Discussion in 'Free Speech Alley' started by LaSalleAve, Nov 12, 2012.
Yet we try to pass legislation....
What about them?
Point is we "need" more to study.
Coal is cheep and abundant yet the EPA is about to destroy it. Take a guess why.
Who says we don't? Really?
Its the people who claim we are the "cause" that should be punched in the face because "they" are the ones who are gaining power and writing laws.
It seems that man has an impact on the concentration of CO2 and other greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere. There is too much data to ignore. I am not sue how accurate the projections and estimated consenquences are though.
I think warming may be the least of the problems and acidification of the oceans the greatest. The earth has gone through warming periods as severe as predicted before. In fact as the glaciers in Greenland recede 1000 year old Viking villiages are exposed. Sea rise and other effects of warming are engineering challenges and are manageable at our level of technology.
For those who don't know the seas absorb much of the free CO2 in the atmosphere. When combined in water it becomes acid. Changing the ph of the oceans could destroy the ecology and kill the oceans. This is an extreme but potentially deadly possibility. The result of a massive pan ocean kill would be catostrophic.
That being said there are two points to ponder. First as the world develops there will be more CO2 pumped into the sky no matter what people say. Already China is a greater producer of CO2 than we are. There are 9 billion people in the world. Let's say 1-1.5 billion live as we do here. Guess what folks the other 7.5 billion want the same. Sun, wind and all other renewable energy sources won't do the job to provide the power required. We need fossil fuels and nuclear. Those are the only generators of usable energy that are fuel dense enough to work. You would have to cover the equator with solar panel to get enough power. Can't see that happening ever. Same with any other power source you propose; they are either too limited in availability or too far from when power is used to get there. I have sold equipment for large scale solar, wind and coal gas projects I know the engineering and economics and they don't work.
What do we do? We don't go destroy what we have and are building and try to stop all CO2 emmissions. Even if we did the rest of the world won't. We will just be poor , cold and in the dark. We also don't say f**k it and tell our children to fix it.
I have faith in mankind's genius. We will find a way to generate power in a benign way. Our knowledge grows exponentially and soon we will have fusion power or something like it safe, and cheap. Until then treat "global warming" as an engineering problem and address what we can with technology.
I've never heard anyone say that we are the cause, just that if we don't do something our bad habits will further the damage.
@Winston, time to eat more meat....
"The 400-page report by the Food and Agricultural Organisation, entitled Livestock's Long Shadow, also surveys the damage done by sheep, chickens, pigs and goats. But in almost every case, the world's 1.5 billion cattle are most to blame. Livestock are responsible for 18 per cent of the greenhouse gases that cause global warming, more than cars, planes and all other forms of transport put together."
Look, if you have cheap energy, you have the means to "invest" in viable solutions.
Coal's emissions are already way down, but not good enough of for the tree hugging phaggots. Fine, ban the shit and then we just sell it to the rest of the world so they can phucking burn it dirtier. People really need to stop and think for a second.
Why is this "damage" bad?
Why is producing a better quality of life bad?
What bad things happen if the earth warms?
Why is a warmer earth bad?
"Carbon dioxide concentrations may have been up to sixteen times higher about 60 million years ago without producing runaway greenhouse effects. Other periods experienced two to four times current levels of CO2 with some warming. Scientists have been unable to determine whether the warming preceded or followed the rises in carbon dioxide. For virtually all of the period from around 125 million to about 75,000 years ago, CO2 levels were markedly higher than now"
Think article has many good points and I would recommend it to all for a read.
Never said we were the major contributor though one could say our breeding of livestock make their production of greenhouse gases part of our contibution. Also never said it was the end of everything though ocean acidification is a worry.
As I said tree hugger solutions aren't viable. With modern knowledge & technology we can engineer our way through any problems at relatively little expense.
My take on the tree hugging phaggots is that at the core they are anti American and anti western socialists who want to level the world to poverty existance (except themselvs because they are the natural leaders of man). They are using this to attack what has made the world livable. Extremeists can take a real issue to use to their advantage. That doesn't mean the issue isn't real and should be ignored.
But that's my point. This issue of "climate change" has existed before humans.
What exactly are we trying to fix here?
Pollution aside b/c that shit is bad and we do everything to fix it, but how in the phuck do you fix something that happened well before humans?
Separate names with a comma.