Climate Change Thread

[Fragony]

I'd have thought the right wing prepping community would be pretty much in favour of all the energy and resource efficient measures the Greens advocate, whether or not they want to accept the climate change arguments. And any right minded person would support reducing our reliance on the oil rich countries. Approached from a number of perspectives, green measures are still sensible; do it now, find your preferred argument for it later.

Has nothing to do with left or right, everybody likes a clean enviroment. In the west at least we have gotten very far, remember ths letter that was written with the water from the Thames, it is displayed at Londonś national museum it's insane.

This is what is good https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pqQSwQLDIK8 It is fee, healthy and fast. Cycling an hour to get somewhere is normal for me. What if all these people used a car, everything would be jammed and everybody would be cursing. I know it is not realistic that everybody just take a bike to get around but it would help. This is very much normal here

[Husar]

Look at this graph https://www.google.com/search?q=eart...MJMw3THGqSjYM:

Look at the end of the graph.
The carbon dioxide explodes and the temperature doesn't go down as it did before, it heavily fluctuates at the highest level.
The impact is pretty obvious.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Look at the end of the graph.
The carbon dioxide explodes and the temperature doesn't go down as it did before, it heavily fluctuates at the highest level.
The impact is pretty obvious.

Indeed, the correlation is obvious. What is interesting to me is that the CO2 does not appear to be dragging the temperature up fast enough to match the correspondence noted in the rest of the chart.

[Fragony]

Look at the end of the graph.
The carbon dioxide explodes and the temperature doesn't go down as it did before, it heavily fluctuates at the highest level.
The impact is pretty obvious.

It is obviously not unless we had several industrial ages. Ever heard of the medieval warmth, it was warmer then than it is now, Greenland is called greenland for a reason. It is an ice-age that is comming and there is nothing we can do to stop it

[Husar]

Indeed, the correlation is obvious. What is interesting to me is that the CO2 does not appear to be dragging the temperature up fast enough to match the correspondence noted in the rest of the chart.

There could be mitigating factors. E.g. there was a study that showed chem...ehm...contrails reduce temperatures on the ground quite a bit.

It is an ice-age that is comming and there is nothing we can do to stop it

And/Or...we are already stopping that ice age from happening...

[Fragony]

Can't, just buy a good coat

[Husar]

Can't, just buy a good coat

Well, since you probably understand the language of your masters, you might understand this:



I doubt it will convince you, but the evidence is against you anyway.

[Fragony]

He takes a very short period, nothing can be said about it for either side. He seems pretty neutral though I like that. Look at the graph I posted earlier, you will see the same thing happening over and over again Also posted a good docu, there is some Dutch in it but that shouldn't be hard for you, you Germans somethimes accidently end up here and do fine. Tanks aren't fun though what is wrong with a car

[Husar]

He takes a very short period, nothing can be said about it for either side. He seems pretty neutral though I like that. Look at the graph I posted earlier, you will see the same thing happening over and over again.

The problem with your graph is that one can't really see what exactly is happening today because everything is cramped too close together. Noone doubts these cycles, but they cannot explain why the planet is heating up now when it should be cooling down as you say yourself. In the video he shows how solar activity has been going down since the 1980s and yet the planet became warmer since then. That's not supposed to happen in a natural cycle.

[Fragony]

The problem with your graph is that one can't really see what exactly is happening today because everything is cramped too close together. Noone doubts these cycles, but they cannot explain why the planet is heating up now when it should be cooling down as you say yourself. In the video he shows how solar activity has been going down since the 1980s and yet the planet became warmer since then. That's not supposed to happen in a natural cycle.

But yet it does, it is just that we have nothing to do with it, yet we are still stuck with the idea that we are, something that 'has settled'. It isn't. The only thing that has settled is a global CO2 emmision trade that some people get really rich with, it is basicly blackmail, the whole idea is hurting us, taxes are raised, our limits of transportation are compromised, and that won't stop untill we just call bull. We should just make things cleaner, starting with cleaning up the oceans from that plastic mess (thx China) and not become flaggalants. In western-Europe at least enviroments are realy clean, wildlife is doing great, even wolves and lynches are back (got a lynch here myself, half of it at least)

[Seamus Fermanagh]

But yet it does, it is just that we have nothing to do with it, yet we are still stuck with the idea that we are, something that 'has settled'. It isn't. The only thing that has settled is a global CO2 emmision trade that some people get really rich with, it is basicly blackmail, the whole idea is hurting us, taxes are raised, our limits of transportation are compromised, and that won't stop untill we just call bull. We should just make things cleaner, starting with cleaning up the oceans from that plastic mess (thx China) and not become flaggalants. In western-Europe at least enviroments are realy clean, wildlife is doing great, even wolves and lynches are back (got a lynch here myself, half of it at least)

Side Note: I am pretty sure you mean Lynx when you wrote lynch. Lynch has VERY negative connotations to us yanks and is not a pretty part of our history.


As to the main theme, you seem to be conflating those who are using Global Warming as a tool to enact their preferred vision of a corporation-less global quasi-communism with scientists warning and calling for significant change in the face of global warming. Certainly there are those on the political left (USA definition) who would use any tool to advance their agenda.

In and of itself, however, their trumpeting of the need to change to cope with global warming does NOT automatically mean that the scientific data regarding Global Warming is somehow invalid. Meet the political argument with a political argument. Scientific data and theories derived therefrom must also be met in kind.

[Husar]

First of all, emissions trade is a terrible idea and doesn't do anything to further global communism or even help a lot with emission reduction.

Secondly, for someone who seems to be 100% sure about his argument, there is also very little to back that argument up. The graph that was linked doesn't show why temperature is going up when we should be headed into an ice age. That's a contradiction that needs to be explained.

And thirdly, the platic pollution isn't just China's fault, it's our fault. China is just where we outsourced most of our production and the point about our environments being "really clean" is wrong as well. They may be cleaner than in other countries, but "really clean" is something else. And for many years we (Germans and probably others) actually exported our waste to China. China stopped that by the way, but I guess we'll just export our waste elsewhere now instead of dealing with it ourselves.

[Fragony]

Side Note: I am pretty sure you mean Lynx when you wrote lynch. Lynch has VERY negative connotations to us yanks and is not a pretty part of our history.


As to the main theme, you seem to be conflating those who are using Global Warming as a tool to enact their preferred vision of a corporation-less global quasi-communism with scientists warning and calling for significant change in the face of global warming. Certainly there are those on the political left (USA definition) who would use any tool to advance their agenda.

In and of itself, however, their trumpeting of the need to change to cope with global warming does NOT automatically mean that the scientific data regarding Global Warming is somehow invalid. Meet the political argument with a political argument. Scientific data and theories derived therefrom must also be met in kind.

Yes I meant Linx, sorry my bad I didn't mean any harm, I sometimes make mistakes in English, clumsy mistake

As for subject, the science is not settled at all

[Montmorency]

As for subject, the science is not settled at all

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Deceptive usage of the words "science" and "settled"

Neither is it settled that Netherlands is #2 food exporter in world. Maybe they're #5 or #100, who knows? I heard that once they were the top food producer in the galaxy, but that was centuries ago, things changed. Netherlands just needs to reclaim more land from the sea, which everyone thinks will recede or freeze soon. Netherlands is good at that. Once Uk is out of EUSSR they can help Netherlands into agriculture.

[Fragony]

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Deceptive usage of the words "science" and "settled"

Neither is it settled that Netherlands is #2 food exporter in world. Maybe they're #5 or #100, who knows? I heard that once they were the top food producer in the galaxy, but that was centuries ago, things changed. Netherlands just needs to reclaim more land from the sea, which everyone thinks will recede or freeze soon. Netherlands is good at that. Once Uk is out of EUSSR they can help Netherlands into agriculture.

You will find it easily, if the EU (read France) didn't hold the Neds back in gen-tech and pulsh-fishery (very enviroment friendly compared to how they do it) we could easily be just be the largest food producers in the world. France protects it't outdated ways and it holds us down, every innovation the Netherlands gets their hands on is used, I realy dislike it that Dutch aren't allowed to because others don't innovate

[CrossLOPER]

Look at the end of the graph.
The carbon dioxide explodes and the temperature doesn't go down as it did before, it heavily fluctuates at the highest level.
The impact is pretty obvious.

You are arguing with a drop of sunshine that thought acid rain was a scam, despite living on a continent covered in ancient stone and concrete work damaged by the condition.

[Beskar]

You are arguing with a drop of sunshine that thought acid rain was a scam, despite living on a continent covered in ancient stone and concrete work damaged by the condition.

His own town had a crisis with it's bells which lasted from the 17th century started to thin the metal due to the acidity in the rain, changing their pitch. But this affected Amsterdam a lot more due to higher pollution levels whilst he lives in a more beautiful area so it was milder.

[Fragony]

I lived in Amsterdam when I was still at university, absolutily nothing. They found out why trees where having trouble, water levels where lowered, acid rain is also a hoax. I do live in a beautifull place though although Amsterdam is also very pleasing but I like Amersfoort much better https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZdBlYgJFc1w&t=907s
I got 20 restaurants in my street but there are much more, nice peacefull. You should visit it someday

[Shaka_Khan]

The pastures don't have enough grass. Many Mongolians are leaving the countryside and moving into the city. They burn coal, which is affordable for them.

[Beskar]

Going to throw it out there -
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices...a8797136.html?

In short, we had a heatwave in Winter. Person says this is sign of things going horribly wrong. Cue people ignoring it till it is too late.

[Tuuvi]

[a completely inoffensive name]

Future historians will call Ben Shapiro peak YouTube intellectual.

[CrossLOPER]

Future historians will call Ben Shapiro peak YouTube intellectual.

There is some good stuff on youtube, but a VERY low barrier to entry. The source from that video mentions that Shapiro is basically very good at arguing with people who haven't finished high school or those who brag that they didn't learn anything in Uni.

[a completely inoffensive name]

There is some good stuff on youtube, but a VERY low barrier to entry. The source from that video mentions that Shapiro is basically very good at arguing with people who haven't finished high school or those who brag that they didn't learn anything in Uni.

Youtube is a heated pool, roughly 10 feet deep. Shapiro, Crowder, and the rest are all regurgitating increasingly radical talking points, and the left just spend their time making videos elaborating why dumb statements are dumb.

[Montmorency]

I wasn't going to post about the insurrection in Oregon, but here's a dread-mongering Twitter thread: my favorite.

1. I'm gonna write a proper piece about this soon, but for now a quick thread on the direction of US conservative climate policy. I think over the next 10 years -- & probably much sooner -- we'll see two distinct trends.
2. First, the US right will transition seamlessly from climate denialism to climate nationalism/fascism. They will acknowledge the threat & use it to justify exploiting US fossil fuel reserves, building walls, shutting down immigration, & passing punitive trade policies.
3. Collective action problems just don't sit well in the reactionary mind -- and non-zero-sum collective solutions are incomprehensible to it. However, a mad scramble of all-against-all, in which the powerful US can hoard & intimidate & come out ahead? That, reactionaries get.
4. Second, US conservatives will ramp up their demagoguery around "eco-terrorism." As it becomes clear that the GOP simply won't allow a small-d democratic solution, desperate young people are going to turn to direct action. The GOP will use that to justify repression.
5. And be clear: as climate gets more & more chaotic, and the ambient sense of threat & uncertainty rises around the world, these kinds of reactionary responses will gain *more* public appeal, not less. Threat & uncertainty make everyone more conservative.
6. So the US is at a crucial juncture, one that reflects a larger global dynamic: the space for addressing climate change in a cooperative, mutually beneficial way is rapidly shrinking. From here on out, circumstances will bolster the forces of reaction.
7. That's why the situation in Oregon is freaking me out. I thought we had at least a little time left in which the mechanisms of democracy could still work. But the fossil-funded white minority is openly, nakedly rejecting democracy & it looks like they'll get away with it.
8. The right will see that it worked & it will rapidly become standard practice, across states, maybe federally. (If you think the rules are different in different states, so it wouldn't work, you are still hung up on thinking rules matter.)
9. That would mean the end of any chance of the US addressing climate change through peaceful, mutually beneficial, democratic means. Oregon Ds elected majorities, then super-majorities ... now they're supposed to accept that success is only possible if they vote EVERY R out?
10. If democratic means become impossible, what's left is violence. There may be some radical climate activists who think they're ready for that, but guess what? The reactionaries will always have more guns & fewer scruples. The forces of decency will never win that fight.
11. Basically, this is future-of-the-species stuff, getting decided through a spectacle that's barely even able to break into the daily news cycle. And the next time around, there may not even be the pretense of democracy. We are truly headed into the shit. </fin>
12. Oops, meant to add one thing: alongside rising reactionary violence & zero-sum competition, a warming world will also accelerate the trend of hyper-inequality.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-48755154

In conjunction, I was thinking recently about how geoengineering is inevitable - not in the sense that it has to be part of our toolbox (though maybe it does), but in the sense that as climate catastrophe worsens resultant of our inadequate adaptation states around the world will panic and go rogue, independently implementing last-ditch geoengineering measures such as sulfate aerosol injection. What happens then is this presumably screws up regional climate dynamics and exacerbates ecological collapse and pressure on logistics of food and water generation. And then the wars begin.

Future's so bright, I gotta wear shades.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

I do not think we can "conserve" our way out of this one. Assuming that it is anthropomorphic (and the large bulk of research suggests that it is) we can certainly mitigate things and work for long term improvement, but we are not in a position to reverse a century and a half of impact overnight.

As a species, we seem to address crises better through advances in technology rather than any other route. Fission plants, Wind and Solar where practicable, Geothermal and hydro where doable....and we can save all of the lovely petroleum and use it for those huge and decidedly useful carbon molecules rather than burning it.

[Pannonian]

I do not think we can "conserve" our way out of this one. Assuming that it is anthropomorphic (and the large bulk of research suggests that it is) we can certainly mitigate things and work for long term improvement, but we are not in a position to reverse a century and a half of impact overnight.

As a species, we seem to address crises better through advances in technology rather than any other route. Fission plants, Wind and Solar where practicable, Geothermal and hydro where doable....and we can save all of the lovely petroleum and use it for those huge and decidedly useful carbon molecules rather than burning it.

Conserving will help and is something we can do right now without delay. The ideological issue is that there is a political bloc, ironically calling itself conservative, that has anti-environmentalism as part of a package of beliefs. As "liberals" believe in environmentalism as part of their package, so "anti-liberals" must therefore oppose it as part of their package. Any science, politics or indeed prudence must take a distant second place to the primary goal of contesting the "liberals". You can see this in other areas as well.

[Furunculus]

I think you'll find that oppositional dynamic is limited in its reach across the conservative group, and nearly equally (non) prevalent in the liberal group too (in spread and intensity).

[Beskar]

@Seamus Fermanagh, I hope you don't mind me asking. If I remember correctly, you were never a fan of the anthropomorphic argument. This last reply suggests that this opinion may have shifted. I am curious to what may have contributed to this.

[Pannonian]

I think you'll find that oppositional dynamic is limited in its reach across the conservative group, and nearly equally (non) prevalent in the liberal group too (in spread and intensity).

The liberal group generally supports the traditional basis of science, ie. evidential research, scientific method, etc. The conservative group generally supports faith-based arguments with a scattering of minority-supporting scientists (which is the opposite of how peer review is supposed to work). The democracy of peers is supposed to be based on a growing consensus of informed opinions that are qualified to pick through evidential-based arguments. Unfortunately, the democracy of nations means most people are not qualified to pick through these arguments, but get an equal vote to those who are, and overwhelm and overrule scientific arguments. Democratic but religious nations such as the US get to see this in the clearest form, but the US right is exporting this to elsewhere as well.