Topic Actions

Topic Search

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests

CO2 sanity

The Management is not responsible for the contents of this forum. Enter at your own risk.
Re: CO2 sanity
Post by Annachie   » Thu Sep 13, 2018 12:44 am

Annachie
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 3099
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2011 7:36 pm

Daryl wrote:I agree with part of your comment. The politics are disastrous, and between corruption and old tribal ties it is unlikely to improve for a very long time.
That doesn't mean that the increasingly harsh climate isn't a big factor as well.

TFLYTSNBN wrote:[quote="Daryl"]Previous dramatic changes in climate have led to mass extinctions. I doubt that mankind will become extinct, but massive death tolls in some areas are possible. Look at the famines in Africa for an initial heads up.



The problem with Africa is toxic politics disrupting food production, not climate.
[/quote]Hell, parts of Africa have had more droughts than Australia and with far less "structure" to cope with it.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You are so going to die. :p ~~~~ runsforcelery
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
still not dead. :)
Top
Re: CO2 sanity
Post by The E   » Sun Sep 30, 2018 3:52 pm

The E
Admiral

Posts: 2683
Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 1:28 pm
Location: Meerbusch, Germany

Since another topic reminded me of TFLY's inability to read and ingest science, time to revisit this one!

So there was a news release by the trump admin about their intention to relax fuel standards. Their reasoning, apparently, is "the climate's fucked anyway, we're heading towards a 7 degree temperature increase by the century's end already, so why not fuck things up even more"

The Trump administration, known for rolling back of regulations combating climate change, is acknowledging the planet will warm to catastrophic levels even as it argues to roll back Obama-era fuel efficiency rules.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration issued the projection, noting that the Earth's temperature will rise by 7 degrees Fahrenheit by the end of the century, or about 4 degrees Celsius, a level that would cause catastrophic impacts to the Earth. The projection came as part of an environmental impact statement to justify the agency's recent proposal to relax the fuel efficiency rules, the Washington Post reported Friday.

The agency argued the federal government is helpless to head off the dramatic rise in global temperature, so weakening the fuel efficiency standards for cars and light trucks would make little impact. Last year, the transportation sector became the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in the U.S.


"CO2 sanity", my ass.
Top
Re: CO2 sanity
Post by Imaginos1892   » Mon Oct 01, 2018 7:52 pm

Imaginos1892
Rear Admiral

Posts: 1332
Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2012 3:24 pm
Location: San Diego, California, USA

The E wrote:The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration issued the projection, noting that the Earth's temperature will rise by 7 degrees Fahrenheit by the end of the century

And they know jack shit about climate…why?

Repealing or modifying the stuck-on-stupid laws that encourage manufacturers to build SUV's instead of midsize cars sounds like a good idea to me.
———————————
There is no shortage of people convinced they can create the perfect world. Trouble is, they always start out by fucking up this one.
Top
Re: CO2 sanity
Post by Daryl   » Tue Oct 02, 2018 5:53 am

Daryl
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 3485
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2010 1:57 am
Location: Queensland Australia

The whole SUV thing does puzzle me. Sports (yeah right at 2 tons), Utility (what does that even mean), Vehicle (well yes if you don't mind driving a truck in down town traffic.)
Two ways I can see to make a SUV.
One for small to medium SUVs, is to take a well designed hatchback, bulk up the body, make it ride higher, make it heavier, then leave the original mechanicals to struggle with the greater weight, and higher centre of gravity.
Two for larger ones, is to take a small truck or large pickup, then put a bulky body on with lashes of luxury tat, then send it off with industrial type ride and handling.
There is a third way of building ridiculously expensive and impractical gadgets, from Hummers to Cayennes.
I assume that successive US administrations didn't have the courage to mandate fuel economy standards for such crap? The correct procedure isn't to relax the existing laws, but to mandate them across the entire passenger vehicle range.
Top
Re: CO2 sanity
Post by The E   » Tue Oct 02, 2018 8:06 am

The E
Admiral

Posts: 2683
Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 1:28 pm
Location: Meerbusch, Germany

Imaginos1892 wrote:And they know jack shit about climate…why?


Not saying that they do (this is, after all, the Trump admin), but for them to take a position that basically amounts to "climate change is real, unavoidable and unavoidably catastrophic, so who cares about fuel standards" strikes me as being at odds with the normal conservative position of "climate change ain't real, and if it were real (which it isn't), it's not our fault"
Top
Re: CO2 sanity
Post by Imaginos1892   » Tue Oct 02, 2018 8:35 pm

Imaginos1892
Rear Admiral

Posts: 1332
Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2012 3:24 pm
Location: San Diego, California, USA

The E wrote:The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration issued the projection, noting that the Earth's temperature will rise by 7 degrees Fahrenheit by the end of the century

Imaginos1892 wrote:And they know jack shit about climate…why?

for them to take a position that basically amounts to "climate change is real, unavoidable and unavoidably catastrophic

I mean that pronouncements about climate from the traffic department are as idiotic as law enforcement policy statements from the CDC.

When people call crime a ‘disease’ or an ‘epidemic’ IT’S A METAPHOR! They do not mean that crime is literally an infectious pathogen that you can be immunized against.

I’m tired of all those ‘progressives’ that believe knowing something about one of their pet causes means they know everything about everything. Like Jane Fonda pretending to know more about conditions in North Vietnamese prison camps than the POWs incarcerated there.
———————————
They say I can't be a nonconformist because I’m not like the other nonconformists.
Top
Re: CO2 sanity
Post by The E   » Wed Oct 03, 2018 1:14 am

The E
Admiral

Posts: 2683
Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 1:28 pm
Location: Meerbusch, Germany

Imaginos1892 wrote:I mean that pronouncements about climate from the traffic department are as idiotic as law enforcement policy statements from the CDC.

When people call crime a ‘disease’ or an ‘epidemic’ IT’S A METAPHOR! They do not mean that crime is literally an infectious pathogen that you can be immunized against.


You say that buuuuut....

There's a fairly convincing body of work that links the use of leaded gasoline and leaded pipes to low-key brain damage and, incidentally, crime rates.

That's some pretty fundamental epidemiological work here, very similar to the foundational inquiries of that particular science, and it absolutely falls within the remit of institutions like the CDC.

And, just to be clear here: My initial comment was about the tone of the statement, the utter fatalism of it. No matter where you stand on the whole climate change thing (even if you're on the wrong side), for someone to say "eh, we're all going to die anyway so who cares" strikes me as a bit odd.

I’m tired of all those ‘progressives’ that believe knowing something about one of their pet causes means they know everything about everything. Like Jane Fonda pretending to know more about conditions in North Vietnamese prison camps than the POWs incarcerated there.


This is a strawman argument.
Top
Re: CO2 sanity
Post by Annachie   » Wed Oct 03, 2018 1:29 am

Annachie
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 3099
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2011 7:36 pm

To me, it strikes at what I believe is the heart of the modern GOP.
"It's not going to bother me so who cares"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You are so going to die. :p ~~~~ runsforcelery
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
still not dead. :)
Top
Re: CO2 sanity
Post by TFLYTSNBN   » Wed Oct 03, 2018 10:26 am

TFLYTSNBN

The E wrote:
Imaginos1892 wrote:And they know jack shit about climate…why?


Not saying that they do (this is, after all, the Trump admin), but for them to take a position that basically amounts to "climate change is real, unavoidable and unavoidably catastrophic, so who cares about fuel standards" strikes me as being at odds with the normal conservative position of "climate change ain't real, and if it were real (which it isn't), it's not our fault"



Actually; the conservative AGW skeptical position is that climate does change and the Earth's geological and fossil record demonstrates that climate has been changing for billions of years.

The issues for conservative skeptics who DO know the science is the overhyping of CO2s role as a greenhouse gas. Svante Aarhenius had some rather heated arguments with Robert Angstrom whose actual measurements of absorbtion spectre refuted Aarnhenius' presumption that CO2 rather than H2O was the predominant greenhouse gas. Anyone who has done any work in remote sensing understands just how narrow the CO2 IR absorbtion bands are.

Another major issue for conservative skeptics is what should be done if it is true that climate is changing. Anyone observing the effects of droughts, floods, earthquakes and cyclonic storms understands that prosperous, technologically advanced societies cope with these events far better than poor, primitive societies. It is counterproductive to cripple the world economy by severely constraining greenhouse gas emissions which will have minimal impact on climate if the resulting economic impact severely cripples the ability of societies to cope with changing climate.
Top
Re: CO2 sanity
Post by Daryl   » Thu Oct 04, 2018 6:32 pm

Daryl
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 3485
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2010 1:57 am
Location: Queensland Australia

So basically the best solution for coping with climate change is to -
Build airconditioned buildings to live in, and climate controled hydroponic green houses to grow food in?
Then build more coal power stations to run this?

You can then be secure while watching the third world famines on your 4k TV in perfect comfort.
Sounds like a conservative approach to me.
Top

Return to Politics