Vitalsign Posted September 9 Share Posted September 9 1 minute ago, Uaarkson said: Blocking you oughta burn a few less calories. Get fucked Hope you have a good Monday, they can be the WORST. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b_m_b_m_b_m Posted September 9 Share Posted September 9 Climate science in the 70s supported the idea that increasing co2 emissions due to human industrial output would warm the earth, a theory which had been hypothesized and data to back it for more than a century at that point. There were few studies and data which supported the idea of a global cooling in the 1970s; the data since then almost exclusively supports the fact that human carbon emissions are the primary driver of increased global temperatures observed and predicted in the future, and matches the warming predictions of that time. Using the global cooling talking points today is a deliberate troll which is none too surprising given the person posting it. It was a media trend back then and it’s a troll job now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vitalsign Posted September 9 Share Posted September 9 11 minutes ago, b_m_b_m_b_m said: Climate science in the 70s supported the idea that increasing co2 emissions due to human industrial output would warm the earth, a theory which had been hypothesized and data to back it for more than a century at that point. There were few studies and data which supported the idea of a global cooling in the 1970s; the data since then almost exclusively supports the fact that human carbon emissions are the primary driver of increased global temperatures observed and predicted in the future, and matches the warming predictions of that time. Using the global cooling talking points today is a deliberate troll which is none too surprising given the person posting it. It was a media trend back then and it’s a troll job now what will be said 50 years from now about the science? My brief yet electric conversation with uaarkson proved the point that people think it’s an impending apocalypse yet don’t treat it as such. Less humans, less traveling, less globalization are the treatments for it. No wants to do anything aside from use paper straws. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b_m_b_m_b_m Posted September 9 Share Posted September 9 1 minute ago, Vitalsign said: what will be said 50 years from now about the science? CO2 will still be a greenhouse gas and the data models will update their predictions accordingly based on physical data Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Littleronin Posted September 9 Share Posted September 9 Davis up to 6500 acres since this afternoon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TUFKAK Posted September 9 Share Posted September 9 If you’re gonna feed the chud troll dont get actually mad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperSpreader Posted September 9 Share Posted September 9 The first few weeks of the pandemic you could see the mountains again in LA. The skies got clear, dolphins were seen again in parts they weren't before. The air was cleaner, the haze went away. The AQI improved. If anyone needs a recent experiment, there it is. Clearly you can't shut down all life/industry, but you can build towards a more sustainable one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uaarkson Posted September 9 Share Posted September 9 6 hours ago, SuperSpreader said: The first few weeks of the pandemic you could see the mountains again in LA. The skies got clear, dolphins were seen again in parts they weren't before. The air was cleaner, the haze went away. The AQI improved. If anyone needs a recent experiment, there it is. Clearly you can't shut down all life/industry, but you can build towards a more sustainable one. No clearly the problem is human reproduction. You know, the one thing we’re actually here to do Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CitizenVectron Posted September 9 Share Posted September 9 1 hour ago, Uaarkson said: No clearly the problem is human reproduction. You know, the one thing we’re actually here to do While I am myself something of an anti-natalist and think beings with consciousness are a mistake, we are already here, and I would never begrudge people for having kids within reason (I think having more than 2-3 is a bad move for multiple reasons). Ideally the human population shrinks to a few hundred million in the next 100-200 years and then levels out, assuming we can't find a way to get off the planet (which seems unlikely to happen). 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greatoneshere Posted September 9 Share Posted September 9 So any time there is an existential threat to the human race (war, famine, climate change, etc.) no one should have kids if you believe in the existential threat and that it's happening. That's quite a (stupid) take. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uaarkson Posted September 9 Share Posted September 9 My youngest big mistake started pre-school today 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uaarkson Posted September 9 Share Posted September 9 19 minutes ago, Greatoneshere said: So any time there is an existential threat to the human race (war, famine, climate change, etc.) no one should have kids if you believe in the existential threat and that it's happening. That's quite a (stupid) take. It’s an even more nonsensical take when you remember that there’s wayyyy more than enough land and material resources to support a much larger population. The issue is utilization/implementation, and sustainability (and political will but that’s a whole other thing). 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greatoneshere Posted September 10 Share Posted September 10 1 hour ago, Uaarkson said: It’s an even more nonsensical take when you remember that there’s wayyyy more than enough land and material resources to support a much larger population. The issue is utilization/implementation, and sustainability (and political will but that’s a whole other thing). Nah man you shouldn't have had kids, it's way less work than actually fixing society and infrastructure and human behavioral patterns on a macro scale, you know, shit that's good to do long term. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Littleronin Posted September 10 Share Posted September 10 Update on the mess that is the Reno Davis fire. I believe the current evac area some 20000 people live. For people that get their new from OTA station CBS, NBC/Fox and ABC have lost their antennas due to the fire moving up the mountain they are on. Bright side they revised the acreage numbers slightly down. But winds will remain an issue and they are still saying 0% containment. I would think they are treating this like they did with the South Lake Tahoe fire a couple years back and hunker down hard. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keyser_Soze Posted September 12 Share Posted September 12 Quote Photo taken 9/10/24 The Bridge Fire in the Angeles National Forest exploded to ~47k acres with 0% containment. The fire was quite visible last night from behind the Los Angeles skyline photographed the Baldwin Hills area. A sad reality of fire season in LA. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.