NY Magazine article: The Uninhabitable Earth

blackascoal said:
Damn you're stupid. :0) Seriously stupid.

I made the logical case for why North Korea owns a nuke, not limited to we would have already regime changed them and mass-murdered countless North Koreans as we did in Libya and Iraq if NK didn't have one.

Any wonder why Iran wants one. As in the case of NK, they don't need to own 10, 000 .. just one keeps the war monsters who destroys civilizations outside the door.

Seems to me that makes a case for getting rid of all of them .. why shouldn't other nations have nukes if you do? .. especially given the fact that only one nation has ever used nuclear weapons .. and that nation did it twice.
Click to expand...

Democrats. They love slavery and internment camps, too.
 
tsuke said:
the funniest thing about climatologists is they have gotten the end of the world wrong more times than the worst christian doomsday cult and they get more credible each time!
Click to expand...

You guys really cherrypick that stuff. Even Gore hasn't called of the "end of the world."

But look around the planet. The Dead Zone in the Gulf of Mexico, disappearing reefs, lost habitat, shortages, the oceanic food supply getting close to critical mass...is this really all just hunky dory w/ you guys? This is all just since the Industrial Revolution. Imagine another 100 or 500 years of us behaving as we are, without taking long-term consequences into consideration.

Do you think that's sustainable?
 
blackascoal said:
Damn you're stupid. :0) Seriously stupid.

I made the logical case for why North Korea owns a nuke, not limited to we would have already regime changed them and mass-murdered countless North Koreans as we did in Libya and Iraq if NK didn't have one.

Any wonder why Iran wants one. As in the case of NK, they don't need to own 10, 000 .. just one keeps the war monsters who destroys civilizations outside the door.

Seems to me that makes a case for getting rid of all of them .. why shouldn't other nations have nukes if you do? .. especially given the fact that only one nation has ever used nuclear weapons .. and that nation did it twice.
Click to expand...

Socialist Progressive Democrat, FDR, built the damn thing ... and Socialist Progressive Democrat, Truman, used it. And he created the N. Korean Socialist nightmare :palm:

You're stupid as fuck if you think Russia, China, NK, or Pakistan will give up their nukes if we do :palm:

You're the biggest nuclear proliferation hawk on this board.
 
Thing1 said:
You guys really cherrypick that stuff. Even Gore hasn't called of the "end of the world."

But look around the planet. The Dead Zone in the Gulf of Mexico, disappearing reefs, lost habitat, shortages, the oceanic food supply getting close to critical mass...is this really all just hunky dory w/ you guys? This is all just since the Industrial Revolution. Imagine another 100 or 500 years of us behaving as we are, without taking long-term consequences into consideration.

Do you think that's sustainable?
Click to expand...

not the end of the world. just another ice age. island nations dissapering. etc.
 
tsuke said:
not the end of the world. just another ice age. island nations dissapering. etc.
Click to expand...

Yeah - sorta telling that you didn't answer my question.

You guys know something is wrong, but you're too lazy or short-sighted to talk about it. You also see the environment as a "lefty" issue, so it's easier to cherrypick & make fun of it than to really think about the consequences of our actions.

Our current course is not sustainable. And I'm not an AGW guy, and this actually doesn't even relate that much to carbon - but it's not sustainable. We don't plan long-term when it comes to energy use & development. In what other area of policy would that be even remotely acceptable?
 
Thing1 said:
You guys really cherrypick that stuff. Even Gore hasn't called of the "end of the world." This is all just since the Industrial Revolution.
Click to expand...

NO, You are cherry picking the data ... claiming that the globe started warming after the end of the Little Ice Age. Well ... duh!
 
Bigdog said:
NO, You are cherry picking the data ... claiming that the globe started warming after the end of the Little Ice Age. Well ... duh!
Click to expand...

Where did I claim that?

You have to stop looking at the messengers. Like I said, you see lefties, and you have a knee-jerk that you have to oppose whatever it is they're talking about.

It's a weird way to decide your positions on issues. Look at the facts. The planet is letting us know we need to at least consider some changes right now.
 
Bigdog said:
NO, You are cherry picking the data ... claiming that the globe started warming after the end of the Little Ice Age. Well ... duh!
Click to expand...

You fantasize about sucking Rush's limp, shriveled dick then licking the stinky, sweaty cheese from underneath his rolls of flab.
 
I truly wish we could make protecting the environment a non-partisan issue.

Some right-wing think tanks are on board, at least. There are a whole host of reasons to transition to renewables & cleaner sources of energy, including national security and economic growth. I find that too many on the right don't think logically about it - they let their distaste for the left or their dislike of Gore guide their opinion much more than what's happening.
 
Nomad said:
According to this article, as the Arctic permafrost which traps gasses contained in massive underground carbon deposits begins to melt, these gasses will be released into the atmosphere at many times the current level, which will only serve to speed up impending climatological disaster.

If things keep going the way they are, by the end of this century, Earth could become too hot and inhospitable to support life.

This in turn, could very likely lead to anarchy, societal breakdown, mass violence and perpetual war.



Let's all be glad that we, or most of us, will likely not be around to see it.
Click to expand...
You post some random hysterical article from the NYT yet totally dismiss real evidence that global temps. have fallen below the El Nino high of last year. You said that you'd only believe evidence from NASA or NOAA, so when I pointed that Dr. Roy Spencer maintained the UAH dataset on behalf of NASA you headed for the hills.

Sent from my iPhone 25S with cherries on top
 
Sorry to spoil your climate porn, but there are microbes that consume the methane.
http://www.nature.com/ismej/journal/v9/n8/full/ismej201513a.html
I know you guys want to believe every frightening scenario, but you are just plain lazy. You have to try to be skeptical once in a while. Due diligence... Don't you like to be sure what you believe is correct? Don't you try to poke holes to see if it holds up to scrutiny? I suspect you do not.
 
Milagro said:
You post some random hysterical article from the NYT yet totally dismiss real evidence that global temps. have fallen below the El Nino high of last year. You said that you'd only believe evidence from NASA or NOAA, so when I pointed that Dr. Roy Spencer maintained the UAH dataset on behalf of NASA you headed for the hills.

Sent from my iPhone 25S with cherries on top
Click to expand...

Just because one point dipped below the previous year suggests nothing in terms of a trend

I explained to you the significance of the term ANOMALY and suggested you look it up.

Then I pointed out to you that the trajectory of the temperature graph line is obviously on a steadily upward trend.

But on both issues you headed for the hills.
 
Thing1 said:
The cavalier attitude on the right is really depressing.

I'm sure if things reach a critical stage, they'll blame Obama somehow.
Click to expand...

No when that sort of thing happens they simply deny they were opposed to whatever salubrious modes could have been utilized.

For example slavery, civil rights, suffrage, child labor, ...whatever the atrocity conservatives supported or oppositional change to it opposed, it is later stated that it was not the case. Global warming will be no different.
 
Micawber said:
No when that sort of thing happens they simply deny they were opposed to whatever salubrious modes could have been utilized.

For example slavery, civil rights, suffrage, child labor, ...whatever the atrocity conservatives supported or oppositional change to it opposed, it is later stated that it was not the case. Global warming will be no different.
Click to expand...

All those things the Democrats loved. Why are you so proud of that PackD?
 
Thing1 said:
I truly wish we could make protecting the environment a non-partisan issue.

Some right-wing think tanks are on board, at least. There are a whole host of reasons to transition to renewables & cleaner sources of energy, including national security and economic growth. I find that too many on the right don't think logically about it - they let their distaste for the left or their dislike of Gore guide their opinion much more than what's happening.
Click to expand...

sure we can develop renewables(including nuclear) and we have. the question is why do we need to pay for the development of every other country as well? And if we did why cant it be a gift freely given as charity instead of an obligation taken at gun point?

Again. US, China, India, Germany. Only one of those reduced their emissions last year and that country doesnt want to be in paris anymore.
 
Nomad said:
According to this article, as the Arctic permafrost which traps gasses contained in massive underground carbon deposits begins to melt, these gasses will be released into the atmosphere at many times the current level, which will only serve to speed up impending climatological disaster.

If things keep going the way they are, by the end of this century, Earth could become too hot and inhospitable to support life.

This in turn, could very likely lead to anarchy, societal breakdown, mass violence and perpetual war.



Let's all be glad that we, or most of us, will likely not be around to see it.
Click to expand...

The climate change idiots were preaching doom and gloom 40 years ago. Fatass Al Gore said it over 10 years ago. Haven't seen any of it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top