Where are we going?

[Lacessit]

8 minutes ago, UbonThani said:

That's nice. I see you have no knowledge on science. Just abuse. Means you lost.

 

Goodbye.

If I recall correctly, the terms uneducated, tinfoil hat, lefty, loony etc. have been a constant refrain in your posts.

I've been a successful scientist for more than fifty years. Your opinion I have no knowledge of science is delusional.

[nobodysfriend]

1 hour ago, UbonThani said:

 So 64 out of 11,944, or 0.5%, take the view that humans are the main cause of global warming. But that includes all abstracts, including those that did not take a position. It would be nice to take the 64 as a percent of those that did take a position. Unfortunately, in their data set, Cook et al put 4a, those that do not address the cause of global warming, with 4b, those that express the view that humans’ role in global warming is uncertain or undefined. It would be nice to separate them, but we can’t unless we have the even rawer data. So let’s generously conclude that everyone in category 4 has expressed no view. That’s a total of 7970, leaving a total of 3,974 that have expressed a view. The 64 who think the main cause is humans is, drum roll please: 1.6%.

 I know you won't believe it , because you only believe what you want , but...

 

Here are some facts from the NASA :

 

https://climate.nasa.gov/causes/

 

Scientists attribute the global warming trend observed since the mid-20^th century to the human expansion of the "greenhouse effect"

 

• Carbon dioxide (CO₂). A minor but very important component of the atmosphere, carbon dioxide is released through natural processes such as respiration and volcano eruptions and through human activities such as deforestation, land use changes, and burning fossil fuels. Humans have increased atmospheric CO₂ concentration by more than a third since the Industrial Revolution began. This is the most important long-lived "forcing" of climate change.

 

The Role of Human Activity

 

In its Fifth Assessment Report, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a group of 1,300 independent scientific experts from countries all over the world under the auspices of the United Nations, concluded there's a more than 95 percent probability that human activities over the past 50 years have warmed our planet.

The industrial activities that our modern civilization depends upon have raised atmospheric carbon dioxide levels from 280 parts per million to 412 parts per million in the last 150 years. The panel also concluded there's a better than 95 percent probability that human-produced greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide have caused much of the observed increase in Earth's temperatures over the past 50 years.

Edited February 12, 2020 by nobodysfriend

[Assurancetourix]

2 hours ago, Lacessit said:

It would seem financial institutions disagree with you. There is not a single bank or private financial institution on the planet that will lend money for a new coal mine or coal-fired power station.

You will then have to explain to me why the Germans stopped their nuclear power plants to replace them by coal power plants.

and also why Cambodia has just signed an agreement for the construction of two new coal power plants ...................

So-called virtuous pension funds ... let me laugh

[Assurancetourix]

11 hours ago, nobodysfriend said:

Thanks for your very good post .

Btw , we are just creating our own ' catastrophe ' ---> Bolsonaro and the amazonian rainforest for example ... We are so intelligent , but also so stupid ... it has something to do with education ... We are educated to become members of a society that is based on profitmaking . Profitmaking leads easily to greed and greed to destruction . That is what needs to change ...

Either way, whatever may happen in the future, we will have to adapt or die.
To continue to believe in infinite growth in a world and finite resources is dementia.

[geronimo]

I think it's going to be a race between man destroying his habitat and AI destroying man .....

[Assurancetourix]

2 minutes ago, geronimo said:

I think it's going to be a race between man destroying his habitat and AI destroying man .....

If this is the case and I fear that it is because the Mankind is in fact suicidal.
He likes thrills;
I believe that it will be served.
AI is already surpassing it in many areas; one day science fiction films and novels will become reality; AI will remove Humanity from the earth because it has become obsolete, useless.

[geronimo]

So, if we are all phucked, we may as well enjoy the moments .......

[geronimo]

Just now, Assurancetourix said:

If this is the case and I fear that it is because the Mankind is in fact suicidal.
He likes thrills;
I believe that it will be served.
AI is already surpassing it in many areas; one day science fiction films and novels will become reality; AI will remove Humanity from the earth because it has become obsolete, useless.

More than useless, we are the cause of all the strife! AI would be doing all forms of life a huge favour by removing humanity!

[nobodysfriend]

6 minutes ago, geronimo said:

I think it's going to be a race between man destroying his habitat and AI destroying man .....

Man destroying his habitat means man destroying himself ...

AI should be used to replace our ( corrupt ) politicians , who still think that everything will go on like they are used to ...

 

[geronimo]

Perhaps we could even ask AI the question,

"How come a species with so much intelligence, is hell bent on destroying it's home, while also knowing that it has nowhere else to go?"

 

Be interesting to see the answer .... My money is on ... "Remove the hierarchy and all will be well"

Edited February 12, 2020 by geronimo

[geronimo]

3 minutes ago, nobodysfriend said:

Man destroying his habitat means man destroying himself ...

AI should be used to replace our ( corrupt ) politicians , who still think that everything will go on like they are used to ...

 

But removing all the politicians would result in them being replaced. I think we need to take down the world bank and the federal reserve and go back to gold deposits/money. Defeat the world's elite families, who control economies and start wars as it makes them huge profits. Hitler was funded by these greedy phuckers .....

Edited February 12, 2020 by geronimo

[Assurancetourix]

1 minute ago, geronimo said:

So, if we are all phucked, we may as well enjoy the moments .......

What I have been doing for a few years;
actually since I started working in 1969 ..
I always did what I wanted to do ...
I think it has not been too bad for me, apart from the fact that the amount of my retirement is far from what I thought. 

On the other hand the future of our children, future generations looks particularly dark and can be definitive in a nuclear apotheosis after which only AI can survive;
it is certainly it who will start this final nuclear war.

 

If that happens, what hurts my heart the most will be the disappearance, maybe not in fact, of all the positive that Mankind has been able to create; I can't live without classical music that I listen to every day for several hours (right now, while I'm writing: Evgeny Kissin plays Rachmaninoff's Piano Concert No. 2)

[geronimo]

2 minutes ago, Assurancetourix said:

What I have been doing for a few years;
actually since I started working in 1969 ..
I always did what I wanted to do ...
I think it has not been too bad for me, apart from the fact that the amount of my retirement is far from what I thought. 

On the other hand the future of our children, future generations looks particularly dark and can be definitive in a nuclear apotheosis after which only AI can survive;
it is certainly it who will start this final nuclear war.

 

If that happens, what hurts my heart the most will be the disappearance, maybe not in fact, of all the positive that Mankind has been able to create; I can't live without classical music that I listen to every day for several hours (right now, while I'm writing: Evgeny Kissin plays Rachmaninoff's Piano Concert No. 2)

I have long ago resolved myself to cherish every moment of my life, see the good in everything and observe the show without emotion of any kind .....

[nobodysfriend]

6 minutes ago, geronimo said:

Perhaps we could even ask AI the question,

"How come a species with so much intelligence, is hell bent on destroying it's home, while also knowing that it has nowhere else to go?"

 

Be interesting to see the answer ....

I wanted to see the answer , too , so I just googled your phrase ...

 

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/05/26/climate-change-weve-created-a-civilisation-hell-bent-on-destroying-itself-im-terrified-writes-earth-scientist/

That is part of what I found :

Change within a lifetime

I was born in the early 1970s. This means in my lifetime the number of people on Earth has doubled, while the size of wild animal populations has been reduced by 60%. Humanity has swung a wrecking ball through the biosphere. We have chopped down over half of the world’s rainforests and by the middle of this century there may not be much more than a quarter left. This has been accompanied by a massive loss in biodiversity, such that the biosphere may be entering one of the great mass extinction events in the history of life on Earth.

What makes this even more disturbing, is that these impacts are as yet largely unaffected by climate change. Climate change is the ghosts of impacts future. It has the potential to ratchet up whatever humans have done to even higher levels. Credible assessments conclude that one in six species are threatened with extinction if climate change continues.

 

Coupled with the "Great Silence", it implies that the reason we haven't heard from anyone is that intelligent life, when it happens anywhere else in the universe, doesn't last and when it does it flames out quickly and takes the biosphere with it (preventing any other intelligent life from reappearing. Sorry dolphins!). While this is depressing in a very deep sense both cosmically (no Star Trek/Wars/Valerian universes filled with alien civilizations) and locally (we're going to wipe ourselves out, and soon) it is perhaps understandable given our current progress towards reproducing the conditions of the greatest extinction event in earth's history.

 

https://science.slashdot.org/story/17/08/13/2130215/astrophysicist-believes-technologically-advanced-species-extinguish-themselves

[Assurancetourix]

6 minutes ago, geronimo said:

Hitler was funded by these greedy phuckers .....

History books are always written by the winners.
In this case the so-called good camp did everything to prevent us, the generations after the Second World War, from knowing the why of the how;
but all the archives have not been destroyed and a few rare participants on the so-called "good" side have cleverly turned their jackets over so that we know that in fact the Rockefellers and C * were on the same side as Hitler.

[geronimo]

8 minutes ago, Assurancetourix said:

History books are always written by the winners.
In this case the so-called good camp did everything to prevent us, the generations after the Second World War, from knowing the why of the how;
but all the archives have not been destroyed and a few rare participants on the so-called "good" side have cleverly turned their jackets over so that we know that in fact the Rockefellers and C * were on the same side as Hitler.

In 1933, the Nazi HQ was in Manhattan ........

[Assurancetourix]

I always ask myself this question which will obviously remain unanswered;
why raise billions of dollars or euros in your bank account or in physical things ...?
What is it for when you can buy absolutely everything you want?
One hundred cars , each for  4 million euros ( Bugatti ) or a luxury yacht or a castle or all three at the same time. And  Mona Lisa in your  living room; why not?
I do not see the point of amassing such fortunes;

fortunes that will be swept away like a straw during the final explosion.
These milliardiares know very well that humanity runs to its loss; they contribute much more than you or me.

My current goal is to be able to buy myself a new camera without it interfering in the family budget; let's say a colossal investment of around 20,000 baht. 

Edited February 12, 2020 by Assurancetourix

[RocketDog]

On 2/11/2020 at 8:36 AM, UbonThani said:

" Great Thunberg started a movement for the young people, "

 

Sure conned you. Her parents are using her to make money. Books, videos, sponsorships etc.

 

It's all about money.

 

Nothing to do with saving anything. Al Gore started the money making enviro con.

Even if telling the truth is profitable it doesn't change the truth. 

[Lacessit]

47 minutes ago, Assurancetourix said:

 

If that happens, what hurts my heart the most will be the disappearance, maybe not in fact, of all the positive that Mankind has been able to create; I can't live without classical music that I listen to every day for several hours (right now, while I'm writing: Evgeny Kissin plays Rachmaninoff's Piano Concert No. 2)

IMO Rubinstein did the best rendition of all time, particularly the third movement.

Is Gershwin's 'Rhapsody in Blue" too recent for you? That's a modern classic.

[Assurancetourix]

2 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

Is Gershwin's 'Rhapsody in Blue" too recent for you? That's a modern classic.

It is not too recent for me;
Besides, I have listened to it several times interpreted by different artists.
And when it is interpreted by Yuja Wang in an alluring outfit, it is even better

 

 

[TKDfella]

2 hours ago, Lacessit said:

There is no causative link between lung cancer and smoking. However the fact one is 20 times more likely to die of lung cancer ( let's leave out emphysema and heart disease ) as a smoker is sufficient evidence for sensible people to quit.

Heat cells over Australia, breaking up of the Larsen Ice Shelf, disappearance of glaciers in Iceland are not forecasts. They are happening now.

One of the favorite arguments of deniers is climate change is a scam, aimed at getting research funding.

95% of the world's scientists accept climate change is man-made. Their acceptance is based on their training in physics and chemistry, plus the evidence before them.

Probably only 5-10% of said scientists are engaged in climate science themselves. The proposition scientists around the world are part of a giant conspiracy is patently ridiculous. It's more probable the 5% that disagree are bought by the fossil fuel industry.

It's very like the legal battles fought by Big Tobacco for decades against smokers who sued them for damage to their health. The fossil fuel industry is doing the same - deny, deflect, red herrings and propaganda.

If you really thought about it, you would be ashamed of being so gullible.

 

I think you need to learn the difference between climate change and global warming. Climate Change is a natural sequence of events that happened continuously in the past, happens now, and in the future. Climate change happens on the other planets too. Jupiter's gigantic storms and cyclones continue to produce those colourful patterns we see. Jupiter's Great Red Spot is also getting smaller.

Global Warming was originally introduced to specifically relate to Earth to include climate change plus the anthropological influence. All animal life has an influence on its surroundings (there is even evidence that the larger dinosaurs were eating their way extinction before the impact event) but it's a question of by how much.

Some years ago I started do my own study, not a strict laboratory one, just a simple model of my local environment. I measured the surface ground temperature in a couple of roadside places where there were plenty of trees on the way to Nongkhai, and some close to where I live. When they pulled down the trees for an extra lane traffic to Nongkhai I went out and took some more readings during the summer as close as I could to the originals. Extra trees had also been felled for the building of the so called 'villages'. Now there was no shade protecting the ground which was about 3^o C higher than before and around where I live where there has also been development, a little under a 2^o C rise. Now I admit there could be quite a large margin of error in what I did but the point is there was a rise in ground temperature. Now add that to what goes on elsewhere on a larger scale and you have a recipe for larger areas of surface ground warming. But of course this isn't the only consequence. Wind patterns are also affected by such changes as well as other factors. The big question is, are those changes detrimental? There are two camps among the scientific community; NASA says the average temperature is up by about 1.9^o C, sea level is rising, CO₂ levels are rising and so on. The two camps arise from the non-anthropogenic/anthropogenic influence. But there is also a more subtle influence...how the questionnaires given to scientists are structured and do they ask the right questions? Apparently a recent German questionnaire study suggest that many of the questions are vague and not direct enough but is there a reason for that also?

I am not going to give my opinion, such as it is, as whether we are on a catastrophic course or not but we have seen in recent years the impact by plastic pollution, storing of radioactive waste etc. The evidence for global changes are there...how it is interpreted is something else.

[UbonThani]

Lefties don't understand basic co2 science nor the law of dimishing returns. It's been known for decades around the world the law applies. Going from zero to 100ppm temps  are sensitive. At higher less it becomes less and less.

 

The runaway warming loonies were basing their models on constant sensitivity which is wrong.

 

Lifting heavy weights 5 times a week same muscle group is not better than twice or 3 times.

 

Same rule applies to many things not just co2.

 

Yet the loonies think 3 oil guys run opposition to co2 hype. It's not. It's well know science and knowledge of how the rule of dimishing returns works.

 

Have a nice day.

[canuckamuck]

3 hours ago, geronimo said:

I only started this thread to beat Ivor Bigun's god thread!

That is a lofty goal, but you are on your way.

[geronimo]

9 minutes ago, canuckamuck said:

That is a lofty goal, but you are on your way.

I heard Ivor's going to be given a free pass into the 8-dotters lounge ......... 

[UbonThani]

 

Up to ~200 ppm^v, the equivalent to about ~77% of the temperature increasing effectiveness of CO2. This is essential to sustain photosynthesis in plants and thus the viability of all life on earth.

§ A further ~100 ppm^v was the level prior to any industrialisation, this atmospheric CO2 made the survival of the biosphere possible, giving a further 5.9% of the CO2 Greenhouse effect.

§ Following that a further 100ppm^v, (certainly man-made in part), adding ~4.1% of the CO2 effectiveness brings the current level ~400 ppm^v.

§ CO2 at 400pmm^v is already committed and immutable. So CO2 has already reached about ~87+% of its potential warming effect in the atmosphere.

[UbonThani]

 

It could be not be influenced by any remedial decarbonisation action, however drastic, taken by a minority of nations.

In a rational, non-political world, that prospect should be greeted with unmitigated joy.

If it is so:

· concern over CO2 as a man-made pollutant can be mostly discounted.

· it is not essential to disrupt the economy of the Western world to no purpose.

· the cost to the European economy alone is considered to be ~ £165 billion per annum till the end of the century, not including the diversion of employment and industries to elsewhere: this is deliberate economic self-harm that can be avoided: these vast resources could be spent for much more worthwhile endeavours.

· were warming happening, unless excessive, it provides a more benign climate for the biosphere and mankind.

· any extra CO2 has already increased the fertility of all plant life on the planet.

· if warming is occurring at all, a warmer climate within natural variation would provide a future of greater opportunity and prosperity for human development, especially so for the third world.

[Odysseus123]

1 hour ago, Assurancetourix said:

History books are always written by the winners.
In this case the so-called good camp did everything to prevent us, the generations after the Second World War, from knowing the why of the how;
but all the archives have not been destroyed and a few rare participants on the so-called "good" side have cleverly turned their jackets over so that we know that in fact the Rockefellers and C * were on the same side as Hitler.

Actually that is not true..

 

Take Franz Halder for example.The Americans set him and 230 of his colleagues (all ex German general staff) up in 1946 to basically write the history of the Eastern Front campaigns all by themselves.Their skewed version of events were not seriously challenged until the 1990's.

 

And the greatest historian of them all (Thucydides)-the man who along with Herodotus virtually invented History-was on the losing side (Athens).

[UbonThani]

So in summary go drive a car, fly somewhere and enjoy a nice cold beer.

 

Switch off the tv and don't listen to alarmists on the con.

[Assurancetourix]

4 minutes ago, Odysseus123 said:

Actually that is not true..

If you speak of my first sentence, I concede it;

 

although it depends on which side we are on.

this example, on the Victory Monument in Bangkok;

 

the battle of Koh Chang in 1941 is considered by the Thai people as a great victory ( the good joke! )
In any case, this is what they want to show to future generations.

If being sank 1/3 of its fleet in 2 hours by two gunboats (small boats!) Is a victory ... !!!

On earth the battles will be won not by the Thai army who are too happy to have avoided a confrontation but by their allies, the Japanese.

[geronimo]

1 minute ago, Assurancetourix said:

If you speak of my first sentence, I concede it;

 

although it depends on which side we are on.

this example, on the Victory Monument in Bangkok;

 

the battle of Koh Chang in 1941 is considered by the Thai people as a great victory ( the good joke! )
In any case, this is what they want to show to future generations.

If being sank 1/3 of its fleet in 2 hours by two gunboats (small boats!) Is a victory ... !!!

On earth the battles will be won not by the Thai army who are too happy to have avoided a confrontation but by their allies, the Japanese.

Oh well, we all make mistakes ......