Papa
Banned
Self-selecting yourself out of the gene pool. Fantastic work, comrade.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
'No doubt left' about scientific consensus on global warming, say experts
- Thread starter Insane Metal
- Start date
Self-selecting yourself out of the gene pool. Fantastic work, comrade.
Papa
Banned
But has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like?
DeleteriousObnoxious
Member
I don't know about looking more likely but the climate increases temperatures and that whales are swimmimg but recovery still challenging.
JordanN
Banned
I posted this before on Neogaf and many didn't like the answer, but for all the whining about climate change, the world still doesn't seem to care about the shifting of large groups of humans into the countries that pollute the most or the post I just made last page where several countries have extremely high birth rates but no one is telling them they're going to die, but only Western countries must accept doom instead.
Human made climate change could definitely be a real thing, but it's funny how no one is taking the obvious solution, like move all humans to Uganda instead. Instead, we're seeing more and more immigration into places like Canada or the U.S instead.
I think people are being dishonest or that the effects of climate change wont be as drastic if if it doesn't force anyone to give up their current lifestyle.
Last edited:
Yeah, from what I heard the biggest population growth over the next few decades will be from several African countries. I suppose the reason why no one has explictly suggested that Africans have fewer children to "save the planet" is because it is politically incorrect to criticise the cultural practices of black people.I posted this before on Neogaf and many didn't like the answer, but for all the whining about climate change, the world still doesn't seem to care about the shifting of large groups of humans into the countries that pollute the most or the post I just made last page where several countries have extremely high birth rates but no one is telling them they're going to die, but only Western countries must accept doom instead.
Human made climate change could definitely be a real thing, but it's funny how no one is taking the obvious solution, like move all humans to Uganda instead. Instead, we're seeing more and more immigration into places like Canada or the U.S instead.
I think people are being dishonest or that the effects of climate change wont be as drastic if if it doesn't force anyone to give up their current lifestyle.
It seems a lot of people would rather endure than risk being accused of racism.
JordanN
Banned
It's a sad state of affairs because I believe they're going to be used for political purposes by the Left. In fact, it already exists. They're being called "climate refugees".
Trying to force billions of people to come live in Western countries because of "the climate" is going to cause mass havoc, yet if we suggested these same poor countries to have less children and try to stay where they are, we're going to be called "Nazis" and "racists".
Yup, no doubt Europe, owing to its geographical location, is gonna be the number one destination when things get too difficult in Africa. Some Europeans are already getting a taster of the social and cultural tension caused by mass migration. I often wonder what will happen when the demographic changes really start changing things in the western world. The Left like pretending the diversity utopia will emerge when the white population is signifcantly reduced, but I don't believe that a western world where white people are a minority will be better -- and I say that as someone who isn't white.
DeleteriousObnoxious
Member
the cheapest way to reduce emissions has already been invented, Trees.
the other cheap way is to restore our underwater sea forests.. but with nuclear waste sipping out to the ocean.. its not exactly the best idea. Technology got us into this mess, its insane to think technology will get us out of this mess. its time to learn some things about nature, if we are to thrive on this planet.
Lanrutcon
Member
Explain. Things are already difficult in Africa. When shit starts flooding, Africa is going to be fine. Plus...Africa is a huuuuuge place. The variation in the level of fuckedness is pretty noticeable.
Noboru Wataya
Banned
I’ve more important things to worry about. Like my lack of Shenmue 3 pre order bonuses as a kickstarter for 1.
MisterFalcon
Member
I posted this before on Neogaf and many didn't like the answer, but for all the whining about climate change, the world still doesn't seem to care about the shifting of large groups of humans into the countries that pollute the most or the post I just made last page where several countries have extremely high birth rates but no one is telling them they're going to die, but only Western countries must accept doom instead.
Human made climate change could definitely be a real thing, but it's funny how no one is taking the obvious solution, like move all humans to Uganda instead. Instead, we're seeing more and more immigration into places like Canada or the U.S instead.
I think people are being dishonest or that the effects of climate change wont be as drastic if if it doesn't force anyone to give up their current lifestyle.
CO2 emissions per capita are not very useful, CO2 is produced mostly by industry and not human breating. You should compare it to GDP:
Suddenly all the worst ones are not Evil Western Countries anymore so it's not fitting the narrative as neatly. Even poor little Uganda does worse then the EU average.
DeleteriousObnoxious
Member
I beg to differ
Sign Petition: We Demand TEPCO De-Contaminate All Fukushima Waste Water Before Pacific Ocean Dumping
Please take the time to sign the other petition ('We Demand TEPCO To De-Contaminate All Fukushima Waste Water Before Pacific Ocean (459 signatures on petition)
www.thepetitionsite.com
Your welcome to Prove me wrong and again nuclear powerplants are located near large reservoir of water. Anything damaging to the plant could go into oceans. Or worse our drink water.
Last edited:
DeleteriousObnoxious
Member
While the overpopulation is the real deal.CO2 emissions per capita are not very useful, CO2 is produced mostly by industry and not human breating. You should compare it to GDP:
Suddenly all the worst ones are not Evil Western Countries anymore so it's not fitting the narrative as neatly. Even poor little Uganda does worse then the EU average.
People poor gets more children because they Benefit financially from it. These are facts. So There are clearly something wrong With the way we destribute things around the globe. While There is no doubt unconstrained procreation activity is colossal problem i doubt the culture would be Any better off.
I got some wisdom words for ya all
Deny a man something is okay as long as you provide a decent alternative, failure to do so will give unforseen consequences.
Last edited:
Ornlu
Banned
I beg to differ
Sign Petition: We Demand TEPCO De-Contaminate All Fukushima Waste Water Before Pacific Ocean Dumping
Please take the time to sign the other petition ('We Demand TEPCO To De-Contaminate All Fukushima Waste Water Before Pacific Ocean (459 signatures on petition)www.thepetitionsite.com
Your welcome to Prove me wrong and again nuclear powerplants are located near large reservoir of water. Anything damaging to the plant could go into oceans. Or worse our drink water.
Ah, I thought you were trying to say that some evil corporatists were dumping drums of nuclear waste into undersea trenches and trying to summon Godzilla or something.
Regarding Fukushima, yes there has been radiation leakage, that is true. The amounts are very low in regards to dangerous levels of exposure. Here's a more lighthearted article:
Worried About Fukushima Radiation in Seafood? Turns Out Bananas Are More Radioactive Than Fish | Oceana
Six years ago, a devastating tsunami swept over the eastern edge of Japan, killing over 18,000 people and triggering a nuclear meltdown at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant. The plant was perched on the coast, so some radiation leaked into the sea. In the months and years following the...
oceana.org
There are tons of other articles about it; I picked that one because it's a bit more on the fun side.
Radiation in and of itself is not a boogeyman. It is fatal at extremely high levels. It is dangerous at high levels. It can lead to cancer due to long term exposure at medium levels. It is absolutely everywhere, every second of every day all around you in light and very light levels. I'm not sure if people get worried about it due to it's lack of visibility to our senses, or if it's due to the association with nuclear power.
You would receive a much higher dose of radiation by getting off the train in Grand Central Station, than you would get from any interaction you are going to have from radiation from the Fukushima reactor.
That contributes to climate change if anything. China doesn't care about global warming in the first place and they sell all their super cheap shit to underdeveloped countries where you don't have recycling or proper waste disposal.
Last edited:
DeleteriousObnoxious
Member
Great counter i throw My towel in the ring This time.Ah, I thought you were trying to say that some evil corporatists were dumping drums of nuclear waste into undersea trenches and trying to summon Godzilla or something.
Regarding Fukushima, yes there has been radiation leakage, that is true. The amounts are very low in regards to dangerous levels of exposure. Here's a more lighthearted article:
Worried About Fukushima Radiation in Seafood? Turns Out Bananas Are More Radioactive Than Fish | Oceana
Six years ago, a devastating tsunami swept over the eastern edge of Japan, killing over 18,000 people and triggering a nuclear meltdown at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant. The plant was perched on the coast, so some radiation leaked into the sea. In the months and years following the...
There are tons of other articles about it; I picked that one because it's a bit more on the fun side.
Radiation in and of itself is not a boogeyman. It is fatal at extremely high levels. It is dangerous at high levels. It can lead to cancer due to long term exposure at medium levels. It is absolutely everywhere, every second of every day all around you in light and very light levels. I'm not sure if people get worried about it due to it's lack of visibility to our senses, or if it's due to the association with nuclear power.
You would receive a much higher dose of radiation by getting off the train in Grand Central Station, than you would get from any interaction you are going to have from radiation from the Fukushima reactor.
And I am happy to be proven wrong about fukushima leakage into pacific ocean.
Still it is a really dangerous game to have such nuclear powerplants located near oceans. If something does go wrong in a wrong country at the wrong time. I am still ultimately against nuclear power as a solution. To our power demands.
Last edited:
Ornlu
Banned
I don't blame you for being against the idea of nuclear reactors as-is. The technology could certainly be improved. However, if you want to have clean baseline (I.E. it's always on and available) energy, the only means available today is nuclear. Wind and solar are great source for supplementary energy. Hydro is environmentally devastating on the large scales required for large amounts of power. "Biofuel" and "bioenergy" are boondoggles that will never be useful or feasible at scale. Carbon capture looks very promising (to me), but is in it's infancy.
So, if you accept that premise; which you certainly do not have to...and you also see global warming as a crisis, then the only logical solution that doesn't require killing most of humanity is to embrace nuclear 100%. Full on large scale production with the intent of reducing carbon production to 0. Switching fully to Thorium Salt reactors and eventually Fusion if an when that becomes viable.
FoundressofNothing
Member
China Poised to Take Lead on Climate After Trump’s Move to Undo Policies
For years, the Obama administration prodded, cajoled and beseeched China to make commitments to limit the use of fossil fuels to try to slow the global effects of climate change.
President Obama and other American officials saw the pledges from both Beijing and Washington as crucial: China is the largest emitter of greenhouse gases, followed by the United States.
In the coming years, the opposite dynamic is poised to play out. President Trump’s signing of an executive order on Tuesday aimed at undoing many of the Obama administration’s climate change policies flips the roles of the two powers.
Now, it is far likelier that the world will see China pushing the United States to meet its commitments and try to live up to the letter and spirit of the 2015 Paris Agreement, even if Mr. Trump has signaled he has no intention of doing so.
“They’ve set the direction they intend to go in the next five years,” Barbara Finamore, a senior lawyer and Asia director at the Natural Resources Defense Council, based in New York, said of China. “It’s clear they intend to double down on bringing down their reliance on coal and increasing their use of renewable energy.”
“China wants to take over the role of the U.S. as a climate leader, and they’ve baked it into their five-year plans,” she added, referring to the economic development blueprints drawn up by the Chinese government.
China Is a Climate Leader but Still Isn’t Doing Enough on Emissions, Report Says
Last year, President Trump announced that the United States was withdrawing from the agreement, which had been widely praised as a signature global achievement during the Obama administration. President Xi Jinping of China has urged nations to remain committed to the agreement.
MarioLuigi
Banned
Huh? Your comment suggests that people are telling white people not to have children as a legitimate way to save the planet? Are people actually saying that! How is that even acceptable!? Loony left at it again!
Well ofcourse China don't give a damn about climate change! Climate change is bullshit and it was invented by the chinese!
Yeaaaah... meanwhile I've spent the last two weeks in Nigeria helping out on a project and while there I've first hand witnessed the products Chinese firms sell on mass there.
Cheap shit that breaks every few days and has no quality control (thus no eco-friendly/power saving design as well).
Being fully aware that people will just replace it every time it happens since they make it so cheap. And since there are no incinerators or really any recycling of any kind that shit just lands on the side of the road or in a hole.
Truly the most eco-friendly country in the world.
Last edited:
FoundressofNothing
Member
Nowhere does anything I posted say that China is the "most eco-friendly country in the world". I'm simply saying that China cares more about climate change than the Trump administration. I don't doubt anything in your anecdote at all by the way, it correlates with everything I've heard.
NickFire
Member
Thank you for the laugh.
Ornlu
Banned
Do you think they actually care, or that they want to be seen as caring? What's your read on it?
FoundressofNothing
Member
I think that they actually care about it because it will affect their economy (e.g.) and if the environment changes badly enough it might stir civic unrest. I'm no international relations expert but I don't think that they care about the optics of it.
Woo-Fu
Banned
Not really, we know any number of things to do about it. What we don't know how to do is getting people to pay for it, or perhaps more accurately getting career politicians to put their livelihood on the line by trying to push legislation through.
Last edited:
Ornlu
Banned
It's definitely something I'm keeping my eye on. At the moment I'm leaning in the direction of it being mostly for optics, but the CCP is too opaque to really know for sure.
FoundressofNothing
Member
Definitely.
DeleteriousObnoxious
Member
i know you already know my position, but i do accept your premise i just think there are a new positive way to approach our energy demand.. key word here is Sustainability. we need to put some break on our growth take care of the people that does exist, but we also need to have some limits on our population growth. i think the extreme amount of poverty is why they are procreating and a way to get this issue solved could be UBI "Universal Basic Income" with inflation security. but i am not clever enough to have the whole picture i am focused on our future but i don't know what to do.
i just think its sad we can't support all the individuel life on earth humans that have hunted by traditions in 3000 years in harmony with nature are currently endangered.. humans not other animals.
So my cry to the world of humanity is Sustainability. nothing else will work.
Last edited:
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
The same China that is building lots of low carbon solar farms and nuclear power plants?
Halo is Back
Member
While China is busy creating new technologies to power our lives, in America we are too worried about dem good old blue collar workers. Technology breeds new jobs and kills obsolete ones
JordanN
Banned
Does this apply to the thousands of factories used to produced cheap trinkets that get shipped all around the world in gas guzzling ships?
I'm with
Papa
, in that I question the actual effectiveness of trying to stop climate change because it touches down on every part of our lives.Unless China is going to demand everything becomes eco-friendly, just switching to solar farms isn't going to cut it.
Papa
Banned
That small time thinking ain’t helpin nobody bruv
Kenpachii
Member
People talked about we are doomed is instant skip for me.
Climate change isn't a issue and its easily fixable in many ways that i can think off. Let alone somebody that has a clue.
All this says is they still had doubts even while they claimed already to have no doubt.
Also we are not fucked even remotely. We have technology enough to deal with climate change if we wanted too.
Climate change isn't a issue and its easily fixable in many ways that i can think off. Let alone somebody that has a clue.
All this says is they still had doubts even while they claimed already to have no doubt.
Also we are not fucked even remotely. We have technology enough to deal with climate change if we wanted too.
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
What I was replying to was an assertion that China doesn't care about climate change. It's a fact that China is building lots of nuclear and solar, which is something that the USA should be doing but isn't.Does this apply to the thousands of factories used to produced cheap trinkets that get shipped all around the world in gas guzzling ships?
I'm with
Unless China is going to demand everything becomes eco-friendly, just switching to solar farms isn't going to cut it.
The carbon footprint of their manufacturing and shipping industry is another issue entirely. We can compare respective industries between countries and their relative carbon footprints. China's isn't necessarily that much better or worse than the rest of the top 10, and even then the supply chain as a whole is globally interconnected. Who's share of the responsibility is greater, the buyer or the seller?
Besides, it's not like they aren't trying.
China just launched the world's first electric cargo ship
Tesla is not the only one bringing electric engines to cargo transport.
www.businessinsider.com
To get back to the point, which is whether or not China cares about climate change, it is a fact that they are pushing more to decarbonize their domestic energy production at a greater rate than most other countries. In this case, China is both the buyer and seller for domestic energy.
Solar power in China - Wikipedia
Nuclear power in China - Wikipedia
Solar power by country - Wikipedia
Nuclear power by country - Wikipedia
Is it because it's actually more cost effective? Is the real reason that they want to forcibly increase domestic manufacturing for those industries? Is it because they don't want to be beholden to foreign nations for energy? Who knows what the reason(s) are. The results are that their development of green tech is progressing at a greater pace than most other countries.
HoodWinked
Member
I'm not that concerned about it because either we all work together or we dont nothing will on our end will make any difference, but also if things get really bad we'll simply figure out a technological solution like the mr. burns sun blocker or another possibility is creating sulfer dioxide clouds in the upper atmosphere.
Halo is Back
Member
Investing in new technologies is small time thinking? The only small time thinking is people who only think short term which was the main point of my post
Last edited:
I_D
Member
I disagree about the amount of fucked-ness. We're definitely fucked. Or, at least, our children/grandchildren/great-grandchildren/etc. are.
Getting rid of greenhouse gases, pollution, etc. is pretty darn easy on paper. Using technology to clean the planet is pretty darn easy on paper. It is 100% feasible, without a doubt.
The problem is that most companies don't seem to want to make the change. It costs money (A LOT of money) to clean up companies/factories/farms/etc. so I don't blame them for not wanting to change.
Obviously we have the random wackos who think humans have nothing to do with global warming, but the real issue is the "If we wanted to" aspect. Nobody actually wants to lose money in order to make things better. And that's perfectly understandable. Why should I change my ways and lose money to make things better, when everybody else is going to continue to fuck things up?
The only solution, honestly, would require some significant legislation, which opens up a whole other can of worms.
Papa
Banned
If you think I’m opposed to technology then you haven’t been reading what I’ve been saying
MetalAlien
Banned
To actually fix this would require a complete dismantling of society as we know it. Not just cars but electricity, farming, livestock, air travel, sea travel (that doesn't use a sail), space exploration, cities.... even cities cause this problem. Birthrates would have to be dramatically reduced, population control on a global scale. Tightly restrict where humans are even allowed to inhabit.
In other words.... it's ALL bullshit... there is no fixing this. If you think it can be fixed and we still live here... you are fooling yourself. We are the problem.... the earth requires our absence.
Now excuse me i'm saving up for a V8 engine swap in my truck.
In other words.... it's ALL bullshit... there is no fixing this. If you think it can be fixed and we still live here... you are fooling yourself. We are the problem.... the earth requires our absence.
Now excuse me i'm saving up for a V8 engine swap in my truck.
Last edited:
Papa
Banned
Does this apply to the thousands of factories used to produced cheap trinkets that get shipped all around the world in gas guzzling ships?
I'm with
Unless China is going to demand everything becomes eco-friendly, just switching to solar farms isn't going to cut it.
Ehhh that’s not quite what I was saying. I think we should be trying to stop it, just not at the expense of handing the keys of the world over to China. People seem unable to contend with the fact that the dormant red beast is a threat. I don’t fully understand why but suspect it’s thanks to the mistaken conflation of race and culture coupled with decades of leftist education in schools that has rendered racism the most heinous crime one could possibly commit. So because they’re afraid of being labelled racist and they see criticism of Chinese culture as racism, they refuse to even consider it...? I don’t know, but there are some very smart people who only seem to be able to resort to emissions accounting. I don’t care about who emits what so much as what the geopolitical effects of proposed solutions will be. People seem enamoured with the Paris agreement but it was a dreadful deal that would’ve hamstrung the US while practically allowing China off scot free because of their self-reported developing status. All sorts of fucked up incentives with that. No thanks. Trump was right to pull out.
The Scrivener
Member
Can't we just make rain? Could be a good business investment. I mean if some tribes can bash a few sticks on the ground and chant to make it rain, then I'm sure NASA can do it? Don't they already have that top secret military base that makes weather?
Last edited:
DeleteriousObnoxious
Member
its kind of like the prisoner dilemma just on global scale...
Something needs to force the change and no one will like that in the beginning so the argument for forcing that change globally needs to be very sound. technology is way more expensive to carbon capturing than just doing the simple act of planting trees. We have people more worried about cancer than worried about global warming. funny enough they are more likely to die by global warming than Cancer.. so talk about a waste of money.
