FAIL THREAD!!!!

[Tech_Junkie]

This is another reason I dont have kids. :yabbem:

Some pieces of paper, drops of oil, and golden metal will eventually end humanity.

The biggest fail of all.

 

[StridAst]

I always wondered why people got heated over not believing global warming is real. After all, there are really no negatives being conservative with the environment. So why would people be against it? Its because they can get more oil now. They dont want you to conserve. If you conserve they lose money by the billions. So once again the 1% is changing protocol so they can make even more money.

I mean, if accelerated global warming is not real, then why is the world spending huge amounts of money staking claims in an area that is not suppose to be changing. :thinking:

As a somewhat interesting note, Those who pretend the earth isn't warming at all are mostly those who rode the short bus to school back in the day. The largest part of the global warming debate is not "if" the earth is warming up, but rather "if" we can really take full credit for the changes.

The earth's been warming up since long before we discovered the uses of oil. And looking back in what we can reconstruct temperatures for, the ice ages and interglacial periods have been progressively faster and more extreme in the changes with each new cycle. However the industrial revolution happened at the end of the "little ice age" which also coincides with when we started to have "reliable" more or less global temperature records. Some claim that all the temperature increase once the earth broke free from that cold period is the fault of human industry. Probably not the case. The problem is we don't have enough data to truly prove how much is the fault of what. The earth IS heating up, but if it's 3% humans and 97% natural cycles, then simply cutting out oil will only delay for a few months/years what would still end up happening. Conversely if it's 50% humans 50% natural cycles, then cutting oil out would delay it for centuries, giving us much more time to adapt. *shrug* ultimately I think the real fail with humans and oil is Peak Oil and not global warming.

At the rate we consume it, we are likely near the peak, but since consumption is increasing, demand will likely far outpace supply before much longer. What do you suppose will happen then? How much of western economy is based off affordable oil? How fragile will the economy be when things cross those critical thresholds? We know that the supply can't keep up with the demand much longer, yet we don't try to protect ourselves from the consequences of the price increasing suddenly.

*wanders off to play "Lemmings"*

 

[Tech_Junkie]

Sorry, didnt mean to start a global warming debate.

LOL, what are we going to do when we run out of oil??? What are we going to do when the Earth shrugs us off it back?

The sun in an endless supply of energy. If and when we come close to being out of oil, the 1% will follow by developing solar resources.

We are no way near peak oil consumption. We are near peak CHEAP oil consumption. Do you honestly think the higher ups will let the system fall?? If the system fails, they dont make money. Their style of living will change. And as we have seen numerous times in the past, they will not let that happen. So I would not sweat a global break down just because we are running out of cheap oil. That theory is a red herring to create fear in the public to keep peoples eye off the truth. Capitalism is at its highest. If you really think they will chance throw that away you're not seeing whats really going on.

And you're underestimating the power of the 3% of humanity.

 

[StridAst]

Sorry, didnt mean to start a global warming debate.

LOL, what are we going to do when we run out of oil??? What are we going to do when the Earth shrugs us off it back?

The sun in an endless supply of energy. If and when we come close to being out of oil, the 1% will follow by developing solar resources.

We are no way near peak oil consumption. We are near peak CHEAP oil consumption. Do you honestly think the higher ups will let the system fall?? If the system fails, they dont make money. Their style of living will change. And as we have seen numerous times in the past, they will not let that happen. So I would not sweat a global break down just because we are running out of cheap oil. That theory is a red herring to create fear in the public to keep peoples eye off the truth. Capitalism is at its highest. If you really think they will chance throw that away you're not seeing whats really going on.

And you're underestimating the power of the 3% of humanity.

Agreed on that it's only an issue of "cheap" oil, But I personally suspect the current system is more of a game of "hot potato" or "musical chairs" Rather than a tightly controlled system ruling the world, I believe most of that top 3% is just counting on things lasting until someone else has to deal with it. :shhh: From what I've personally seen of people, that just seems more likely. Still time will tell. It always does, But when things change it's not the top 3% that hurt the most. it's the bottom 25%

 

[Tech_Junkie]

Agreed on that it's only an issue of "cheap" oil, But I personally suspect the current system is more of a game of "hot potato" or "musical chairs" Rather than a tightly controlled system ruling the world, I believe most of that top 3% is just counting on things lasting until someone else has to deal with it.

Yeah, I dont buy that. I think its just political smoke and mirrors to keep the public confused.

If you study Capitalism there is only control. They know exactly whats going on, and have plans in place so they do not lose, and always progress. This is clearly evident of the bail out the people just paid out to the companies that profit most from them. Dont even get me started there. But it shows what people will take, and how much they can get away with. As long as corporations are plugged into the government they will never lose. Its all about control, and flow of wealth. Its Capitalism at its finest.

And please dont think I'm anti Capitalism. I just think the people should be included in it, instead of just having to live with its fallout.

 

[Benm]

I really don't see why it would matter if we reduced fossil fuel use for the climate side of things either. We will burn all the fossil fuel eventually, what would it matter if doing so took us 50 or 250 years?

I don't see it as a bad thing though, perhaps it will delay the next ice age by a few 100 years, giving humanity longer to exist as it does. One thing for certain is that an ice age will destroy out way of life for a very long period of time. As a species humans will survive, as we did before, but it will not be comfortable, and the vast majority of people on earth will simply die - I'm glad I'll not be here to see it.

 

[daguin]

I really don't see why it would matter if we reduced fossil fuel use for the climate side of things either. We will burn all the fossil fuel eventually, what would it matter if doing so took us 50 or 250 years?

I don't see it as a bad thing though, perhaps it will delay the next ice age by a few 100 years, giving humanity longer to exist as it does. One thing for certain is that an ice age will destroy out way of life for a very long period of time. As a species humans will survive, as we did before, but it will not be comfortable, and the vast majority of people on earth will simply die - I'm glad I'll not be here to see it.

Hunter-gatherer tribes have a very small carbon footprint

Peace,
dave

 

[Sigurthr]

May just be the odd nihilistic streak in me, or perhaps it's just the misanthrope... but I say bring on the ice age. Our species could use a good enema.

Anyway, of course the earth is warming (we're heading in to a new ice age cycle). The question is only that of if humanity has hastened it by any appreciable amount. Peronsally I don't think we have had any significant effect, if you look at the fossil records for atmospheric CO2, Methane, and O2 levels, you'll see that even if we put out a massive carbon footprint until we have exhausted every single drop of oil and chunk of coal it would be less atmospheric CO2 than a single volcano released in the past. We may not have been around then, but the earth itself (and most of the species on it including our ancestors) survived and adapted. Would a climate reversal be catastrophic to the vast majority of the population? Yes. Would it be the end of all life like so many eco-nuts like to proclaim it is? Heck no, lol.

Conserve fossil fuels now so that it lasts longer (at affordable prices) until an unlimited replacement is developed. Conserve so that we reduce our CO2 emissions? That is just silly.

 

[ElectroMagneticFreak]

The one thing to keep in mind related to the amount of additional CO2 released by humans is how fast the carbon sinks (trees) and other photosynthetic organisms can strip the carbon from all the extra CO2 produced because of humankind and then release oxygen in return. I know it seems cliche to say this but that is what the rainforests of the world do and I think it's something like 50% of it is now clearcut with greedy eyes on the rest that is still left.

While there may historically have been higher levels of CO2 in different ages of the earth, the fact is human beings have taken away part of the natural process (desforestation) that is part of the natural check on excess CO2. Combine that with the fact that we are unnaturally releasing enormous amounts of CO2 through burning of all kinds of fossil fuels, and there is an unnatural balance that may not be able to be fixed.

Whether people like to believe it or not, CO2 absorbs infrared light from the sun and stores this heat, so it is impossible to say the x-amount increase of unnatural human added CO2 will not have an auxiliary effect on otherwise natural global temperature cycles. If we remove much of the lungs of the earth "aka" the great rainforests of the world we have broken the natural equilibrium which exists that otherwise would keep things in check.

It really remains to be seen what will happen..

 

[Sigurthr]

Deforestation is indeed a huge problem as that is one of only two ways the earth fixed atmospheric CO2 to terrestrial carbon. I just have yet to be convinced that the manmade CO2 emission makes much of a difference. The deforestation definitely makes a difference, that is clear (though algae/plankton do account for more CO2 scrubbing than terrestrial trees). It's just that if climate change is the bullet that will strike us down, what difference does it make if the bullet is 5mph faster with our CO2 emission, or 5mph slower without manmade CO2.

Not to mention all the species lost due to deforestation. Now don't get me wrong, we'd be screwed without logging. What would we wipe our asses with then? XD Renewable logging is the way to go, not just clearcutting. Eco-people like to tout composites a lot but few of them know that most plastics are oil based, haha.

 

[ElectroMagneticFreak]

What would we wipe our asses with then? XD Renewable logging is the way to go, not just clearcutting. .

Well I just happened to study sustainability for a couple years in University and I can say that hemp makes excellent toilet paper!

In addition hemp oil can produce plastics of as high a quality as fossil fuel oil. I know of a few products that are made of hemp plastic.

Hemp is a fantastic plant because it requires no additional irrigation and no pesticides. The fact that it is an annual is a huge plus as well and only requires a few months to grow , so it is ridiculous to cut trees down just for paper but I suppose for now trees are still needed for building material. Hemp seeds are one of the few vegetable proteins which contain a complete set of all the 20 necessary amino acids, as well as the omega oils.

Don't forget that the founding fathers of the U.S. including Thomas Jefferson all grew hemp! (And they smoked it too btw.) :crackup:



Starting @ 1:31 is the History Channel segment on the founding fathers and Hemp.

 

[daguin]

LOL! Wait! WUT?

Was that a topic shift?

Yep, there's the lettuce to prove it

Peace,
dave

 

[00Giorge]

What again!

 

[jcranmer]

For all you animal lovers out there.

 

[AnthoT]

As the atmosphere heats up, more ice melts from the poles
The ice that melts is "fresh" water
Fresh water is less dense than salt water
The fresh water will "float" on top of the salt water
This layer of fresh water will prevent the transfer of warmer salt water (heated at the equator) up toward the poles
If enough fresh water builds up, it will force the breakdown of the trade currents
The trade currents bring warmth from the equator to the northern latitudes
No heat from the equator to the northern latitudes will lead to the next ice age

Here's the irony

Global warming is the mechanism by which the earth triggers an ice age

Peace,
dave

The movie "The day after tomorrow" is a perfect example of what you just said, it makes a lot of sense as well

 

[Cyparagon]

Obligatory: