It's official: Antarctic glacial basin is a goner

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

dainthomas

Lifer
Dec 7, 2004
14,632
3,503
136
No, I have a better idea, let's do absolutely nothing. That way we can be assured of the worst possible outcome.

Doing something just for the sake of doing something seems silly. What if it does nothing but shift wealth around and make (some) people feel better about themselves?
 

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
36,039
30,321
136
Doing something just for the sake of doing something seems silly. What if it does nothing but shift wealth around and make (some) people feel better about themselves?
climate-summit-jobs1-800x600.jpeg
 

preslove

Lifer
Sep 10, 2003
16,754
63
91
Doing something just for the sake of doing something seems silly. What if it does nothing but shift wealth around and make (some) people feel better about themselves?

Better than doing nothing and letting the human race go extinct, you stupid piece of shit.
 

preslove

Lifer
Sep 10, 2003
16,754
63
91
140502_CDESK_LivingDangerously_chart.jpg.CROP.original-original.jpg


Climate change deniers are idiots who think that there is a huge conspiracy of thousands of scientists who are somehow going to get rich from green energy tech. All the while, the deniers are believing in misinformation pumped out by people employed by the fossil fuel industry, which is currently getting rich off of the status quo.

You have to be fucking brain dead stupid to believe this shit.
 

preslove

Lifer
Sep 10, 2003
16,754
63
91
Better world?

Any action to stop, and I mean ACTUALLY STOP, CO2 this century would devastate human industry. Our prosperity would come to a screeching halt.

Straw man? No one is saying stop cold turkey. They're advocating for throwing money at green tech and taxing polluters. The financial costs associated with climate change are going to dwarf these costs.

Oh, and then there's the worst case scenario of causing the fall of human civilization, or even extinction of humanity.
 

Ruptga

Lifer
Aug 3, 2006
10,246
207
106
Better world?

Any action to stop, and I mean ACTUALLY STOP, CO2 this century would devastate human industry. Our prosperity would come to a screeching halt.

Yeah, better, not best. To say "since we can't fix every problem in our lifetimes we should do nothing" is fucking retarded.

I'm all for ignoring what we can't control, but there are still plenty of things we can control and many of those things can have a direct impact on the current generation.
 

bradly1101

Diamond Member
May 5, 2013
4,689
294
126
www.bradlygsmith.org
It's unlikely, imho.

The change in weather is nothing but trends. Trends that have come and gone 1,000's of times in the past. You can't really judge weather on a daily basis, and hardly on a yearly basis. You have to look at it in decades/centuries and we've barely been keeping scientific track of the weather for a century.

Can man cause a small amount of global warming? Of course. Does it matter? Probably not.

So this is false?

Carbon_Dioxide_400kyr.png
 

preslove

Lifer
Sep 10, 2003
16,754
63
91
Yeah, better, not best. To say "since we can't fix every problem in our lifetimes we should do nothing" is fucking retarded.

I'm all for ignoring what we can't control, but there are still plenty of things we can control and many of those things can have a direct impact on the current generation.

It's funny how idiot republicans say that they're all worried about leaving debt for the following generations, but don't give a fuck about leaving a planet those generations can actually survive on.
 

Ruptga

Lifer
Aug 3, 2006
10,246
207
106
It's funny how idiot republicans say that they're all worried about leaving debt for the following generations, but don't give a fuck about leaving a planet those generations can actually survive on.
internet-bro-fist.jpg
 

mmntech

Lifer
Sep 20, 2007
17,501
12
0
It's funny how idiot republicans say that they're all worried about leaving debt for the following generations, but don't give a fuck about leaving a planet those generations can actually survive on.

And what are those costs exactly?
 

Ruptga

Lifer
Aug 3, 2006
10,246
207
106
And what are those costs exactly?

You're obviously trolling, but the answer is so easy I'm gonna throw it out there anyway.

1. rising sea levels over the next few centuries
2. air quality issues
3. water quality issues
4. biodiversity and ecosystem damage issues (land and sea)
5. altered weather patterns

to name a few. All of the above are well known, well researched, and well proven effects of pollution and man-made climate change. The obnoxious minority can apply their superior common sense and "teach the controversy" all day every day, but the facts remain.

knock yourself out
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attribution_of_recent_climate_change
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
33,895
7,917
136
Straw man? No one is saying stop cold turkey.

Then... assuming the UN claims are 100% true, I suggest you all move off the beach. Because the year 2100 will come roaring in and global economies will still largely be emitting CO2.

They're advocating for throwing money at green tech and taxing polluters. The financial costs associated with climate change are going to dwarf these costs.

I favor solar, thorium fission, and fusion research and development.

Taxes won't do anything.

Oh, and then there's the worst case scenario of causing the fall of human civilization, or even extinction of humanity.

I'll buy you some tin foil and clear that right up.
 

phucheneh

Diamond Member
Jun 30, 2012
7,306
5
0
global climate change caused by man is the fairy tale.

though perhaps cave men had gasoline powered cars and coal power plants to turn the Ice Age around? :hmm:

a49GMIM.gif

I'm guessing you also believe that radiation levels in our atmosphere just happened to start rising in the 1940's and then dropped massively when we quit large scale testing of nuclear bombs. I mean, like, prove we caused that shit, LOL RIGHT?

I mean, I'd be so willing to wager than radiation is not harmful, that I would be willing to volunteer that your dick be irradiated until you are sterile and and cannot produce any children to indoctrinate with your dumbshit stupid thoughts on 'science.'
 

preslove

Lifer
Sep 10, 2003
16,754
63
91
Then... assuming the UN claims are 100% true, I suggest you all move off the beach. Because the year 2100 will come roaring in and global economies will still largely be emitting CO2.

These findings are new, which means they weren't in the latest UN report. That's the thing about climate change, new evidence of how fucked we are comes up all the time.

I favor solar, thorium fission, and fusion research and development.

Taxes won't do anything.

Why not?

I'll buy you some tin foil and clear that right up.

Are you really too stupid to understand that a mass extinction would kill us off? It's the worst case scenario, but it's certainly possible.

Carbon_Dioxide_400kyr.png


If this continues, unabated, we aren't going to be around for more than a few hundred years. Maybe even less.

Oh, and your side is the one that thinks this is all a hoax to somehow make al gore rich. That's a conspiracy theory.
 

Ruptga

Lifer
Aug 3, 2006
10,246
207
106
Taxes can have an effect if they make dirtier methods (of power generation, of construction, of whatever) less profitable. Disincentivizing the worst activities won't undo damage, but it will prevent the worst damage.
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
33,895
7,917
136
Aren't favoring any of the above reducing C02, and you'd be pretty much contradicting yourself at that point ?

How? Those will take decades, if not centuries to properly develop and deploy on a global scale. The IPCC's worst fears regarding CO2 would have already come true by then.

Anyone that wants to stop CO2 immediately is not going to be using future technology to do it.