Support NeoGAF

[Peter Ian Staker]

Wouldn't this lead to plant overgrowth as they would have to do something with that energy?

 

[NiiloPielinen]

I mean our death is probably the best way to ensure we don't fuck up the planet anymore.

And our survival is the best chance the planet has to avoid getting fucked.

I mean eventually a supervolcano is going to erupt, a big meteor is going to hit and sun will expand and swallow the whole planet. Only chance to mitigate the effects or to avoid them at all is intelligent life.

 

[Auto-Reply]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-BLxZjKrXEc

 

[Grinchy]

I mean our death is probably the best way to ensure we don't fuck up the planet anymore.

Earth has been a molten rock ball in its lifetime. We can't possibly fuck the earth up. It'll be fine no matter what we do. We're just fucking up our ability to live on it.

 

[HStallion]

Fuck putting it into plants. PUT IT INTO PEOPLE!

Going green takes on a whole new meaning.

 

[newshinycd]

Human lifestyle is far more harmful than some edited DNA, might as well try to compensate for how much we fucked up and are fucking up out planet. What kind of danger do you think a GMO poses specifically?

Not sure. There are a couple of people I know from high school that are now anti-GMO. I've heard different things. Cancer, autism, uptick in Celiac/IBD, etc. I was in the same chemisty class as with them in high school. They failed.
IMHO, Anti-GMO people are just as fucking stupid as anti-vaxxers. "B-b-but gee-em-ohs have CHEMICALS in them! And CHEMICALS are bad for you!111one"

 

[Xe4]

Definetly sounds promising, as with most CO2 capture techologies. Unfortunately, it's a GMO, so stupid mother fuckers like Greenpeace won't have any of that, and try to stop it's deployment all costs, like they did with golden rice.

 

[moniker]

Earth has been a molten rock ball in its lifetime. We can't possibly fuck the earth up. It'll be fine no matter what we do. We're just fucking up our ability to live on it.

Seriously. It's been estimated that some of Earth's previous mass extinction events killed of up to 95% of all species.

 

[Cindi Mayweather]

If we reduced emissions to normal levels would it be possible for the artic to revive?

 

[NingenJanai]

 

[Joni]

Wouldn't this lead to plant overgrowth as they would have to do something with that energy?

It would bring back real trees instead of the tiny failed copies we have now.

 

[PeskyToaster]

we'll save the planet and get to continue growth. easy peasy.

 

[Croatoan]

I'm starting to truly believe that technology to reduce atmospheric CO2 is our only hope in the long term. So many people don't accept in it, and there's a lot of people that do who in my opinion do very little to help. They use disposable plates when there's real ones they could use then wash, they buy gas guzzlers instead of the most efficient vehicle they can, etc. Its so frustrating. I do what I can. I can't in good faith waste when I worry about my children's future.

It has always been our only hope, the best ideas are really expensive though. A combination of the following would likely work;

1. A series of giant mirrors/solar panels orbiting the earth that either A) direct sunlight away from earth, or B) Capture sunlight for energy. This is the same tech we would need to terraform mars (only on mars you would direct the mirrors towards the surface to cause global warming).

2. Some type of reflective particulates that get blasted into the upper atmosphere where they stay (not sure this one is a good idea but it would likely work).

3. Spraying salt water onto clouds over the ocean to create almost constant cloud cover.

4. CO2 Scrubbers that pull CO2 from the air and artificially split it like plants do. The waste can be stored or used in other processes.

There are a lot of other experimental ways to do this as well. Hell, if we just started planting trees every where possible it would help. Green buildings with nurseries on the top would be good too.

If we reduced emissions to normal levels would it be possible for the artic to revive?

After thousands of years yeah. The only way to actually fix things is to cool the planet. What I mention above would do that.

 

[Trokil]

Well, according to the FAO and scientific research organic plants are already absorbing way more carbon dioxide than regular crop or GMO crop and even store it deeper in the soil. But of course nobody has a patent on that, so it does not exist.

Also what would also store a lot of carbon dioxide are trees, but at the moment we destroy woods like crazy for farmland or palm oil trees, because butter is more expensive than palm oil and people want cheap food.

Who cares about climate change, I want my burger for a dollar, else I could not afford a new I-phone every year.

Not sure. There are a couple of people I know from high school that are now anti-GMO. I've heard different things. Cancer, autism, uptick in Celiac/IBD, etc. I was in the same chemisty class as with them in high school. They failed.
IMHO, Anti-GMO people are just as fucking stupid as anti-vaxxers. "B-b-but gee-em-ohs have CHEMICALS in them! And CHEMICALS are bad for you!111one"

I love the ignorance of the GMO people. GMO fields are contributing to climate change, because GMO plants do not store as much carbon dioxide as organic plants, so they have to build artificial plants to counterbalance the effects of the large GMO fields. Somebody would call this laughable, but somehow this all makes sense. And they want to produce even more food, although we already produce twice of the amount of what we need, so we can throw away more food and contribute even more to climate change.

 

[SamVimes]

Well, according to the FAO and scientific research organic plants are already absorbing way more carbon dioxide than regular crop or GMO crop and even store it deeper in the soil. But of course nobody has a patent on that, so it does not exist.

Also what would also store a lot of carbon dioxide are trees, but at the moment we destroy woods like crazy for farmland or palm oil trees, because butter is more expensive than palm oil and people want cheap food.

Who cares about climate change, I want my burger for a dollar, else I could not afford a new I-phone every year.



I love the ignorance of the GMO people. GMO fields are contributing to climate change, because GMO plants do not store as much carbon dioxide as organic plants, so they have to build artificial plants to counterbalance the effects of the large GMO fields. Somebody would call this laughable, but somehow this all makes sense. And they want to produce even more food, although we already produce twice of the amount of what we need, so we can throw away more food and contribute even more to climate change.

Source? Because I have one that says the opposite: http://www.vib.be/en/news/Documents/vib_fact_genetisch gewijzigde gewassen_ENG_2016_LR.pdf
"Overall, the cultivation of GM crops over the last 18 years has delivered substantial benefits for the environment. Insect-resistant crops have resulted in a 230 million kg decrease in the use of insecticides. Herbicide-tolerant crops have led to reductions in fuel use and CO2 emissions of 6.3 billion liters and 16.8 million metric tons respectively, by supporting no-till farming. Overall, GM crops have produced an environmental benefit of 37%."