads in the sand won't make the problem go away. And hoping for the world to unite in some kumbaya moment and move full steam ahead with renewables overnight isn't happening either. 

Stratospheric aerosols all the way! Doing nothing is not an option and this is a global prolem, not a country one. We should release the aerosols. If countries can release massive amounts of greenhouse gases, then we can release aerosols. What's the difference? We know both alter the climate. So why are greenhouse gases ok to spew but not aerosols?

I say let's do it. 

 

[jm1220]

2 hours ago, cleetussnow said:

yeah millions  woops.  I'll edit my post

 

The Sun fuses 600 million tons of hydrogen to helium every second and the helium accumulates like ash in the core. The core gradually shrinks as there’s less hydrogen to burn, but as it shrinks it heats up, and the reaction rate/energy output from the Sun increases and over time the outer envelope of the Sun expands. Interesting stuff. 600 million tons sounds like a lot until you realize the Earth is basically a dot compared to the Sun. 

[jm1220]

In Long Beach today-nice and around 60 but would rather be at home where it’s 75. 

[LibertyBell]

57 minutes ago, Sundog said:

The truth is without fossil fuels we would not have our modern civilization. And capitalism is by far the best system humanity has ever conceived (with a realistic chance of being implemented) to help the most people overall. 

But now we really need to do something about fossil fuels' side effects. Burying our heads in the sand won't make the problem go away. And hoping for the world to unite in some kumbaya moment and move full steam ahead with renewables overnight isn't happening either. 

Stratospheric aerosols all the way! Doing nothing is not an option and this is a global prolem, not a country one. We should release the aerosols. If countries can release massive amounts of greenhouse gases, then we can release aerosols. What's the difference? We know both alter the climate. So why are greenhouse gases ok to spew but not aerosols?

I say let's do it. 

 

extreme capitalism becomes oligarchy (as we are seeing now).

every system becomes corrupt eventually and needs to be cleaned out and a reboot becomes necessary.

The main problem with a for profit system is it does not address the harms that corporations do to the environment or to society as a whole.  Benefit capitalism addresses that by making companies accountable not just to shareholders but to the environment and to society as a whole.  The Nordic nations do that well and have a longer life expectancy and far better health and environment because of it.

[LibertyBell]

Just now, jm1220 said:

In Long Beach today-nice and around 60 but would rather be at home where it’s 75. 

really? wow it's 70 here just a few miles north.

[cleetussnow]

2 hours ago, LibertyBell said:

The problem goes back to the population of course.  We never should have let it hit 8 billion.

But on a side note, I've been reading up about more efficient ways to do farming to where we can feed more people without damaging the environment.  It would have to be a transition of course.

It involves no till farming and advanced nutrient retention methods that limit runoff.

A lot of 'industrial' farming has gone no till actually.  

[cleetussnow]

15 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

extreme capitalism becomes oligarchy (as we are seeing now).

every system becomes corrupt eventually and needs to be cleaned out and a reboot becomes necessary.

The main problem with a for profit system is it does not address the harms that corporations do to the environment or to society as a whole.  Benefit capitalism addresses that by making companies accountable not just to shareholders but to the environment and to society as a whole.  The Nordic nations do that well and have a longer life expectancy and far better health and environment because of it.

Uh...you should see what socialism does to the environment...Chernobyl anyone?  I'vealso seen eastern Europe prior to the wall coming down and - and China are not exactly Thunberg adherents.  The State comes before all else and no fs given about climate.  They are building coal plants still like no other place on earth!  its gross in China.  I've been there too.    

[LibertyBell]

14 minutes ago, cleetussnow said:

Uh...you should see what socialism does to the environment...Chernobyl anyone?  I'vealso seen eastern Europe prior to the wall coming down and - and China are not exactly Thunberg adherents.  The State comes before all else and no fs given about climate.  They are building coal plants still like no other place on earth!  its gross in China.  I've been there too.    

The Soviet Union was horrible but they weren't even remotely close to socialism. China is also pretty bad but not anywhere close to the system I envision.

The Nordic nations are at the top of every benchmark, including life expectancy.  Those are the best, and they don't use corrupt crony capitalism like this cesspool of a nation does.  A mixed economy is the best system.

The US is very mediocre in every way.

[LibertyBell]

16 minutes ago, cleetussnow said:

A lot of 'industrial' farming has gone no till actually.  

they need to stop or greatly limit the use of fertilizers and pesticides.

Pesticides are making their way into our water systems and fertilizers are going into the waterways and causing toxic algae blooms.

[FPizz]

81, beautiful.  Wish these days could have been the weekend, but working on the deck isn't too terrible

[LibertyBell]

13 minutes ago, FPizz said:

81, beautiful.  Wish these days could have been the weekend, but working on the deck isn't too terrible

wow you guys are much warmer, it's only gotten up to 71 here

 

[Brian5671]

1 minute ago, LibertyBell said:

wow you guys are much warmer, it's only gotten up to 71 here

 

inland and away from the sea breeze

[LibertyBell]

7 minutes ago, Brian5671 said:

inland and away from the sea breeze

But at least not Long Beach which is 10 degrees colder than we are.

Living on a barrier island must be a nightmare lol.

Sucks during the cold season and sucks during the warm season.

[LibertyBell]

24 minutes ago, FPizz said:

81, beautiful.  Wish these days could have been the weekend, but working on the deck isn't too terrible

Such an interesting dichotomy

You - 81

Me- 71

JM - 61

(of course he's not in Long Beach right now but that's what he said the temperature is there right now.)

[IrishRob17]

84 for the high, down to 82 now.

[Brian5671]

2 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

But at least not Long Beach which is 10 degrees colder than we are.

Living on a barrier island must be a nightmare lol.

Sucks during the cold season and sucks during the warm season.

it's good from mid June to October but otherwise I agree

[LibertyBell]

2 minutes ago, IrishRob17 said:

84 for the high, down to 82 now.

Your hottest day so far this year, Rob?

 

[LongBeachSurfFreak]

10 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

But at least not Long Beach which is 10 degrees colder than we are.

Living on a barrier island must be a nightmare lol.

Sucks during the cold season and sucks during the warm season.

There’s nothing better then walking out of your apartment and being on the beach. If I were wealthy I would have a lb condo, and a mountain house at 2,500’ in the southern greens. 

[Sundog]

9 minutes ago, LongBeachSurfFreak said:

There’s nothing better then walking out of your apartment and being on the beach. If I were wealthy I would have a lb condo, and a mountain house at 2,500’ in the southern greens. 

The seabreeze is a beautiful thing when inland they are broiling.