This is pretty cool!!
http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/green-tech/a23417/convert-co2-into-ethanol/?ref=yfp
What effect does it have on photosynthesis?
Quote from: bksflddan on October 18, 2016, 09:38:38 AM
What effect does it have on photosynthesis?
I didn't see any mention of the effects on photosynthesis. I'm sure since they're in the early stages of experimentation, they're looking at that......still pretty cool.....
Quote from: diesel on October 18, 2016, 09:33:22 AM
This is pretty cool!!
http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/green-tech/a23417/convert-co2-into-ethanol/?ref=yfp
Not too surprising really.... I had to go back and find the article I posted a year and a half ago on Audi converting CO2, water, and electricity into e-diesel... I would guess that going from one combustible fuel to another would be evolutionary rather than revolutionary... the key to the article you posted is scalability...
http://autoweek.com/article/green-cars/audi-cooks-first-batch-synthetic-e-diesel (http://autoweek.com/article/green-cars/audi-cooks-first-batch-synthetic-e-diesel)
Quote from: SCrubjay on October 18, 2016, 02:26:16 PM
Not too surprising really.... I had to go back and find the article I posted a year and a half ago on Audi converting CO2, water, and electricity into e-diesel... I would guess that going from one combustible fuel to another would be evolutionary rather than revolutionary... the key to the article you posted is scalability...
http://autoweek.com/article/green-cars/audi-cooks-first-batch-synthetic-e-diesel (http://autoweek.com/article/green-cars/audi-cooks-first-batch-synthetic-e-diesel)
Have to see if I can find the article on green gas I posted a year or two ago....that process made a ton of sense as it allowed for a fuel 98% identical to petrol, made from bio materials, current refineries can be converted to produce it, the process uses a catalyst and chemical reaction that produces heat which can be harnessed to create electricity, the fuel is interchangeable with petrol based gas which means the existing infrastructure can be used, aviation and jet fuels can be produced from the process, and the best bio material is the bark from scrub type trees that grows in crappy ground with low water requirements and remove saline content from the soil.....
Quote from: Just_A_Fan on October 18, 2016, 03:24:17 PM
Have to see if I can find the article on green gas I posted a year or two ago....that process made a ton of sense as it allowed for a fuel 98% identical to petrol, made from bio materials, current refineries can be converted to produce it, the process uses a catalyst and chemical reaction that produces heat which can be harnessed to create electricity, the fuel is interchangeable with petrol based gas which means the existing infrastructure can be used, aviation and jet fuels can be produced from the process, and the best bio material is the bark from scrub type trees that grows in crappy ground with low water requirements and remove saline content from the soil.....
I have no problem converting Pinto Beans to Natural Gas... and I offer free samples...
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/10/19/ala/
Quote from: bksflddan on October 19, 2016, 01:04:32 PM
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/10/19/ala/
This is what confuses me. We have people who will flat out deny that climate change is even occurring and then when it is REALLY obvious that it's occurring.....like when we've got way more greenery than normal, we get this.....
This proves that our caps are melting and there is more land mass and more CO2 and our climate is changing BECAUSE of CO2 emissions......oh, but it's a good thing 'cause we're getting lots of plants.......nothing to see here......move along......REALLY???
Quote from: diesel on October 19, 2016, 01:52:25 PM
This is what confuses me. We have people who will flat out deny that climate change is even occurring and then when it is REALLY obvious that it's occurring.....like when we've got way more greenery than normal, we get this.....
This proves that our caps are melting and there is more land mass and more CO2 and our climate is changing BECAUSE of CO2 emissions......oh, but it's a good thing 'cause we're getting lots of plants.......nothing to see here......move along......REALLY???
The climate has been changing since the Earth was formed and will continue to do so until she dies. Most people react negatively to the "sky is falling and let's stop civilization" crowd not based on the climate changing "slightly" but to the notions that a) we can do anything to stop it, b) that grabbing money in huge amounts from people/business and redistributing it will do anything about it, c) that the small changes that occur will end life as we know it......I'll put it to you this way Diesel with a simple question and answer; what were the most life filled, green, and explosive periods on this planet? Answer; Triassic, Jurassic, and into the Cretaceous Periods (aka the Mesozoic era). The temperatures were warmer than today, CO2 levels were higher than today, and plant and animal life exploded on a huge scale. There were no polar caps in much of this period and when they did form they were very small/short lived, volcanoes were putting out more CO2 that mankind has ever dreamt of doing, and the Earth was a happy camper. What you fail to realize is that the global warming crowd is after one thing only, MONEY, and they get it by scaring uneducated and ill informed people with chicken little tales with very little basis in factual outcomes. We are a sub-tropical species so a little warming north of the Mason-Dixon line isn't something that our species genetically is going to have issues with....will some other critters, Yep, but that's what happens in evolution, some make it some don't.....
Quote from: Just_A_Fan on October 19, 2016, 03:25:18 PM
The climate has been changing since the Earth was formed and will continue to do so until she dies we kill her ......
FTFY
/ couldn't resist ;) LOL
Quote from: Just_A_Fan on October 19, 2016, 03:25:18 PM
We are a sub-tropical species so a little warming north of the Mason-Dixon line isn't something that our species genetically is going to have issues with....will some other critters, Yep, but that's what happens in evolution, some make it some don't.....
Our species relies on a lot of OTHER "critters" so your simplistic view of this is very cavalier.......
Quote from: diesel on October 20, 2016, 10:02:14 AM
Our species relies on a lot of OTHER "critters" so your simplistic view of this is very cavalier.......
Oh yes, when you can't refute with fact use the typical sky is falling greenie response....the polar bear making it or not making it will not have a whole lot of impact on our species, same with the delta smelt, though polar bears aren't anywhere close to dying out any time soon. Critters have an amazing way of adapting to world around them, the polar bear being a good example, and the ones that can't die off, like the mammoth, saber tooth, et al. Been that way since life began and it's not going to change.....
Quote from: Just_A_Fan on October 20, 2016, 03:55:52 PM
Oh yes, when you can't refute with fact use the typical sky is falling greenie response....the polar bear making it or not making it will not have a whole lot of impact on our species, same with the delta smelt, though polar bears aren't anywhere close to dying out any time soon. Critters have an amazing way of adapting to world around them, the polar bear being a good example, and the ones that can't die off, like the mammoth, saber tooth, et al. Been that way since life began and it's not going to change.....
Could THIS affect us?
http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/10/03/496402620/bee-species-added-to-u-s-endangered-species-list-for-1st-time
Quote from: diesel on October 20, 2016, 04:20:08 PM
Could THIS affect us?
http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/10/03/496402620/bee-species-added-to-u-s-endangered-species-list-for-1st-time
Did you bother to read and comprehend the article? For example:
Despite the threats, the University of Hawaii says these bees "have managed to persist with amazing tenacity." While this group of species is now endangered, new species of the genus are discovered regularly — "11 new native species have been found in the past 15 years."
Amazing tenacity and 11 NEW species found in just the past 15 years......hmm, nature at work and the sky hasn't fallen....also:
"From that one original colonist they evolved into 63 known endemic species, about 10% of the world's yellow-faced bees and more than are found in this genus in all of North America."
So, in short, evolution working as the critters adapt and continue to adapt to their surroundings.....some make it, some don't.
The protected status "will allow authorities to implement recovery programs, access funding and limit their harm from outside sources," as Gregory Koob of the Fish and Wildlife Service told The Associated Press.
Quote from: izne1home on October 24, 2016, 07:27:00 AM
The protected status "will allow authorities to implement recovery programs, access funding and limit their harm from outside sources," as Gregory Koob of the Fish and Wildlife Service told The Associated Press.
Always boils down to that with most of the greenie stuff....
Quote from: Just_A_Fan on October 24, 2016, 08:36:06 AM
Always boils down to that with most of the greenie stuff....
see... Green is Good... you're almost a tree hugger
Quote from: SCrubjay on October 24, 2016, 08:50:34 AM
see... Green is Good... you're almost a tree hugger
LOL!!!!
In truth though, I am a tree hugger but one with some common sense.....the "greenies" don't have the latter and are mostly a bunch of funding grubbers....
Went up through Yosemite a few weeks ago and the forest on the west side is at least half dead...think they've got some bug reeking havoc....breaks your heart to see :(
Quote from: Just_A_Fan on October 24, 2016, 09:07:58 AM
Went up through Yosemite a few weeks ago and the forest on the west side is at least half dead...think they've got some bug reeking havoc....breaks your heart to see :(
That is drought related......dry wood invites the bug.....
Quote from: diesel on October 24, 2016, 11:02:09 AM
That is drought related......dry wood invites the bug.....
Spoke to a ranger for while about it. He said they were having issues with whatever this bug is before the drought, but that it wasn't helping....it's only on the west side as you are going into the main park...past that and up into Tuolome everything was green and beautiful...guess they are finally allowing the loggers in to clear it out as it's a tinder box waiting to go up....ranger was saying had they let the loggers in a couple of years ago they could have gotten ahead of it by quite a bit. Love the forest, my favorite place on the planet, but this stupid idea that we shouldn't be managing it much more proactively is showing how short sighted that mentality is....
Quote from: Just_A_Fan on October 24, 2016, 02:31:30 PM
Spoke to a ranger for while about it. He said they were having issues with whatever this bug is before the drought, but that it wasn't helping....it's only on the west side as you are going into the main park...past that and up into Tuolome everything was green and beautiful...guess they are finally allowing the loggers in to clear it out as it's a tinder box waiting to go up....ranger was saying had they let the loggers in a couple of years ago they could have gotten ahead of it by quite a bit. Love the forest, my favorite place on the planet, but this stupid idea that we shouldn't be managing it much more proactively is showing how short sighted that mentality is....
In our efforts to "manage" it, i.e. CONTROL it, we've screwed it up over and over.......if we'd quit screwing with it, I'd bet nature would take it's rightful course......
Quote from: diesel on October 24, 2016, 10:01:17 PM
In our efforts to "manage" it, i.e. CONTROL it, we've screwed it up over and over.......if we'd quit screwing with it, I'd bet nature would take it's rightful course......
Uh, no....that mentality is what has led to the huge forest fires we've experienced....it sounds kum-bi-ah on the surface until you apply a little common sense and look at the law of unintended consequences. Forest management keeps infestations from spreading, reduces fire potential, and insures logged sections are replanted so we have forest in the future....know a number of rangers and they will tell you the same thing. And your ignorance on good forest management is atypical of so many and the reason why we have the problems we do. If you actually look at the logging industry's record on replanting with watchful eyes of the forest management rangers, you would see that because of their collective efforts we have had more and healthier forest lands....wasn't till the kum-bi-ah crowd start pushing stupid policies that we had problems.....
65K dead trees in Sequioia Nat Forest alone. Pine beatle, infecting cedar and pine.
Over a million in California alone. Wringing hands anal defilade is exactly why the Yellowstone fire was so devastating.
Quote from: Just_A_Fan on October 25, 2016, 05:21:43 AM
Uh, no....that mentality is what has led to the huge forest fires we've experienced....it sounds kum-bi-ah on the surface until you apply a little common sense and look at the law of unintended consequences. Forest management keeps infestations from spreading, reduces fire potential, and insures logged sections are replanted so we have forest in the future....know a number of rangers and they will tell you the same thing. And your ignorance on good forest management is atypical of so many and the reason why we have the problems we do. If you actually look at the logging industry's record on replanting with watchful eyes of the forest management rangers, you would see that because of their collective efforts we have had more and healthier forest lands....wasn't till the kum-bi-ah crowd start pushing stupid policies that we had problems.....
Gosh, whatever did the forest DO before we came along to "manage" it????
Let the damn fires do their job. If you are idiot enough to build a home or a city in a fire prone area, you have no right to moan & bitch about how a fire destroyed your life. The forest can manage itself quite well. I read an article once that said the indigenous peoples used to deliberately light fires for this very reason. I do not know if that is true or not, but kind of makes sense. Even lumber jacking leaves brush behind that is the start of most fires. Just let the fires go & they will clean up the area quite nicely & the forest will repair itself. I know this seems a bit strange coming from someone who lives in the mountains, but we do take care to keep our place clean & mostly brush free. I like some brush around for the wildlife, but not enough to create a fire hazard.
Quote from: laidback on October 25, 2016, 10:39:51 AM
Let the damn fires do their job. If you are idiot enough to build a home or a city in a fire prone area, you have no right to moan & bitch about how a fire destroyed your life. The forest can manage itself quite well. I read an article once that said the indigenous peoples used to deliberately light fires for this very reason. I do not know if that is true or not, but kind of makes sense. Even lumber jacking leaves brush behind that is the start of most fires. Just let the fires go & they will clean up the area quite nicely & the forest will repair itself. I know this seems a bit strange coming from someone who lives in the mountains, but we do take care to keep our place clean & mostly brush free. I like some brush around for the wildlife, but not enough to create a fire hazard.
So if you have a house in California don't bitch about earthquakes destroying your home, if you live anywhere near the coast and a hurricane destroys your home don't bitch, if you live in the middle of the country don't bitch if a tornado flattens out your place.....REALLY, that's how you see this?
Now getting back to forest management....we USED to manage the forest areas, mostly through controlled logging in the public lands sections...the loggers used to clear out underbrush that was way overgrown which let the forest "breath" and also reduced the risk of fires that would burn the whole thing down. The rangers used to go through and tag the trees to be removed and the loggers took out the trees and the surrounding underbrush. If large sections were to be removed they also had a replanting process they went through. Then we got stupid and kicked out 95% of the logging, did the kum-bi-ah thing, and the forest got overgrown, especially in the underbrush, and became a tinder box waiting to go up....and it has. What the natives did, and the rangers and loggers used to do as well, was set "controlled" burns OF THE UNDERBRUSH to prevent the whole bloody forest from burning down. That was the way the natives helped "manage" the forests. They weren't stupid, the forest was part of their livelihood, so they learned over the centuries how to best maintain it. Will the forest come back? Sure, in a few hundred years, but in the meantime our "let nature just do its thing" mentality has managed to burn down huge sections of the forest needlessly, kill lots of critters, and harm humans too.....that's NUTS when a little, logical forest management could of reduced or prevented much of that....
Quote from: Just_A_Fan on October 25, 2016, 11:07:45 AM
So if you have a house in California don't bitch about earthquakes destroying your home, if you live anywhere near the coast and a hurricane destroys your home don't bitch, if you live in the middle of the country don't bitch if a tornado flattens out your place.....REALLY, that's how you see this?
Absolutely that's the way I see this. You made the choice, so you live with the results. You gotta pick one & live with the results. How stupid is it to build a home or city in a flood plain, and yet it's being done. To deliberately build in any area that mother nature has a habit of tearing up on a regular basis and then crying oh poor me is stupidity at it's best.
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/kathleen-brown/nobel-prize-winning-physicist-obama-dead-wrong-global-warming-0
"So global warming really starts with these two people: Al Gore and [former United Nations climate head Rajendra] Pachauri," Giaever continued. "And what they did - they made this curve popular...And what did this curve measure? Well, this curve measures what is the average temperature for the world for a whole year...For one year. So there's an average temperature for the whole Earth for one year and that measures in a fraction of a degree.
"So what does that mean? I think probably nothing. Let me talk about that again: From 1880 to 2015, the temperature has increased from 288 K [degrees Kelvin] to 288.8 K - 0.3 percent. I think the temperature has been amazingly stable.
"If I take where I live in Albany, New York, there is roughly an 80 K difference between summer and winter at some time, so would you think that a 0.8 degree average on the Earth makes any difference to the climate in Albany? Is that sensible to you?...
"I would say that global warming basically is a non-problem. Just leave it alone, it will take care of itself," he added.
Quote from: laidback on October 25, 2016, 12:05:41 PM
Absolutely that's the way I see this. You made the choice, so you live with the results. You gotta pick one & live with the results. How stupid is it to build a home or city in a flood plain, and yet it's being done. To deliberately build in any area that mother nature has a habit of tearing up on a regular basis and then crying oh poor me is stupidity at it's best.
So where does Mother Nature not tear things up?
Quote from: izne1home on October 25, 2016, 01:39:42 PM
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/kathleen-brown/nobel-prize-winning-physicist-obama-dead-wrong-global-warming-0
"So global warming really starts with these two people: Al Gore and [former United Nations climate head Rajendra] Pachauri," Giaever continued. "And what they did - they made this curve popular...And what did this curve measure? Well, this curve measures what is the average temperature for the world for a whole year...For one year. So there's an average temperature for the whole Earth for one year and that measures in a fraction of a degree.
"So what does that mean? I think probably nothing. Let me talk about that again: From 1880 to 2015, the temperature has increased from 288 K [degrees Kelvin] to 288.8 K - 0.3 percent. I think the temperature has been amazingly stable.
"If I take where I live in Albany, New York, there is roughly an 80 K difference between summer and winter at some time, so would you think that a 0.8 degree average on the Earth makes any difference to the climate in Albany? Is that sensible to you?...
"I would say that global warming basically is a non-problem. Just leave it alone, it will take care of itself," he added.
Pretty much spot on....
Giaever rejected the notion that man-made global warming is an "incontrovertible" truth, telling his Lindau audience that "global warming really has become a new religion. Because you can't discuss it -- it's not proper."
He added that the "optimal temperature" for the globe has never been establsihed.
"What is the optimal temperature for the Earth? Is it the temperature we have right now? That would be a miracle." he said. "Maybe it's two degrees warmer. Maybe it's two degrees colder. No one has told me what the optimal temperature is for the whole Earth."
Quote from: Just_A_Fan on October 25, 2016, 02:13:00 PM
So where does Mother Nature not tear things up?
Exactly my point. You pick the one you want to live with & quit bitching when it hits.
.......Let me talk about that again: From 1880 to 2015, the temperature has increased from 288 K [degrees Kelvin] to 288.8 K - 0.3 percent. I think the temperature has been amazingly stable.
"If I take where I live in Albany, New York, there is roughly an 80 K difference between summer and winter at some time, so would you think that a 0.8 degree average on the Earth makes any difference to the climate in Albany? Is that sensible to you?...
that is a really disturbing statement .... it is misleading to those that know nothing about Kelvin.... 288 K is 58.73 F.. and 288.8 K is 60.17 F... so the increase may by .8 K... but in the US of A (suck it Celsius).. that is 1.44 degrees Fahrenheit... the same approximate 3% but a more significant increase when you understand the difference in scale.
Quote from: laidback on October 25, 2016, 03:10:56 PM
Exactly my point. You pick the one you want to live with & quit bitching when it hits.
LOL...okay that is about as good as we can probably do
Quote from: SCrubjay on October 25, 2016, 03:39:43 PM
.......Let me talk about that again: From 1880 to 2015, the temperature has increased from 288 K [degrees Kelvin] to 288.8 K - 0.3 percent. I think the temperature has been amazingly stable.
"If I take where I live in Albany, New York, there is roughly an 80 K difference between summer and winter at some time, so would you think that a 0.8 degree average on the Earth makes any difference to the climate in Albany? Is that sensible to you?...
that is a really disturbing statement .... it is misleading to those that know nothing about Kelvin.... 288 K is 58.73 F.. and 288.8 K is 60.17 F... so the increase may by .8 K... but in the US of A (suck it Celsius).. that is 1.44 degrees Fahrenheit... the same approximate 3% but a more significant increase when you understand the difference in scale.
That's fair, however once you start reviewing the data manipulation that has been going by NOAA, NASA, and others pushing the warming agenda, which they finally admitted to and/or caught doing, then even that small increase becomes questionable as to its accuracy. His other points are spot on and not misleading in any way. We are far from the warmest periods in Earth's history and those warmer periods produced huge vegetation and life expansions. Actually global cooling would be a much greater threat to our species, the majority of the other species, and vegetation on this rock.
Quote from: SCrubjay on October 25, 2016, 03:39:43 PM
.......Let me talk about that again: From 1880 to 2015, the temperature has increased from 288 K [degrees Kelvin] to 288.8 K - 0.3 percent. I think the temperature has been amazingly stable.
"If I take where I live in Albany, New York, there is roughly an 80 K difference between summer and winter at some time, so would you think that a 0.8 degree average on the Earth makes any difference to the climate in Albany? Is that sensible to you?...
that is a really disturbing statement .... it is misleading to those that know nothing about Kelvin.... 288 K is 58.73 F.. and 288.8 K is 60.17 F... so the increase may by .8 K... but in the US of A (suck it Celsius).. that is 1.44 degrees Fahrenheit... the same approximate 3% but a more significant increase when you understand the difference in scale.
The last time I had to calculate a Kelvin conversion was at Bullard in 1975. Just throwing it out there for dialog, but it is troubling that very smart scientests are polarized on the issue.
Quote from: izne1home on October 26, 2016, 10:09:24 AM
The last time I had to calculate a Kelvin conversion was at Bullard in 1975. Just throwing it out there for dialog, but it is troubling that very smart scientests are polarized on the issue.
I think his remark about this stuff becoming a "religion" is why....
Quote from: izne1home on October 26, 2016, 10:09:24 AM
The last time I had to calculate a Kelvin conversion was at Bullard in 1975. ....
See you probably could have done the math better than me, since you went to a rich-kid school.... my inner city education failed me, cause I couldn't even do my own math right....
I dropped a decimal point.. the
Kelvin increase is by .278%.. BUT the Fahrenheit increase is 2.45% .... and Celsius is a 5.38% increase.... if you use a different scale, you get a different result... or as JustaFan calls it.... Manipulating the data.
Quote from: SCrubjay on October 26, 2016, 03:11:01 PM
See you probably could have done the math better than me, since you went to a rich-kid school.... my inner city education failed me, cause I couldn't even do my own math right....
I dropped a decimal point.. the Kelvin increase is by .278%.. BUT the Fahrenheit increase is 2.45% .... and Celsius is a 5.38% increase.... if you use a different scale, you get a different result... or as JustaFan calls it.... Manipulating the data.
Yep, numbers get manipulated all the time. :)
Quote from: SCrubjay on October 26, 2016, 03:11:01 PM
See you probably could have done the math better than me, since you went to a rich-kid school.....
Rich kid math: 2 + 2 = I think it's like 5 or something by it doesn't matter because Daddy will just give me a $20 bill.
And yes, those were the girls I dated in high school. Fun and lucrative.
Quote from: SCrubjay on October 26, 2016, 03:11:01 PM
See you probably could have done the math better than me, since you went to a rich-kid school.... my inner city education failed me, cause I couldn't even do my own math right....
I dropped a decimal point.. the Kelvin increase is by .278%.. BUT the Fahrenheit increase is 2.45% .... and Celsius is a 5.38% increase.... if you use a different scale, you get a different result... or as JustaFan calls it.... Manipulating the data.
I still think his point, "what is the proper temperature for the Earth?", is the real question. We can use differing scales of measure and various percentages, but that is really nothing but number games. Without defining the baseline for comparison of numbers, they have no contextual meaning or usefulness for scientific application. If the Earth's proper baseline temperature should be X and 100 years ago it was X - .8/2.45/5.38% then today we are actually improving from then vs if X was the baseline at the temperature 100 years ago and today we are + .8/2.45/5.38% then we are getting worse.
The earth is gonna do what the earth is gonna do. There is nothing the human race can do to change that. Those that survive the change, will survive. those that can't, will die. Survival of the fittest & all of that other stuff the doomsayers have been saying all these years, although it will not be a catastrophic event like they want us to believe, it will be a long, slow hundreds of years trip. The earth has been changing for millions of years, it's stupid to think humans have been the cause of the current "global warming crisis". S**t happens when you get old, regardless of whether you are the earth or a human.
Quote from: Just_A_Fan on October 27, 2016, 04:28:47 AM
... Without defining the baseline for comparison of numbers, they have no contextual meaning or usefulness for scientific application. ..
Let's bring Laidback's comments into this for context.... for millions of years the Earth, a Closed Biological System, kept everything in pretty much equilibrium... Storms, floods, drought, famine, fires, hurricanes, disease, wild animals, etc. kept the human population pretty much in check.... from the time of Christ to the signing of the Declaration of Independence the Earth's population tripled from about 300 million to 900 million... in the next 100 years we added as many people on the globe as the prior 1800 years.... that takes us approximately to 1900 or pretty close to the 1880 date noted..... at that point we are at 1.65 Billion.. and now, in just 116 years we have added 5.6 Billion to total 7.2 Billion...
Along with that, we have industrialization like never seen on the planet... plus all those people create a whole bunch of carbon dioxide and methane.... while we continue to deforest large parts of the world ...
Now... I have no idea if all of us are causing Global Warming or if it part of the natural cycle... BUT if it has to be the Scare Tactic to get us all to WAKE THE F(_)CK UP and take care of the only planet we have... then I am fine with that...
because if not, Laidback will definitely be proven right and the Earth will heal herself and humans will be reduced back to populations She can support.... good times acomin' .... I just want Charlize Therone on my side...
(http://cdn1-www.comingsoon.net/assets/uploads/1970/01/file_612049_mad-max-sequel.jpg)
And none of what you mentioned above can be compared to the toxic crap that all the volcanoes world wide spit into our atmosphere millions of years ago, and yet here we are, mushing along thinking we humans are going to destroy/save the earth. Ain't a gonna happen. Humans may be gone, but old mother earth is gonna just be gettin on down the road. She may be wearing a different outfit, but she will still be here looking for someone else to dance with.
Quote from: laidback on October 27, 2016, 02:15:06 PM
..... Humans may be gone, but old mother earth is gonna just be gettin on down the road....
Absolutely agree....
Quote from: laidback on October 27, 2016, 02:15:06 PM
.... and yet here we are, mushing along thinking we humans are going to destroy/save the earth. ..
We shouldn't confuse "saving the earth" with being good stewards to the only planet we have and prolonging our ability to inhabit this rock as a viable species... I believe THAT is completely within our control.
Quote from: SCrubjay on October 27, 2016, 09:17:46 AM
Let's bring Laidback's comments into this for context.... for millions of years the Earth, a Closed Biological System, kept everything in pretty much equilibrium... Storms, floods, drought, famine, fires, hurricanes, disease, wild animals, etc. kept the human population pretty much in check.... from the time of Christ to the signing of the Declaration of Independence the Earth's population tripled from about 300 million to 900 million... in the next 100 years we added as many people on the globe as the prior 1800 years.... that takes us approximately to 1900 or pretty close to the 1880 date noted..... at that point we are at 1.65 Billion.. and now, in just 116 years we have added 5.6 Billion to total 7.2 Billion...
Along with that, we have industrialization like never seen on the planet... plus all those people create a whole bunch of carbon dioxide and methane.... while we continue to deforest large parts of the world ...
Now... I have no idea if all of us are causing Global Warming or if it part of the natural cycle... BUT if it has to be the Scare Tactic to get us all to WAKE THE F(_)CK UP and take care of the only planet we have... then I am fine with that...
because if not, Laidback will definitely be proven right and the Earth will heal herself and humans will be reduced back to populations She can support.... good times acomin' .... I just want Charlize Therone on my side...
(http://cdn1-www.comingsoon.net/assets/uploads/1970/01/file_612049_mad-max-sequel.jpg)
Don't disagree with any of the above....good stewards is exactly what we should be.....and Laidback is probably spot on in his assessment. If we lived on a planet with informed, broadminded, forward thinking people we'd be fine. The reality, however, is the exact opposite. The threat to this planet is not in the area of global warming, actually a generally warmer plant would be beneficial to us, it's in some of the other things you mentioned, especially in the area of over-population. Not to sound like a fatalist, but Laidback is correct that the planet will equal itself out over time. That may be our species either dying out or tremendously being reduced in size (natural or though our own hands), or we may discover how to exit this rock and move beyond our solar system (what we should be collectively working on). The scare tactics though have zero impact on the sum of the gross issues and are simply allowing those who wish to capitalize on pseudo-science, politics, and ignorance to engineer money grabs.
Quote from: laidback on October 27, 2016, 02:15:06 PM
And none of what you mentioned above can be compared to the toxic crap that all the volcanoes world wide spit into our atmosphere millions of years ago, and yet here we are, mushing along thinking we humans are going to destroy/save the earth. Ain't a gonna happen. Humans may be gone, but old mother earth is gonna just be gettin on down the road. She may be wearing a different outfit, but she will still be here looking for someone else to dance with.
Pretty much....(thumbs up sign goes here)
Quote from: SCrubjay on October 27, 2016, 02:44:14 PM
We shouldn't confuse "saving the earth" with being good stewards to the only planet we have and prolonging our ability to inhabit this rock as a viable species... I believe THAT is completely within our control.
Scrubs, you are being idealistic now :) :) :)
Know this will ruffle some feathers, oh well, but so long as religion that espouses "go forth and multiply to the point of insanity" running alongside PC public policies that remove fiscal constraints from people doing just that exist on this planet, there is no way we will ever have the control necessary to reign in much of what would be needed.