Global Warming. What should be done about it?
-
Honestly the global warming issue should not be adressed. This will take care of itself through the implementation of alternative fuel production. The new science of breeding microscopic algae (diatoms) is what is going to have the largest impact. These algae are an oil producing type, and the newest breeds are able to produce almost 80% of their weight per day. Latest experiments use a closed, clear PVC triangle which pumps the water/algae mix using straight CO2 from a factories smokestack, producing only oxygen, biomass, and oil. This oil is such a high quality and purity that it needs only about 4 hours of refining time to be usable as straight 100% biodiesel. Using this method, one factory has become 100% self sufficient in its power. Using 3 biodiesel generators that only pollute 6% as much as the electric power plant equivalent energy. It has also been able to stockpile its excess biodiesel for use in its yard trucks and company pickups.
In short, once we get control of our electricity usage and switch to a high biodiesel oil usage, the whole enviromental aspect will come around on its own. By the way, did you know that if cities would start switching from the current mercury-vapor street light bulbs, to a 4000-LED bulb, they could cut their electric usage by almost 25%? A city like chicago would need about 1-2 less coal trains per week with these savings, big difference huh.
-
an inconvenient truth from al gore made me think twice
-
24valvenotak;174089 wrote:
an inconvenient truth from al gore made me think twicei dont think i can take anything seriously from somebody who thinks they created the internet and who owns a house that uses i believe 20x more energy than the average american home...
-
its not his research buddy, he is just the one delivering the message... such as facts, studies, theories from people far smarter then you or i, you know, that sort of nonsense
-
torbs;174065 wrote:
Umm...how can you say we are very small part then say if you don't do anything it could be catastrophic...sounds like you know what the truth is (humans don't really have a big impact on global climate change) however you take in the far left agenda that if we do not do something, we are all gonna die...Those two things together don't jive...
I'm all for keeping emmissions down to a minimum...but shit people, be realfuckingistic about this. We could stop driving cars and not pollute at all and it would have a minimal impact on the climate...
God forbid the earth be in one of its MANY cycles :icon_cheers:
Learn to read torbs, I said we had little to do with CAUSING global warming, but I believe honestly there are things we can do to counteract the NATURAL course of global warming. At some point in the future (not sure how near/far) there will be another ice age that will have a catastrophic affect on the world we live in, whether we cause it or not is debatable, but what IF there was something we could do to prevent it aside from bio-fuels, etc... What if we had technology that could reduce the CO2 in the air (natural or man made)? Is that not worth investing in now, to help prevent something catastrophic in the future?
The alternative is to do nothing and let nature take its course, but that would be entirely against human nature. We control the environment (or try) all the time in crop production (chemicals, fertilizer, irrigation, etc...) if we didn't do that, the world would be hurting as there would not be abundant cheap food available and we would probably experience world-wide famine. You wouldn't want that now, right? Of course not! So why would you not want to help prevent another catastrophe...again, not necessarily a man made disaster. Why not invest in the technology to clean the air and stabilize the CO2 levels so that they do not elevate to excessive levels? The example that Gary presented w/ the algae is a prime example of what I'm talking about.
If that is the "Far-Left" agenda, I'd suggest you look at the far left some more as Gore is WAAAAAAAAAY further left on this issue than me. Of course, Torbs will probably respond saying that only a liberal would think that another ice age will happen (regardless of humans causing it or not)
-
I didn't bother to read everyone's comments, but I think the guy is right. Global catastrophe or not, we need to stop polluting. I don't think anyone can argue that. The more toxins we introduce into the environment, the closer we come to destroying the world we live in.
On a side note: If I remember right, during the last major ice age the average global temperature was less than 2 degrees F lower than it is now. Ice core samples from Antarctica showed that the levels of CO2 were much higher then than they are now. I don't doubt that the Earth is warming up, but I don't think that CO2 from humans is the main reason why.
-
torbs;174091 wrote:
i dont think i can take anything seriously from somebody who thinks they created the internet and who owns a house that uses i believe 20x more energy than the average american home...I think his energy bill is something like $30, 000 a year or something close to it.
He contradicts himself by saying we have to use less energy and then using 20x the national average to power his estate, whether he's just stating information from other sources or not he's still a hipocrate.That's like preaching to somebody about how bad smoking cigarettes are and then selling them a pack afterwards.
Sterling Archer: Oh my god! You killed a hooker!
Cyril Figgis: Call girl!
Sterling Archer: No Cyril! When they're dead they're just hookers!
-
See, I feel he was making the case that there might be global warming. I'm mostly interested in your take on his way of presenting it though and the columns vs rows aspect of it along with his conclusions. If you disagree with his conclusion that one of 4 things can happen, point out the flaw in his reasoning. Whether he is/isn't arguing about man made global warming is not the issue, the issue is what happens if we do/don't act on it. He pretty much nailed it (in a nutshell) imho.
I feel you are better off preparing for the worst as opposed to hoping for the best.
-
His summary of the A and B columns is a little weak. If taking action causes global depression in the top box, it would almost certainly do it in the bottom box (the smiley face scenarios are not equivalent). Essentially, using his reasoning, ticket A guarantees a global depression, while ticket B poses risks of catastrophe but also retains the possibility of maintaining global prosperity. This makes the probability of significant warming a key factor in determining the course of action and not merely an afterthought as he indicates.
-
well if you really think about it its not like the money is going uselessly, it would create tons of jobs and whoever makes the equipment is still making tons of money so if we want to pay them for something that probally wont matter thats fine the money is still on the earth
-
IMO he was trying to appear neutral while making the case for global warming. His grid was way over simplistic (can you really call it a grid if there is only 4 boxes? :icon_cyclops: ), but IMO the whole premise is flawed. You could say the same thing about driving your car every day. There is a chance you could be in a car wreck and be killed each time you go for a drive. You can either A) do nothing and hope you don't get in a wreck and be killed, or you can B) install a roll cage, wear a fire suit, full body armor, a helmet, etc each time you go for a drive. The chances of getting injured wearing all that gear would next to nothing, but in reality it doesn't make sense to go through all those safety measures. There are probably a lot better analogies than the car wreck, but I thought it was most appropriate for this forum.
tjamz;174139 wrote:
See, I feel he was making the case that there might be global warming. I'm mostly interested in your take on his way of presenting it though and the columns vs rows aspect of it along with his conclusions. If you disagree with his conclusion that one of 4 things can happen, point out the flaw in his reasoning. Whether he is/isn't arguing about man made global warming is not the issue, the issue is what happens if we do/don't act on it. He pretty much nailed it (in a nutshell) imho.I feel you are better off preparing for the worst as opposed to hoping for the best.
DaveH
'94 Supra- 7.77 @ 176mph -
There is also the possibility that if we tried column A (think that was the one that said we DO something about it) that all the money spent and whatever won't do shit for helping us and an ice age will still happen. Does ANYONE honestly think humans could have THAT large of an effect to cause an ice age, let alone stop one?? Fuck that, we don't have that much affect. We are a tiny shit-streak in the toilet bowl called earth, we are just here for the ride no matter how big of an effect we'd like to think we have.
-
I'm a believer in the literal Genesis creation of the world. I don't believe it's been around for millions and billions of years, but thousands. I believe we were created and put in charge of the earth to use it as we like, but also to be good stewards of what we were given.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v1/n2/human-caused-global-warming
I believe alot of that websites views.
-
tjamz;174026 wrote:
Please watch video before posting your opinion. I myself am not 100% convinced about global warming being man made, but I tend to agree with what the guy in the video is talking about:Watch Me!
Interesting video
fallguy;174182 wrote:
I'm a believer in the literal Genesis creation of the world. I don't believe it's been around for millions and billions of years, but thousands. I believe we were created and put in charge of the earth to use it as we like, but also to be good stewards of what we were given.http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v1/n2/human-caused-global-warming
I believe alot of that websites views.
I agree
The issue of climate change is one that we ignore at our own peril. There may still be disputes about exactly how much we're contributing to the warming of the earth's atmosphere and how much is naturally occurring, but what we can be scientifically certain of is that our continued use of fossil fuels is pushing us to a point of no return. And unless we free ourselves from a dependence on these fossil fuels and chart a new course on energy in this country, we are condemning future generations to global catastrophe.
Obama '08 -
Screw Obama...Fred Thompson '08
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login