Quote:Original post by kSquared

Reasonable and scientifically inexorable conclusion, overwhelmingly supported by facts and evidence:

Observation 1: Greenhouse gases are higher now than ever before.
Observation 2: Human economic activity is higher now than ever before.
Conclusion: Human economic activity is responsible for the increase in greenhouse gases.

I mean no offense, kSquared, but outside any argument about climatic change, this is not a valid conclusion. Its like saying:

Observation 1: Greenhouse gases are higher now than ever before.
Observation 2: Video games sales are higher now than ever before.
Conclusion: Video games sales are responsible for the increase in Greenhouse gases

Its the "apples are red, goldfishes are red, apples are goldfish argument".

Im all for anti-polution laws and the protection of the environment, but as a scientist, I have yet to see serious evidence that humans are causing climate changes. Thats not a reason for not controlling what we shoot in the air better, but we could spare ourselves the media panic and the bogus studies.

Quote:Original post by LessBread

Quote:Original post by Eelco
unfortunatly its only a select few people that stand to lose greatly from any climate change (like my entire country disappearing), while most people have more important things to worry about than a few extra degrees and a decrease of biodiversity on the short term, but would rather make sure they have something to eat. i cant blame them for giving the finger to any oil-slick wealthy western hippy bastards coming to tell them they cant use fossile fuels.

And what if the shift occurs geometrically rather than linearly? That is, what if it's not a few extra degrees in temperature and a small decrease in biodiversity but something far worse? What if the planet becomes uninhabitable?

if you wouldnt have deleted the part of my post where i adressed that, i wouldnt have to retype it now, but never mind, let me word it more clearly:

-this planet has been non-sterile from an estimated 4billion years ago up till now
-at the dawn of life, its safe to say there was no organic carbon stored underground
-hence, life must be possible even if we were to release all stored carbon
-we will only be able to release a quite small fraction of it in an economically viable manner
-so it is reasonable to assume the climate after release of all economically accesible carbon is somewhere between what its now and what it is estimated to have been like in the far past.
-assuming the worst, that might suck quite badly for us, but were quite a versatile species: people can live from the desert to antarica now, theyll be able to live on antartica then no matter what happens. actually i wouldnt be surprised if a not too big shift to warmer global climate would increase the capacity of this planet to support life rather than decrease it. afaik its an established fact that the amount of biomass/m^2 has been much higher in the warmer past.

Quote:

Quote:Original post by Eelco
the only realistic solution seems developing something more envirnomentally friendly and cheaper than oil. im all for it.

Horsepower. It worked before ...

[grin]

i was more thinking of something people would embrace willingly. i know, im a lazy bastard.

Quote:Original post by templewulf

Quote:Original post by Servant of the Lord
The world is steadily running out of food sources, true or false?

Terrifically false. The problem is actually in distribution. America consumes WAY more than any other nation, and could probably feed the whole world if we'd spend our efforts more wisely.

We could, but in a few years our population will be greater and we would consume more. We wouldn't just consume more but we would continue to destroy other food sources and soon run out completely. Well, not completely but run out enough that around ninety percent of the world would be without food. Our only options would be in:
(A) Biologicly producing edible substances
(B) Turning inedible material into edible material
(C) Finding nother planet and relocating or transporting its food

There are probaly other options as well, but this is all I see at the moment.

Quote:
As far as the world ending soon, it doesn't have to. That's why everybody's making such a big deal out of preventable greenhouse gasses. There are non-preventable sources of climate change, but that doesn't lessen our contributions to it.

@SotL:
I don't mean this insultingly, but have you heard of the Church of Last Thursday? It's pretty heavily slanted satire, but I'm sure you get the gist of it. What do you think it means for people who believe in the possibility of things being created "fully-formed"?

I never heard of that, but it was sorta interesting. It is basicly a matrix, and it seems rather stupid; but there is often wisdom in stupidity and one does best to think over every circumstance and theory. Thanks for that link[attention]
PS, Maybe I should stop kicking them cats[grin]

Quote:Original post by LessBread

Quote:Original post by Servant of the Lord
...'Gree-goo freaks'(?)...

Actually, it's gray goo. For an extensive list of end of the world scenarios, check out Exit Mundi.

Thanks Lessbread. That seems quite probable, actaully. It seems some nation might be able to create one that dies when in contact with water and release it in another nation, so it would stop at the sea; that would be more deadly than a nuclear bombing. Maybe someone could make one that doesn't multiply but instead takes cancer and turns it into something else, or turn dirt into stemcells so as not to offend those that don't like the whole abortion thing.

Quote:

Quote:Original post by Servant of the Lord
(I was joking about the blasphemy thing) Yeah that's true, a few mistakes don't mean much, but I just think its funny that people put up a wikipedia article and it is all 'end of discussion' when the poster who put up that link could have made the article minutes before posting(at least, I think they could've, is there a screen were moderaters check it before it gets added or do they just check it after?).

I don't think a wiki link necessarily brings an end to the discussion. It does put an end to wild speculation based on ignorance - or at least it should. I don't think the effort to post an wiki article in order to win a debate is worth it. As for the wiki validation procedures, how about investigating the process and letting us know exactly how it works?

I am not too familair with how to go about that, but I will try.

Quote:Original post by LessBread
Horsepower. It worked before ...
[grin]

lol. How about we just hurry up and invent teleporters already? But really, do electric cars work well or not? Couldn't we just make a powerplant that has a huge metal doughnut, with a magnet in the center that spins to create power, or would that not make enough for its size?

Quote:Original post by Servant of the Lord

Quote:Original post by templewulf

Quote:Original post by Servant of the Lord
The world is steadily running out of food sources, true or false?

Terrifically false. The problem is actually in distribution. America consumes WAY more than any other nation, and could probably feed the whole world if we'd spend our efforts more wisely.

We could, but in a few years our population will be greater and we would consume more. We wouldn't just consume more but we would continue to destroy other food sources and soon run out completely. Well, not completely but run out enough that around ninety percent of the world would be without food. Our only options would be in:
(A) Biologicly producing edible substances
(B) Turning inedible material into edible material
(C) Finding nother planet and relocating or transporting its food

There are probaly other options as well, but this is all I see at the moment.

aside from the fact that your argument is a bit incoherent: yes, we will run into the limits of our resources one day or another. but its not as if thats the first time something like that has happened in the history of the earth. actually, working with limited resources is pretty much the norm for any species. it will undoubtly be violent times, but the end of the world? nah.

Quote:Original post by Servant of the Lord

Quote:Original post by LessBread
Horsepower. It worked before ...
[grin]

lol. How about we just hurry up and invent teleporters already? But really, do electric cars work well or not? Couldn't we just make a powerplant that has a huge metal doughnut, with a magnet in the center that spins to create power, or would that not make enough for its size?

since the world is about to end anyway, i suppose you wouldnt mind keeping that magnet spinning? or do you think they burn all that coal in powerplants just to keep it comfortably heated in there?