CanucksCorner.com Forums

Billions and billions of people fucking, eating and shitting are why the environment is fucked Per. Why cant you see this?

Kill off 5 or 6 billion of us and watch the flora and fauna return

The Brown Wizard wrote: ↑Sat Sep 28, 2019 1:19 pm Billions and billions of people fucking, eating and shitting are why the environment is fucked Per. Why cant you see this?

Kill off 5 or 6 billion of us and watch the flora and fauna return

Lol, sure.

But that would hardly be ethical, would it?

Per wrote: ↑Sat Sep 28, 2019 1:36 pm

The Brown Wizard wrote: ↑Sat Sep 28, 2019 1:19 pm Billions and billions of people fucking, eating and shitting are why the environment is fucked Per. Why cant you see this?

Kill off 5 or 6 billion of us and watch the flora and fauna return

Lol, sure.

But that would hardly be ethical, would it?

That depends on perspective...if youre one of the lucky livers then you just won the environmental lucky lotto

Strangelove wrote: ↑Sat Sep 28, 2019 1:13 pm

Per wrote: ↑Sat Sep 28, 2019 1:08 pm but it’s good that the problems of climate change are getting more attention. Maybe the politicians will finally get their thumbs out of their asses and start doing something.

The concentration of CO2 is higher than ever before in the history of mankind, and sea levels are rising.
We need to address the elephant in the room.

Earth to Per: Nothing can be done about climate change.

Oh it's true!

I disagree.

We could reverse the destruction of the ozon layer through international treaties and legislation, and I’m sure we can reverse the greenhouse effect as well, if we just put our best minds on it.

We did the ozon thingy a tad late, so melanomas sky rocketed, but we brought it under control.

Same with global warming. We are late to the party, and we can’t stop it completely, but we can still prevent the worst case scenarios and slow down the process. Eventually we may even be able to reverse it, but that may take a century or two. Perhaps more.

But we need to at least try.

Agree to disagree.

Humans can't control the Earth's climate.

I like my lucky livers with onions.

Hey Mic, you may want to head over Russia.

Reefer2 wrote: ↑Sat Sep 28, 2019 4:49 pm Hey Mic, you may want to head over Russia.

Maybe just for the Tennis women there are...

20 REASONS TO BE SKEPTICAL OF MAN-MADE GLOBAL WARMING

https://chipstero7.blogspot.com/2018/09 ... -made.html

Yeahno.... rather than trusting some random blogger, how about checking in with the real scientists?

https://climate.nasa.gov/causes/

The amount of solar energy that Earth receives has followed the Sun’s natural 11-year cycle of small ups and downs with no net increase since the 1950s. Over the same period, global temperature has risen markedly. It is therefore extremely unlikely that the Sun has caused the observed global temperature warming trend over the past half-century.

In its Fifth Assessment Report, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a group of 1,300 independent scientific experts from countries all over the world under the auspices of the United Nations, concluded there's a more than 95 percent probability that human activities over the past 50 years have warmed our planet.

The industrial activities that our modern civilization depends upon have raised atmospheric carbon dioxide levels from 280 parts per million to 400 parts per million in the last 150 years. The panel also concluded there's a better than 95 percent probability that human-produced greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide have caused much of the observed increase in Earth's temperatures over the past 50 years.

So, to sum it up:

Climate change deniers sponsored by big oil and coal say "we don't know why it's getting warmer, so let''s just stick our heads in the sand and pretend like it's not happening."

97% of climate scientists say "we don't know why it's getting warmer, but it's a 95% probability that it is because of the green house gasses we're emitting, so how about trying to reduce those?"

I say better safe than sorry, so opt for what the scientists suggest. They're probably smarter than us.
And if we end up with a cleaner environment and better health for no particular reason, then so be it.

,

Watching a bit of Dr Patrick Moore last night. Still have moore to see.

The hydrocarbons we burn were atmospheric CO2 that has been converted to oil/coal in the ground. We are just re releasing it.

Climate scientist - those who agree with the IPCC
Climate change deniers - Scientists who disagree with IPCC
It is polarized political branding.

Topper wrote: ↑Mon Sep 30, 2019 5:25 am The hydrocarbons we burn were atmospheric CO2 that has been converted to oil/coal in the ground. We are just re releasing it.

Absolutely.

The problem is just that we are re-releasing millions of years worth of CO2 within centuries, so the amount in the atmosphere is sky rocketing.

I saw some while ago though that some Norwegians (iirc) have invented a gadget that harvests carbon out of thin air and converts it to graphene. There's a huge market for graphene, and if we can turn this into some large scale industry, maybe the problem is solved?

Climate scientist - those who agree with the IPCC

Actually, only some 97% do.

Climate change deniers - Scientists who disagree with IPCC

I assume these are the other 3%?
Although I have seen articles debunking climate change deniers point out that many of the scientists critical of the IPCC have earned their credentials in completely unrelated fields of science, so I guess that not all climate change deniers are actually climate scientists.

Oh, and there are of course also a whole lot of climate change deniers that lack any formal training whatsoever in the sciences...

Has Cook ever explained his abstract search that came up with the 97% number? It was all hocus pocus with several authors debunking him on the classification of their papers.

I know he has admitted the number is a bogus political plot to further his agenda by appealing to layman and political support.

Sadly it is perpetuated as if it were creation science.

Moore talks of a steady depletion of CO2 over the past millions of years (need to listen further to get exact scale of reference).

Topper wrote: ↑Mon Sep 30, 2019 7:17 am Moore talks of a steady depletion of CO2 over the past millions of years (need to listen further to get exact scale of reference).

Would make sense, as the long term trend has been the world getting cooler.

It was way hotter back when dinosaurs roamed the earth.

We probably wouldn't have liked it back then.