Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.


View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | ... | 70
DarthKermit
5346 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3317

Trusted

  #2250962 4-Jun-2019 11:12
Send private message

Beccara:

 

Perhaps the answer to the Fermi paradox is that species reaching a certain technological threshold can't/won't transition away from older technologies in time to prevent ecological collapse 

 

 

Perhaps the answer is technology is fundamentally incompatible with a planet's ecosystem survival?




nzrock
113 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 7


  #2250971 4-Jun-2019 11:28
Send private message

DarthKermit:

 

Beccara:

 

Perhaps the answer to the Fermi paradox is that species reaching a certain technological threshold can't/won't transition away from older technologies in time to prevent ecological collapse 

 

 

Perhaps the answer is technology is fundamentally incompatible with a planet's ecosystem survival?

 

 

 

 

more CO2 = more plant food, which means more plants + more O2, which means more food for herbivorous,  which means more food for everybody, which as to be good for the planet's ecosystem


Rikkitic
Awrrr
19069 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 16312

Lifetime subscriber

  #2250975 4-Jun-2019 11:34
Send private message

Since people are disappearing the world's forests at an unprecedented rate, I don't think that is going to help much.

 

 





Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

 


 




nzrock
113 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 7


  #2250977 4-Jun-2019 11:35
Send private message

Rikkitic:

 

I think it is a stupid question. Can a man outrun a cheetah? Can a weightlifter beat an elephant? It is comparing apples to oranges. If the sun went out tomorrow, nothing we could do would compensate for that. It doesn't matter whether or not we have more effect on the climate than the sun does. What matters is that we have some effect, and that is causing us big problems.

 

 

 

 

 

 

It is not a stupid question, it is a very straight forward question.

 

You ether believe that man is responsible for climate change, with the sun having minimal effect or the sun is responsible for the current climate change with man having a minimal effect.

 

Comparing apples to oranges in this debate is exactly my point. Comparing what the sun can do to our climate to what we can do, with what ever leaver we have available (excluding nuking the planet) is like comparing, what we can currently do, to what the cave man could do, to change the climate


Talkiet
4819 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3934

Trusted

  #2250993 4-Jun-2019 11:39
Send private message

nzrock:

 

Rikkitic:

 

I think it is a stupid question. Can a man outrun a cheetah? Can a weightlifter beat an elephant? It is comparing apples to oranges. If the sun went out tomorrow, nothing we could do would compensate for that. It doesn't matter whether or not we have more effect on the climate than the sun does. What matters is that we have some effect, and that is causing us big problems.

 

 

It is not a stupid question, it is a very straight forward question.

 

You ether believe that man is responsible for climate change, with the sun having minimal effect or the sun is responsible for the current climate change with man having a minimal effect.

 

[snip]

 

 

With all due respect, you're completely wrong.

 

It's logically possible for a very small force to have a massive impact. Read my lever comment further up. A small bump could unbalance a thousand ton rock and destroy a building.

 

You're asking me to decide if it was the small tap I made, or the thousand ton rock that destroyed the building, and excluding the actual situation of it being both.

 

Cheers - N

 

 





Please note all comments are from my own brain and don't necessarily represent the position or opinions of my employer, previous employers, colleagues, friends or pets.


DarthKermit
5346 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3317

Trusted

  #2250994 4-Jun-2019 11:41
Send private message

nzrock:

 

It is not a stupid question, it is a very straight forward question.

 

You ether believe that man is responsible for climate change, with the sun having minimal effect or the sun is responsible for the current climate change with man having a minimal effect.

 

 

That's a false dichotomy. Truth is we don't know which is the more significant cause.


 
 
 
 

Shop now for Lenovo laptops and other devices (affiliate link).
Fred99
13684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018


  #2250998 4-Jun-2019 11:43
Send private message

nzrock:

 

DarthKermit:

 

Beccara:

 

Perhaps the answer to the Fermi paradox is that species reaching a certain technological threshold can't/won't transition away from older technologies in time to prevent ecological collapse 

 

 

Perhaps the answer is technology is fundamentally incompatible with a planet's ecosystem survival?

 

 

 

 

more CO2 = more plant food, which means more plants + more O2, which means more food for herbivorous,  which means more food for everybody, which as to be good for the planet's ecosystem

 

 

It's abject disingenuous BS to argue that the projected increase in atmospheric CO2 levels are "good for the planet's ecosystem".

 

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/ask-the-experts-does-rising-co2-benefit-plants1/


Mistenfuru
198 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 120


  #2250999 4-Jun-2019 11:44
Send private message

more CO2 = more plant food, which means more plants + more O2, which means more food for herbivorous,  which means more food for everybody, which as to be good for the planet's ecosystem

 

Sadly it doesn't work that way, we've almost reached the point where increases in global temperature have more negative effect on plant growth than the benefits of an increase in C02





World of Warcraft Veteran, Avid Sci-Fi Geek.  

 

ISP - Technical Support - Lines and infrastructure.


Geektastic
18009 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 8465

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  #2251000 4-Jun-2019 11:45
Send private message

Why is it important whether humanity survives or not?





Fred99
13684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018


  #2251001 4-Jun-2019 11:47
Send private message

Geektastic: Why is it important whether humanity survives or not?

 

Because without us, stray kittens would starve.


tdgeek
30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  #2251003 4-Jun-2019 11:51
Send private message

Mistenfuru:

 

more CO2 = more plant food, which means more plants + more O2, which means more food for herbivorous,  which means more food for everybody, which as to be good for the planet's ecosystem

 

Sadly it doesn't work that way, we've almost reached the point where increases in global temperature have more negative effect on plant growth than the benefits of an increase in C02

 

 

I believe that there was an issue with the Amazon, where the temp caused the greenery to shut down and emit CO2 instead of taking it in


 
 
 

Support Geekzone with one-off or recurring donations Donate via PressPatron.
Mistenfuru
198 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 120


  #2251004 4-Jun-2019 11:51
Send private message

Geektastic: Why is it important whether humanity survives or not?

 

I think Elon Musk put it best, "We have a duty to protect the light of consciousness"





World of Warcraft Veteran, Avid Sci-Fi Geek.  

 

ISP - Technical Support - Lines and infrastructure.


kobiak
1615 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 551

Trusted

  #2251007 4-Jun-2019 11:57
Send private message

https://www.rt.com/news/453382-greenpeace-founder-global-warming-scam/

 

not sure if it was posted before, but hey once again.

 

 





helping others at evgenyk.nz


DarthKermit
5346 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3317

Trusted

  #2251008 4-Jun-2019 11:58
Send private message

I prefer Douglas Adams: "Many were increasingly of the opinion that they'd all made a big mistake coming down from the trees in the first place, and some said that even the trees had been a bad move, and that no-one should ever have left the oceans."


Rikkitic
Awrrr
19069 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 16312

Lifetime subscriber

  #2251011 4-Jun-2019 12:03
Send private message

kobiak:

 

https://www.rt.com/news/453382-greenpeace-founder-global-warming-scam/

 

not sure if it was posted before, but hey once again.

 

 

 

 

From RT, that well-known source of objective, unbiased news.

 

 





Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

 


 


1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | ... | 70
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic








Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.