Global Warming

[Snake]

Originally Posted by alex.s

almost.

there's no reason to punish. punishing people is detrimental. no reason to make it harder to operate a vehicle you already have. positive incentives to switch to clean energy makes sense though.

but.... again. you guys are really focusing hard on individuals so i'm going to say this again... co2 emissions from individuals have no effect on any of this. it is industry. industry produces more than 10x more pollution than individuals.

Let me get further clarification. By "individuals" are you talking about the affects of individuals as a single unit or individuals as a combined group (the sum of all individuals) ?

[Snake]

Originally Posted by alex.s

as i've said before, electric passenger cars are meaningless and inconsequential next to industry.

it's also a ridiculous strawman argument to try to suggest cutting co2 emissions means immediately stopping production of products that cause emission.

cutting co2 emissions means implementing policies that will benefit people who switch to clean energy. not making it illegal to burn fossil fuels.

Just trying to better understand your side of the equation. The best way to understand is to look at both sides.

[alex.s]

by individuals i mean the things you do for yourself. your car. your lawn mower.

by industry, i mean companies. i mean big factories. i mean large power plants. i mean massive international cargo ships.

[corksil]

Alex.s has obviously thought about this a lot. He is a wise man and his facts and reasoning are on point.

"Industry" is the culprit for the bulk of CO2 emission.

I have a lot of machines which burn fossil fuel and consume petro-chemicals and their by-products. I also maintain a lot of machines owned by others. YET -- from my perspective it is very simple. These are very small machines in comparison to those used by multi-national corporations. Even IF one of these small machines is not running properly and producing too much CO2 emission... Even IF the machine is run for a very long period of time in this improper state... Even IF the machine has a 'reputation' and stigma attached to it's use -- It is still a very small machine in comparison to those used by multi-national corporations.

It's a simple case of going after the wrong "bad guy".

People will always need a scapegoat so they can feel good about their own consumption. People will always feel better about their own gross over-consumption when they can point a finger at the [bad] behavior of another. It is true that society and culture in the west are absolutely and entirely infatuated with over-consumption. It is sad, but it is true. Let's not over-complicate things.

I think that a lot of people feel very good about driving an electric car. I think that a lot of those people fail to realize that the power generated FOR their electric car happens in a different place, on a different power grid. Many remain blithely oblivious to the fact that their own "consumption" happens in a different place, at a detriment to the individuals living in that place -- yet it is not their problem because they don't have to witness the procedure. All they must do is witness the result, which is a perceived benefit to them.

Perhaps it's best to consider the different forms of power generation. There is no such thing as "clean" energy. The generation of energy is inherently a dirty process because it takes work to generate energy. Resources are expended in proportion to the potential power output available from them. This is very simple stuff.

I'm trying to remain optimistic about this entire discussion and not make things too complicated. Burning fuel results in exhaust. Exhaust is bad for everyone.

The greatest trick of the petro-chemical industry is to make an individual think that the product they just paid a lot of money for is junk or only designed for a small amount of use before being discarded. This is what funds the wrong industry. This belief is what spurs consumption forward.

[corksil]

Does anyone know what an 'aliphatic hydrocarbon' is?

No, I don't believe that anyone does.

The reason is, because the definition is constantly changing.

We are all fvck3d. That's the simple answer.

Try to retain optimism.

[MLR]

Originally Posted by corksil

Alex.s has obviously thought about this a lot. He is a wise man and his facts and reasoning are on point.

"Industry" is the culprit for the bulk of CO2 emission.

I have a lot of machines which burn fossil fuel and consume petro-chemicals and their by-products. I also maintain a lot of machines owned by others. YET -- from my perspective it is very simple. These are very small machines in comparison to those used by multi-national corporations. Even IF one of these small machines is not running properly and producing too much CO2 emission... Even IF the machine is run for a very long period of time in this improper state... Even IF the machine has a 'reputation' and stigma attached to it's use -- It is still a very small machine in comparison to those used by multi-national corporations.

It's a simple case of going after the wrong "bad guy".

People will always need a scapegoat so they can feel good about their own consumption. People will always feel better about their own gross over-consumption when they can point a finger at the [bad] behavior of another. It is true that society and culture in the west are absolutely and entirely infatuated with over-consumption. It is sad, but it is true. Let's not over-complicate things.

I think that a lot of people feel very good about driving an electric car. I think that a lot of those people fail to realize that the power generated FOR their electric car happens in a different place, on a different power grid. Many remain blithely oblivious to the fact that their own "consumption" happens in a different place, at a detriment to the individuals living in that place -- yet it is not their problem because they don't have to witness the procedure. All they must do is witness the result, which is a perceived benefit to them.

Perhaps it's best to consider the different forms of power generation. There is no such thing as "clean" energy. The generation of energy is inherently a dirty process because it takes work to generate energy. Resources are expended in proportion to the potential power output available from them. This is very simple stuff.

I'm trying to remain optimistic about this entire discussion and not make things too complicated. Burning fuel results in exhaust. Exhaust is bad for everyone.

The greatest trick of the petro-chemical industry is to make an individual think that the product they just paid a lot of money for is junk or only designed for a small amount of use before being discarded. This is what funds the wrong industry. This belief is what spurs consumption forward.

Yeap.

People are stupid.

From my experience with chemistry, which is limited, everything is fine till you mix them in just the right quality, then the reaction expands exponentially.

Research from Permian-Triassic extinction event is an interesting read.

The CO2 from the Siberian Traps burning huge coal reserves seemed to play a part.

I wonder how much coal we burn now compared to that event?

This has been a good discussion boys and girls.

[Snake]

Previously I had asked if anyone had an electric bike or car/clean fuel vehicle to which there was only one person. Someone did point out though that even if you have an electric vehicle you still are probably contributing to Co2 emissions through the power plant that produces your electricity. Which leads me to my next question:
How many of you produce your own energy through either Solar Panels or a Wind Turbine?

[alex.s]

Originally Posted by Snake

Previously I had asked if anyone had an electric bike or car/clean fuel vehicle to which there was only one person. Someone did point out though that even if you have an electric vehicle you still are probably contributing to Co2 emissions through the power plant that produces your electricity. Which leads me to my next question:
How many of you produce your own energy through either Solar Panels or a Wind Turbine?

i live in an apartment, but of my immediate coworkers, roughly 30% of them have solar. i read that the USA recently passed 40gigawatts of solar power production, 10gw of that was added last year.

[Snake]

Originally Posted by alex.s

i live in an apartment, but of my immediate coworkers, roughly 30% of them have solar. i read that the USA recently passed 40gigawatts of solar power production, 10gw of that was added last year.

Well every little bit helps and that's a good start.

[greg737]

Told you all on page 1 of this thread that Man-Caused-Global-Warming was going to be the world's next great religion.

[Snake]

Originally Posted by greg737

Told you all on page 1 of this thread that Man-Caused-Global-Warming was going to be the world's next great religion.

Amen brotha' you are so right!

[CC Cowboy]

My globe only gets warm when I put the light on inside it. So, I think the warmth must be coming from inner earth.

[MLR]

Originally Posted by greg737

Told you all on page 1 of this thread that Man-Caused-Global-Warming was going to be the world's next great religion.

I personally don't like the concerns of people about the environment being labelled "as the next religion".

Climatology has everything to with science and the collection of data to form educated assumptions and facts from researching the hard data.

Religion is about controlling population through an ideological belief system, where fact and evidence doesn't play a part.

If you are to stupid to understand science, by all means, try religion.

[Snake]

Why do some people have to revert to name calling?

[corksil]

Our species has already begun mining our land fills.

You know you've got a problem when you're literally picking through your own poo to try and find some un-digested nutrition to sustain your existence.

Two new subdivisions are going in right down the street. The roads here already cannot handle the current amount of traffic. Yet somehow a few thousand MORE people will suddenly populating the area near my home. Over-population is the problem, and as per that movie "idiocracy" --- the breeding doesn't typically take place between the brightest individuals.

I understand that I come off as a major as$hole for stating this inconvenient truth and having the opinion that people should stop having kids. However, from a scientific standpoint -- it's the only real solution.

There are large diesel generators in existence that burn extremely crude forms and mixtures of waste oil and "used" petrochemicals. That is a way to turn a waste product into usable energy -- but its backwards logic because if there weren't people consuming that much energy we would not have a need for it's production and the resulting carbon emissions.

We all know what a carbon "footprint" is. Suppose I were to fly to europe once a week to spend time with a romantic interest. Would that be considered a carbon "cockprint?" In all seriousness, most people are simply unaware of how their behavior affects the planet.

Reminds me of the ouroboros... the snake eating it's tail.

All of this is a very good discussion.

[MLR]

Originally Posted by Snake

Why do some people have to revert to name calling?

I simply stated at the end of my post that I believe you need to be pretty stupid to believe in religion.

My statement was not pointed at anyone in particular.

If you would like to start a thread about religion "fill ya boots", as I was brought up in the Catholic school system and religion was a topic that had more time allocated to it than science, I think I could bring some good points to the topic, I've also spent some time researching Islam, Judaism and other beliefs to see how they originated and also how they reflect on each other and the issues that have been caused.

If I offened you by my blunt manner and my personal views, then I suggest you disregard my posts in the future, I would really hate to hurt your feelings.

[Flying]

Originally Posted by corksil

Two new subdivisions are going in right down the street. The roads here already cannot handle the current amount of traffic. Yet somehow a few thousand MORE people will suddenly populating the area near my home. Over-population is the problem, and as per that movie "idiocracy" --- the breeding doesn't typically take place between the brightest individuals.

I understand that I come off as a major as$hole for stating this inconvenient truth and having the opinion that people should stop having kids. However, from a scientific standpoint -- it's the only real solution.

Ehhh.. human society still has room to work with for the near future. Presently Japan has 10x the population density of the USA, while at the same time using only 60% of the energy that we do per capita.

Overpopulation and the eugenic assumption of Idiocracy should not be equated together.

[greg737]

Originally Posted by MLR

I personally don't like the concerns of people about the environment being labelled "as the next religion".

Climatology has everything to with science and the collection of data to form educated assumptions and facts from researching the hard data.

Religion is about controlling population through an ideological belief system, where fact and evidence doesn't play a part.

If you are to stupid to understand science, by all means, try religion.

See? that's what I'm pointing at. people have no sense of humor about their religion, even referring to their religion as a "religion" is offensive to them.

there are things we call "facts" which are just bits of information, then there are things we call "beliefs" which are also just bits of information. both "facts" and "beliefs" can be either true or absolute bullcrap, or anywhere in between. the only real difference between the two is that a belief is held in a position of primacy within the person's mind, and when placed in that high position it becomes more than just a piece of information, it becomes a part of that person's identity, part of his/her "belief system" (otherwise known as a "religion").

a religion is simply a bunch of beliefs rolled up in a narrative story (and due to the nature of beliefs this story isn't actually required to make any real sense, for evidence of this just look at the back-story/origin story of any religion). a belief is nothing more than a piece of information (correct or incorrect, truth or absolute bullshit, doesn't matter) that is held in a place of primacy a person's mind. that's why we (humanity) begin religious indoctrination/brainwashing early with our children, to install bits of information (true or otherwise) into positions of primacy within their minds.

we do this because we know that we need to craft our next generation into societally responsible, useful and productive people. it's an instinct to want to produce people who will be not only useful and socially proper, but we also want the comfort of having the next generation also believing like us. this instinct is least harmful when you're choosing to pass on a reformed (i.e. relatively non-warlike) religion, like Judaism, Buddhism or one of the major Christian denominations because reformed religions are able to peacefully and productively co-exist with and within the governmental apparatus of a modern secular state. with an un-reformed religion you have one that sees itself as something that must supplant, or take over and run, the society in question. the operational tenets of an un-reformed religion demand that it become the government, that it institute a theocracy (theocratic rule).

[MLR]

If you think reformed religion is enlightened and divorced from state you are dreaming.

I live in one of the most multicultural countries on earth, but in Australia, they say prayers in parliment.

http://blogs.usyd.edu.au/cru/2012/08...and_the_1.html

This is a blatent kick in the face to other religious beliefs as well as those of us who don't belief in fairytales.

To be a functional member of a society you don't need religion, you need to follow the laws of the land and not be a dick to other people.

People think ethics and religion are one in the same, but ethics was around before religion, religion just took ethics and shaped it to suit their own agenda.

Look at the 10 commandments, the first 4 are religious vomit, the last 6 is about what is expected from someone to be a functional member of society.

If you remove the first 4 you will still have a functional society.

This is my final say on religion in this thread, I am enjoying the debates about the climate to much to derail the thread.

On topic.

There has been some talk on TV about the governments looking at the correspondence between climate change, famine and war latley, interesting times indeed.

[allanoue]

I have faith in the scientific method.

principles and procedures for the systematic pursuit of knowledge involving the recognition and formulation of a problem, the collection of data through observation and experiment, and the formulation and testing of hypotheses

I would not call that religion but if you want to I'm fine with that.

[greg737]

Originally Posted by MLR

If you think reformed religion is enlightened and divogrced from state you are dreaming.

I live in one of the most multicultural countries on earth, but in Australia, they say prayers in parliment.

http://blogs.usyd.edu.au/cru/2012/08...and_the_1.html

This is a blatent kick in the face to other religious beliefs as well as those of us who don't belief in fairytales.

To be a functional member of a society you don't need religion, you need to follow the laws of the land and not be a dick to other people.

People think ethics and religion are one in the same, but ethics was around before religion, religion just took ethics and shaped it to suit their own agenda.

Look at the 10 commandments, the first 4 are religious vomit, the last 6 is about what is expected from someone to be a functional member of society.

If you remove the first 4 you will still have a functional society.

This is my final say on religion in this thread, I am enjoying the debates about the climate to much to derail the thread.

On topic.

There has been some talk on TV about the governments looking at the correspondence between climate change, famine and war latley, interesting times indeed.

Wow! Look at you go! I don't care about your issues with religion (really, I couldn't​ care less). All I did was describe reformed religions as being more compatible with modern secular civilization/government.

[Alex]

/closed