The climate change consensus extends beyond climate scientists

[freebeard]

Hey, I'm not the only one that watches S0!

Fat Charlie — That last sentence made my head hurt but I eventually got it.

They claimed it was for the sake of their grandparents and grandchildren, but it was of course for the sake of their grandparent's grandchildren, and their grandchildren's grandparents.

Was that from earlier in the thread? I must have missed it.

[freebeard]

Quartz:The US government keeps spectacularly underestimating solar energy installation

Nonetheless, there is an unmistakable trend in the data: The EIA regularly underestimates the growth in renewables but overestimates US fossil-fuel consumption, which some critics see as an attempt to boost the oil and gas industry.

The coal industry conspicuous by it's absence.

Renewable Energy Threatens the World’s Biggest Science Project

Inside the $24 billion long bet on fusion power in France.

All based on a misapprehension of the mechanism that powers the Electric Universe.

[rmay635703]

Originally Posted by Old Tele man

Laughed at the "zero pollution" statement for the French nuke...today, yes; but not in the future when the waste products have to disposed of.

Why we need thorium
99% less waste
And the waste is concentrated enough to build passive solid state generation that uses the waste as the power source.

[Panther140]

Originally Posted by sendler

I'll never be ready to just throw in the towel. Everything we can do and the sooner we do it will help the transition to sustainability. We have been making many mistakes. It's who we are as a modern world hijacks our stone age hunter/ gatherer brains. But there are more and more people becoming aware. So I still see light.

Our actual problem is really a population problem. Any region that cannot feed its local population with locally grown crops and livestock is overpopulated.

We have too many people now, because everybody survives to breeding age and beyond. People that are genetically unfit for survival are artificially assisted, and their bad traits are allowed to multiply. We take extensive measures to ensure that our weaklings survive and reproduce to make more weaklings.

It wont be long before every strong bloodline is strongly tainted by these weak traits that we help to prevail, to the point where nobody is able to survive or reproduce successfully without significant medical intervention.

After that takes place, any interruption in western civilization's way of life will cause mass death. I don't know when this will happen, but I do not believe that this way of life is eternal. It will be disrupted some day by something, and there will be a lot of people who die to infectious disease or other ailments.

How long would you survive if the semi trucks stopped bringing you food from my region? How long would the average person live in your city if it were blockaded?

[oil pan 4]

The only long lived radioactive waste thorium produces is plutonium 238, which is used in deep space missions.
Disposal problem solved.

[freebeard]

Our actual problem is really a population problem.

Exactly! The problem is the proportion of the population that hasn't seen the light.

"We have too many people now, because everybody survives to breeding age and beyond." People that go childless because of the Leftist propaganda.

"It wont be long before every strong bloodline is strongly tainted by these weak traits that we help to prevail, to the point where nobody is able to survive or reproduce successfully without significant medical intervention." Those notional strong bloodlines will have a Facespook neural implant.

"After that takes place, any interruption in western civilization's way of life will cause mass death. I don't know when this will happen..." Or why. How about the Shawyer EM drive or the Mach drive perfected, a space elevator on the Moon, and cities in the kilometer high lava tubes? Not enough pain and suffering, I suppose?

All powered by Thorium.

[redpoint5]

Originally Posted by Panther140

People that are genetically unfit for survival are artificially assisted, and their bad traits are allowed to multiply. We take extensive measures to ensure that our weaklings survive and reproduce to make more weaklings.

I see this as the biggest problem. Population growth has been on the decline for some time, and I expect to see growth halt around the end of my lifetime. I have heard it said that the US would have a negative growth rate if we didn't have immigration, and Japan's population is in decline.

However, I see no solution on the horizon for the spread of unhealthy genetic traits. The best solution is very unpopular with people on both sides of the political spectrum, which would be gene selection or manipulation (designer babies). While gene diversity is critical for species survival, I can see no reason why bad eyesight or type 1 diabetes would be beneficial. We should probably just eliminate the easily recognizable detrimental genes, but the problem is the slippery slope.

As far as everyone becoming a farmer; I don't want to grow corn because I find it uninteresting. I'd rather go to Mars or explore the depths of the sea. The only way to discover the mysteries of the universe is to have an abundance of resources.

[oil pan 4]

The US population is that of a typical developed country where the population is steady.
The main thing driving US population growth now is immigration.

[freebeard]

I see this as the biggest problem.

As bad as Idiocracy?

Culture evolves faster than biology. Home Depot have to teach their Millennial employees how to use a tape measure.

[Xist]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

I often find the truth of any matter to be close to the center of any two extreme positions.

Take any politician. Are they really as good or as bad as people like to say? The United States has survived dozens of presidents and will survive many more. Strong opinions sound exhausting. I only strongly dislike many things because I am grumpy. People making "literally" an auto-antonym, saying "I was like" instead of "I felt," "I thought," and "I said," and humming.

Is any of that important?

...no...

People rarely want to watch realistic movies. News stories often make things sound like the end of the world, and politicians want us to think their agenda is the most important thing ever.

I see many YouTube videos that have thumbnails of people having extreme reasons and have extreme titles. People follow individuals with strong opinions.

Can you imagine a successful YouTube channel where someone calmly explains how both Republicans and Democrats exaggerate their sides and the truth is somewhere in the middle?

Some people say we cannot reverse Animaniac global warming. The Paris Awards would cost $100 Trillion just for the first step to reduce antimatter global warming.
How much would it cost to create a solar shade? If you reduce solar radiation by 1%, how much would it cool that area?

Couldn't you use solar shades to equalize temperatures around a hurricane?