Go Back   EcoModder Forum > Off-Topic > The Lounge
Register Now
 Register Now
 


Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 03-14-2022, 02:52 PM   #11 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
aerohead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Sanger,Texas,U.S.A.
Posts: 15,861
Thanks: 23,922
Thanked 7,207 Times in 4,640 Posts
making

Quote:
Originally Posted by freebeard View Post
Are you just making things up?

Humankind has persisted through (round numbers: 200,000/12,000) Cataclysms ....so far.
1) Nope!
2) Humankind will not persist unless we do what the scientists recommend.
3) They have the best measurement technology.
4) There's no one better at 'arithmetic'.
5) Their ability to pastcast (sp?) and forecast has a pretty good record.
6) People that can shoot a BB through a birds eye, at a million miles has my attention and respect.
7) Some economists who would dismiss scientific consensus on climate can't even achieve consensus on what caused the Wall Street Crash of 1929.
8) Bless their pointed little heads.

__________________
Photobucket album: http://s1271.photobucket.com/albums/jj622/aerohead2/
  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 03-14-2022, 02:58 PM   #12 (permalink)
Human Environmentalist
 
redpoint5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Oregon
Posts: 12,393

Acura TSX - '06 Acura TSX
90 day: 24.19 mpg (US)

Lafawnda - '01 Honda CBR600 F4i
90 day: 47.32 mpg (US)

Big Yeller - '98 Dodge Ram 2500 base
90 day: 21.82 mpg (US)

Prius Plug-in - '12 Toyota Prius Plug-in
90 day: 57.64 mpg (US)

Mazda CX-5 - '17 Mazda CX-5 Touring
90 day: 26.68 mpg (US)

Chevy ZR-2 - '03 Chevrolet S10 ZR2
90 day: 17.14 mpg (US)
Thanks: 4,189
Thanked 4,378 Times in 3,353 Posts
Just curious to those with a catastrophist prediction, at what approximate year should we begin to see declining human well-being (as a whole, not anecdotes)? In the 60's, Population Bomb predicted global starvation in the 70's and 80's. Defenders of the problem as presented claim it was only wrong by timeframe. That begs the question again of when that will become a problem? Predictions are not useful if there's no time frame attached. Grossly missing the time frame also casts massive doubt on the predictor's understanding.
__________________
Gas and Electric Vehicle Cost of Ownership Calculator







Give me absolute safety, or give me death!
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2022, 03:24 PM   #13 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
aerohead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Sanger,Texas,U.S.A.
Posts: 15,861
Thanks: 23,922
Thanked 7,207 Times in 4,640 Posts
curious

Quote:
Originally Posted by redpoint5 View Post
Just curious to those with a catastrophist prediction, at what approximate year should we begin to see declining human well-being (as a whole, not anecdotes)? In the 60's, Population Bomb predicted global starvation in the 70's and 80's. Defenders of the problem as presented claim it was only wrong by timeframe. That begs the question again of when that will become a problem? Predictions are not useful if there's no time frame attached. Grossly missing the time frame also casts massive doubt on the predictor's understanding.
1) Your making contextual comments without providing context.
2) 'When' is probably the most important issue, as those up close and personal to the 'problems' are witnessing non-linear accelerations with positive feedback loops.
3) If you'd followed any of the actual science you wouldn't be making such uninformed comments.
4) You should no what the atmospheric concentrations are.
5) You should know what Earth was like the last time those concentrations existed.
6) If you knew, you wouldn't sleep nights.
7) And you'd be out in the streets demanding that someone do something.
8) It would only be rational.
9) There is no doubt as to what the field scientists are witnessing, and the implications.
10) Any doubt you might possess would be borne out of your own ignorance.
__________________
Photobucket album: http://s1271.photobucket.com/albums/jj622/aerohead2/
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2022, 04:28 PM   #14 (permalink)
Human Environmentalist
 
redpoint5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Oregon
Posts: 12,393

Acura TSX - '06 Acura TSX
90 day: 24.19 mpg (US)

Lafawnda - '01 Honda CBR600 F4i
90 day: 47.32 mpg (US)

Big Yeller - '98 Dodge Ram 2500 base
90 day: 21.82 mpg (US)

Prius Plug-in - '12 Toyota Prius Plug-in
90 day: 57.64 mpg (US)

Mazda CX-5 - '17 Mazda CX-5 Touring
90 day: 26.68 mpg (US)

Chevy ZR-2 - '03 Chevrolet S10 ZR2
90 day: 17.14 mpg (US)
Thanks: 4,189
Thanked 4,378 Times in 3,353 Posts
I already know CO2 concentrations are about 400 ppm, up from about 280 before the industrial revolution. It's way up from a recent geologic low of about 180, which is barely enough to support plant life.

I know these increased concentrations are directly responsible for the "greening" of the earth as plant growth increases.

How any of that will play out in the future is unclear, which is why I don't lose any sleep.
__________________
Gas and Electric Vehicle Cost of Ownership Calculator







Give me absolute safety, or give me death!
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2022, 05:15 PM   #15 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
aerohead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Sanger,Texas,U.S.A.
Posts: 15,861
Thanks: 23,922
Thanked 7,207 Times in 4,640 Posts
2nd paragraph

Quote:
Originally Posted by redpoint5 View Post
I already know CO2 concentrations are about 400 ppm, up from about 280 before the industrial revolution. It's way up from a recent geologic low of about 180, which is barely enough to support plant life.

I know these increased concentrations are directly responsible for the "greening" of the earth as plant growth increases.

How any of that will play out in the future is unclear, which is why I don't lose any sleep.

You may 'think'.
Or you may 'believe.'
I don't believe that you 'know' any such thing.
The logic-tight compartments of your mind appear ever ready to dismiss any new intelligence.
__________________
Photobucket album: http://s1271.photobucket.com/albums/jj622/aerohead2/
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2022, 07:02 PM   #16 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
freebeard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: northwest of normal
Posts: 27,562
Thanks: 7,738
Thanked 8,554 Times in 7,041 Posts
"No, you."
__________________
.
.
Without freedom of speech we wouldn't know who all the idiots are. -- anonymous poster

____________________
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2022, 07:24 PM   #17 (permalink)
Human Environmentalist
 
redpoint5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Oregon
Posts: 12,393

Acura TSX - '06 Acura TSX
90 day: 24.19 mpg (US)

Lafawnda - '01 Honda CBR600 F4i
90 day: 47.32 mpg (US)

Big Yeller - '98 Dodge Ram 2500 base
90 day: 21.82 mpg (US)

Prius Plug-in - '12 Toyota Prius Plug-in
90 day: 57.64 mpg (US)

Mazda CX-5 - '17 Mazda CX-5 Touring
90 day: 26.68 mpg (US)

Chevy ZR-2 - '03 Chevrolet S10 ZR2
90 day: 17.14 mpg (US)
Thanks: 4,189
Thanked 4,378 Times in 3,353 Posts
Xactly what I was thinking.

I'm more happy to be wrong than most, and more eager to annoy any arbitrary tribe. Keeps me and them on their toes.
__________________
Gas and Electric Vehicle Cost of Ownership Calculator







Give me absolute safety, or give me death!
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to redpoint5 For This Useful Post:
aerohead (09-15-2022)
Old 03-16-2022, 06:34 PM   #18 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 982
Thanks: 271
Thanked 385 Times in 259 Posts
Just a question about nuclear power in your view.

Quote:
Originally Posted by aerohead View Post
1) Your making contextual comments without providing context.
2) 'When' is probably the most important issue, as those up close and personal to the 'problems' are witnessing non-linear accelerations with positive feedback loops.
3) If you'd followed any of the actual science you wouldn't be making such uninformed comments.
4) You should no what the atmospheric concentrations are.
5) You should know what Earth was like the last time those concentrations existed.
6) If you knew, you wouldn't sleep nights.
7) And you'd be out in the streets demanding that someone do something.
8) It would only be rational.
9) There is no doubt as to what the field scientists are witnessing, and the implications.
10) Any doubt you might possess would be borne out of your own ignorance.
With all that you have said and listed above: do you support the use of nuclear power?
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2022, 07:24 PM   #19 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 982
Thanks: 271
Thanked 385 Times in 259 Posts
I have family that work in Kenya as physicians.

Quote:
Originally Posted by aerohead View Post
They have worked in Kenya since the 60s. They say this drought is not the root of the problem. The problem is population.

This is true all across the globe.

So, how do you control population?

Demand that all women be educated! That is all you need to do! Education is the best contraceptive.
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to RustyLugNut For This Useful Post:
aerohead (09-15-2022)
Old 03-17-2022, 02:18 PM   #20 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
freebeard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: northwest of normal
Posts: 27,562
Thanks: 7,738
Thanked 8,554 Times in 7,041 Posts


I concur with the question, but question his time frame. He assumes a 10,000-year cycle, whereas I think it's more like 12,300 years.

__________________
.
.
Without freedom of speech we wouldn't know who all the idiots are. -- anonymous poster

____________________
  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread


Thread Tools




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com