RE: We can fix the insanity of climate change, but should we?

You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: We can fix the insanity of climate change, but should we?

View the full context

brittilicious in Informationwar • last year

I have said this before, but I will say it again. It is irrelevant if climate change is man-made or due to the natural cycles of the Earth. Climate change is negatively affecting our ability to live on this planet--not because we are not succeeding in controlling the weather, but because we are failing to accommodate our infrastructure to the changing conditions. For example, if the 'pineapple express' is going to start routinely washing out major hwys every year, then we need to build hwys that can withstand the increased weather pressure. If our farmlands are to be continually devastated by catastrophic drought, then we need to improve our farming practices and technology to ensure that we can continue to grow food. If fresh water supplies are dwindling, we need to ensure that we are properly conserving it.

A lot of this stuff is discussed, but never implemented. Many politicians will reject the idea of climate change, but not because they have a better way to solve our problems, but instead, they simply want to avoid investing in the cost of improved infrastructure-or worse even--they are accepting money from lobbyists who want to save corporate money from being spent on improved infrastructure.

Why can't we have nice things--like political leaders who want to improve our quality of life.

last year in Informationwar by brittilicious

0.00 STEM

Sort:

Trending

[-]

smithlabs last year

We agree on solving problems directly. The 'politicians' don't want Any problems...ever! Solved problem don't increase their political power, so they are useless; by definition.

This article just points out a simple way to remove Carbon, semi permanently, from the equation. Since it won't change global in temperatures at all, it points out the hypocrisy of this entire manufactured crisis. Since we can't control the output of the sun, we will have temperatures consistent with that output!

It has happened before, and is a function of the temperature of the greatest thermonuclear furnace we have in the solar system!

If it really becomes a problem, we can put mylar satellites in low Earth orbit,and reflect a Small percentage of sunlight back into space. But over reporting of disasters, have people believing that these kinds of problems are new; and have never occurred before! It all has...look at the dust bowl here in the 1930's, now That was a drought.

We need to desalinate the ocean waters for unlimited fresh water! Instead of distilling it, simply break the salt down; the resulting chlorine can be used to purify the water, and the sodium can be sold directly. They have done this to chlorinate pools for decades, and it uses a lot less power that distilling.

0.00 STEM

[-]

brittilicious last year

Large scale de-salination of the ocean has it's own problems, but in many regions we will need to do it. I am not sure if de-salination operations are more or less harmful to local marine ecosystems than rising temperatures, but I do know that rising temperatures are harmful. Last year's "heat dome" was an extinction level event in the Pacific Northwest. For example, temps were above 40 Celsius, which is highly unusual, and BILLIONS of clams, mussels and other shellfish were wiped out. That is a lot of potential food that just disappeared in a few days. More importantly, will the ecosystem survive, or will this valuable food source disappear from the region?

And I agree the 30s were very bad, although that drought was over in less than a decade. It was so bad on the Canadian Prairies that the Federal Government thought the region would be unable to recover. It did. We also know that, historically, there were much worse droughts in the western American continent than the 30s. We are able to determine the length of periods of drought that occurred over the last few thousand years by observing tree rings and those tree rings show us there were devastating droughts that lasted 30, 60, 80 years!! When a devastating drought will last longer than the typical human lifespan, we are in big trouble. If we want our communities to survive, we need to change the way we do things and improve our infrastructure.

As you say, however, politicians are useless.

I will tell you something though--and this is absolutely real. There are not enough commercially viable deposits of metals available to continue with the global rate of development. It is IMPOSSIBLE for the rest of the world to develop to the same level as North America and Western Europe, and other "first world" nations. This is simply because there are not enough metals to build the required infrastructure.

Sadly, we waste a lot of our metal sources already. Instead of building structures to last, we build temporary structures that are expected to be ripped down after short term use. The steel used to build those structures often ends up in landfills. In fact, there is already more metal in landfills than there is currently in use.

Bottom line? It is poor stewardship of the Earth.

0.00 STEM

[-]

smithlabs last year

GOD made this planet with plenty of resources for our use, until the end of time; so all will be fine. We are told to fear not, and he plans better than anyone on this ball of dirt!

BUT, we need to treat things on a way GOD approves of! We continue to recycle steel, and other metals; at an ever increasing rate. I approve of good stewardship, but plans that will protect the Earth; by starving the innocent, I oppose totally.

Most greenies want to force others to 'fix' things by litigation; conservationists clean it up themselves, to improve the environment! I am a conservationist, that will Never be a greenie!!!!

It behooves us all to do our best, and fix what can be fixed.

👍💙🤕🤠🌿

0.00 STEM

[-]

brittilicious last year

I have heard that argument, but is there a verse that goes with it?

The latest tech in capturing metal waste is through the use of bacteria. Sounds interesting, but weird.

Tell me more about starving the innocent. What plans are doing that?

0.00 STEM

[-]

smithlabs last year

Fear not, is a very commonly repeated admonition, both new and old testaments.

Most of the metal capture is for toxic metals, but they make good progress! I have seen articles in my Engineering magazines where they are mining seawater for rare and expensive metals. I have done some liquid machining in my lab for a patent I'm working on, so it's wide open!

The liberals here have stated publicly that the population of the World must be reduced by 80%. Now they are taking steps to destroy the supply chain for food. Packing facilities are being burned down, farm animals are being destroyed for lack of fodder, in the Netherlands the farmers are being forced off their land to build housing instead, here we pay farmers not to produce, fertilizer is 400% higher this year over last, tens of thousands of gallons of milk has been dumped for lack of transportation....

All due to policies from politicians who want 8 out of 10 people dead! Pure Evil is in charge today....

But we will continue to feed the homeless in spite of their continual attacks on us!

0.00 STEM

[-]

brittilicious last year

I understand where you are coming from with "fear not", but is that the same as promising the present Earth will persist in sustaining human life no matter what? The long anticipated "Tribulation" does not promise a world without end or a continuance of resources. I think the opposite is the expectation--isn't it?

I have not heard of any actual policies to kill off 80% of the population. That sounds horrible. The only thing I have seen in regard to population reduction is related to family planning and increasing the availability of contraceptives. In general, when countries industrialize--like the USA has, population decreases. That is just fact and is a function of how many children are desired by industrial and post industrial workers, which turns out to be as few as possible. Agrarian societies, on the other hand, have always had a sweet spot somewhere between 'enough children to efficiently work the land' and 'yikes, we have too many kids to keep fed!'. Meanwhile, the post industrial parents must balance the number of children with the cost of raising those children. No matter how they slice it, each additional child beyond zero offers diminishing returns and fewer resources to spread between the kids.

These are hard times. I do not know what evil plans evil people are up to, but whatever they are doing, I believe they are taking advantage of our hard times. "Chaos is a ladder" to quote a fictional evil character of popular culture fame. Russia, for example, is unable to feed their population without importing nearly half of their food. Why? After the fall of the USSR, they couldn't keep their farmers farming. Sadly they were unable to make a go of it and packed up and moved to cities. India and the Mid East are two regions that were traditionally a source of food for places like Russia, but catastrophic drought and industrialization has reduced the amount of food available for export. Does invading Ukraine seem to make more sense in this context?

China is similar. The rapid growth of their industrialized population want food and they can finally afford it. After catastrophic flooding on their own farmland, and the devastating loss of livestock due to the COVID19 outbreak, China has been importing food like mad over the last few years. Did you know that in 2020 when American and Canadian meat packers were forced back to work despite the danger of catching COVID19, they were packing meat not for us, but for the Chinese market? People died so that corporations could sell extra meat to China.

So, ultimately, there is a food crunch all over the world. The answer isn't killing off the population, however. Instead it is increasing food security. The population will naturally decline on it's own as we technologically progress.

I will add one more thing. Farmers being forced off their land, dumping of commodities (especially food), widespread homelessness, severe labour shortage yet lack of jobs that pay a living wage, hyper-inflation, and various other ills we are experiencing are hallmarks of market failure. We are suffering from bad economic policies.

0.00 STEM

[-]

smithlabs last year

We are in the tribulation (where we are today, IMHO) where Satan must rule for a day. This does Not mean we lack what we need, but rather policies deny us these resources! The current energy crisis is a direct result of joe biden's stopping the keystone pipeline, and shutting down all drilling leases. So the commodity is here, but deliberately rendered unavailable. The end of time occurs at the second coming, the inverse is that the world is functioning until then. The reduction in resources will be similar to the energy problems we are facing today, being policy related.

This is one post on population reduction:
https://reason.com/2006/04/03/to-save-the-planet-kill-90-per/
There are many references on a search, I was surprised that the kill rate increased ten percent since the last time I looked!

I agree that chaos is a ladder, but added to that...chaos is a planned policy! The problems we are facing are deliberate, to bring anarchy to our streets!

China has been under the Dragon's control for millennia, so we can expect nothing but focussed evil from them!

The green deal has been swallowed in Europe, and is destroying the entirely. Farmers are not allowed to plant, to reduce nitrogen residue in the soil. There is no science behind this goal, and entire countries starve to try to reach it! Again planning and policy, focussed on killing the majority of the world's population.

There is another foot in the door. If parents allow their children to be gender changed, these drugs are also used for chemical castration. There won't be another generation that way, and they did it to their own children!

All the conditions you list are dead on, and a direct result of policies from politicians who want 8 out of 10 people dead! It is, sadly, planned to do exactly what you pointed out....

🤮🤢🤬👎😭😳

0.00 STEM

[-]

brittilicious last year

I haven't heard of a plan to reduce nitrogen in the soil. In my experience, when farmers are 'paid not to grow' it is because there is a surplus of the crop and they want to keep the price of that crop at a certain level.

0.00 STEM

Show 1 more reply