A CONSERVATIVE solution to global warming (Part 1)

[Subduction Zone]

Has it ever occurred to you that you make a
fool of yourself speaking with such certainty
of things you know nothing about?

Or that you are the one who is all dogma, no
info?

That is all that they have sometimes. Take the Greenhouse Effect. Not controversial in any way at all and yet @BSM1 bailed almost immediately on the conversation. I did not even get to the explanation, I only laid the groundwork on how we know that there is some sort of anomalous warming of the Earth (which is a good thing). But even understanding the most basic of science threatens their whole belief system so they need to deny the obvious to preserve their denial.

 

[Audie]

No, because these actions are only being employed in the service of the capitalist's prime directive: to maximize the profits returned to the capital investors. It is an economic philosophy and system based solely on greed.

In your imagination these things are so.

You are talking as an extreme left wing ideolog
I wonder what all happened to you, to make you
think this way.

Reading history may not be one of them

Through nothing I did but be born, I associate
often enough with some very seriously rich people.

What do you think their motivation is, to put
in very long hours of hard work (such as you are
utterly unqualified to do,yourself) when they already
have far more wealth then anyone could possibly need?

 

[PureX]

None of the world's existing economic systems are "pure". They are all tweaked and modified versions of the theories. There have been periods when the system was tweaked so as to "unrig" the advantages to the wealthy, and we can install those tweaks again.

Heavily taxing the wealthy investors isn't addressing the problem. Neither are labor unions and anti-monopoly laws. These are the equivalent of putting bandaids on broken limbs.

IMO, a properly tweaked capitalist system has proven to be the best economic system yet devised. But if you have a better idea, I'm all ears.

Even "tweaked" there were still MILLIONS of Americans going without basic food, clothing, shelter, and opportunity.

 

[Audie]

Even "tweaked" there were still MILLIONS of Americans going without basic food, clothing, shelter, and opportunity.

See if you can provide evidence for that
Tweak away; you will need to.

What millions-I suppose- of americans do is
whine and blame others for their own failures.

You trade them, the whiners and losers, one
for one with people from any of several third
world countries where there actually are not
any opportunities, and how they love it here,
and make the most of it.

The sorriest bum in the USA lives in material
splendor compared to half the world's population.

It may be a comforting illusion to think that your
or others' state is none of their fault, but that
of them stinkin' greedy plutocrats who grab all
the good stuff, and if you could just overthrow
them, all would be well.

You should visit Venezuela, see how it works.

 

[Twilight Hue]

"Books" can be very misleading. I can find you countless books that "prove" evolution to be wrong. I don't take them seriously.

Here are the facts that cannot be denied. The amount of CO2 is ever increasing in our atmosphere. CO2 causes a greenhouse effect. The increase is due to man's activities. And there will be some feedback from that increasing CO2 that causes additional warming.

Those are all easily demonstrable. If you disagree with any of those you are already not following the evidence or the scientific method. The important question is "how much feedback".

I'm curious as to what experiments were performed that would conclusively point out it is man-made.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I'm curious as to what experiments were performed that would conclusively point out it is man-made.

Good question. One does an isotopic analysis of CO2. Carbon from fossil fuels has a different isotope ratio than atmospheric CO2.

Here is an article that explains that:

How do we know that recent CO₂ increases are due to human activities?

 

[Audie]

I'm curious as to what experiments were performed that would conclusively point out it is man-made.

You mean, prove?

 

[Twilight Hue]

You mean, prove?

Well people are saying that climate change is man-made in a very confident way. All I see is predictive modeling.

No one's going to deny there's climate change, what the contention is if it's really all man-made as people say, or not, although obviously we are a contributor.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Well people are saying that climate change is man-made in a very confident way. All I see is predictive modeling.

No one's going to deny there's climate change, what the contention is if it's really all man-made as people say, or not, although obviously we are a contributor.

Did you read the article that I linked for you?

 

[Audie]

Well people are saying that climate change is man-made in a very confident way. All I see is predictive modeling.

No one's going to deny there's climate change, what the contention is if it's really all man-made or not although obviously we are a contributor.

Ok gotcha.

Possibly, you could find photos from space showing what
a thin membrane the atmosphere is, compared to the size of the earth. There is precious little to breathe, at 4 miles up.

You could watch these hundred car coal trains going by,
one after another, think how many tonnes, how many
cubic meters of CO2 that might be.

The ocean cant soak up all of it.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Good question. One does an isotopic analysis of CO2. Carbon from fossil fuels has a different isotope ratio than atmospheric CO2.

Here is an article that explains that:

How do we know that recent CO₂ increases are due to human activities?

I think the whole argument is more political than scientific. Science can verify climate change but the specifics seem to be still in contention which is why nobody is gaining much ground aside from the legislative political end of things.

I've always had the notion that governments are more privy to actual information over the average citizen. If the danger was really that great to infrastructure, and a true threat to life, I can pretty much be assured that pretty much all worldwide worldwide governments will respond collectively no matter what affiliated party people belong to.

The fact that you got pros and cons on the climate change issue (formerly known as global warming. Don't forget that. *Heh*) shows me that there is nothing conclusive to the extent that all the alarm bells and Sirens are going off.

I'm also waiting for those islands to go underwater like they said they would.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Did you read the article that I linked for you?

No I didn't but I will .

 

[Twilight Hue]

Did you read the article that I linked for you?

So they're tracking a certain type of carbon and comparing it with past levels and types of carbon in the atmosphere.

It's a start. It's interesting, so it'll take a little time to read more about it.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I think the whole argument is more political than scientific. Science can verify climate change but the specifics seem to be still in contention which is why nobody is gaining much ground aside from the legislative political end of things.

I've always had the notion that governments are more privy to actual information over the average citizen. If the danger was really that great to infrastructure, and a true threat to life, I can pretty much be assured that pretty much all worldwide worldwide governments will respond collectively no matter what affiliated party people belong to.

The fact that you got pros and cons on the climate change issue (formerly known as global warming. Don't forget that. *Heh*) shows me that there is nothing conclusive to the extent that all the alarm bells and Sirens are going off.

I'm also waiting for those islands to go underwater like they said they would.

Wait a second now. You asked a question. How do we know that the additional CO2 is from man. I supplied an explanation. Let's avoid the crazy conspiracy theories. And many world governments have responded. Those that have not tend to be poor countries that right now rather shortsightedly are avoiding change because they feel it would harm them.

 

[Subduction Zone]

So they're tracking a certain type of carbon and comparing it with past levels and types of carbon in the atmosphere.

It's a start. It's interesting, so it'll take a little time to read more about it.

Thank you. Yes specifically the rations between C12 and C13 are measured. Plants tend to prefer the lighter isotopes so CO2 from fossil fuels is slightly lighter than natural CO2.

 

[Audie]

I think the whole argument is more political than scientific. Science can verify climate change but the specifics seem to be still in contention which is why nobody is gaining much ground aside from the legislative political end of things.

I've always had the notion that governments are more privy to actual information over the average citizen. If the danger was really that great to infrastructure, and a true threat to life, I can pretty much be assured that pretty much all worldwide worldwide governments will respond collectively no matter what affiliated party people belong to.

The fact that you got pros and cons on the climate change issue (formerly known as global warming. Don't forget that. *Heh*) shows me that there is nothing conclusive to the extent that all the alarm bells and Sirens are going off.

I'm also waiting for those islands to go underwater like they said they would.

You do of course know that Alaska and Siberia were connected by a "land bridge" wider then than the whole
state of Alaska is now, during the ice age.

It is all under water now

The polar ice is melting more and more rapidly
these days. Dont get in too big a hurry to see what
that will do for us.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You do of course know that Alaska and Siberia were connected by a "land bridge" wider then than the whole
state of Alaska is now, during the ice age.

It is all under water now

The polar ice is melting more and more rapidly
these days. Dont get in too big a hurry to see what
that will do for us.

I checked the rates. Unfortunately I will not have beach front property in my lifetime

 

[icehorse]

Well people are saying that climate change is man-made in a very confident way. All I see is predictive modeling.

No one's going to deny there's climate change, what the contention is if it's really all man-made as people say, or not, although obviously we are a contributor.

When the question comes up, as it does frequently, I always wonder why anyone cares? Projections are that climate change could well displace a BILLION people from their homes. Who cares if we're the only cause, we ought to do what we can to mitigate the problem, no?

 

[Subduction Zone]

When the question comes up, as it does frequently, I always wonder why anyone cares? Projections are that climate change could well displace a BILLION people from their homes. Who cares if we're the only cause, we ought to do what we can to mitigate the problem, no?

Mitigation would be a huge challenge.

 

[icehorse]

Mitigation would be a huge challenge.

totally agreed. but what choice do we have?

i would recommend a book called "drawdown".