Jump to content
BANGKOK
CG1 Blue

Will Covid 19 settle the Climate Change Debate?

Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, nausea said:

Nature will sort it out, either through pandemics or other means. It's hubris to think this little human infestation is gonna have a good end, not unless we accept our role as caretakers rather than exploiters. I sometimes believe in God because who else would set the speed of light as the ultimate limit of human exploration. We'll create this feisty little monkey race Satan but as damage limitation we'll give them four score years and ten, or thereabouts, and the speed of light. We can't have monkeys mucking up this perfect universe I've created. But your idea of free will, yeah, that's interesting.

we have de facto evidence we are the only specie that are actively improving conditions 

for life on earth

greening of earth.jpg

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

But drinking water (kitchen) is direct from the mains in most UK properties, and the bathroom water supply is from a tank. How would the gunk work it's way round to the mains supply? Sorry, veering way off topic, but I'm curious! 

Same in Australia for new dwellings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
25 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

But drinking water (kitchen) is direct from the mains in most UK properties, and the bathroom water supply is from a tank. How would the gunk work it's way round to the mains supply? Sorry, veering way off topic, but I'm curious! 

then a complete rework has been done to facilitate barbaric practices from immigration i presume, in order to maintain public health.

but this kind of advanced plumbing does not generally exist in thailand.

infrastructure tend to be the very last concern of developing nations

for some peculiar reason.

and diy wannabees also dont have the competence to keep tap water sanitized

Edited by brokenbone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, johng said:

Yes there is nothing wrong with plastic itself its the disposal/recycling that needs addressing.

"The planet will be here for a long, long, LONG time after we’re gone, and it will heal itself, it will cleanse itself, ’cause that’s what it does. It’s a self-correcting system. The air and the water will recover, the earth will be renewed. And if it’s true that plastic is not degradable, well, the planet will simply incorporate plastic into a new paradigm: the earth plus plastic. The earth doesn’t share our prejudice toward plastic. Plastic came out of the earth. The earth probably sees plastic as just another one of its children. Could be the only reason the earth allowed us to be spawned from it in the first place. It wanted plastic for itself. Didn’t know how to make it. Needed us. Could be the answer to our age-old egocentric philosophical question, “Why are we here?”  "Plastic..." 

-George Carlin

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, johng said:

There are certainly too many people on the planet at the moment,some way of limiting the population has to be found..if humankind doesn't do it then mother nature will.

Most people are caught in the conundrum of their normalcy bias.  
This last month should have all but shattered that, but then people will go back to thinking in their old, tired ways.  The human race as we know it won't be around much longer.  How that happens isn't even relevant.  Everyone will hold to their own narrative even as the wheels come off the buggy.  
That's why I like Carlin (see above).  Human hubris thinks itself infallible, eternal, immortal.  But we aren't a molecule of water in an ocean. In the big scheme of things we are naught. And what you see around you now?  Not lasting much longer.  But no problem ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls - keep the debate lively. 

 

 

 

Edited by connda

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People are really so weird. Why do we even want to talk about if we want to keep our planet clean and habitable?

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Will this period of less human activity make a material difference to global temperatures etc., such that it can prove humans are responsible for climate change? Or if it makes no difference, will it disprove that theory? 

 

Do you even understand what climate change is?  The models have time constants on the order of 75 years. Anything we do today will only be seen by our grandchildren.

 

So to answer your question, no. It won't make the slightest difference in the debate. The truth is there shouldn't even be a debate. Whether or not the primary driver of climate is anthropogenic, pouring millions of tons of CO2 into an already unstable atmosphere is just plain ignorant.

 

There is no confusion about the greenhouse effect. It does cause temperature rise. The only "debate" if you want to call it that, is that some people don't want to believe it is the primary driver of recent climate changes. I agree that the climate change sciences are self selecting for the most extreme models. Nobody gets funded for saying "it might not be that bad."  So the truth is that it is probably overblown to a degree.  But there is no question of what CO2 does. So independent of what is causing the problem, making it worse by continuously adding even more CO2 is just plain stupid.

 

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Monomial said:

 

Do you even understand what climate change is?  The models have time constants on the order of 75 years. Anything we do today will only be seen by our grandchildren.

 

So to answer your question, no. It won't make the slightest difference in the debate. The truth is there shouldn't even be a debate. Whether or not the primary driver of climate is anthropogenic, pouring millions of tons of CO2 into an already unstable atmosphere is just plain ignorant.

 

There is no confusion about the greenhouse effect. It does cause temperature rise. The only "debate" if you want to call it that, is that some people don't want to believe it is the primary driver of recent climate changes. I agree that the climate change sciences are self selecting for the most extreme models. Nobody gets funded for saying "it might not be that bad."  So the truth is that it is probably overblown to a degree.  But there is no question of what CO2 does. So independent of what is causing the problem, making it worse by continuously adding even more CO2 is just plain stupid.

 

I stopped reading after your first sentence 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Monomial said:

 

Do you even understand what climate change is?  The models have time constants on the order of 75 years. Anything we do today will only be seen by our grandchildren.

 

So to answer your question, no. It won't make the slightest difference in the debate. The truth is there shouldn't even be a debate. Whether or not the primary driver of climate is anthropogenic, pouring millions of tons of CO2 into an already unstable atmosphere is just plain ignorant.

 

There is no confusion about the greenhouse effect. It does cause temperature rise. The only "debate" if you want to call it that, is that some people don't want to believe it is the primary driver of recent climate changes. I agree that the climate change sciences are self selecting for the most extreme models. Nobody gets funded for saying "it might not be that bad."  So the truth is that it is probably overblown to a degree.  But there is no question of what CO2 does. So independent of what is causing the problem, making it worse by continuously adding even more CO2 is just plain stupid.

 

in what way is snowball earth preferable over greenhouse earth ?

 more temp & co2 has been supportive of life,

while snowball earth tend to all but snuff out all life.

also where did you pick up the idea that its just a matter of a single human

generation earth shift between the two extremes ?

we can see the major cycles takes millions of years,

and within those major cycles, there is countless cycles with higher and higher frequency

Edited by brokenbone
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, brokenbone said:

dont contract a thai plumber or diy plumber, or the lethal goop will infect more then corona.

in fact its a punishable offense in the civilized word to contaminate

the otherwise perfectly drinkable tap water

Had bum guns installed in three different properties in Australia by three different licensed plumbers. But continue in your delusion, man with the filthy a##e. You've obviously never heard of non-return valves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Kerryd said:

Climate Change is NOT "man made". It is a naturally occurring cycle that has been going on ever since this planet was formed. Otherwise Earth would still be locked in a "snowball" earth phase where 99.99% of life of the planet is extinct.
These cycles last from 10s of thousands of years to 10s of millions of years, depending on a number of factors, the vast majority of which have absolutely nothing to do with mankind...

Dude! Quick, before someone steals your incredible research, get thee to a university and publish!

 

Or perhaps you have no qualifications, data or knowledge to back up your looooooonnnnngggg and tedious recounting of basic and unrelated earth facts?

I know that the people who are working on these issues regularly check TVF for the latest on climate science and they always look for Kerryd's cogent analyses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, brokenbone said:

in my home country there are natural wells clean enough to drink water from,

but there has been rivers throughout the entire history where it just isnt healthy.

the contamination of water can be largely attributed to bum gun users,

theres a chart somewhere on internet showing colera spread,

and it aint in the industrialized word, its in the areas where the population

arent spending money on proper toilet paper, manufactured by the industry for the purpose

of proper hygienic wiping and swiping the ar$e

It's always useful when people talk about issues where one has professional knowledge so that one can evaluate the basis of other people's opinions. Thank you for saving my time by demonstrating that I no longer have to pay any attention to any post regarding scientific knowledge from you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, natway09 said:

Whilst I agree that the earth goes through long term temperature changes I have followed a

glacier in NZ for 55 years & seen it retract & grow 2 times in that time & I am talking 60 ft of ice & a retraction of 150metres.

Remember it  takes 100ft of snow to make 1 ft of ice so any immediate change is 6 yrars.

We are undoutedly polluting our planet & I don't mean just rubbish.

The airlines as an example are contributing vast amounts of carbons into our air.

This, after Covis will be reduced considerably.

Not only have executives of airlines realized that there is little money in the business for the effort & capital investmemt that a lot of cheap airlines will just disappear.

This flying half way around the world for a 12 day hoiday are over except for the rich

With our amazing capabilities of internet business travel can be halved.

Efficiency of machinery & less use of fossil fuels are our future.

A touchy subject at this time but there are too many of us on this planet which I said long before this virus came along & when we have had for 25 years 27,000 people die of starvation every day & what have we done to fix. Nothing except a few greedy "charities" who treat it like a business & the charity forwards maybe  10% if lucky getting where it should.

I'm off for a beer !!

 

 

Good post, but the sentence at the end confuses me - where can one go off for a beer?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, all that stuff I've been quoting is research done by actual scientists.

You know, ones with degrees plastered all over the walls, who've spent most of their (adult) lives researching this very subject.

Easy to find on the net. Try wiki for starters. 

Unless of course you think Wikipedia is all "fake" news and no one actually fact checks anything and all the references are fake too.

Or maybe you think that somehow, climate change never, every happened before man evolved as well. Maybe all those previous Ice Ages are just hoaxes being perpetuated by scientists.
Maybe you think the world is really only 6,000 years old (despite all the evidence) and that it's flat (despite all the evidence).

All I've done is search and read material that has been researched (by real scientists) and then typed some of it here.

Still waiting for proof that all those Ice Ages never happened. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_agehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_age
And proof that scientists weren't researching Climate Change as far back as the 1800s. https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2948/milankovitch-orbital-cycles-and-their-role-in-earths-climate/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milankovitch_cycles
 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...