271–280 of 282 posts
It will be interesting to see how this plays out, because right now the West coast from San Francisco North to at least Fort Bragg, has been suffering a kelp die off of great proportions. No one is quite sure whats going on, but apparently due to climate change, or at least warmer ocean water from further South that we've had for the last 5 or more years, has caused the kelp to die off at a rapid rate, to the point o…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"No one is quite sure whats going on, but apparently due to climate change" Look... statements like that, don't help any serious arguments for climate change. To practical-skeptics, you might as well have written "IDK BUT WE BETTER FAVOR SOME COMPANIES WITH TAXES TO BE SAFE" which is a real annoyance of mine. Esp considering other commenters pretty much ruled out your assumption.
AGW skeptics, like evolution and spheroid Earth skeptics are their own audience, no one else is really bothering to tailor their speech to them. We’ve entered the casually dismissive phase of the relationship. The ROI for dealing with people who are in denial is rarely positive after all.
The failure of climate-control laws to get passed should send a clear signal that debate is actually the only place where "climate change is happening" can win.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There two species involved. From the linked article: "Compared to red urchins ... [purple urchins are] smaller, less meaty and not worth fishing for. And they're voracious eaters of kelp." https://www.kqed.org/science/1357320/scientists-and-fisherme...
After vacuuming up a bunch of purple urchins, would it be possible to alter their DNA to be more like that of red urchins? Then release those genetically modified urchins back into the ocean to pass their “red-shifted” traits into the greater purple urchin population. I realize there are plenty of ethical issues surrounding an attempt at genetically modifying an entire species. Perhaps doing so would be irresponsible…
Serious question, what incentive is there for this to be done on a large scale by anyone? The EPA is being systematically dismantled and the official line of the government (or at least, those in charge of the government) is that climate change is not man made. If it is just a natural process, how could our food systems have any impact on it? I can't imagine how this wouldn't add at least some costs to feed prices, a…
Slap a "No Cow Farts" sticker/logo on beef raised with a sufficient level of seaweed in their diet. Choose that instead of farty-beef at the store. Don't expect anything to work as well as individuals changing their minds about what is important and acting on it.
You can get antibiotic free meat from whole foods etc, but what do you think is consumed at higher quantities?
If its purely up to buyers choice, it will not happen unless there is a cost associated with carbon output.
Serious question, what incentive is there for this to be done on a large scale by anyone? The EPA is being systematically dismantled and the official line of the government (or at least, those in charge of the government) is that climate change is not man made. If it is just a natural process, how could our food systems have any impact on it? I can't imagine how this wouldn't add at least some costs to feed prices, a…
>... dairy farmer named Joe Dorgan inadvertently conducted an experiment on his herd in Prince Edward Island, Canada. Dorgan noticed cows that grazed on washed-up seaweed in paddocks along the shore were healthier and more productive ... and found the new diet saved him money and induced “rip-roaring heats,” or longer cycles of reproductive activity.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Slap a "No Cow Farts" sticker/logo on beef raised with a sufficient level of seaweed in their diet. Choose that instead of farty-beef at the store. Don't expect anything to work as well as individuals changing their minds about what is important and acting on it.
Thats crazy, that depends entirely on people being able to afford to pay more for the same basic product. What economics would indicate that this would happen? You can get antibiotic free meat from whole foods etc, but what do you think is consumed at higher quantities? If its purely up to buyers choice, it will not happen unless there is a cost associated with carbon output.
If you observe that people don't often pay for "antibiotic free" meat it's likely because they don't see it as a worthwhile value proposition.
If you say that buyers won't choose to pay for global-warming-safe beef, while watching them choose to pay for chemical-pesticide-free beef then that is just another way of saying that no one cares about global warming, and I don't think that is the case.
I'll be the heretic then... how about you all eat less beef, easy solution to the "problem". And no, I'm not a vege-anything. Just to prove it, here's a great song by the Reverend Horton Heat, that I used to play on my radio show. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wQynViAF6Ds
Minus 1? Crimney... it's a good song. Guess I should have posted a link to fart song, eh
Sure, but have you tasted the milk? It really tastes off.
How could you possibly know this?
For example: Why is it that, as a rule of thumb, people that make money make it in real estate?
Why is it that all the pictures of the sun are orange but the sun is not orange?
Why exactly, is it that people prefer gas ranges to electric ranges?
Why is it that horoscopes are demonstrably false but thermodynamics is demonstrably true?
Why is it that heat rises but it's cold in the mountains?
I have the answers but you have only the questions.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
AGW skeptics, like evolution and spheroid Earth skeptics are their own audience, no one else is really bothering to tailor their speech to them. We’ve entered the casually dismissive phase of the relationship. The ROI for dealing with people who are in denial is rarely positive after all.
As reasonable as that seems, the reality is stark: keeping the debate officially open is a bet that you'll be able to win arguments, and telling your opponents it's over is a bet that they won't be able to scrape together any political power. Don't slam on the brakes until you've crossed that finish line, wherever that is. The failure of climate-control laws to get passed should send a clear signal that debate is act…
The sad truth of climate change is that debate is beside the point, it’s pure power dynamics. Massively rich and powerful entrenched interests simply don’t care about debate or consensus, they just want to keep profiting until the bitter end. They’re not really related to the keyboard warriors online who for ideological or psychological reasons want to endlesssly “debate” the issue.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Per various articles I could find on the West Coast Kelp Die Off, it appears that multiple years of warm El Nino waters, a massive starfish wasting disease, and urchin boom resulted in a 3-pronged assault on kelp populations. Now that the El Nino waters have cooled, and the starfish population is returning to normal, 2 of the 3 stress factors are being reduced. The last--the urchin population--is being controlled thr…
So I have studied this issue extensively. I personally know Jon Holcomb, the vacuum inventor. First, to dispel any myths. There is zero funding for this effort. It also takes a solid month of effort to clear a football field sized area. Compare that speed to the breeding cycle of the invasive urchin species boom and you have a very ineffective method of population control. Although his efforts were innovative. Jon wi…