Jump to content
Rippounet

What should be done... about climate change

Recommended Posts

18 hours ago, Conflicting Thought said:

Right, cuz living in denial is soo logical. 

Hoping that elon fucking musk is going to save us all is so realistic and based on facts and logic. Ugh. 

To be fair throwing a tantrum in front of the UN and telling everyone we need to have net zero carbon emissions by 2025, without offering even the slightest clue of how to achieve that monumental task isn’t particularly helpful either.

Which is why I’ve got one of Elon Musks products ordered and being delivered soon and really couldn’t care much less about the rantings of Greta, if you want people to hear your message it’s probably better to get a spokesperson who,even if they arnt old enough to vote at least isn’t completely lacking in social skills.

At the same time I do agree that more needs to be done to combat climate change, but getting carbon emissions to net zero by 2025 just isn’t achievable without huge changes to peoples every day lives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Bittersweet Distractor said:

throwing a tantrum

Quote

couldn’t care much less about the rantings of Greta

Yeah, for some reason I suspect you're not inclined to listen to her actual arguments in good faith.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do agree with measures such as redirecting fossil fuel subsidies to renewables instead and doing everything reasonably possible to speed up the transition to a renewable economy. But the time this will require means that it still won’t be enough to achieve the radical targets the climate activists want in the short term.

And I think it is just realistic to accept that a certain degree (pun not intended) of additional warming is therefore unavoidable.

I have to reiterate, however, that once we have transitioned to renewable and nuclear energy coupled with mass battery storage and electric transport, up to 60% and potentially 70% of emissions will have been addressed. That should be the focus. Bringing that about without penalising normal working people in the interim with higher energy, transport and general living expenses should be the goal.

Edited by Free Northman Reborn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a prevailing argument that since certain countries are not responding to the call to combat global warming, that we ask why should we? Its like being in a sinking boat and not bothering to bail out the water because no one else is. Some of us will have to bail faster if we want to stay afloat.

Global warming is a real problem that everyone is affected by. Even if could manage to prevent getting worse, or stop it, we will never get back to where we were before industialiation.

We do need to convince everyone to work towards slowing it ( Global warming ) down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Bittersweet Distractor said:

To be fair throwing a tantrum in front of the UN and telling everyone we need to have net zero carbon emissions by 2025, without offering even the slightest clue of how to achieve that monumental task isn’t particularly helpful either.

Which is why I’ve got one of Elon Musks products ordered and being delivered soon and really couldn’t care much less about the rantings of Greta, if you want people to hear your message it’s probably better to get a spokesperson who,even if they arnt old enough to vote at least isn’t completely lacking in social skills.

At the same time I do agree that more needs to be done to combat climate change, but getting carbon emissions to net zero by 2025 just isn’t achievable without huge changes to peoples every day lives.

Daddy elon will save us!!. At least greta did make you post in this thread, even though it was nonsense. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

I do agree with measures such as redirecting fossil fuel subsidies to renewables instead and doing everything reasonably possible to speed up the transition to a renewable economy. But the time this will require means that it still won’t be enough to achieve the radical targets the climate activists want in the short term.

And I think it is just realistic to accept that a certain degree (pun not intended) of additional warming is therefore unavoidable.

I have to reiterate, however, that once we have transitioned to renewable and nuclear energy coupled with mass battery storage and electric transport, up to 60% and potentially 70% of emissions will have been addressed. That should be the focus. Bringing that about without penalising normal working people in the interim with higher energy, transport and general living expenses should be the goal.

Have you heard (cuz i doubt you read it) of feedback loops. You are misinformed and maybe delusional?. I sure hope the big daddy capitalist will save us all while i live like nothing is happening. Jesus christ. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Conflicting Thought said:

Have you heard (cuz i doubt you read it) of feedback loops. You are misinformed and maybe delusional?. I sure hope the big daddy capitalist will save us all while i live like nothing is happening. Jesus christ. 

I don't think you're reading what I'm writing. I acknowledge repeatedly that reducing emissions gradually rather than immediately won't prevent the warming that the activists want to prevent. But we will just have to deal with that. It's not ideal. But it is inevitable.

If we can figure out ways to terraform Mars, we can figure out ways to counter whatever climate feedback loops MIGHT emerge on Earth. Technology is our only realistic hope. Because we simply aren't going to prevent the few degrees of warming that the alarmists say will doom our species to extinction (which it won't, of course).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

I don't think you're reading what I'm writing. I acknowledge repeatedly that reducing emissions gradually rather than immediately won't prevent the warming that the activists want to prevent. But we will just have to deal with that. It's not ideal. But it is inevitable.

If we can figure out ways to terraform Mars, we can figure out ways to counter whatever climate feedback loops MIGHT emerge on Earth. Technology is our only realistic hope. Because we simply aren't going to prevent the few degrees of warming that the alarmists say will doom our species to extinction (which it won't, of course).

Lol, this would require vastly more resources and time and effort than just drastically cutting back co2 levels here.  If we can't save this planet no one is even going to make it to Mars, let alone with the money, tech, and resources needed to terraform it.  I love sci-fi too but you've got the cart before the horse pal.

Share this post


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

Yeah, for some reason I suspect you're not inclined to listen to her actual arguments in good faith.

How so?, if you read what I said I actually agree with many of them, but the way she goes about presenting them will alienate more people than it will inspire.

3 hours ago, Conflicting Thought said:

Daddy elon will save us!!. At least greta did make you post in this thread, even though it was nonsense. 

I'm not relying on anyone to 'save us' all I did was point out that he has actually done more to combat climate change and air pollution than she has.

Has Greta or XR actually proposed a viable plan to make carbon emissions net zero by 2025?, or has she merely sailed across the Atlantic to scold a lot of world leaders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bittersweet Distractor said:

How so?, if you read what I said I actually agree with many of them, but the way she goes about presenting them will alienate more people than it will inspire.

I'm not relying on anyone to 'save us' all I did was point out that he has actually done more to combat climate change and air pollution than she has.

Has Greta or XR actually proposed a viable plan to make carbon emissions net zero by 2025?, or has she merely sailed across the Atlantic to scold a lot of world leaders.

Do you know what an activist is? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean, plans for how to handle climate change have only existed for fucking decades at this point. But yeah, the 16 year old needs to put out a comprehensive plan before we do anything, rather than just light a fire under some asses so that the plans that already exist, and that we know would fucking work, can be implemented.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

Bringing that about without penalising normal working people in the interim with higher energy, transport and general living expenses should be the goal.

The -honest- question here is whether this is realistic. That is to say, whether preserving our way of life is realistic, or whether doing away with it is the only possible solution.

As of now the answer is no. The transitioning efforts (to green energy) that are made, however encouraging, are barely dealing with the new demands in energy. So it's not just that we need to transition faster, we also need to scale down our energy needs in order to have an impact, i.e. completely rethink our way of life.

This is why the type of "progressive transition" like the one we're trying through the consumer society and advocated by someone like FNR cannot work. It could only work if we found a new miracle green source of energy tomorrow (or yesterday) or an efficient way to reduce the amount carbon dioxyde (and other greenhouse gases) in the atmosphere.

And that's the next point that somehow people like FNR do not seem to get. We have no way to reduce the amount of greenhouse gases once they're in the atmosphere. So far we are only good at reducing emissions, and of course we're not even doing this on a massive scale yet. It's not just that direct air capture has to be considerably improved to be a working solution, it also has to use green energy, which means the transition to green energy is a precondition, and as I said earlier green energy is barely meeting new demands as it is. And of course someone would have to pay for it...
The most efficient way to get rid of greenhouse gases is rewilding, i.e. planting trees and restoring wetlands (peatlands) over huge areas. Which of course would entail rethinking our way of life...

There's no escaping it: we need to abandon the consumer society. It got us in this mess in the first place, so it only makes sense to get rid of it. And sure, I personally think it's easier done through decentralized democratic socialism, but it doesn't have to be. It might be conceivable to limit socio-economic justice to a minimum and keep a form of traditional capitalism under heavy regulations... But we're not having that kind of sensible discussion so in the end authoritarian central planification may very well end up being the only kind of solution...

2 hours ago, Bittersweet Distractor said:

Has Greta or XR actually proposed a viable plan to make carbon emissions net zero by 2025?

Net zero is a pipedream, but anyone can find out what should be done (rethinking our way of life) and what can easily be done (massively regulating the worst industries).
Start with what I wrote above and translate that into policy. Anyone should be able to make a political program out of it in a a couple of months at most. But they're not.

2 hours ago, Bittersweet Distractor said:

or has she merely sailed across the Atlantic to scold a lot of world leaders.

Who is she supposed to scold?

3 hours ago, Bittersweet Distractor said:

the way she goes about presenting them will alienate more people than it will inspire.

People alienated by the strong opinions of a teenager are worthless for this cause anyway. And no, I do not think she's alienating more people than she's inspiring else she wouldn't keep being invited by world leaders.

I do agree though that the information the average citizen is getting is dismal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

nonono reformers must always have a complete and completely viable plan laid out, funded, and ready to implement antecedent to approaching their opponents regarding proposed reform.  it needs thorough schematics, testing, and modeling; security clearances must issue; all complications must be anticipated, their contingency reduced to written forecast.  one might say that the reform must be accomplished prior to its proposal, that it must fully precede itself in reality, that it must be 100% successful retroactive to the origin of the universe.  that's just the rule. 

and in propagating the reform to naysayers and doubting thomases, after it gives birth to itself in order to establish itself as inevitable, proponents must sign off with the signature--

Quote

Smooth Propagator Propagating Correctly

this is also a rule.

Edited by sologdin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, sologdin said:

nonono reformers must always have a complete and completely viable plan laid out, funded, and ready to implement antecedent to approaching their opponents regarding proposed reform.  it needs thorough schematics, testing, and modeling; security clearances must issue; all complications must be anticipated, their contingency reduced to written forecast.  one might say that the reform must be accomplished prior to its proposal, that it must fully precede itself in reality, that it must be 100% successful retroactive to the origin of the universe.  that's just the rule. 

and in propagating the reform to naysayers and doubting thomases, after it gives birth to itself in order to establish itself as inevitable, proponents must sign off with the signature--

this is also a rule.

Ah yes love this part of 100 Years of Solitude where the Colonels orders are being carried out before he gives them.  Obviously 16 year old climate activists deserve to be tone policed until they attain this level of manifesting policy.  When that which comes after determines what comes before.

Edited by larrytheimp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×