hate these ads?, log in or register to hide them
Page 114 of 118 FirstFirst ... 1464104111112113114115116117 ... LastLast
Results 2,261 to 2,280 of 2354

Thread: God Hates THE WORLD (Natural Disaster Thread)

  1. #2261
    Movember 2011 RazoR's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Location
    The Motherland
    Posts
    31,621
    besides that feces are 99.9999% organic and good for the ocean

  2. #2262
    Venec's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Europe's Mexico - Poland
    Posts
    6,420
    Quote Originally Posted by Boltorano View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Neoo Gabriel View Post
    In the meantime, behold what 1+ billion indians are doing to the oceans of the planet because they don't believe in sanitation - or maybe because they are so civilizationally retarded that they just cant stop shitting in the street:

    That's a wave intensity simulation from after the December 2004 Tsunami. The original link isn't even fully cropped out of the image.
    You could call it... a shitstorm

    NeoG gonna NeoG.

  3. #2263

    Join Date
    May 31, 2011
    Posts
    4,873
    It seems Ars Technica silently monitors this thread and has published a related article today, providing a fitting graph for the China vs. the World discussion. (Spoilered for large(r) images):

    The factors driving a country's emissions can be described by GDP (Gross Domestic Product), the energy used per unit of GDP, and the greenhouse gas emitted per unit energy. The wealthiest (OECD) nations are averaging about 2% economic growth, while the rest of the world is averaging 4.5%. Those two categories of nations are reducing energy per unit GDP at about the same rate, so energy use barely increased among the wealthiest nations but increased 2.8% among the others. As a result, much of the recent increase in emissions has obviously come from developing economies.
      Spoiler:


    Annual emissions by country. The solid line shows all emissions within a country's borders; the dashed line accounts for things manufactured by one country but purchased by another.


    How far does that put us from the road that halts warming at 1.5 or 2°C? Well, even if every nation was on track to hit all its 2030 pledges, we'd end up at around 54 billion tons of CO2 being emitted. To stop at 2°C, that number should be about 15 billion tons lower. To stop at 1.5°C, the gap grows to 32 billion tons. As we knew at the time the Paris Agreement was signed, those initial pledges were only good enough to limit warming to close to 3°C—better than a future of unrestrained emissions growth, but not exactly "mission accomplished."
      Spoiler:


    The gap between current emissions trajectories and the pathways that would halt global warming sooner. "NDC scenarios" represent the fulfillment of pledges made by countries in the 2015 Paris Agreement.


    https://arstechnica.com/science/2019...hind-schedule/

  4. #2264
    Keckers's Avatar
    Join Date
    July 31, 2012
    Posts
    20,001
    Until the capitalist class starts pulling their weight with regards to climate change it doesn't matter what we do.
    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Mason
    It is absurd that we are capable of witnessing a 40,000 year old system of gender oppression begin to dissolve before our eyes yet still see the abolition of a 200 year old economic system as an unrealistic utopia.

  5. #2265

    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Location
    Pizza delivery van
    Posts
    7,050
    Quote Originally Posted by Keckers View Post
    Until the capitalist class starts pulling their weight with regards to climate change it doesn't matter what we do.
    You could start protesting and sitting on a cardboard box every friday.

  6. #2266
    Keckers's Avatar
    Join Date
    July 31, 2012
    Posts
    20,001
    We should teach bomb making skills to extinction rebellion.
    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Mason
    It is absurd that we are capable of witnessing a 40,000 year old system of gender oppression begin to dissolve before our eyes yet still see the abolition of a 200 year old economic system as an unrealistic utopia.

  7. #2267
    Movember 2011 RazoR's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Location
    The Motherland
    Posts
    31,621
    Calm down, Posadas.

  8. #2268
    rufuske's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    2,647
    If they're too lazy to find a copy of Jolly Roger's Cookbook, I wouldn't hope they can achieve any impact.

  9. #2269
    Liare's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    13,790
    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    You are dense as fuck. That’s not my argument at ALL.
    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    All that’s done has slowed down their rate of growth. You can see that clearly in your own post.
    this, is a literal "lets blow up the world for shareholder value" argument.

    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    You are the one who bought wealth into this, and then I showed you that the wealth is mostly in Europe, and suddenly, it wasn’t important any more.
    there are multiple factors involved, i had, seemingly wrongly, assumed that this was so fucking obvious it did not need mentioning, but evidently, it does. so here it goes "there are multiple factors involved."

    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    So then it’s per capita, sure. That’s important. Both the US and Europe are improving, good for them. China, a\India, and the rest of the world, which outnumber us by quite a large number, are growing their per capita numbers-
    and not even once do you acknowledge why this might indeed be the case, how the massive outsourcing of industrial activity might affect this alongside lifting hundred of millions of people out of poverty. indeed, you seem to imply it would be better to keep these people in poverty for the sake of climate because that way, it won't affect your living standard.

    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    Maybe you are learning a bunch of math but don’t have much experience with actual numbers, but trend lines are what they are, and what they are saying is that the West, while it can certainly do more, doesn’t fucking matter if China and India and “the rest of the world” continue to not manage waste, and pollute, etc. etc.
    on one hand, you have the parts of the West, who is pursuing a policy of aggressively doing fucking nothing and shifting to using natural gas in favour of coal because it's cheaper.

    on the other you have China and India that are industrializing at a phase that makes even what the USSR did seem conservative to say the least, and investing in heavily in production of renewable energy sources (by far the largest bottleneck) while accepting that it cannot currently meet demand growth and wont, for a significant number of years, be able to.

    some of these is going to have a trend-curve that tops high, breaks and then trends downward, the others is going to have a more moderately growing trend curve as production is eventually moved home, but that doesn't actually meaningfully trend downward at all when you include emissions from consumption in it.

    you get to guess who is who, and who is the bigger problem long term.

    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    But sure, go on deliberately misconstruing what I’m saying because you think it wins you something.
    you seem fundamentally unable to comprehend what is actually going on and where the actual problems are here.
    suffice to say, any strategy that keeps billions in poverty is not going to happen, any strategy where increased investment in fossil fuels plays a part long term is the actual problem. pretending that "China is worse" because their current emissions are higher entirely fails to account for the factors that cause that and the commitments and actions they have taken to address this.

    indeed the Chinese/Indian carbon increase is baked into the predictive models used as a basis for the RCP scenarios directly or indirectly because the scientific community is not staffed by towering assholes who think denying billions access to the fruits of industry is going to be a acceptable outcome.



    what these scenarios do assume is that those already ahead, that is to say the west, would be willing to commit to actually sorting out the costly challenges of developing and implementing it, and then transfer the technologies onwards, hence the assumption that emissions level out and then gradually decrease in the more optimistic scenarios.
    Viking, n.:
    1. Daring Scandinavian seafarers, explorers, adventurers, entrepreneurs world-famous for their aggressive, nautical import business, highly leveraged takeovers and blue eyes.
    2. Bloodthirsty sea pirates who ravaged northern Europe beginning in the 9th century.

    Hagar's note: The first definition is much preferred; the second is used only by malcontents, the envious, and disgruntled owners of waterfront property.

  10. #2270
    Keckers's Avatar
    Join Date
    July 31, 2012
    Posts
    20,001
    Quote Originally Posted by rufuske View Post
    If they're too lazy to find a copy of Jolly Roger's Cookbook, I wouldn't hope they can achieve any impact.
    I think it's a culture thing, they need more vocal socialists and less liberals in their ranks.
    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Mason
    It is absurd that we are capable of witnessing a 40,000 year old system of gender oppression begin to dissolve before our eyes yet still see the abolition of a 200 year old economic system as an unrealistic utopia.

  11. #2271
    Donor erichkknaar's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    14,047
    Quote Originally Posted by Liare View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    You are dense as fuck. That’s not my argument at ALL.
    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    All that’s done has slowed down their rate of growth. You can see that clearly in your own post.
    this, is a literal "lets blow up the world for shareholder value" argument.

    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    You are the one who bought wealth into this, and then I showed you that the wealth is mostly in Europe, and suddenly, it wasn’t important any more.
    there are multiple factors involved, i had, seemingly wrongly, assumed that this was so fucking obvious it did not need mentioning, but evidently, it does. so here it goes "there are multiple factors involved."

    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    So then it’s per capita, sure. That’s important. Both the US and Europe are improving, good for them. China, a\India, and the rest of the world, which outnumber us by quite a large number, are growing their per capita numbers-
    and not even once do you acknowledge why this might indeed be the case, how the massive outsourcing of industrial activity might affect this alongside lifting hundred of millions of people out of poverty. indeed, you seem to imply it would be better to keep these people in poverty for the sake of climate because that way, it won't affect your living standard.

    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    Maybe you are learning a bunch of math but don’t have much experience with actual numbers, but trend lines are what they are, and what they are saying is that the West, while it can certainly do more, doesn’t fucking matter if China and India and “the rest of the world” continue to not manage waste, and pollute, etc. etc.
    on one hand, you have the parts of the West, who is pursuing a policy of aggressively doing fucking nothing and shifting to using natural gas in favour of coal because it's cheaper.

    on the other you have China and India that are industrializing at a phase that makes even what the USSR did seem conservative to say the least, and investing in heavily in production of renewable energy sources (by far the largest bottleneck) while accepting that it cannot currently meet demand growth and wont, for a significant number of years, be able to.

    some of these is going to have a trend-curve that tops high, breaks and then trends downward, the others is going to have a more moderately growing trend curve as production is eventually moved home, but that doesn't actually meaningfully trend downward at all when you include emissions from consumption in it.

    you get to guess who is who, and who is the bigger problem long term.

    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    But sure, go on deliberately misconstruing what I’m saying because you think it wins you something.
    you seem fundamentally unable to comprehend what is actually going on and where the actual problems are here.
    suffice to say, any strategy that keeps billions in poverty is not going to happen, any strategy where increased investment in fossil fuels plays a part long term is the actual problem. pretending that "China is worse" because their current emissions are higher entirely fails to account for the factors that cause that and the commitments and actions they have taken to address this.

    indeed the Chinese/Indian carbon increase is baked into the predictive models used as a basis for the RCP scenarios directly or indirectly because the scientific community is not staffed by towering assholes who think denying billions access to the fruits of industry is going to be a acceptable outcome.



    what these scenarios do assume is that those already ahead, that is to say the west, would be willing to commit to actually sorting out the costly challenges of developing and implementing it, and then transfer the technologies onwards, hence the assumption that emissions level out and then gradually decrease in the more optimistic scenarios.
    Clearly you don't want to actually read what I'm saying. You just wibble about what you think I'm saying.

    OK.

    Let me be clearer.

    We're fucked. Noting is coming to save you.
    meh

  12. #2272
    Neoo Gabriel's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 27, 2011
    Posts
    1,584
    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Liare View Post


    what these scenarios do assume is that those already ahead, that is to say the west, would be willing to commit to actually sorting out the costly challenges of developing and implementing it, and then transfer the technologies onwards, hence the assumption that emissions level out and then gradually decrease in the more optimistic scenarios.
    Clearly you don't want to actually read what I'm saying. You just wibble about what you think I'm saying.

    OK.

    Let me be clearer.

    We're fucked. Noting is coming to save you.
    I think it's safe (hic) to assume that somewhere between red and brown is the path we will take assuming business as usual (ie. what will happen despite all the posturing) barring a quick and significant reduction in global human population (disease, nuclear war, etc). Make peace with that and plan accordingly.

  13. #2273
    Donor Shiodome's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Location
    I am a white male.
    Posts
    5,350
    wtf does (hic) mean?

  14. #2274
    Movember 2011Movember 2012 Nordstern's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    10,889
    https://www.npr.org/2019/12/08/78091...e-great-plains

    Not sure if this belongs in the US politics thread or here, but an NGO is buying up ranches in Montana and converting them to rewilded prairie. Many locals are opposed to it, because:

    1. Ranchers are obviously the best conservationists.
    2. Big sums of outside money are coming into our local economy. And that's somehow wrong.
    3. The land should be put to productive use by locals (whose kids don't want to work the land), not conserved by outsiders.
    4. "God gave people (white people, not those natives) this land so it can be worked, so we can produce food or fuel from it."
    5. ThE uNiTeD nAtIoNs Is TrYiNg To FoRcE wHiTe PeOpLe OfF tHeIr LaNd!!!111!!

    Unlike national parks, the land will be open to hunting, and nearby Native American tribes already have agreements that allow them to hunt bison on the land, which suits them just fine.
    "Holy shit, I ask you to stop being autistic and you debate what autistic is." - spasm
    Quote Originally Posted by Larkonis Trassler View Post
    WTF I hate white people now...

  15. #2275
    evil edna's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    5,582
    Quote Originally Posted by Shiodome View Post
    wtf does (hic) mean?
    I think he has gas.

    And yeah no matter what the eco nerds might want to think we are fucked, might as well enjoy all the single use plastics

  16. #2276
    Lachesis VII's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 20, 2011
    Location
    Egghelende
    Posts
    5,141
    Quote Originally Posted by evil edna View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Shiodome View Post
    wtf does (hic) mean?
    I think he has gas.

    And yeah no matter what the eco nerds might want to think we are fucked, might as well enjoy all the single use plastics

  17. #2277
    Neoo Gabriel's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 27, 2011
    Posts
    1,584
    Quote Originally Posted by Nordstern View Post
    https://www.npr.org/2019/12/08/78091...e-great-plains

    Not sure if this belongs in the US politics thread or here, but an NGO is buying up ranches in Montana and converting them to rewilded prairie. Many locals are opposed to it, because:

    1. Ranchers are obviously the best conservationists.
    2. Big sums of outside money are coming into our local economy. And that's somehow wrong.
    3. The land should be put to productive use by locals (whose kids don't want to work the land), not conserved by outsiders.
    4. "God gave people (white people, not those natives) this land so it can be worked, so we can produce food or fuel from it."
    5. ThE uNiTeD nAtIoNs Is TrYiNg To FoRcE wHiTe PeOpLe OfF tHeIr LaNd!!!111!!

    Unlike national parks, the land will be open to hunting, and nearby Native American tribes already have agreements that allow them to hunt bison on the land, which suits them just fine.
    That is an interesting project, thanks for sharing that.

    Personally - because of the awesome factor and as an environmental/economic experiment - I would like there to be a way to restore a single unrestricted massive patch of prairie all the way down the eastern side of the Rockies just to be able to witness the millions of buffalo in their migration.

  18. #2278
    Movember 2011Movember 2012 Nordstern's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    10,889
    Quote Originally Posted by Neoo Gabriel View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Nordstern View Post
    https://www.npr.org/2019/12/08/78091...e-great-plains

    Not sure if this belongs in the US politics thread or here, but an NGO is buying up ranches in Montana and converting them to rewilded prairie. Many locals are opposed to it, because:

    1. Ranchers are obviously the best conservationists.
    2. Big sums of outside money are coming into our local economy. And that's somehow wrong.
    3. The land should be put to productive use by locals (whose kids don't want to work the land), not conserved by outsiders.
    4. "God gave people (white people, not those natives) this land so it can be worked, so we can produce food or fuel from it."
    5. ThE uNiTeD nAtIoNs Is TrYiNg To FoRcE wHiTe PeOpLe OfF tHeIr LaNd!!!111!!

    Unlike national parks, the land will be open to hunting, and nearby Native American tribes already have agreements that allow them to hunt bison on the land, which suits them just fine.
    That is an interesting project, thanks for sharing that.

    Personally - because of the awesome factor and as an environmental/economic experiment - I would like there to be a way to restore a single unrestricted massive patch of prairie all the way down the eastern side of the Rockies just to be able to witness the millions of buffalo in their migration.
    The trucking industry would like to have a chat with you in regards to why you tore up the interstate system.
    "Holy shit, I ask you to stop being autistic and you debate what autistic is." - spasm
    Quote Originally Posted by Larkonis Trassler View Post
    WTF I hate white people now...

  19. #2279
    Neoo Gabriel's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 27, 2011
    Posts
    1,584
    Quote Originally Posted by Nordstern View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Neoo Gabriel View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Nordstern View Post
    https://www.npr.org/2019/12/08/78091...e-great-plains

    Not sure if this belongs in the US politics thread or here, but an NGO is buying up ranches in Montana and converting them to rewilded prairie. Many locals are opposed to it, because:

    1. Ranchers are obviously the best conservationists.
    2. Big sums of outside money are coming into our local economy. And that's somehow wrong.
    3. The land should be put to productive use by locals (whose kids don't want to work the land), not conserved by outsiders.
    4. "God gave people (white people, not those natives) this land so it can be worked, so we can produce food or fuel from it."
    5. ThE uNiTeD nAtIoNs Is TrYiNg To FoRcE wHiTe PeOpLe OfF tHeIr LaNd!!!111!!

    Unlike national parks, the land will be open to hunting, and nearby Native American tribes already have agreements that allow them to hunt bison on the land, which suits them just fine.
    That is an interesting project, thanks for sharing that.

    Personally - because of the awesome factor and as an environmental/economic experiment - I would like there to be a way to restore a single unrestricted massive patch of prairie all the way down the eastern side of the Rockies just to be able to witness the millions of buffalo in their migration.
    The trucking industry would like to have a chat with you in regards to why you tore up the interstate system.
    Nah, we could have elevated sections of highway in multiple places to allow crossings underneath, or have several of these per highway:
    https://twistedsifter.com/2012/07/an...und-the-world/


    Edit: Elevated Highway example:

  20. #2280
    Lachesis VII's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 20, 2011
    Location
    Egghelende
    Posts
    5,141
    Last edited by Lachesis VII; December 15 2019 at 03:28:53 PM.

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •