The impending environmental disaster

flea.rider said:
ok .. the earth is a self healing unit .. has been for millions of yrs ..theres a thing called a glacial and inter glacial period .. that happens .. guess which one we are in and then guess how long we have before we go into the other ?
on long term reflection .. 10k yrs or so we are getting colder .. but the earth has this funny mechanism if you melt the poles it shut's down the heat transport of the planet .. thus sending us into a very fast and shocking cold period ... there also that modern minimum thats happening to the sun .. yes it's just started .. but have a look at what happened last time ..
and if you think co2 is anything but plant food ..you need to go back to school ...

no i don't wear a tinfoil hat .. i just read a lot
Click to expand...

If you read a lot you should be aware that the conclusive scientific consensus is that human activity has led to the substantial increase in global temperatures.
 
deuse said:
So your saying the if 80% moved to electric cars. It would not help?

A single person here and there adds up.
Click to expand...

That would help in terms of emissions of pollutants, but it wouldn't necessarily help with overall greenhouse gas emissions because electric cars are not green. Their power is just generated elsewhere.

deuse said:
So it's Just the developed countries.

And you would agree that letting more people from 3rd world countries in to the UK, is adding to the problem.
We in the UK need less people.
Click to expand...

They continue to exist whether they're in the UK or not. We'd just be displacing the problem.
 
413x said:
Even this says having fewer kids reduces carbon. But it's bad for humanity.
Click to expand...

Yeah, carbon isn't everything particularly on a personal level as @dLockers keeps reminding us all. The UK has trashed its natural environment and we could be doing a lot more to help nature rebuild in this country. But.... But China..
 
I think the stand out is Hs2. So much cost, so little benefit, so much destruction and it was approved.

If things like this are still going ahead those in power obviously don't care (like we know)
 
dLockers said:
Birth rate drops as poverty drops. The sooner we can lift countries out of poverty, the sooner the birth rate will drop.
Click to expand...

We need the third world to have our western existence. If everyone was on the same level you couldn't have all your cheap tat that we have now. Everyone wants their cake and eat it.

How many people are willing to give that up? The percentage is very small.
 
adam cool dude said:
We need the third world to have our western existence. If everyone was on the same level you couldn't have all your cheap tat that we have now. Everyone wants their cake and eat it.

How many people are willing to give that up? The percentage is very small.
Click to expand...

This.

Imagine everyone being the average American. The world would just die. Its impossible.
 
dirtychinchilla said:
If you read a lot you should be aware that the conclusive scientific consensus is that human activity has led to the substantial increase in global temperatures.
Click to expand...
since ? you mean the so called 90k surveys ? to tom dick and harry ? cmip 5 and 95% of the other models are wrong it's been proven .. when real data does not follow a model ie: the hockey stick .. no where near btw ..
go read some of the new stuff in Nature

the Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics or The Heartland Institute’s 2013 NIPCC report stated that the earth “has not warmed significantly for the past 16 years despite an 8% increase in atmospheric CO2.”

Asia-Pacific Journal of Atmospheric Science study using observational data rather than computer climate models concluded that “the models are exaggerating climate sensitivity” and overestimate how fast the earth will warm as CO2 levels increase

Two other studies using observational data found that IPCC projections of future global warming are too high. [76] [97] Climatologist and former NASA scientist Roy Spencer, PhD, concluded that 95% of climate models have “over-forecast the warming trend since 1979.” [77] According to Emeritus Professor of Geography at the University of Winnipeg, Tim Ball, PhD, “IPCC computer climate models are the vehicles of deception… [T]hey create the results they are designed to produce.”

it's a real eye opener i'm hoping yours will open soon ..
 
flea.rider said:
since ? you mean the so called 90k surveys ? to tom dick and harry ? cmip 5 and 95% of the other models are wrong it's been proven .. when real data does not follow a model ie: the hockey stick .. no where near btw ..
go read some of the new stuff in Nature

the Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics or The Heartland Institute’s 2013 NIPCC report stated that the earth “has not warmed significantly for the past 16 years despite an 8% increase in atmospheric CO2.”

Asia-Pacific Journal of Atmospheric Science study using observational data rather than computer climate models concluded that “the models are exaggerating climate sensitivity” and overestimate how fast the earth will warm as CO2 levels increase

Two other studies using observational data found that IPCC projections of future global warming are too high. [76] [97] Climatologist and former NASA scientist Roy Spencer, PhD, concluded that 95% of climate models have “over-forecast the warming trend since 1979.” [77] According to Emeritus Professor of Geography at the University of Winnipeg, Tim Ball, PhD, “IPCC computer climate models are the vehicles of deception… [T]hey create the results they are designed to produce.”

it's a real eye opener i'm hoping yours will open soon ..
Click to expand...

Seeing as you quoted NASA im sure you will love this

There is a nice graph in there showing the warming as well, I dont see how you will dispute it.
 
200sols said:
Seeing as you quoted NASA im sure you will love this

There is a nice graph in there showing the warming as well, I dont see how you will dispute it.
Click to expand...

I think people like flea find a few papers that dispute consensus, push those out and ignore the majority. Its a bizarre mindset but its similar to conspiracy theory types who select a few 'papers' and point to those to dispute all the others.
 
200sols said:
Per year they would have lived.
Click to expand...

Forgot about that! So with lets say 70 year av lifespan that will be 4,102 tonnes!

So basically what people are saying is the best environmental policy would be the Herod one> - Kill everybodies first born?
 
Jono8 said:
Well it can't be too obvious seen as nothing is being done about it.
Click to expand...
It can only be described as broken if 'working' can be described. What is your metric of 'working'? Because most graphs of human nature look like hockey sticks right now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom