|
Originally Posted by trvsmrtn
(Post 3181083)
I guess I have to start screenshotting my replies if they’re just going to get deleted. I’d love to know the reason that one was deleted.
I guess I’ll just say that if you haven’t bothered to read it, but you think the Green New Deal, a non binding resolution, is going to damage the airline industry, then you’re just ignorant. |
Originally Posted by Bozo the pilot
(Post 3181555)
Okay, since you're pushing it, what's in it for our industry? I may have missed in all honesty.
This is the problem with our country! We, as a society, have become so ****ing lazy, that we won’t read a simple 14 page document that is double spaced, large font, and actually pretty easy to read. Instead we leave it to the talking heads on TV to tell us what is in these documents and give them the opportunity to twist it in order to push their own agenda. The green new deal is basically just invest money to make transportation more energy efficient and invest money to train people who currently work in coal and oil to work in solar and wind. It is a non-binding resolution that merely lays out goals to work towards, [MOD EDIT] Read it for yourself: https://www.congress.gov/116/bills/h...6hres109ih.pdf |
Originally Posted by rickair7777
(Post 3181003)
Plenty of utter ignorance on both sides of that debate.
The real problem with climate science is that NOBODY has any experience with analysis and prediction of the potential for long-term changes caused by man on anything like a planetary scale. We're in uncharted territory, so when people make assertions about what *will* happen in X number of years, it's very easy to show that they don't have any empirical data or any model that's known to be accurate for extrapolation at that scale. I'm not trying to assert how accurate or not the predictions are, we simply don't know. I'm pointing out why it's so hard to get all of society on board with severe, life-altering austerity in the hopes of averting something which we cannot accurately predict. For that reason any viable solutions will need to keep human and political realities front and center... basically going to need to allow people to keep their lifestyles and economies while getting rid of excess CO2. Otherwise a lot of people will just live their lives and take their chances. I'm mostly one of those, because I'm an engineer and the global warming advocates are so emotionally vested in fringe technology and politically infeasible austerity that they're sabotaging their own efforts. Wholesale nuclear power (using safe, standardized modern core designs) is the only conceivable way of getting there by 2050. Added benefit is that if necessary you can build extra nuke plants co-located with industrial scale carbon-capture systems to actually remove carbon from the atmosphere (all proven technology). That may be necessary to reverse the inertia of climate change; it may not be enough to stop putting CO2 in the air. But again we won't know for sure until we get there. This guy definitely gets it :-) |
This is one of my favorite quotes from Bill Bryson’s book, a short history of nearly everything:
“If you imagine the 4,500-bilion-odd years of Earth's history compressed into a normal earthly day, then life begins very early, about 4 A.M., with the rise of the first simple, single-celled organisms, but then advances no further for the next sixteen hours. Not until almost 8:30 in the evening, with the day five-sixths over, has Earth anything to show the universe but a restless skin of microbes. Then, finally, the first sea plants appear, followed twenty minutes later by the first jellyfish and the enigmatic Ediacaran fauna first seen by Reginald Sprigg in Australia. At 9:04 P.M. trilobites swim onto the scene, followed more or less immediately by the shapely creatures of the Burgess Shale. Just before 10 P.M. plants begin to pop up on the land. Soon after, with less than two hours left in the day, the first land creatures follow. Thanks to ten minutes or so of balmy weather, by 10:24 the Earth is covered in the great carboniferous forests whose residues give us all our coal, and the first winged insects are evident. Dinosaurs plod onto the scene just before 11 P.M. and hold sway for about three-quarters of an hour. At twenty-one minutes to midnight they vanish and the age of mammals begins. Humans emerge one minute and seventeen seconds before midnight. The whole of our recorded history, on this scale, would be no more than a few seconds, a single human lifetime barely an instant. Throughout this greatly speeded-up day continents slide about and bang together at a clip that seems positively reckless. Mountains rise and melt away, ocean basins come and go, ice sheets advance and withdraw. And throughout the whole, about three times every minute, somewhere on the planet there is a flash-bulb pop of light marking the impact of a Manson-sized meteor or one even larger. It's a wonder that anything at all can survive in such a pummeled and unsettled environment. In fact, not many things do for long.” The most relevant part being this: “Humans emerge one minute and seventeen seconds before midnight. The whole of our recorded history, on this scale, would be no more than a few seconds, a single human lifetime barely an instant.” Now I don’t doubt that we humans are making a significant impact on our environment, but when you look at it like this, it kind of makes one wish we had a larger sample size to work with. Anyway, this is an interesting thread and look forward to continued civil discourse. |
I’m all for a Pigovian tax on carbon to allow free market economics price the externalities—just waiting for democratically elected politician propose one. Probably still waiting in 2050. Everybody wants to go to Heaven, nobody wants to do what’s required.
|
Originally Posted by NewCareer
(Post 3182058)
This is one of my favorite quotes from Bill Bryson’s book, a short history of nearly everything:
“If you imagine the 4,500-bilion-odd years of Earth's history compressed into a normal earthly day, then life begins very early, about 4 A.M., with the rise of the first simple, single-celled organisms, but then advances no further for the next sixteen hours. Not until almost 8:30 in the evening, with the day five-sixths over, has Earth anything to show the universe but a restless skin of microbes. Then, finally, the first sea plants appear, followed twenty minutes later by the first jellyfish and the enigmatic Ediacaran fauna first seen by Reginald Sprigg in Australia. At 9:04 P.M. trilobites swim onto the scene, followed more or less immediately by the shapely creatures of the Burgess Shale. Just before 10 P.M. plants begin to pop up on the land. Soon after, with less than two hours left in the day, the first land creatures follow. Thanks to ten minutes or so of balmy weather, by 10:24 the Earth is covered in the great carboniferous forests whose residues give us all our coal, and the first winged insects are evident. Dinosaurs plod onto the scene just before 11 P.M. and hold sway for about three-quarters of an hour. At twenty-one minutes to midnight they vanish and the age of mammals begins. Humans emerge one minute and seventeen seconds before midnight. The whole of our recorded history, on this scale, would be no more than a few seconds, a single human lifetime barely an instant. Throughout this greatly speeded-up day continents slide about and bang together at a clip that seems positively reckless. Mountains rise and melt away, ocean basins come and go, ice sheets advance and withdraw. And throughout the whole, about three times every minute, somewhere on the planet there is a flash-bulb pop of light marking the impact of a Manson-sized meteor or one even larger. It's a wonder that anything at all can survive in such a pummeled and unsettled environment. In fact, not many things do for long.” The most relevant part being this: “Humans emerge one minute and seventeen seconds before midnight. The whole of our recorded history, on this scale, would be no more than a few seconds, a single human lifetime barely an instant.” Now I don’t doubt that we humans are making a significant impact on our environment, but when you look at it like this, it kind of makes one wish we had a larger sample size to work with. Anyway, this is an interesting thread and look forward to continued civil discourse. |
Originally Posted by hydrostream
(Post 3182099)
About the same amount of time that a bullet would take to hit an artery and bleed you out. Maybe we are Earth’s bullet.
|
Originally Posted by hydrostream
(Post 3182099)
About the same amount of time that a bullet would take to hit an artery and bleed you out. Maybe we are Earth’s bullet.
|
Is it? 70,300 nuclear weapons were in the world in 1986. That’s a pretty big bullet, lucky it wasn’t fired. I’m certain with almost 8 billion of us we have the capacity to end the world as we know it. Life will go on though.
|
Originally Posted by hydrostream
(Post 3182578)
Is it? 70,300 nuclear weapons were in the world in 1986. That’s a pretty big bullet, lucky it wasn’t fired. I’m certain with almost 8 billion of us we have the capacity to end the world as we know it. Life will go on though.
So with that addition I will modify your post with adding one word to "lucky it wasn't fired"............yet. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:56 AM. |
User Alert System provided by
Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) -
vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Website Copyright ©2000 - 2017 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands