[ QUOTE ]
Worst case, we kill ourselves off. Earth ain't going nowhere.
I'm one of the old-timers with my "Won't affect me and I don't have no grandkids... but yours are screwed" opinion. If you make my life more difficult to green it up a bit, I won't do it. As it stands I don't recycle. I have a garbage bag. Everything goes in it. That way I only have to take one bag a week out to the curb. I'll be long dead by the time it's an issue.
[/ QUOTE ]
*subscribes to newsletter*
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
*shrugs* There's less debate on climate change than you think. What's at question is actually whether humans have anything to do with it or not.
You're perfectly justified in continuing as is, to be honest, but I'd rather be more cautious; after all, generating renewable energy, relying more on mass transit, buying produce locally, eating less meat, all of these lessen the impact one has on the environment--and, in many cases, can actually boost the local economy, always a good thing.
It's not like Earths are a dime a dozen. Why take the chance?
[/ QUOTE ]
Actually, there's a crapload of debate on whether there is global warming. Much like the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, one only is familiar with the activity if you're involved in it. There's debate if its occuring, debate if it is anthropogenic, and debate if carbon emission is related to it.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm familiar with the debate on the last two. As far as the first one, it's my understanding that the general debate is that the climate is changing--not necessarily warming, mind you.
[ QUOTE ]
Engaging in large-scale campaigns of deception and propaganda is not right.
[/ QUOTE ]
Ends do not justify the means, then?
Even setting the issues aside, none of the solutions I've suggested really do fall into the category of deception, propaganda, or even ethically dubious. Buying local produce helps stimulate the local economy--note that I did not stipulate that it had to be organic. Reducing meat consumption (but not necessarily becoming vegetarian) will reduce our reliance on industrial livestock, which will reduce the toxic runoff from the waste lagoons and lower methane emissions. Finding sources of renewable energy will reduce our reliance on fossil fuels from political instable regions in the world (though, admittedly, it will increase our reliance on rare elements).
[ QUOTE ]
And if you think propaganda is a strong world, that's what the British public education system calls Gore's "Inconvenient Truth." And they're right. Regardless of whether the AGW is a valid theory, nothing in that film resembles the truth.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, please continue to attack An Inconvenient Truth. Because that's clearly the only argument anyone has when speaking of climate change. And yes, continue to attack it, because even if it does heinously distort the truth, destroying it will really make people more inclined to conserve.
If anything, it makes more sense to take propaganda like that, smile, and then shove it into the back room where it can be forgotten.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
*shrugs* There's less debate on climate change than you think. What's at question is actually whether humans have anything to do with it or not.
You're perfectly justified in continuing as is, to be honest, but I'd rather be more cautious; after all, generating renewable energy, relying more on mass transit, buying produce locally, eating less meat, all of these lessen the impact one has on the environment--and, in many cases, can actually boost the local economy, always a good thing.
It's not like Earths are a dime a dozen. Why take the chance?
[/ QUOTE ]
Actually, there's a crapload of debate on whether there is global warming. Much like the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, one only is familiar with the activity if you're involved in it. There's debate if its occuring, debate if it is anthropogenic, and debate if carbon emission is related to it.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm familiar with the debate on the last two. As far as the first one, it's my understanding that the general debate is that the climate is changing--not necessarily warming, mind you.
[ QUOTE ]
Engaging in large-scale campaigns of deception and propaganda is not right.
[/ QUOTE ]
Ends do not justify the means, then?
Even setting the issues aside, none of the solutions I've suggested really do fall into the category of deception, propaganda, or even ethically dubious. Buying local produce helps stimulate the local economy--note that I did not stipulate that it had to be organic. Reducing meat consumption (but not necessarily becoming vegetarian) will reduce our reliance on industrial livestock, which will reduce the toxic runoff from the waste lagoons and lower methane emissions. Finding sources of renewable energy will reduce our reliance on fossil fuels from political instable regions in the world (though, admittedly, it will increase our reliance on rare elements).
[ QUOTE ]
And if you think propaganda is a strong world, that's what the British public education system calls Gore's "Inconvenient Truth." And they're right. Regardless of whether the AGW is a valid theory, nothing in that film resembles the truth.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, please continue to attack An Inconvenient Truth. Because that's clearly the only argument anyone has when speaking of climate change. And yes, continue to attack it, because even if it does heinously distort the truth, destroying it will really make people more inclined to conserve.
If anything, it makes more sense to take propaganda like that, smile, and then shove it into the back room where it can be forgotten.
[/ QUOTE ]
Nothing you suggested qualified as deception, those accusations were in relation to things like Gore's AIT. Hence me bringing it up.
There's a big difference between changing and warming, especially in view of the articles in the WSJ today calling for dramatic efforts to cool the planet. Y'know, like the Everglades which have dropped an average of 3 degrees F since 1880. Gotta freeze out them gators.
[ QUOTE ]
Gotta freeze out them gators.
[/ QUOTE ]
And the Hurricanes too. College football is better when those two teams are not involved.
>.>
<.<
What?!??!!?
Current favs: Champ: Frau Schmeterling-22 MM 50s: NOTW-Blaster, Cat-Girl Commando-corr, Queen of the Dawn-PB, NOTW-Def, Peterbilt-Brute, IcedTNA-Tank, Archilies-scrap, Mann Eater-stalk, Redemptive Soul-toller, Mt Fuji of A-Team-Tank, Hot Stuff Vale-Dom
My MiniCity
[ QUOTE ]
Nothing you suggested qualified as deception, those accusations were in relation to things like Gore's AIT. Hence me bringing it up.
[/ QUOTE ]
Fair enough. I just don't think it really helps anyone trying to suggest conservation when they bring it up just to tear it down.
[ QUOTE ]
There's a big difference between changing and warming, especially in view of the articles in the WSJ today calling for dramatic efforts to cool the planet.
[/ QUOTE ]
I will flat out that I stopped reading the majority of Dow Jones's printed material the instant News Corp took them over, FEER being the sole exception, so I have no idea what the article says.
Besides, dramatic efforts to cool the planet will fail, if only because one of those [censored] (Chairman Shen-ji Yang, Sister Miriam Webster, or Colonel Corazon Santiago) will always vote against launching the solar shades.
On a more serious note, the concept of geoengineering on that scale bothers me, largely on the simple fact that we really don't know what we're doing. Even if we can prove that global warming is happening due to human intervention, that doesn't mean belching reflective material into the upper atmosphere or launching a series of mirrors to reflect the light won't cause some greater harm--particularly in chaotic systems that we don't fully understand, and only just now are getting the barest models.
[ QUOTE ]
Y'know, like the Everglades which have dropped an average of 3 degrees F since 1880. Gotta freeze out them gators.
[/ QUOTE ]
Well, somebody's got to give the Real Housewives more gator-leather handbags.
[ QUOTE ]
Well, somebody's got to give the Real Housewives more gator-leather handbags.
[/ QUOTE ]
*dreams of a world with Gucci for all*
[ QUOTE ]
Fair enough. I just don't think it really helps anyone trying to suggest conservation when they bring it up just to tear it down.
[/ QUOTE ]
I want conservation to be an efficiently executed science that leads us to a better, more sustainable society. We need dramatic changes, and dithering over polar bears that aren't in danger weakens our case when we have something valid and helpful, like more efficient washing machines.
Coincidentally, making your washing machine 5% more efficient reduces the emissions caused by your clothes more than reducing the manufacturing efficiency by 50%. Generally speaking at least, in terms of water and energy use.
[ QUOTE ]
Besides, dramatic efforts to cool the planet will fail, if only because one of those [censored] (Chairman Shen-ji Yang, Sister Miriam Webster, or Colonel Corazon Santiago) will always vote against launching the solar shades.
[/ QUOTE ]
That's why those commies are the first to go. While those free Perimeter defenses are annoying, if a city is too tough to crack, I just drag it underwater with the 'formers. Environment is a great weapon.
Stopping Deforestation and replanting trees is actually one of the best ways to go. Trees can cut down on the CO2 in the air dramatically plus give us a better quality of air.
Just my $.02. Course noone listens to me anyway.
Defcon 0 - (D4 lvl 50),DJ Shecky Cape Radio
@Shecky
Twitter: @DJ_Shecky, @siliconshecky, @thecaperadio
When you air your dirty laundry out on a clothesline above the street, everyone is allowed to snicker at the skid marks in your underoos. - Lemur_Lad
Gonna have to count me out Emmi. Definitely having dinner with mom tomorrow night. Maybe next week.
~Wyldnytes
Belle O'Ball 50 dark/dark tank Wyldnytes 50 claws/dark scrapper
Darknwyld 45 MA/reflex scrapper Hynote 24 stone/strength tank
Jesi Belle 35 mace/will brute Ignyshun 12 electrical brute
Global: @wyldnytes
Twitter: @wyldnytes
A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort.
[ QUOTE ]
Stopping Deforestation and replanting trees is actually one of the best ways to go. Trees can cut down on the CO2 in the air dramatically plus give us a better quality of air.
Just my $.02. Course noone listens to me anyway.
[/ QUOTE ]
Uh, I was listening, but I couldn't hear you over the LVL 1 HEALOR LFAEFARM spam.
[ QUOTE ]
I want conservation to be an efficiently executed science that leads us to a better, more sustainable society.
[/ QUOTE ]
A noble goal; unfortunately, to get to that point, one would also have to educate society at large in what science actually entails~
[ QUOTE ]
We need dramatic changes, and dithering over polar bears that aren't in danger weakens our case when we have something valid and helpful, like more efficient washing machines.
[/ QUOTE ]
This is an extraordinarily valid point. Things like efficient water machines, properly pressurized tires, better eating habits, more reliance on walking, biking, and mass transit, are all minor things that add up to major benefits.
Unfortunately, they're just not as cute and upsetting as seeing a picture of a polar bear stranded on a small block of ice.
Put another way, the small changes actually require sacrifice of a mild sort, and aren't a visible, free way of demonstrating concern. (There's a reason why the (RED) campaign is so successful, even if it hasn't actually helped many people.)
I mean, the thought of mass transit makes my skin crawl (the only reason I use it is because I detest driving), but it's very easy to go kawaii over a sad polar bear covering its nose.
ACK STOP!!! THIS CONVERSATION ISNT FLUFF AT ALL!! IT'S...IT'S GOT MEANING AND IMPORTANCE AND AND..THINKING BEHIND IT!!!!! RUN!!! FLEEE!!!! GAAAHHH!!!!!!
-Pogoman, Master of Kick-Fu
-Co-Leader and recruiting officer of the Virtue Honor Guard
- lvl 50 ma/sr scrapper
-Ace O' Diamonds lvl 50 fire/rad controller
and waaaay to many other alts to mention right now
But, seriously, we gotta find alternative fuels, and perhaps invest more in solar power? I mean there IS that huge ball of fire, and helium, and megauberheat sitting right there in the sky.
-Pogoman, Master of Kick-Fu
-Co-Leader and recruiting officer of the Virtue Honor Guard
- lvl 50 ma/sr scrapper
-Ace O' Diamonds lvl 50 fire/rad controller
and waaaay to many other alts to mention right now
I say, if we pave it all, there will be less dust and dirt to clean up. 
Current favs: Champ: Frau Schmeterling-22 MM 50s: NOTW-Blaster, Cat-Girl Commando-corr, Queen of the Dawn-PB, NOTW-Def, Peterbilt-Brute, IcedTNA-Tank, Archilies-scrap, Mann Eater-stalk, Redemptive Soul-toller, Mt Fuji of A-Team-Tank, Hot Stuff Vale-Dom
My MiniCity
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I want conservation to be an efficiently executed science that leads us to a better, more sustainable society.
[/ QUOTE ]
A noble goal; unfortunately, to get to that point, one would also have to educate society at large in what science actually entails~
[/ QUOTE ]
And that's why I'm going to probably end up getting a PhD in English and split hairs over the meaning of Bottom's Dream and whether dot.Hack qualifies as a multimedia epic, instead of changing the world.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
We need dramatic changes, and dithering over polar bears that aren't in danger weakens our case when we have something valid and helpful, like more efficient washing machines.
[/ QUOTE ]
This is an extraordinarily valid point. Things like efficient water machines, properly pressurized tires, better eating habits, more reliance on walking, biking, and mass transit, are all minor things that add up to major benefits.
Unfortunately, they're just not as cute and upsetting as seeing a picture of a polar bear stranded on a small block of ice.
Put another way, the small changes actually require sacrifice of a mild sort, and aren't a visible, free way of demonstrating concern. (There's a reason why the (RED) campaign is so successful, even if it hasn't actually helped many people.)
I mean, the thought of mass transit makes my skin crawl (the only reason I use it is because I detest driving), but it's very easy to go kawaii over a sad polar bear covering its nose.
[/ QUOTE ]
Coincidentally, it's really hard to "strand" a polar bear. They can swim around 100 miles between things, and contrary to popular belief, they don't all live on icebergs, but on islands.
Also, the damn things will eat people. I have a dim view of creatures that will eat me, such as mosquitoes, polar bears, and house cats.
[ QUOTE ]
I say, if we pave it all, there will be less dust and dirt to clean up.
[/ QUOTE ]
Impervious surfaces contribute to non-point source pollution, erosion, and flooding.
*wakes up and gnaws on Emgro*
Whut?
SG Mate: Cien, what the hell is this Rookery thing?
RadDidIt: (interjecting) Dude. It's the Rookery.
SG Mate: Yeah, but what IS it?
RadDidIt: Silliness Incarnate.
I have a Bachelor's Degree in English- Creative Writing and Literature and it's gotten me nowhere 
-Pogoman, Master of Kick-Fu
-Co-Leader and recruiting officer of the Virtue Honor Guard
- lvl 50 ma/sr scrapper
-Ace O' Diamonds lvl 50 fire/rad controller
and waaaay to many other alts to mention right now
So now you are denying that polar bears are in danger? Who are you sarah palin's press agent Emgro? Seriously that is some incredible denial you are in over the reality of pollution and it's effects on the world. Keep drinking the kool aid though it you like it that much.
There are no fact in Gore's movie? So those glaciers are all still there, they just don't show up on film now? Is that what you are saying. Every national academy of science in the industrialized world has has accepted the reality of climate change. But no, the guy that wrote jurassic park is who we should be listening to.
Heroes : Angrem (50 Stone tank), Exo Inferis (50 Fire blaster), Exo Proteus (50 ill/emp), IceVengance (50 cold defender)
Villains : AtomBomb (50 Rad/Kin corruptor), Aleks (50 SS/Inv brute), StoneLethal (50 EM/Stone brute), Davroz (50 Bots/Dark mastermind)
[ QUOTE ]
Coincidentally, it's really hard to "strand" a polar bear. They can swim around 100 miles between things, and contrary to popular belief, they don't all live on icebergs, but on islands.
[/ QUOTE ]
But he looks so sad in those photos. Are you saying he's acting? Faking it, for the nature paparazzi?
[ QUOTE ]
Impervious surfaces contribute to non-point source pollution, erosion, and flooding.
[/ QUOTE ]
One of the largest sources of pollution in neighborhood streams actually comes from nearby roads: since the rainwater don't seep into the asphalt (and, relatedly, nor will things like gasoline, antifreeze, motoroil, that bubblegum wrapper), it all has to go somewhere else.
Sometimes, into drainage pipes, which don't necessarily lead directly to treatment plants. It's "non-point" precisely because you can't point to, say, the BP refinery dumping mercury into Lake Michigan. 
Additionally, it's been shown that areas with high levels of pavement tend to be several degrees warmer than areas without such construction--
[ QUOTE ]
So now you are denying that polar bears are in danger? Who are you sarah palin's press agent Emgro? Seriously that is some incredible denial you are in over the reality of pollution and it's effects on the world. Keep drinking the kool aid though it you like it that much.
[/ QUOTE ]
Inflammatory remarks won't convince people. Polar bears remain endangered, and their food sources are shrinking, but they are not yet critically endangered and at risk of extinction.
It's something to keep an eye on, but it's not something to panic about; the problem is, because polar bears are an appealing, marketable face on climate change, they're held to be a prime example of what's at risk, when it's not them, it's us.
For instance: there are several cases of tiny Pacific islands losing above-ocean area very quickly, a harbinger of things to come. Certain diseases and species previously constrained to warm climates have started encroaching into more temperate zones.
Polar bears, by contrast, are still at naturally sustainable levels, provided we don't decide to screw them over further.
[ QUOTE ]
There are no fact in Gore's movie? So those glaciers are all still there, they just don't show up on film now? Is that what you are saying. Every national academy of science in the industrialized world has has accepted the reality of climate change. But no, the guy that wrote jurassic park is who we should be listening to.
[/ QUOTE ]
Gore's documentary had facts, but he also stretched truths in many places, one of the most egregious being the coastline projections.
[ QUOTE ]
So now you are denying that polar bears are in danger? Who are you sarah palin's press agent Emgro? Seriously that is some incredible denial you are in over the reality of pollution and it's effects on the world. Keep drinking the kool aid though it you like it that much.
[/ QUOTE ]
Seriously, dude. Polar bears aren't even an endangered species. They aren't now, and I've been in rooms where people make comments like, "Polar bears are the next headliner species, we need to get them labeled endangered to get more attention."
Seriously. They are vulnerable, not endangered.
[ QUOTE ]
There are no fact in Gore's movie? So those glaciers are all still there, they just don't show up on film now? Is that what you are saying.
[/ QUOTE ]
Nope, some of them shrinking. Some of them are gone. Some of them are growing, and there's new ones too. Glaciers shrank until the 1940s or so, and grew back a lot in the 1960s. They are a changing thing, and wanting them to stay the same is like expecting volcanoes not to erupt.
[ QUOTE ]
Every national academy of science in the industrialized world has has accepted the reality of climate change. But no, the guy that wrote jurassic park is who we should be listening to.
[/ QUOTE ]
Academies have no opinions. They are groups of people, with individual opinions. Many of those people disagree with the common popular view on global warming. Such is my experience at the universities I've attended and visited, and the people I've spoken and communicated with.
And the guy that wrote Jurassic Park actually has a scientific education, unlike say, Al Gore, who you are holding up as reliable. As for the rest of why I like Crichton, I already answered it. He has no qualms about taking what a scientist says and making it more readable for the rest of us. However, he is careful to provide his sources, allowing the curious to further pursue those lines of inquiry and satisfy their desire to know the fact behind the fiction.
This is called transparency, something notably absent from the people who aggressively re-edit certain wiki articles, tore down Nils-Axel Morner's tree, and used footage from sci-fi disaster movies in a so-called documentary that listed no sources.
I was taking issue with the statement that there are "no facts" in the movie. That is completely not the case. Typical of the denial gambit is to grab one flaw and then say "See it's all lies because there is one thing that is not correct."
Heroes : Angrem (50 Stone tank), Exo Inferis (50 Fire blaster), Exo Proteus (50 ill/emp), IceVengance (50 cold defender)
Villains : AtomBomb (50 Rad/Kin corruptor), Aleks (50 SS/Inv brute), StoneLethal (50 EM/Stone brute), Davroz (50 Bots/Dark mastermind)
[ QUOTE ]
I was taking issue with the statement that there are "no facts" in the movie. That is completely not the case. Typical of the denial gambit is to grab one flaw and then say "See it's all lies because there is one thing that is not correct."
[/ QUOTE ]
I said there was no truth, not no facts. A fact wrapped in hyberbole and rhetoric is still a fact, but not in the least truthful.
Saying /Willpower is the best defensive set may (or may not, just using it as an example) be a fact. Saying that the superiority of /Willpower renders all other defensive sets obsolete is not true just because of that fact, however.
See that's exactly my point. I never held up Gore as a reliable source, I said his movie had some facts in it. I used the national science academies as sources. And instead of discussing that Emgro, you choose to go into some tangent about academies vs the people in them. The published opinion of those organizations stands as a matter of record. So where are these dissenting scientists?
I always hear claims they exist, who are they? How many nobel prizes do they have in the fields of hard science?
Heroes : Angrem (50 Stone tank), Exo Inferis (50 Fire blaster), Exo Proteus (50 ill/emp), IceVengance (50 cold defender)
Villains : AtomBomb (50 Rad/Kin corruptor), Aleks (50 SS/Inv brute), StoneLethal (50 EM/Stone brute), Davroz (50 Bots/Dark mastermind)
Llamas keeper is a BS/WP scrapp btw.
anywhoo, have a good night everyone ill see ya tomorrow :-)