4 Years to Save Earth!

Discussion in 'Earth Science' started by madanthonywayne, Jan 19, 2009.

  1. spidergoat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    51,936
    Why should we do nothing and miss out on the next big thing in industry? Everything we do to reduce carbon emissions will free us from the burden of running this country on a fuel with no future.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. disease Banned Banned

    Messages:
    657
    The inconvenient truth is that we don't really care about how comfortable or rich future generations will be. We're evolved to learn and pass on that learning; but we tend to ignore the mess we make until it gets to be a problem. This is usually when it's too late and so we have to move elsewhere. Our history is one of resource depletion, then moving to a new resource - hunting & gathering became agriculture, cities eventually became places of invention, and we got 'machines', then steam and combustion engines that exploit a natural resource which we're steadily depleting. And so on.

    Unfortunately, at this stage of our 'development', we don't have anywhere left to move on to. The idea we can all migrate to another planet is an interesting dream, but is more to do with our desire to find "new land" somewhere than with being a realistic option.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. swivel Sci-Fi Author Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,494
    Something smells fishy to me.

    There is a loud group of people that want us to return to the "utopia" of the stone age. These people think that technology and capitalism are going to make the Earth unable to support billions of us. They think that using up these resources is going to put an end to our systems which run off of them.

    So... why don't they just keep quiet and allow us to hasten the arrival of the glory days of subsistence hunter/gather lifestyles? Why warn us? Why have us WILLINGLY destroy what they claim self-destruct on its own?

    Perhaps they don't believe their own bullshit? Maybe all the claims of running out of resources have proven false over and over, which means their only chance is to scare us into harming our future? What am I missing?
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. spidergoat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    51,936
    We had progressed pretty far before the industrial age. There's no need to go back to hunter-gatherer lifestyles. Agriculture is fine, human, horse, and hydro power are all nice. The cotton gin and the plow are very useful. To answer your question, we can sleepwalk into the future and get slapped down hard, or we can prepare for it using what resources remain wisely.
     
  8. ElectricFetus Sanity going, going, gone Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,181
    Nobels for non-science fields like political propaganda is a joke.
     
  9. Carcano Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,865
    I dont know whats going to happen to the global climate and neither does anyone else.

    I'll tell you what I do know...every last drop of oil will be burned.

    If America doesnt burn it someone else will.
     
  10. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    17,541
    Possible worse case scenario.
    We have a ball of mass spinning in a vacuum in orbit around a star.
    It's rate of spin and it's orbit a delicate balancing of various forces such as gravity, angular momentum and so on.
    seasons come and seasons go and the year currently sits at approx. 365 days a full orbit. Science would be a bit upset if we lost 30 minutes of spin in one year but what may happpen is a lot worse than that....like 30 minutes in one day...or worse...

    The moon is intrinsically locked into this mechanism and is also delicately balanced in it's orbital behaviour by the very same forces.
    So all the ice melts on the Southern pole and it's previously concentrated mass of frozen water is equally distributed globally moving the weight around the planet instead of keeping it at the South pole. The same applies for Northern Ice caps,

    This delicate balancing between forces that keeps this beautiful planet in it's rather unique life giving state is about to go woopsie!

    What can we do about it?


    Probably not much.....

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    edit: one must wonder what would happen if the overall mean radius of this spinning ball in a vacuum were to increase as predicted by the rise in sea levels globally. {theoretically the spin should decrease I think - by how much I woud have no idea}
     
    Last edited: Jan 21, 2009
  11. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    17,541
    and you wonder why the governments haven't signed the kyotto...ha
     
  12. draqon Banned Banned

    Messages:
    35,006
    You are clueless aren't you? Russia has indeed signed many anti-greenhouse protocols and its emissions are extremely low for such a large country as it is.

    Unlike the US.
     
  13. draqon Banned Banned

    Messages:
    35,006
  14. Enmos Staff Member

    Messages:
    43,184
    Uhm.. might that have to do with its population density, perhaps ?
     
  15. draqon Banned Banned

    Messages:
    35,006
    I posted the map, Enmos...its per/capita statistics.

    Its not just that Russia is not that much densely populated, it is in fact that Russia does not have so much greenhouse emissions per person.
     
  16. Enmos Staff Member

    Messages:
    43,184
    Ah I see, my bad.
    Well, it's obvious that the US has an insanely high emission rate.
    But the map shows that Russian rates are similar to Dutch and German rates.. I think The Netherlands and Germany have a rather higher prosperity than Russia.
     
  17. draqon Banned Banned

    Messages:
    35,006
    prosperity per capita? :bugeye:

    you do realize where Germany and Netherlands get their gas from? :bugeye: Russia...

    Russia...does not just serve its own citizens with fuel, it pumps fuel and gas into China, Kazakhstan, Japan, Baltic countries, Central Europe countries which include Germany.
     
  18. Enmos Staff Member

    Messages:
    43,184
    Hmm we have our own gas. The contract with Russia is largely diplomatic.
     
  19. draqon Banned Banned

    Messages:
    35,006

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



     
  20. Enmos Staff Member

    Messages:
    43,184
    Making my point

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  21. draqon Banned Banned

    Messages:
    35,006
    well fine...Netherlands is like the smallest country in Europe...I mean its like the Vatican. So comparing Russia to Netherlands would be a sin.
     
  22. Dr Mabuse Percipient Thaumaturgist Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    714
    Because poverty to crushing poverty is the norm there, as to some notion of 'per capita' numbers. But this data you are looking at is questionable at best to begin with.

    You should make some token effort to understand something before you base an assertion on it.

    Per capita so called 'emissions' go up with the wealth of a nation, even considering that Russia is one of the largest producers of GHG..

    Now as to that map you posted, that map in itself is both outdated and highly questionable data. China is the #1 greenhouse gas producing nation on earth, officially passing the US last May. China has been one of the top producers on earth since the 'industrial revolution' in the 90's there. Any map showing China being the equal of third world countries in Africa is bullshit, even coming at the situation from a 'per capita' standpoint. Though the population in China is huge even that doesn't dilute the #1 producer of gases to the degree that map would indicate. On that 'map' you posted China is in the 'green' with countries in Africa. Complete nonsense that anyone who even had half a clue would spot right away. That doesn't even match up with many other maps, including those used by the UN which show Russia as a first tier producer along with the wealthiest nations.

    Grabbing a map off About.com is not always the best way to get your data. http://greenliving.about.com/od/planetissues/tp/GHG-Contributions.htm

    This more accurate map reflects 2004 data, and indeed shows Russia, as well as China, as world leaders in GHG production. Like all the other credible maps do. http://exploreourpla.net/explorer/?geoLink=1500


    So you neither understand the principles of the data you base your assertion on, nor do you even find good or timely data to misunderstand, and also you misapply even the bogus data to make your incorrect point.

    Then you accuse others of being 'clueless', while you are posting utter nonsense.

    Good work there Einstein.
     
  23. swivel Sci-Fi Author Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,494
    I still don't understand the conflicting messages. Peak Oil conspiracy nuts keep warning that there isn't much time left for oil. They say we need to stop pumping it and move on to something else. Why? If there isn't much left, let's use it up before we move onto something more expensive.

    I still think it is a bunch of lies attempting to grind us back to the stone ages out of an irrational hatred of Capitalism.

    If oil ever ran out, it would happen gradually, with prices going up and up and up. We would re-tool in very short order, building nuclear reactors and converting cars to electric motors and rolling out new models. It isn't like everything would grind to a halt and we would all die, so I don't get the scare tactics. Especially since the group spreading this nonsense seems to lust after just such an Armageddon.

    More similarity between the nuts on the Left and the fruits on the Right. Both seem to hate mankind, see us all as sinners, and secretly crave their own version of "end times" when things will be so much better.
     

Share This Page