Debates
22 Jul 22
06 Aug 22
@wildgrass saidI was offered a long term lease to put a solar farm on my vacant farm land.
Just like farming/ producing/ mining any other dang resource.
Isn't that ironic?
06 Aug 22
@shavixmir saidThe warming is natural because we came out of the little ice age which may have been caused by the volcanic eruptions on and after 536.
You just don’t comprehend.
Right. The ice age. Half of the US was under glaciers, the lower half was tundra.
Compared to 1800, the Earth was an average of 6° colder.
Since 1800 the Earth has become 2 / 2.5° warmer.
Take into account that it’s a bell curve. So the oceans are less than 2° warmer, the equator doesn’t change much. Europe and North America are about 4° ...[text shortened]... ange. Whole forests are going to change; wildlife changes. This is going to happen in your lifetime.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/01/120130131509.htm
After that little ice age the climate had to warm up. Man had nothing to do with it and the cities being hotter is not because of global warming. It is the heat island effect. Ask the chicken little alarmists what the temps are in rural areas away from all the asphalt and concrete.
08 Aug 22
You know, air pollution is very real.
In 2012-2017, it was particularly bad in Korea. I remember regularly having throat issues, and having the skin around my eyes turn red and irritated.
There have also been tests which show that the intelligence of people is impacted by air pollution:
We find that long-term exposure to air pollution impedes cognitive performance in verbal and math tests. We provide evidence that the effect of air pollution on verbal tests becomes more pronounced as people age, especially for men and the less educated. The damage on the aging brain by air pollution likely imposes substantial health and economic costs, considering that cognitive functioning is critical for the elderly for both running daily errands and making high-stake decisions.
https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1809474115
We used prospective data collected from the Conditions Affecting Neurocognitive Development and Learning in Early Childhood study. Outdoor pollutant exposure during pregnancy was predicted at geocoded home addresses using a validated national universal kriging model that combines ground-based monitoring data with an extensive database of land-use covariates. Distance to nearest major roadway was also used as a proxy for traffic-related pollution. Our primary outcome was full-scale IQ measured at age 4–6. In regression models, we adjusted for multiple determinants of child neurodevelopment and assessed interactions between air pollutants and child sex, race, socioeconomic status, reported nutrition, and maternal plasma folate in second trimester.
In our analytic sample (N = 1005) full-scale IQ averaged 2.5 points (95% CI: 0.1, 4.8) lower per 5 μg/m3 higher prenatal PM10, while no associations with nitrogen dioxide or road proximity were observed. Associations between PM10 and IQ were modified by maternal plasma folate (pinteraction = 0.07). In the lowest folate quartile, IQ decreased 6.8 points (95% CI: 1.4, 12.3) per 5-unit increase in PM10; no associations were observed in higher quartiles.
...
Our findings strengthen evidence that air pollution impairs fetal neurodevelopment and suggest a potentially important role of maternal folate in modifying these effects.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0013935119302944
Just by breathing unclean air, kids are potentially going down half a standard deviation from the norm.
While there is some alarmism about climate change and pollution, with some people saying things like Maldives will be in the ocean by 2010! back in the day... We cannot deny that pollution does lower cognitive abilities in addition to literally killing people.
More importantly, have you ever visited an area that is truly a trashcan? Just miserable. In the 1990s, even, there were issues with our little streams appearing red and frequently bubbling due to illegal dumping. There were no fish or birds to be seen in the tributaries to the Han, and few in the Han itself... What a mess!
It's easy to rail against environmentalists when you actually can enjoy green spaces and nature in your cities... But this was not always the case.
You know, environemtnalism and fighting against pollution can be done even while being skeptical of some of the claims that are made...
It is insane to think of good stewardship over the earth and wanting clean, green spaces as a liberal mindtrick. You are a fool if you think that.
Real conservatism should always be rooted in harmony and love for the envrionment... and so we should take the global warming issues seriously.
08 Aug 22
@metal-brain saidI respect your position.
@Philokalia
CO2 is not a pollutant.
I am not exactly sure where I stand on all of this. I tend to default to the consensus of establishment scientists in terms that there may be anthropogenic global warming. It makes sense that the people in China that have made the air so bad that it affects me in Korea, along with all of the other polluters in the world, have also negatively impacted the whole of the earth through their practices.
I think that climate change skeptics are sometimes attacked too much personally, and portrayed as idiots, even though they bring up serious arguments that should be meticulously accounted for, and they should be engaged with respect...
But I tend to think that they are wrong on this.
08 Aug 22
While there is some alarmism about climate change and pollution, with some people saying things like Maldives will be in the ocean by 2010! back in the day... We cannot deny that pollution does lower cognitive abilities in addition to literally killing people.https://www.airport-technology.com/projects/velena-international-airport-expansion/
No one is arguing for dirty air, and modern coal fired power stations do not produce dirty air.
08 Aug 22
@metal-brain saidbecause we like our current climate.
Why should we do anything about natural climate change?
Why do you think a warmer climate is a bad thing? It is better than a colder climate.
What is the worst that can happen?
because we like our current climate.
because a different climate might be worse than the current climate that we like.
08 Aug 22
@averagejoe1 saidAre you telling me they're currently mining coal underneath New York CITY?
Wikldgrass........The produce which you mention, consumed by people in big cities, may have been, snd originated from, harvests in Patagonia. Stay with me here wild grass. Electricity, consumed by those people, has to be created 'close by".
wild grass,, there is no land available near metropolitans (Gotham, to you comic-book children) with which to build all your faareie solar and wind machines. No land!! Jesus H.
Sheesh. Of course resource production happens in places other than where it is needed. What a garbage argument.
08 Aug 22
@wildgrass saidThe worlds climate is constantly changing. We should get worried if it were not changing because that would be unprecedented.
because we like our current climate.
because we like our current climate.
because a different climate might be worse than the current climate that we like.
08 Aug 22
@wajoma saidThe animals in the zoo are constantly changing but we don't let them out to run willy nilly about our neighborhoods.
The worlds climate is constantly changing. We should get worried if it were not changing because that would be unprecedented.
We have trillions in infrastructure invested in our current climate. Let's at least exert some effort to keep it stable for as long as possible so we dont have to move cities around.
08 Aug 22
@wajoma saidBOOO! Lots of things change. The existence of change doesn't mean that we don't have some interest in the direction of change, as a citizen, as a country, as a society, as an an individual, or whatever. Things change, but we can affect change. We dont need to let the waves wash over us and drown us just because tides exist.
The worlds climate is constantly changing. We should get worried if it were not changing because that would be unprecedented.
08 Aug 22
@philokalia said" I tend to default to the consensus of establishment scientists in terms that there may be anthropogenic global warming."
I respect your position.
I am not exactly sure where I stand on all of this. I tend to default to the consensus of establishment scientists in terms that there may be anthropogenic global warming. It makes sense that the people in China that have made the air so bad that it affects me in Korea, along with all of the other polluters in the world, have also negatively im ...[text shortened]... for, and they should be engaged with respect...
But I tend to think that they are wrong on this.
There is no consensus of climate scientists than man is the main cause of global warming. That is another lie pushed by mainstream media propaganda. It was always a lie and it still is. Notice they say "scientists" and not "climate scientists". This is just another dishonest way to mislead people into thinking they are talking about climate science experts when they are not.
https://www.zerohedge.com/weather/big-green-lie-almost-everyone-claims-believe
I want to make it very clear I have nothing against reducing the burning of fossil fuels for conservation of fuel. I think that is a worthy goal, but it is clear they want to use it as an excuse to tax people and they want to tax the poor more than the rich who are burning more fossil fuels that the poor.
I support higher efficiency standards. Since the establishment doesn't I think they are liars whose real goal is taxing and controlling people. They could always change my mind by taking higher efficiency standards seriously instead of scaring people into giving away their money and freedom to government.
08 Aug 22
@wildgrass saidA warmer climate would be a good thing. It would mean more rainfall so plants will produce more food for us. A warmer climate would be beneficial. It is a colder climate that would be worse.
because we like our current climate.
because we like our current climate.
because a different climate might be worse than the current climate that we like.
https://www.science.org/content/article/why-536-was-worst-year-be-alive
08 Aug 22
@metal-brain saidBut its 150 ppm extra presence in our atmosphere compared to the historic level of 300 ppm over many centuries is problematic, because its addition is a direct result of industrialization and the burning of fossil fuels. Ask yourself how that extra 150 ppm got there and what forms of pollution it introduced with it and whether or not the environment would be a lot better off without it.
@Philokalia
CO2 is not a pollutant.