| Author |
Topic: Global Warming |
355 replies
|
|
|
Must be global warming.
edit: the odds of my winning the next race, perhaps.
|
|
|
|
Whilst I don't agree with everything Sam is saying, it frustrates me that nowadays we have certain taboo subjects that cannot be discussed.
For the record the part I agree with Sam on is that greedy people will exacerbate the dangers and attempt to make a huge profit out of the "solutions" to Global warming.
I see it quite similarly to cancer - in that it will seemingly never be cured or solved, and yet millionaires and billionaires continue to profit from that hope of a cure, year in, year out.
What is frustrating as I say, not just here of course but it seems more ingrained in society as a whole - The unwillingness to discuss certain topics that live in a "safe space", where they cannot be touched. I get that people disagree with Sam. But most of you refuted what he said by saying "Are you a scientist? Do you have been published in medical journals? No you're an idiot". Everyone seems quite happy to shut down the debate by insulting, and denigrating - and it turns into a mob of people patting themselves on the back for effectively censoring a discussion.
I get that some of you think what he says should be censored and shouted down as it does not support the scientific research we have, and that spreading misinformation isn't a good thing. But the only people you convince to agree with you when you rebutt people in this style are the people who haven't made up their mind, but are too scared of also being branded idiots.
It's the same with discussing other touchy subjects such as:
Gender/Sex
COVID
Trump
To name a few. If you present a viewpoint that isn't the "already accepted" viewpoints on any of the above subjects, you will find that people will argue with you, but the words they use are intended to end the debate - usually through excessive uses of labels like racist, or conspiracy theorist, or willfull ignorant. The argument is always dismissed like that, and no actual discussion takes place.
__________________________________
Lastly I think it's completely unfair to insult and disparage people for what they believe.
a) There is so much information + misinformation out there on the internet nowadays - can you blame some people for drawing different conclusions from you? (Even if they are the wrong conclusions?)
b) Debating ideas and theories (especially opposing theories) is incredibly important to how we go about solving problems and future problems. It's how we either come to consensus, or compromise the best we can.
Shutting down debate by holding the "idiot hammer" above the heads of anyone daring to think differently or ask questions or engage in the discussion naturally just gets 90% of the people out of the way, because for them it won't be worth the price of being insulted for "not knowing" the "obvious science" or "obvious objective truth."
One last thing - if you do seek to protect people from certain ideas - it is intellectually presumptuous that they would not be smart enough to draw well informed opinions.
|
|
|
|
|
#63 posted Oct 23rd 2021, 20:24:34 (last edited Oct 23rd 2021, 20:26:37 by Denny Holt)
|
Quote
|
Very well said, Armin!
You are dead on target.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#64 posted Oct 23rd 2021, 23:13:06
|
Quote
|
Spot on Armin. Very well articulated with zero aggression or denigrating of those involved.
Thanks mate, nice to know, someone else thinks as I do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#65 posted Oct 23rd 2021, 23:19:12
|
Quote
|
Quote ( Armin van Hülkenburg @ October 23rd 2021,02:42:07 ) zero aggression
Quote ( Roy Mitchell @ October 22nd 2021,18:56:45 ) No thanks you're too ugly. :)
Sorry, you are disqualified. This is an outrageous insult with political, religious and moral implications that just the most devious minds would even think about!
Absolutely outrageous and appalling behaviour from you! Just unbelievable! Out of this world.
:P
|
|
|
|
|
|
#66 posted Oct 23rd 2021, 23:32:42 (last edited Oct 23rd 2021, 23:33:25 by Daryl Gee)
|
Quote
|
Quote ( Armin van Hülkenburg @ October 23rd 2021,02:42:07 ) Lastly I think it's completely unfair to insult and disparage people for what they believe. No, no, no, ffs, this is madness.
If you believe in stupid shit, I'm going to insult you and disparage you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#67 posted Oct 23rd 2021, 23:34:06
|
Quote
|
Oups not at all.
Did you never heard about special relativity ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#68 posted Oct 23rd 2021, 23:35:23
|
Quote
|
|
|
|
|
|
#69 posted Oct 23rd 2021, 23:36:51
|
Quote
|
I dont know, I tried to answer to a post but dont succeed
|
|
|
|
|
|
#70 posted Oct 23rd 2021, 23:36:51
|
Quote
|
I wanna try too.
Like this?
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Joel Trekane @ October 23rd 2021,23:36:51 )
I dont know, I tried to answer to a post but dont succeed
I tried :(
YES!
|
|
|
|
I just wanted to that :
Sam
"The sun is a ball of fuel, and it converts hydrogen to helium through nuclear fusion.
As the hydrogen converts to helium, it gets condensed into less space, while the mass stays mostly the same."
and then reply :
Oups not at all.
Did you never heard about special relativity ?
But i deleted some quote and not the good one probably
|
|
|
|
|
|
#73 posted Oct 24th 2021, 02:04:31
|
Quote
|
Quote ( Daryl Gee @ October 23rd 2021,23:32:42 ) No, no, no, ffs, this is madness.
If you believe in stupid shit, I'm going to insult you and disparage you. So I should call you a willfully ignorant idiot, just because I can see what you refuse to?
Quote ( Joel Trekane @ October 23rd 2021,23:38:18 ) Did you never heard about special relativity ? The way your question is phrased, I'm not sure how to answer it. Shall I say "Yes I've heard" or shall I say "no, I've not never heard?"
Either way: Special relativity is about moving near the speed of light.
I'm not sure how you're trying to apply that to the sun, which is "stationary" in the center of our solar system? I use quotes, because as Einstein pointed out: being stationary is relative also.
Did you ever hear of a Bose Einstein Condensate Joel?
So, if the Sun is not a ball of fuel, how do you explain the heat and other forms of energy the Sun is giving off? What do you think the Sun is made up of, if not Hydrogen and Helium?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#74 posted Oct 24th 2021, 02:50:54
|
Quote
|
Spatial relativity or Special relativity?
Even the 'spatial relativity' of the earth to the sun is a variable.
Very 'Special relativity': where we can exist in the universe because of the relative relationship. ie perfect distance from the sun.
The sun is doing it's thing and bombarding the space around it with every kind of 'ray' you care to look for. Nothing new but what is new, is the increase in atmospheric gases that trap the heat (rays) with-in our atmosphere. Like putting a lid on a pot of boiling pasta, the heat rises very quickly and boils over. The gases are like the lid.
These things were known in the 1960's. However, with time 40 -50 - 60 years, truth about the practices of corporations, government officials and politicians has come to light. They lied then, they lie to keep their jobs and the lie to placate the people.
The media is manipulated and more so, are 'used' to cause a reaction to each and every detail. It's called click bait today, it was shock headlines when people read newspapers. You can still find examples of that today in the supermarket aisle. lol
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Roy Mitchell @ October 24th 2021,02:50:54 ) but what is new, is the increase in atmospheric gases that trap the heat Where did this new gas come from? Because as far as I know: there has been very little in the way of bombardment from space. The CO2 from fossil fuels isn't new: it was in the air previously, before going into plants and animals, and ultimately being turned into fossils.
If you have a source that generates actually new gas, I'd like to know about it. Otherwise: it is the same gas we've previously had on Earth, when temperatures were higher, and we didn't get a runaway greenhouse effect.
Quote ( Roy Mitchell @ October 24th 2021,02:50:54 ) The media is manipulated and more so, are 'used' to cause a reaction to each and every detail. It's called click bait today, it was shock headlines when people read newspapers. You can still find examples of that today in the supermarket aisle. I agree, and this misrepresentation is what I mean when I say hoax.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#76 posted Oct 24th 2021, 04:55:27
|
Quote
|
Don't go weird on me, Sam. You know that those gases (CO2/methane/nitrogen etc) were here already, as you stated.
"The CO2 from fossil fuels isn't new: it was in the air previously, before going into plants and animals, and ultimately being turned into fossils".
They were sequestered in frozen 'tundra' they were in the ground as fossils (oil/natural gas /methane) and they were trapped in the Arctic and the Antarctic in the ice and glaciers' and trees even in minerals like coal. We chose to develop and extract the resources for consumption, thereby releasing the 'gases' to our atmosphere by virtue of consumption. Beginning a closed loop of altered weather and temperature changes that create the weather you get and further enables the release of those trapped gases.
Increased surface temperatures at sea level and in the Himalaya's.. (a point of concern should you care to research this) Both are creating anomalies in the surrounding atmosphere and aquatic areas in the oceans and affects the atmosphere of the world.
A natural balance of resources and ecology led to all life being here. Mother nature will heal or actually it will adapt, we won't. All we've done, is throw the balance 'out of sync' and we are going to hell in a hand basket.
The Arctic and Antarctic were the refrigerators of the world. The ocean currents travelled in patterns that spread warmth and cold. I speak in the past tense, because they are different than they were in the recent past times... like 1950! Only 70 years ago, but much has changed in the natural physical world since then. Ask your grandfather.
Frankly, I think it audacious to believe we can temper the outcome and ludicrous that we can reverse it. How would we cool down the planet earth? We may postpone the inevitable if we don't kill each other first.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#77 posted Oct 24th 2021, 06:18:22
|
Quote
|
Quote ( Roy Mitchell @ October 24th 2021,04:55:27 ) Beginning a closed loop of altered weather and temperature changes that create the weather you get and further enables the release of those trapped gases. I was with you right up to the point you said that.
That part is supposition, which I don't agree with, for the simple reason that: BEFORE they were fossils: they were in the air.
As for "anomalies", that's conjecture based upon a presumption.
In other words: any anomaly gets attributed to being "proof of global warming".
I consider that to be circular logic, as opposed to scientific reasoning, let alone good scientific methodology.
I don't mind that you believe differently, but that's not a "proof" from my viewpoint, nor consistent with my training.
Quote ( Roy Mitchell @ October 24th 2021,04:55:27 ) A natural balance of resources and ecology led to all life being here. Also supposition, and not in evidence. We assume that the puddle is the shape it is because the hole in the ground is that shape, but maybe the hole became that shape because the ice displaced mud, so that the hole accommodated the puddle.
We can run that formula either way, but neither is proof of the other, if you know what I mean. If you want to talk about The Big Bang Theory, we should probably do that offline so we don't start another flame thread.
Quote ( Roy Mitchell @ October 24th 2021,04:55:27 ) The Arctic and Antarctic were the refrigerators of the world. There is grass on Greenland, and that's why it has the name it has. It is currently covered in a sheet of ice. The obvious conclusion is: it is now significantly colder than it once was.
It is significantly colder now than it was in 1250 AD. Climate scientists were saying in the 1970s and 1980s that we were 200 years from the coldest point in the little ice age. We might have localized maxima in that longer term trend, but that doesn't equate to global warming.
I have little doubt that Humans are likely to face an extinction event, and there is a reasonable chance that it will happen within the next 100 years. Maybe as high as 10% or higher, and we should take that level of threat fairly seriously. But I don't see global warming as being the largest threat, or even likely to be a problem in the next 100 years. I can tell you what I think the greatest threat is: artificial intelligence.
We've been toying with the idea of what happens when computers are smarter than us in science fiction for decades, and most of those ideas turn out not so well for humans.
The time has arrived, and autonomous robots have already killed humans, and no one is panicked for some reason. Maybe because people still feel we have some degree of control. After all: the president okayed the drone strike on an American who was not even suspected of a crime, so that's no problem, right? Oh, and we had that shooter cornered in a parking lot, so we sent in a robot to blow him up, because that's fine.
Yeah, we're doing some not so nice things to humans, and our control is shrinking.
When you're driving a car at the edge of it's control, and you hit black ice, taking away the rest of your control: you're pretty much done for. Same will be true with AI, but on a global level, instead of a personal level. Unfortunately: there are some people with a lot of power who think human extinction is a good idea. Bill Gates for example proposed reducing human population to 0 as a "must" for the future.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#78 posted Oct 24th 2021, 08:08:43
|
Quote
|
Quote ( Daryl Gee @ October 23rd 2021,23:32:42 ) No, no, no, ffs, this is madness.
If you believe in stupid shit, I'm going to insult you and disparage you.
This.
I'm all for freedom of speech but this lunacy needs to be called out. I'd go even further and say that it shouldn't be allowed to propagate on here at all. Places like 8chan seems the right forum.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#79 posted Oct 24th 2021, 12:45:10
|
Quote
|
I find some of the comments interesting. Nature, I believe takes care of itself. History shows there have been extreme changes in temperature from extremely high to extremely low. The earth has adapted and survived. So has human and no doubt we will survive whatever it is that is causing an increase in weather at differing parts of the world on different continents. There can be no doubt we as humans influence this change to a degree, however, considering that humans could not really influence weather change in the past, i.e. ice age, one wonders to what extent we can influence today. I believe we can but not to the extremes governments/science claim because nature has a mind of its own. Now there is the issue of industry and energy providers profit that is linked to political party profits regardless of country. In the UK there are vast amounts of profit in supplying alternative power source mostly led by either American or European companies. Thus if we are to reduce emissions as the scientist say we should we have to curb the profit making industries and replace the employment of those working in existing industries. Never going to happen. Profiteers do not give a damn about the working classes as long as they get their 20 pieces of silver. We also need to be mindful that those lobbyists and save the planet groups also make money out of this issue. Of course this is merely my opinion on a controversial issue. I stand corrected if appropriate.
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Mick Brownhill @ October 24th 2021,12:45:10 ) considering that humans could not really influence weather change in the past
The thing is that humans in the past (and we are talking way way past if you mentioned the ice age), the technology they had was... 0.
So in return they had 0 impact on the enviroment. For example, humans in the past didnt have the resources to cut entire forests or to get petroil from the ground. So comparing the impact from humans before and the impact from humans now doesnt make much sense.
As humans evolved so did their impact in the enviroment. And seeing how evolved (even if in the wrong way) we are now, it is no wonder that our impact is also massive!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#81 posted Oct 24th 2021, 13:00:53
|
Quote
|
Quote ( Ricardo Antunes @ October 24th 2021,12:50:19 ) humans in the past didnt have the resources to cut entire forests They could burn entire forests to make room for planting crops, much as they have done in recent years.
They could also irrigate, causing large areas to be planted, that would otherwise be too arid. For example: Egypt used to be the bread basket of the world about 4-6 thousand years ago, until a drop in global temperatures caused the river they were using to dry significantly, and the land turn to desert.
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Sam Martin @ October 24th 2021,06:18:22 ) That part is supposition, which I don't agree with, for the simple reason that: BEFORE they were fossils: they were in the air.
True, and that's millions of years ago. (The time needed for trees and plants to change in coal for example.) And guess what ? Millions of years ago no human was walking around on this Earth. Now a days we are with almost 8 billion, who all are in need of water and food, and who all need their space to live. And meanwhile we burn those fossils in a rate that goes much faster then they needed to be produced by nature.
Because we are extracting those fossils and burn them, the temperature does rise, which does result in rising sea levels. Which means less space to live for those 8 billion. Just ask the Dutch how happy they are with sealevels rising, 1/3rd of their nation is below sea level. If they don't invest a big part of their GNP in building better dykes and other infrastructure, well not need to visit cities like Amsterdam, Rotterdam or The Hague anymore simply because they will be gone.
Or ask it to the people who live on the many small Isle's in the Pacific, what they think about global warming. Several island's did already dissapear completely of the World map, and many will follow within the next years. Just ask them if global warming is a hoax.
It does also result in some parts of the Earth getting no rain anymore, just ask the farmers in Madagascar who haven't seen rain anymore since 2018. Just ask them if global warming is a hoax or joke.
Melting glaciers are also a hoax I pressume ? Well let me tell you that we are all fucked, when the glaciers are gone. They feed our rivers, rivers that we do need for our fresh water. The few glaciers we did have in the highest African mountains are all gone, I will not even try to explain you what kind of problems this brings to the many people who depended on that fresh water.
I lived in Switzerland for a big part of my life, and although I am still young even I do see the big changes that are happening to the glaciers in the Swiss Alps. Rivers like the Po, Rijn, Rhone etc etc tec all depend on those glaciers. ten's of millions depend on those rivers. Just imagine what happens when those rivers will not flow anymore.
Evidence of a earth warming up is all around you, you just have to open your eyes. And I do agree that some people want to make a profit out of this huge problem too, that's how people are. But it doens't change the fact that WE ALL have a huge problem to solve.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#83 posted Oct 24th 2021, 13:04:47
|
Quote
|
Quote ( Sam Martin @ October 24th 2021,13:00:53 ) They could burn entire forests to make room for planting crops, much as they have done in recent years.
I was talking about ice age times though :P
As I said:
Quote ( Ricardo Antunes @ October 24th 2021,12:50:19 ) As humans evolved so did their impact in the enviroment. And seeing how evolved (even if in the wrong way) we are now, it is no wonder that our impact is also massive!
But I guess we are on the same side of the argument here :P
|
|
|
|
|
|
#84 posted Oct 24th 2021, 13:26:46
|
Quote
|
Quote ( Upeo Unaozidi @ October 24th 2021,13:02:24 ) But it doens't change the fact that WE ALL have a huge problem to solve.
👍👍👍 So true climate refugees is not something of the far future, it is already happening. 😢
|
|
|
|
|
|
#85 posted Oct 24th 2021, 13:30:28
|
Quote
|
Quote ( Sam Martin @ October 22nd 2021,18:33:26 ) I suggest that you open your mind up, and consider that some people in the world do understand things better than you. When you encounter those people: learn from them.
What a brilliant comment, shame you seem to be the one here actively ignoring it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#86 posted Oct 24th 2021, 13:35:26
|
Quote
|
Quote ( Upeo Unaozidi @ October 24th 2021,13:02:24 ) Now a days we are with almost 8 billion, who all are in need of water and food, and who all need their space to live. Scarcity is one of those myths put forward to exploit the masses for the profits of a few.
There are about 352,670,000,000,000,000,000 gallons of water in the world's oceans.
Take off 9 zeros, and you have 352,670,000,000 gallons per person, not counting rivers, lakes, etc.
There is also the argument that "you can't drink the Ocean water" but in fact: we can, and do, and cost effectively too. For example Israel produces drinking and irrigation water from the ocean at a lower cost per gallon than California's water costs not using the ocean.
Australia recently built a large, environmentally friendly facility to do the same thing for them.
As for food: we throw away nearly half of the food we produce, and we use more corn in the USA for fuel than for food, despite using as much corn for food as we can figure out how to do.
So that kills the food and water shortage myths, what about land?
Over half of the world's population now lives in cities, so people are packed denser than ever. Those cities collectively are about 3% of the Earth's surface, so it would seem that we still have some room for expansion. The Earth could support about twice the current population without a significant change to how we're doing things, but we'll continue to improve, and increase the living density of our cities.
Quote ( Upeo Unaozidi @ October 24th 2021,13:02:24 ) Because we are extracting those fossils and burn them, the temperature does rise, As I already pointed out previously: the total energy production of humans, including the burning of fossil fuels, makes less than 1 millionth of a degree difference, so this point, while technically correct, is of such a magnitude as to be false in spirit, as the rise is implied to be on the order of degrees within a human life time, which it is not.
Quote ( Upeo Unaozidi @ October 24th 2021,13:02:24 ) Or ask it to the people who live on the many small Isle's in the Pacific, what they think about global warming. Several island's did already dissapear completely of the World map, and many will follow within the next years. Just ask them if global warming is a hoax. News flash: the Earth is not static. Islands vanish, and new islands form, and this has been going on for millennia. This is not new to the industrial revolution, and while attributed to global warming, it is not. The Earth has been warmer than it is now, and the ice sheets have been smaller than they are now. The CO2 levels have been higher than they are now, even since the last ice age, as evidenced by the leeching of calcium from sediment studied. The calcium leeching being due to the higher levels of CO2 causing the water to be more acidic.
Quote ( Upeo Unaozidi @ October 24th 2021,13:02:24 ) Melting glaciers are alos a hoax I pressume ? Nope, Glaciers melt. They also sublimate, and they calve. Glaciers are rivers, and rivers flow. This is how the Earth works, and has 0 to do with global warming. Glaciers can and do melt below the freezing point, and even sublimate to water vapor in gas form below the freezing point.
Your freezer is one of the coldest places on Earth, and food dries out in there. You don't even need to take a trip to a glacier to perform experiments on how ice behaves below freezing.
Quote ( Upeo Unaozidi @ October 24th 2021,13:02:24 ) Well let me tell you that we are all fucked, when the glaciers are gone. They feed our rivers, rivers that we do need for our fresh water. I love this part, where you point out our dependence on glaciers melting, right after implying it is a disaster that they are melting. Sorry: you can't have it both ways. You just destroyed your own argument. Well done.
Quote ( Upeo Unaozidi @ October 24th 2021,13:02:24 ) Eveidence of a earth warming up is all around you, you just have to open your eyes. The funny part is: I used to believe in global warming, and so I'm well familiar with all the "evidence" as you call it.
Maybe you're familiar with Plato's allegory of the cave?
https://sites.psu.edu/bernickerpassionblog/2016/01/22/the-al...
I'm like one who has left the cave, and no longer see the shadows as real objects. Now I'm trying to help others, who can only see the shadows, understand what the world is really like.
In this case: I've seen global warming, and see that it is really a hoax. Those who can only see the shadows call me an idiot for "not getting it" when in fact: I did get it, and then I progressed to a higher level of understanding.
My hope is: you can come to realize the truth also.
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Ethan Littlejohns @ October 24th 2021,13:30:28 ) Quote ( Sam Martin @ October 22nd 2021,18:33:26 )
I suggest that you open your mind up, and consider that some people in the world do understand things better than you. When you encounter those people: learn from them.
What a brilliant comment, shame you seem to be the one here actively ignoring it.
Ironic, because you have it 100% backwards, as I have just pointed out in my previous post. The Global Warming alarmists are not bringing any new information to the discussion.
I posted 9 points supporting the fact that the Earth is in fact cooling.
0 of those points were refuted, so they stand uncontested as it is.
From a scientific standpoint: an uncontested supposition should be treated as a fact, until it can be effectively challenged.
Take gravity for example: It was presumed to be a real thing, until Einstein came up with the curvature of space-time, which provided another possible mechanism for the same result. It is only by an effective challenge that gravity can be called into question. Calling Newton an idiot for believing in gravity is not the way to do it. Nor did Newton call people idiots for not believing in gravity when he came up with the notion, contrary to what the scientific community believed at the time.
I'll refer you also to Plato's thought experiment in my previous post, maybe you can better understand the situation here after you've read it.
Quote ( Armin van Hülkenburg @ October 23rd 2021,02:42:07 ) It's the same with discussing other touchy subjects such as:
Gender/Sex
COVID
Trump
Nice to see you go down the irrelevant path that Armin pointed out was wrong to do.
He's on your side, and you wont listen to him, why should I bother responding? Your mind is made up.
Mod Edit: quote deleted (deleted post)
|
|
|
|
|
|
#88 posted Oct 24th 2021, 13:55:11
|
Quote
|
Quote ( Paul Brosnan @ October 21st 2021,20:14:17 ) Well GPRO and global warming are both fictional so I guess you're right.
I'm genuinely impressed that you've made it to Pro given how opposed you are to using facts, statistics, and data analysis to support your reasoning.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#89 posted Oct 24th 2021, 13:57:14
|
Quote
|
Quote ( Constantin Heller @ October 24th 2021,13:55:11 ) I'm genuinely impressed that you've made it to Pro given how opposed you are to using facts, statistics, and data analysis to support your reasoning. I'm not surprised you retired without making it to Pro, given how opposed you are to using facts, statistics, and data analysis to support your reasoning.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#90 posted Oct 24th 2021, 14:01:23
|
Quote
|
Quote ( Sam Martin @ October 24th 2021,13:44:19 ) I posted 9 points supporting the fact that the Earth is in fact cooling.
0 of those points were refuted, so they stand uncontested as it is.
Actually...
Not trying to argue btw I already have a forum game for that :D
|
|
|
Deutsch
Español
Română
Italiano
Português
Português
Français
Polski
Русский
Български
Македонски
Српски
Nederlands
Vlaams
Suomi
Lietuvių
Čeština
Magyar
Eesti keel
Slovenčina
Türkçe
Shqip
Ελληνικά
Hrvatski
Bahasa Melayu
Dansk
Pirate
