• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."
  • Community Question: What makes a good motherboard?

Scientist Predicts Mini Ice Age in next few decades...

Page 11 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Paratus

Lifer
Jun 4, 2004
14,374
7,164
146
Keep waiting for the almost totally needless airlines to be shut down by mass Believer protests, keep not hearing about it. It's incredibly sad when even Believers don't Believe in their own beliefs... :(
 

chucky2

Lifer
Dec 9, 1999
10,038
36
86
LOL!

Just bummed people who Believe can't actually believe enough to modify their actions to start making real reductions in CO2. Just imagine if all the Believers didn't wait the few decades it'll take for enough countries to make meaningful CO2 reduction, and instead just personally too matters into their own hands (as they should given the severity and magnitude of impact they Believe in).

It is so strange seeing your fellow Believers on my Facebook feed, snidely denigrating non-Believers, and then, what is this?! Flying vacation from Chi to LA?! More CO2 produced for a needless pleasure trip than the entire Yonomamo tribe will produce in a year?! Such hypocrisy from Believers, so so sad... :(
 

Greenman

Lifer
Oct 15, 1999
16,661
2,171
126
Keep waiting for the almost totally needless airlines to be shut down by mass Believer protests, keep not hearing about it. It's incredibly sad when even Believers don't Believe in their own beliefs... :(
I don't think that's true at all. Most alarmists I've interacted with are convinced that MMGW exists, and it appears they're correct. But that doesn't mean they're ready to do anything about it other than token gestures and taxing other people.
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
29,505
3,008
126
and instead just personally too matters into their own hands...
They'd be happy to make that the law, for everyone equally. But self sacrifice is a meaningless gesture that accomplishes nothing but crippling their own mobility and ability to participate in influencing others towards the goal.

When it comes to CO2 it's all or nothing. A global problem needs a global solution. Even if the rest of the planet ceased to exist, China alone could emit enough to melt the poles.
 

chucky2

Lifer
Dec 9, 1999
10,038
36
86
I don't think that's true at all. Most alarmists I've interacted with are convinced that MMGW exists, and it appears they're correct. But that doesn't mean they're ready to do anything about it other than token gestures and taxing other people.
Yes, but if they Believe, should not they also Believe in the long term affects the Climate Change will have? And given that, shouldn't they be doing everything in their power to slow the affects down? I mean, this isn't a drop of oil in your driveway not getting cleaned up, this is mass starvation, WWIII (and IV!), entire coasts being under water, etc. This is End of The World! type stuff, the stakes are massive. For a Believer, how could someone sit on the sidelines and continue business as usual if they truly Believe? It's akin to watching a rape happen daily and doing nothing to stop it.

They'd be happy to make that the law, for everyone equally. But self sacrifice is a meaningless gesture that accomplishes nothing but crippling their own mobility and ability to participate in influencing others towards the goal.

When it comes to CO2 it's all or nothing. A global problem needs a global solution. Even if the rest of the planet ceased to exist, China alone could emit enough to melt the poles.
See above. Believers taking action on what they Believe is certainly not an All, but it's certainly a massive reduction in CO2 output based on their usage and merchandise reductions (and all the reductions of other things based on those reductions). Just think, a Billion or two Believers. All practicing the CO2 reduction they Believe needs to happen. You're saying that doesn't have any affect to CO2 output at all?
 

desy

Diamond Member
Jan 13, 2000
5,276
52
91
Sold on AGW, I have changed how I do things
I don't water my grass. I compost, recycle, eat less meat, buy my vehicles more efficient than the last, take my own bags to the grocery stores, finished insulating my home, bought water reducing shower heads and toilets, buy more eco friendly detergents etc etc.
Am I perfect not even close, however why shouldn't people have more consideration in their daily choices?
 

chucky2

Lifer
Dec 9, 1999
10,038
36
86
Sold on AGW, I have changed how I do things
I don't water my grass. I compost, recycle, eat less meat, buy my vehicles more efficient than the last, take my own bags to the grocery stores, finished insulating my home, bought water reducing shower heads and toilets, buy more eco friendly detergents etc etc.
Am I perfect not even close, however why shouldn't people have more consideration in their daily choices?
That's all great, truly! Just need to stay the course and keep at it. Leading a minimum CO2 impacting lifestyle should be priority #1 for any Believer. Anything less is complete hypocrisy.
 

Subyman

Moderator <br> VC&G Forum
Mar 18, 2005
7,876
32
86
That's all great, truly! Just need to stay the course and keep at it. Leading a minimum CO2 impacting lifestyle should be priority #1 for any Believer. Anything less is complete hypocrisy.
What does that have to do with the data? Your argument against global climate change happening is that some humans are hypocrites?
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
70,177
18,977
136
What does that have to do with the data? Your argument against global climate change happening is that some humans are hypocrites?
It is a pretty funny argument. I think he's trying to go for the idea that people who accept the science on climate change don't REALLY believe it because they haven't made their entire lives carbon neutral.

Even though that's a transparently stupid argument anyway, what people believe has zero impact on whether climate change is real or not. Even if every liberal on the planet was a huge hypocrite that would in no way change the reality of climate change or the actions society needs to take to fight it.

I'm pretty sure our good friend chuck has had this all explained to him in the past but he's a bit slow on the uptake, haha.
 

Subyman

Moderator <br> VC&G Forum
Mar 18, 2005
7,876
32
86
It is a pretty funny argument. I think he's trying to go for the idea that people who accept the science on climate change don't REALLY believe it because they haven't made their entire lives carbon neutral.

Even though that's a transparently stupid argument anyway, what people believe has zero impact on whether climate change is real or not. Even if every liberal on the planet was a huge hypocrite that would in no way change the reality of climate change or the actions society needs to take to fight it.

I'm pretty sure our good friend chuck has had this all explained to him in the past but he's a bit slow on the uptake, haha.
An example for me is that I'd like to transition to an electric car and it would be neat to have solar arrays on my property to charge. However, the trade off right now can't make that happen for me. There aren't electric pick up trucks, solar panels are out of my current budget, I need a lot of range on my vehicle, and I tow a decent amount of payload. There isn't a solution for me.

This means I need to fill up a V8 truck with gas. That doesn't mean I can't accept global warming and vote and advocate for a solution to my needs.
 

chucky2

Lifer
Dec 9, 1999
10,038
36
86
What does that have to do with the data? Your argument against global climate change happening is that some humans are hypocrites?
Oh, not at all. I'm sure we are impacting the climate to some degree, there is no way we could burn that much coal and oil and not. To what degree, hard to say. To what actual short term impact, hard to say. Long term impact, hard to say. I'm far more concerned with not depleting natural resources and limiting true pollution (I don't consider CO2 pollution per se) and just think we should concentrate our efforts there rather than hyperventilating over .1C temp increases over 50 years and acting like the world is ending. But that's just me...

It is a pretty funny argument. I think he's trying to go for the idea that people who accept the science on climate change don't REALLY believe it because they haven't made their entire lives carbon neutral.
Well, either they Believe and will take real steps - regardless of what other people/countries do - to reign in their CO2 impact, as the stakes are that high for anyone who Believes, or they don't really Believe. It's really one or the other, isn't it? How can one Believe but then not Believe in the consequences if inaction?

Even though that's a transparently stupid argument anyway, what people believe has zero impact on whether climate change is real or not. Even if every liberal on the planet was a huge hypocrite that would in no way change the reality of climate change or the actions society needs to take to fight it.
Oh Nick, Nick'ing! :wub: Run that Nick, Nick!

I'm pretty sure our good friend chuck has had this all explained to him in the past but he's a bit slow on the uptake, haha.
You probably Nick'd in the past and I just laughed at you then too! LOL! Poor Nick... :'(
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
70,177
18,977
136
Oh, not at all. I'm sure we are impacting the climate to some degree, there is no way we could burn that much coal and oil and not. To what degree, hard to say. To what actual short term impact, hard to say. Long term impact, hard to say. I'm far more concerned with not depleting natural resources and limiting true pollution (I don't consider CO2 pollution per se) and just think we should concentrate our efforts there rather than hyperventilating over .1C temp increases over 50 years and acting like the world is ending. But that's just me...

Well, either they Believe and will take real steps - regardless of what other people/countries do - to reign in their CO2 impact, as the stakes are that high for anyone who Believes, or they don't really Believe. It's really one or the other, isn't it? How can one Believe but then not Believe in the consequences if inaction?

Oh Nick, Nick'ing! :wub: Run that Nick, Nick!

You probably Nick'd in the past and I just laughed at you then too! LOL! Poor Nick... :'(
Haha, thank you for proving my point. :)
 

chucky2

Lifer
Dec 9, 1999
10,038
36
86
Haha, thank you for proving my point. :)
Anything to help you out Nick, you're one of the few entertaining posters here on the forum. :thumbsup: The other Lefties are pretty dull, when you Nick it's like reading Dilbert but for P&N, always worth a good chuckle! :D:thumbsup:
 

Paratus

Lifer
Jun 4, 2004
14,374
7,164
146
Well as I posted in this thread it's enough that the City of Miami Beech floods with seawater during the highest tides.

Its enough that the US Marshall Islands are beginning to go under.

http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2015/06/opinions/sutter-two-degrees-marshall-islands/
A significant percentage have relocated to Arkansas.

It's enough 200 Native Alaskan villages are suffering from erosion and flooding from melting permafrost. 12 are looking at relocation.
http://unc.news21.com/index.php/stories/alaska.html

So granted it doesn't impact you but it's probably OMG to the folks living there.

Oh wait I forgot. They're mistaken. It can't be happening because Al Gore flys in airplanes or some BS.
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
67,830
2,928
126
Well as I posted in this thread it's enough that the City of Miami Beech floods with seawater during the highest tides.

Its enough that the US Marshall Islands are beginning to go under.

http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2015/06/opinions/sutter-two-degrees-marshall-islands/
A significant percentage have relocated to Arkansas.

It's enough 200 Native Alaskan villages are suffering from erosion and flooding from melting permafrost. 12 are looking at relocation.
http://unc.news21.com/index.php/stories/alaska.html

So granted it doesn't impact you but it's probably OMG to the folks living there.

Oh wait I forgot. They're mistaken. It can't be happening because Al Gore flys in airplanes or some BS.
If Al, you, I, and some others would become Amish, the issue would go away!
 

chucky2

Lifer
Dec 9, 1999
10,038
36
86
Well as I posted in this thread it's enough that the City of Miami Beech floods with seawater during the highest tides.

Its enough that the US Marshall Islands are beginning to go under.

http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2015/06/opinions/sutter-two-degrees-marshall-islands/
A significant percentage have relocated to Arkansas.

It's enough 200 Native Alaskan villages are suffering from erosion and flooding from melting permafrost. 12 are looking at relocation.
http://unc.news21.com/index.php/stories/alaska.html

So granted it doesn't impact you but it's probably OMG to the folks living there.

Oh wait I forgot. They're mistaken. It can't be happening because Al Gore flys in airplanes or some BS.
Never said it can't be happening. The point is you Believers just need to believe enough to stop your massive CO2 supporting ways. Get enough Believers to actually take real action, and CO2 output will eventually go down (not right away, it will take a little while for your reduced consumption to be reflected in the manufacturing world). A Billion or three Believers, all massively scaling back their CO2 impact. Think of the Maldives!
 

Subyman

Moderator <br> VC&G Forum
Mar 18, 2005
7,876
32
86
Never said it can't be happening. The point is you Believers just need to believe enough to stop your massive CO2 supporting ways. Get enough Believers to actually take real action, and CO2 output will eventually go down (not right away, it will take a little while for your reduced consumption to be reflected in the manufacturing world). A Billion or three Believers, all massively scaling back their CO2 impact. Think of the Maldives!
You are a "believer" too. You admitted earlier. Don't know why you are railing against yourself.
 

Paratus

Lifer
Jun 4, 2004
14,374
7,164
146
Never said it can't be happening. The point is you Believers just need to believe enough to stop your massive CO2 supporting ways. Get enough Believers to actually take real action, and CO2 output will eventually go down (not right away, it will take a little while for your reduced consumption to be reflected in the manufacturing world). A Billion or three Believers, all massively scaling back their CO2 impact. Think of the Maldives!
Equivocating?! Don't let facts and science make you lose your faith brother!
 

chucky2

Lifer
Dec 9, 1999
10,038
36
86
You are a "believer" too. You admitted earlier. Don't know why you are railing against yourself.
In a general sense, not to the extent the Believers are. I strive to limit pollution as much as realistically possible in my life (my greatest output is my truck, but there's not much I can do about that, junking it and getting something else would be way more pollution than keeping it).

We just need Believers to actually believe, and cease with convenient excuses. You can't profess to believe to the degree the Believers do, and then be fine jumping on a jet needlessly. Or getting that new piece of <whatever> that you really don't need. Or yet more clothes you don't need shipped from China. And on and on. All of that necessitates CO2 output (among other things) and quite literally none of it is necessary to peoples existence. It's a luxury a Believer is enjoying at the cost of that much more CO2 output, which means, they don't Believe at all. They're convenient Believers - they run their mouths so they can feel jelly, but doing the things that they can that will actually help the problem just doesn't fit their lifestyle. Effectively, they're no different than the people who deny everything and roll coal for fun. If the affects of CO2 are going to lead to conditions that Believers believe in, we can't afford that type of Billary behavior. Don't be a Billary, be a Sanders.
 

chucky2

Lifer
Dec 9, 1999
10,038
36
86
You've made some point I should be addressing?
Wow you have some confusion today I see. First you Nick on me equivocating and that being some point (even if it were true it'd have nothing to do with me LOL at Believers), now you need to be addressing some point. Very odd...
 

Paratus

Lifer
Jun 4, 2004
14,374
7,164
146
Wow you have some confusion today I see. First you Nick on me equivocating and that being some point (even if it were true it'd have nothing to do with me LOL at Believers), now you need to be addressing some point. Very odd...
Well your posts are very confusing. You seem to have an issue with with taking drastic action on climate change, which no one in this thread, as far as I'm aware, has actually recommended.

You deride anyone who understands or follows mainstream climate science as a "believer". Yet you claim to be one too.

It sort of feels like you think climate change is a problem but one that requires reasonable action that balances risks, and costs and benefits. Something I agree with.

It's hard to tell because you smear your posts with a coating of conservative denier BS like you're concerned you might be called a liberal if you stated your position plainly.

It is ok to base your beliefs on reality. Old school conservatives used to cite that as a virtue you know. ;)
 
Last edited:

ASK THE COMMUNITY