-
-
@jegga haha oh man that was a thing of beauty
-
@No-Quarter said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@jegga haha oh man that was a thing of beauty
Complete ownage
-
@TeWaio said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
Loved that. I spent 3yrs of my life researching stuff related to this field.
Any insights you could share?
I know very little..but at least I know I know very little, extinction rebellion and the majority of social media posts are from folk who also know very little but think they know it all. I've met one guy who is an actual climate scientist and he knows less than what these religious fanatics somehow apparently know.
It's all very confusing.
-
@TeWaio said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
Loved that. I spent 3yrs of my life researching stuff related to this field, but man oh man Extinction Rebellion are painful. They are more a religion than a science.
I remember a classic thread back in the day where I think it was you that systematically took Winger's arguments apart.
-
@No-Quarter said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@TeWaio said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
Loved that. I spent 3yrs of my life researching stuff related to this field, but man oh man Extinction Rebellion are painful. They are more a religion than a science.
I remember a classic thread back in the day where I think it was you that systematically took Winger's arguments apart.
They made a video of one exchange with Winger/silver ( he’s silver on planet Rugby)
-
@jegga said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@No-Quarter said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@TeWaio said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
Loved that. I spent 3yrs of my life researching stuff related to this field, but man oh man Extinction Rebellion are painful. They are more a religion than a science.
I remember a classic thread back in the day where I think it was you that systematically took Winger's arguments apart.
They made a video of one exchange with Winger/silver ( he’s silver on planet Rugby)
Sorry... was that video sposed ot make that bloke Sefton look good? Because he seems like a muppet.
-
@No-Quarter Hah yeah that was me, one of the funner moments on the Fern over the years, if only for the "wait a minute...!" factor.
@Rembrandt Well, the climate is definitely getting warmer, and atmospheric CO2 concentration is definitely going up. Historically we know those two things are linked from sampling the temperature vs CO2 relationship going back millions of years via drilling ice cores in the Arctic. So we're on fairly solid footing so far, scientifically.
Whether or not human activity is a) totally responsible for this, or b) just helping it along, or c) has had no impact whatsoever, is up for debate. But given the amount of fossil fuels burnt since the industrial revolution (that took millions of years worth of stored CO2 and whacked it into the atmosphere in very short order, geologically speaking), it's highly probably somewhere between a) and b).
The extent to which people are responsible is sort of a side issue, as the change is happening regardless. The debate then becomes how much effect a massive societal change to curb emissions would have on the entire climate system. If we ban flying, redistribute all the wealth, halt economic growth etc, and we still get 80% of the warming we would've got anyway, then it's probably not worth it. Instead we should crack on as we are with capitalism / economic growth and bet on technology allowing us to innovate our way out of the negative effects of climate change. That it the ideological/political fork in the road, and the left wing vs right wing solutions are obviously dramatically different. This is why it's such a politically charged issue (and why we're discussing it in the TSF politics forum).
Clearly it also depends on the extent of the damaging effects. No one has a definitive answer to that either, as the system is so ridiculously complex to model accurately. But most would agree it makes sense to err on the side of caution, as huge sea level rises / more frequent catastrophic natural disasters will have a big negative affect on society. 50cm sea level rises versus 20m is quite a big difference etc. The presence of possible feedback loops in climate, e.g. the melting of Arctic permafrost releasing methane and runaway warming, makes this even more unpredictable. That example is just one thing that we know might happen, there will also be "unknown unknowns" that (by definition) no one's considered.
Whatever happens, the poor will be affected more than the rich, developing world more than developed, East more than West etc. Which again makes it very political, especially as developed countries got to grow fast in the 20th century without caring about emissions, but now the developing world can't, or shouldn't, do the same? Again, you can take the view of making everyone more wealthy via economic growth, and using that to fuel development of technology to mitigate the effects is better than making everyone poorer by throwing human progress into reverse, but that's a political debate. You can probably tell which side I am on, and it's not Extinction Rebellion's.
Extinction Rebellion are a political / religious movement more than environmental. The idea "humanity has sinned and must repent or be destroyed" is an ancient, powerful story that has deep psychological appeal to humans, as any theologian could tell you. The whole shouty concept of "this is SUCH an emergency there is no time for nuance or debate and you must do as WE say" is really damaging and insidious, particularly the way it is being indoctrinated to children/adolescents. It is causing deep rooted psychological issues in young people, and doesn't help the above logical debates that need to take place in a rational society.
Whatever happens, people aren't going to "extinct", billions almost certainly won't die. But mass migration / hardening of borders is already happening, and will probably get worse. It will be the biggest challenge that humanity will face for decades/centuries to come IMO. NZ is very fortunate in its isolation, in this regard.
-
@TeWaio Cheers, yep that's about where I sit on the situation which obviously makes me an evil rich corporate climate change denier in certain circles (normally with a few additional 'ist' descriptor words for good measure). Have you read anything of Bjorn Lomborg? Seems to make a lot of sense to me. The 90% reduction in mortality from climate events in the last 100 years being a good example of where a good economy saves lives and destroying such an economy to stop climate change would likely cost significantly more lives.
-
@mariner4life said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@TeWaio god that is beautifully written.
Nobody can even muster a response in the most controversial thread on the Fern, which has to be a first.
-
@mariner4life @No-Quarter thanks fellas
@Rembrandt have heard of Bjorn Lomborg quite a bit but never got round to reading any of his stuff, will do so now, thanks
-
@TeWaio said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@mariner4life @No-Quarter thanks fellas
@Rembrandt have heard of Bjorn Lomborg quite a bit but never got round to reading any of his stuff, will do so now, thanks
Bjorn is pretty good. He's very pragmatic, very good with the numbers. Must be hard to keep beating the drum when nobody seeks to listen
-
@TeWaio I guess my only argument is how do we know if that 20% reduction is worth it or not? By the time it happens it maybe too late.
The frustration for me is we know fossil fuels are bad and are causing issues, we know agriculture, in particular meat and dairy contribute heavily. We have the technology and knowledge now to make dramatic changes in these areas which is highly likely going to slow warming. Some govts are dragging their heels and allowing corporate giants to dictate the message.
I haven't lived in NZ for a long time but from the outside it appears the govt is at least trying. The Australian Govt on the other hand seems to favour jobs, economic growth and wealth ahead of the environment and long term outcomes. The fact we allowed a giant coal mine in ecologically important bush so a foreign company can profit tells you were we are at here.
-
@chimoaus said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@TeWaio I guess my only argument is how do we know if that 20% reduction is worth it or not? By the time it happens it maybe too late.
The frustration for me is we know fossil fuels are bad and are causing issues, we know agriculture, in particular meat and dairy contribute heavily. We have the technology and knowledge now to make dramatic changes in these areas which is highly likely going to slow warming. Some govts are dragging their heels and allowing corporate giants to dictate the message.
I haven't lived in NZ for a long time but from the outside it appears the govt is at least trying. The Australian Govt on the other hand seems to favour jobs, economic growth and wealth ahead of the environment and long term outcomes. The fact we allowed a giant coal mine in ecologically important bush so a foreign company can profit tells you were we are at here.
I think any govt that doesnt favour jobs, economic growth and wealth is failing not only it citizens but also its citizens abilities to provide solutions to issues. Govts never solve anything of importance. They wreck innovation far more than they help it. About the only time a got ever helps innovation is if they start a war.
I think it is incredibly sad that so many people see wealth economic growth and jobs as some sort of negative, and if not a negative then running counter to the environment.
The main issue is that the anti capitalists green movement refuse to see it as a personal movement, they do not seriously promote thier cause by leading by example, they preach with empty words and virtue signalling. A climate activist ranting at a rally holding an iPhone is no different to a pastor at a church giving a sermon with a porn magazine tucked under his arm.
The solutions the climate activists promote are personal though, they would really REALLY suck at a personal level, less jobs, rampant poverty and deprivation (if you think different then do some research on what happens without economic growth). The poorest in society would be put through hell, homeless, jobless, not being able to support families,diseases and health systems would collapse. Economic growth is and always has been vital.
The climate activists act like the govt will solve everything and somehow make the lack of economic growth just all work... they wont. They will make it worse. They refuse to make meaningful personal sacrifice as at an instinctual level they know it sucks., but they are just to indoctrinated to understand.
I dont believe their is much of a problem and every year I am proven right as prediction after prediction fails, and if I am proven wrong... what will happen.... nothing as bad as the solution that some people are proposing to avoid it.
As for the NZ govt, they are virtue signalling numpties who will harm the poor of NZ as they attempt to tank our economy , the ones that will be crushed by a strangled economy.... the young and the poor. The young think they have it tough now.... do some research on what is was like to have no money during the great depression and then magnify it.@chimoaus Ok.. so lets say we bow down before the activists and remove meat and dairy form our economy. What replaces it? We have a market for those products. Someone else will take the market share as it wont disappear, just be re-alloacted. So that wont help the environment on a global scale. But then what does NZ do to replace those jobs, industry and export earnings? Who do you rely on to invest and make these changes? The govt? Farmers? At whose cost? Is there a massive global demand for Kale and other veggies tat we could fill? And if so why would they not do it regardless of climate 'emergency'? Because it doesnt make economic sense! Anyone who knows anything about money knows you dont give away all your market share and customers to a competitor for free, then at great expense start up a new business with unknown demand. Yet that is what people are demanding at a national level in NZ.
-
@Baron-Silas-Greenback
Financial literacy should be a compulsory subject in High School.
Real world stuff.This way young people can make an informed and balanced decision.
The Green message is shoved down students' throats, so I don't see why students cannot be taught the real world consequences of economies failing. As it stands, in today's youth, GDP growth etc. are nothing more than abstract numbers for stuffy bankers and businessmen.
I suspect the Greenies won't be a fan of my proposal.
-
Climate Change