Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh we're not living? Am I a ghost typing this? Are you?
Sorry. Did you miss the term "still" ?
You used the world still wrong and the space before punctuation makes me wonder if English isn't your first language
Rising carbon dioxide levels now detected in human blood
151–160 of 166 posts
Re: Rising carbon dioxide levels now detected in human blood
#152Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Methinks our current path has been determined since ~1980, with ~2000 probably being the last chance we had to stay under 1.5C. That's why I said "I realized this back in the 1990s" and was later complaining about Al Gore. > Otherwise I wouldn't get out of bed in the morning. Is that reasonable? This is not like nuclear war—which could still happen, because we still have the weapons, and the madmen to use them—wher…
I concur. On (most) all points you've made in this thread. Two things. #1 What if you're wrong? What if one day you wake up and the world (as we know it) hasn't ended? I totally understand nihilism, despair, despondency, hopelessness, etc. Under Reagan and living near Boeing, I was convinced we'd get nuked. I embraced the punk/goth lifestyle. Then I was diagnosed at 19yo with a terminal disease (aplastic anemia). The…
> What if you're wrong? What if one day you wake up and the world (as we know it) hasn't ended?
It appears that you misunderstood. I said, "This is not [emphasis added] like nuclear war" and "We're cursing our descendants with a world much more hostile than the one we were born into". Much more hostile does not imply the end of the world, and indeed the existence of our descendants implies that everyone is not dead.
> I think I understand where you're at.
I don't think you do, and I wasn't in need of therapy.
Re: Rising carbon dioxide levels now detected in human blood
#153Re: Rising carbon dioxide levels now detected in human blood
#154Earlier quoted context omitted.
While that is true that there is a lag time to deploy nuclear - that is a vestige of the last 40 years of regulating it out of existence. That has changed - technology has improved and regulatory is under scrutiny. The difference is that once nuclear starts to roll out, as it will in the next 3-5 years, we will be seeing large deployments of clean dedicated load ripple through our electrical system in a product assem…
The regulatory regime also affects large scale deployments of solar.
100%
Re: Rising carbon dioxide levels now detected in human blood
#155Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fusion isn't in our lifetimes. Its been 10 years away since the 50s - only to get more R&D grant funding for budget building. If it happened it would be a huge game changer for our economies but it is far away from deployment let along lab proven. It still requires more energy to start/maintain the reaction then it can produce - which is fundamental to success.
Solar and wind are fusion generated energy from the sun. “Fusion at a distance.” Fossil fuels are ancient sunlight, ancient fusion.
A step to far my friend. If we abstract away everything then nothing matters.
Re: Rising carbon dioxide levels now detected in human blood
#156Earlier quoted context omitted.
What difference does it make what they're referencing? I'm glad we agree that fossil fuels were necessary. It has nothing to do with "shareholder value" -- it has to do with minimizing human suffering. Also, it's noteworthy that US emissions peaked in 2007. We're down ~20% since then. The world is absolutely addressing climate change, and the worst case scenarios have already been avoided. Faster would be better but…
> and the worst case scenarios have already been avoided. Do you have a source on this?
Interesting that this question didn't warrant a response.
Anyway, here's new research demonstrating the near polar opposite of the original claim, in case anyone digging up these old threads was also wondering if slibhb's foundational arguments held up: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/389855619_Global_Wa...
Re: Rising carbon dioxide levels now detected in human blood
#157Earlier quoted context omitted.
You'd be amazed at what you can do to yourself with enough fried potatoes and refined sugar.
On the other hand you don't see many overweight vegetarians.
People who are vegetarians are already engaging in a disciplined diet, so they are more likely to eat a restricted calorie diet as well.
Add enough ranch sauce, cheese, oil, refined sugars and carbs to your meals and you'll be just as overweight as someone who does that and has steak too.
Re: Rising carbon dioxide levels now detected in human blood
#158Earlier quoted context omitted.
>During the Biden administration, during the Obama administration, during the Clinton administration The president doesn't actually control much in the USA, despite the nonsensical shit republican congresses let them get away with. Obama, Biden, and Clinton could not do anything that wasn't approved by congress. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Party_divisions_of_United_Stat... Democrats have not really held enough powe…
There was democratic control of the presidency and congress during Biden's term
There really wasn't. The person you replied to covered as much. They had the opportunity for a few big bills, which they did - much of it ultimately stemming from concerns around climate change.
Re: Rising carbon dioxide levels now detected in human blood
#159Earlier quoted context omitted.
You do the people causing this problem a great service with false equivocations like this. It is clear one group would prefer us to ignore the problem and do nothing at all - in fact encourage the problematic behavior - and the other would very much like to take action on the issue if they had the political power.
> the other would very much like to take action on the issue if they had the political power. They had political power! During the Biden administration, during the Obama administration, during the Clinton administration. Al Gore is a famous environmentalist... for making a movie after he was out of power. What the hell did he do for the environment when he was literally in the Oval Office, at the side of the Presiden…
I'm sorry but if you are trying to both-sides this issue then you are either woefully uninformed or just being contrarian for the sake of it.
Re: Rising carbon dioxide levels now detected in human blood
#160Earlier quoted context omitted.
This all seems very confused. I would say you clearly have not thought this through, but that would be fairly rude given the tiny scope of this comment thread. If your definition of better (or perfectly good) is: makes me more comfortable in the short term then I can understand that perspective.
So your opinion is that humanity should not have burned fossil fuels, we should have kept burning wood, until solar/wind/nuclear were invented? Seems obviously wrong.
Almost anything is better than the destruction of the biomes that support human life. I'm not really sure how there is even a discussion to be had about that. But anyone who claims "coal was great" either doesn't understand or doesn't care.