voidisyinyang Posted March 26, 2019 On 3/21/2019 at 12:21 AM, windwalker said: Do I need to remind you of history... On 3/21/2019 at 12:21 AM, windwalker said: Do I need to remind you of history... On 3/20/2019 at 11:52 PM, windwalker said: did ask him to refute some things, he has yet to reply. maybe you can reply for him...give it a try..... http://arctic-news.blogspot.com/2019/03/climate-tipping-points.html Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
voidisyinyang Posted March 31, 2019 (edited) On 3/16/2019 at 11:29 AM, windwalker said: Control of what by whom? Seas were 100ft higher long ago, Co2 was much higher all before human kind appeared on the scene. Who was in control then.? ... Quote Exactly why plants and trees lost their appetite so soon is not yet known, but Curran believes it is likely linked to stresses associated with global warming to date such as drought, heat and fires. This decline in plant's carbon dioxide appetite helps explain why atmospheric carbon dioxide levels have been rising faster than ever of late,...... https://cosmosmagazine.com/climate/trees-and-plants-reached-peak-carbon-10-years-ago Edited March 31, 2019 by voidisyinyang 1 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ralis Posted April 2, 2019 Antarctica Thwaites glacier’s collapse effect on sea level rise. AGW is increasing the movement/deterioration. https://www.alternet.org/2019/04/a-glacier-the-size-of-florida-is-on-track-to-change-the-course-of-human-civilization/ 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Earl Grey Posted April 2, 2019 (edited) 17 minutes ago, ralis said: Antarctica Thwaites glacier’s collapse effect on sea level rise. AGW is increasing the movement/deterioration. https://www.alternet.org/2019/04/a-glacier-the-size-of-florida-is-on-track-to-change-the-course-of-human-civilization/ Whenever people say climate change doesn’t exist, I wonder if they have ever lived in countries that have environmental policies precisely because of climate change affecting things from agriculture to floods, droughts, and more, such as Indonesia or Philippines. When I show my colleagues arguments that refer to “science” proving climate changes is a hoax, the first question they always ask is if the people referring to that data know any science at all. Indonesia and the Philippines alone have hundreds of NGOs and local social entrepreneurs alongside government policies addressing climate change. If it’s still a fake, then I will move climate change skeptics to the same place that I designate anti-vaccinators and Flat Earthers. On the subject of Flat Earthers, apparently they believe Australia does not exist and they’re all actors paid by NASA since “no continent can cling to the bottom of a globe.” Edited April 2, 2019 by Earl Grey 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
windwalker Posted April 2, 2019 (edited) 11 minutes ago, Earl Grey said: Whenever people say climate change doesn’t exist, I wonder if they have ever lived in countries that have environmental policies precisely because of climate change affecting things from agriculture to floods, droughts, and more, such as Indonesia or Philippines. And I wonder how it started with global warming to now climate change, Climate does change, has changed and will change. As it changes some areas will benefit others will not as, it's always been and will be...... Edited April 2, 2019 by windwalker Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zork Posted April 2, 2019 (edited) 2 minutes ago, windwalker said: As it changes some areas will benefit others will not as, it's always been the case...... Do you live in Siberia or the Northern areas of Canada? If not then your area belongs to the latter cases.... Yes climate changes anyway but that doesn't mean we are heading the correct way! Edited April 2, 2019 by Zork Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Earl Grey Posted April 2, 2019 (edited) 4 minutes ago, windwalker said: And I wonder how it started with global warming to now climate change, Climated does change, has changed and will change. As it changes some areas will benefit others will not as, it's always been the case...... Clarification, please: are you making a statement, asking a question, or making a rhetorical musing? Whichever it is, what is the point you’re communicating? Sincerely trying to understand because our first interaction was a misunderstanding that I overreacted to before and am still apologetic over. Edited April 2, 2019 by Earl Grey Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
windwalker Posted April 2, 2019 (edited) 7 minutes ago, Zork said: Do you live in Siberia or the Northern areas of Canada? If not then your area belongs to the latter cases.... Do you? The point is, its not the climate, its the population. Reduce the population. Most of whats said to affect it, if true will also be reduced,,, if not technologies will be developed as needed. Edited April 2, 2019 by windwalker Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
windwalker Posted April 2, 2019 (edited) 21 minutes ago, Earl Grey said: Whichever it is, what is the point you’re communicating? Its not really about the climate.... Edited April 2, 2019 by windwalker Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zork Posted April 2, 2019 6 minutes ago, windwalker said: Do you? No. That is the point. I am concerned. 8 minutes ago, windwalker said: The point is, its not the climate, its the population. Reduce the population. Most of whats Where do you get the facts from? We are past the tipping point. Even if carbon emissions from human activity stop dead in some magical way the methane emissions from the thawing of tundras will make up for it. 13 minutes ago, windwalker said: if not technologies will be developed as needed Seriously? I told you, we are already past the tipping point and there is no such technology in sight. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Earl Grey Posted April 2, 2019 7 minutes ago, windwalker said: Its not really about the climate.... Well, you didn’t answer directly my question and sent a music video of an old song my parents used to play when I was a kid. Good song, video is amusing, but doesn’t really communicate your idea in your own words. I shall leave you with a song from my generation’s lesser known post-grunge band for the year 2000. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
windwalker Posted April 2, 2019 2 minutes ago, Zork said: No. That is the point. I am concerned. Where do you get the facts from? We are past the tipping point. Even if carbon emissions from human activity stop dead in some magical way the methane emissions from the thawing of tundras will make up for it. Seriously? I told you, we are already past the tipping point and there is no such technology in sight. nice avatar,,,used to collect the series correct according to some we've past the tipping point... human kind will manage, maybe not in its present numbers, it will manage.... On a spiritual site understanding that part of us is spiritual should it matter....? talks about change,,,has some interesting population numbers Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
windwalker Posted April 2, 2019 2 minutes ago, Earl Grey said: Well, you didn’t answer directly my question and sent a music video of an old song I did, its not about the climate its about population. reduce the population, much if not most of the problems will resolve themselves. As to the song, it speaks of change and possibilities. what are you and the others trying to prove or disprove....lots of data and claims made with no real answers....the point is? not a fan of the song you posted,,,,like the older stuff better... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zork Posted April 2, 2019 @windwalker You do realise that if we follow this faulty logic, the first people we should cull are the 300 millions who use 40% of the planet's resources? What sane people are trying to do is somehow mediate the situation to avoid this disaster. Climate change won't be the only problem, water wars, famine and disease resulting from cc will be far more important. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ralis Posted April 2, 2019 17 minutes ago, Zork said: No. That is the point. I am concerned. Where do you get the facts from? We are past the tipping point. Even if carbon emissions from human activity stop dead in some magical way the methane emissions from the thawing of tundras will make up for it. Seriously? I told you, we are already past the tipping point and there is no such technology in sight. Methane hydrate CH4 as you stated is a serious problem in that it is contained in myriad pockets and there is no technology that can extract it. The age old appeal to the technological fix in this case is an exercise in futility.. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
windwalker Posted April 2, 2019 1 minute ago, Zork said: You do realise that if we follow this faulty logic, the first people we should cull are the 300 millions who use 40% of the planet's resources? And you feel that those resources would or could be used with out the technology that allows it to be so. What do you think that 40% assuming its the US your talking about is used for? "The United States exports more food than any other country in the world. Among the top export destinations of the United States are Canada, Mexico, China, Japan and Germany." kinda funny how that works out right? takes tech to grow food for other counties that are over populated...But continue to grow because they can import what they can not grow allowing them to grow even more... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
windwalker Posted April 2, 2019 1 minute ago, ralis said: Methane hydrate CH4 as you stated is a serious problem in that it is contained in myriad pockets and there is no technology that can extract it. The age old appeal to the technological fix in this case is an exercise in futility.. never said anything about fixing it, only mentioned that technology will enable one to survive and adapt to the changes... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
windwalker Posted April 2, 2019 9 minutes ago, Zork said: What sane people are trying to do is somehow mediate the situation to avoid this disaster. Climate change won't be the only problem, water wars, famine and disease resulting from cc will be far more important. Exactly, all from overpopulation reduce the population and most of the above mentioned problems will never happen. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Earl Grey Posted April 2, 2019 7 minutes ago, windwalker said: I did, its not about the climate its about population. reduce the population, much if not most of the problems will resolve themselves. Malthusian approach? 7 minutes ago, windwalker said: As to the song, it speaks of change and possibilities. The song speaks of change and possibilities, yes. Possibility is not probability. It's a good song, by the way. 7 minutes ago, windwalker said: what are you and the others trying to prove or disprove....lots of data and claims made with no real answers....the point is? I'm using data and government policies as well as other stakeholders who are involved in the process. Try going to any of the villages I've worked in and saying climate change doesn't exist or to any of the policy people even in the most Populist governments in both Indonesia and the Philippines and they will smile and think it's cute. The point is that the people in charge of policy and the people affected by climate change don't have time to debate whether it's real or not. 9 minutes ago, windwalker said: not a fan of the song you posted,,,,like the older stuff better... Most people in your generation wouldn't care much for the song anyway and we're used to that. That's why the 90s was full of loud music so we could turn up the volume and drown out the Baby Boomers who said that their music was better. In all seriousness, I didn't expect you to like the song. It was just me being facetious because you played a song for the year 2550 and I thought I'd play a song for the year 2000. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ralis Posted April 2, 2019 1 minute ago, windwalker said: never said anything about fixing it, only mentioned that technology will enable one to survive and adapt to the changes... What do you propose? Live in underground chambers for hundreds of years? How many will be chosen for that task? Elite social Darwinists? Been watching too many science fiction movies lately? 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ralis Posted April 2, 2019 1 minute ago, windwalker said: Exactly, all from overpopulation reduce the population and most of the above mentioned problems will never happen. Why not show some facts to back up your argument! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Earl Grey Posted April 2, 2019 3 minutes ago, windwalker said: never said anything about fixing it, only mentioned that technology will enable one to survive and adapt to the changes... The problem with the technology angle is that some groups benefit and others don't, unless we infer from your early statement that there are always going to be winners and losers and people affected differently. Looking at Silicon Valley, the inequality caused by technology baffles me because the techies really believed it would be the great equalizer until the economists and the unprivileged and low-income people came in and said, "Enough about you, let's talk about me." If it's easy for Joe the Schmo in the suburbs to buy a new phone, laptop, and tablet every time Apple dumps something on us, but someone from the inner city is stuck using an old hand-me-down because his income doesn't allow him to replace as frequently, then he gets left out and he gets pushed down further. The tech argument basically says that tech will push people down even more than how climate change and income already pushes these people down, on top of existing socio-economic realities... 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ralis Posted April 2, 2019 1 minute ago, Earl Grey said: The problem with the technology angle is that some groups benefit and others don't, unless we infer from your early statement that there are always going to be winners and losers and people affected differently. Looking at Silicon Valley, the inequality caused by technology baffles me because the techies really believed it would be the great equalizer until the economists and the unprivileged and low-income people came in and said, "Enough about you, let's talk about me." If it's easy for Joe the Schmo in the suburbs to buy a new phone, laptop, and tablet every time Apple dumps something on us, but someone from the inner city is stuck using an old hand-me-down because his income doesn't allow him to replace as frequently, then he gets left out and he gets pushed down further. The tech argument basically says that tech will push people down even more than how climate change and income already pushes these people down, on top of existing socio-economic realities... Windwalker refutes that human activity is the cause of AGW in which he posits no facts as a basis for his narrative. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
windwalker Posted April 2, 2019 2 minutes ago, Earl Grey said: The problem with the technology angle is that some groups benefit and others don't, unless we infer from your early statement that there are always going to be winners and losers and people affected differently. has this not always been the case. your solution would be? The areas you spoke of have population problems....help them to understand how to control it and why,,,would go along way to a better quality of life. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
windwalker Posted April 2, 2019 1 minute ago, ralis said: Windwalker refutes that human activity is the cause of AGW in which he posits no facts as a basis for his narrative. Actually I've posted a lot of different things, and to be clear its not clear as to how much or exactly what. Not playing the game anymore ralis, if you have something to say in "your" own words be my guest. its a fact the climate has changed, and will continue to do so...in the 70s they were worried about it cooling. I wonder if they had the net back then would you then argue against the causes of the cooling. reducing population numbers , reduces all other requirements for human life no? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
