Rickyvol77
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2019
- Messages
- 16,786
- Likes
- 21,566
We still have people volunteering to go to some of these countries to teach their people how to dig wells and farm. Dig wells. Farm. Basic things humans have been doing for 12,000 years, often on the same continent. But I'm sure green technologies will take hold. While we are at it maybe we can get the biggest polluters like China and India to stop using child and slave labor, pay people in their largest industries more than the $2 or less an hour average, and create safety oversight?
In the world of international business there is a general understanding that these developing countries won't stop polluting, using child labor, or have any real workplace safeguards in place until they are able to achieve first world status. The problem is that most of these countries cannot achieve developed status and maintain it without sticking to what got them there. China and India are perfect examples. If those countries had the reform that the USA has had over the past 100 years or so their economies would collapse. Then of course there are the myriad of cultural barriers that will prevent green technologies taking hold anytime soon.
Lets see. You asked for peer reviewed literature. You got peer reviewed literature. Then you prove my point by providing your own summation of said journal. Did you even read what you wrote? You have to be careful coming here and trying to blow your intellectual wad. You'll walk away defeated every time.
Maybe they should stop dumping **** in the ocean an start with a basic landfill.
Rampant burning of garbage is better than the way they handle things now.
Green tech isn’t going to scratch the surface of the problem over there. They need a complete mental reset.
Bro..you asked and ye received. Not my problem you are befuddled by extremely loose semantics and/or a learning disability. You should probably refocus your efforts on why South Sudan isn't investing in green industry..What was your point exactly? That the purpose of the article is to explain that disaster didn't strike because people have different definitions of words? Do you still believe that's what the article says? Because that's what I responded to. I'm not going to regurgitate the entire article for you if you can't understand the abstract and/or are comfortable misrepresenting it entirely.
The article doesn't conclude that the observed data didn't correspond to the "catastrophe everyone predicted" (which is an obvious embellishment of course). It does talk about how skeptics used a favorable dataset and favorable timelines to push the narrative that global warming had stopped. They started their trend after the unusually strong el nino in 1997-1998, which warmed GMST >0.2 degrees C. However, most of the datasets available still showed a positive trend in GMST during this time. Regardless, the difference between the data the skeptics used and the long-term expected trend was less than 0.2 degrees C, and we've had record-setting years since the so-called hiatus.
I don’t think most these people realize how little regulation goes on in China.Our biggest problem - one we've stared in the face every time we deal with the Chinese, is that we falsely believe they think and operate like us because we are all human beings. China has done it's thing for centuries before we were even real civilizations, and China is going to China ... it's really just that simple. China has always had hordes of people - very cheap and expendable labor for everything from farming to cannon fodder, The Chinese upper and trading classes have absolutely no intention of meeting the world on equal terms or treating their own as equals. China for centuries has used everyone else, and made everyone else believe they were using China.
Absolutely. NYC is the most disgusting city I’ve seen – worst than Napoli during the trash strikes.You would not believe the plastic in the water off oyster bay. It’s shredded and it’s everywhere. Was there last August and that’s the target date again this year. If you’re serious I’ll keep you in the loop.
Absolutely. NYC is the most disgusting city I’ve seen – worst than Napoli during the trash strikes.
I’m amazed by the amount of dog crap on trails here. People put it in a plastic baggy then just leave it on the side of the trail. If you’re going to leave it, don’t bag it up – just make sure you fling it well off the trail. It’s still not kosher LNT but bagging it up and leaving it is 100x worse. The idea supposedly is to pick it up on the way back out but I doubt that happens most of the time… On trash pickup hikes we must easily get 60-80 lbs each, half of it being poop bags.
The planet...it’s a living cyclical entity with ebbs and flows and she’s going through a normal major cycle of change..think menopause on a really really large scale. Mankind’s contribution of crap is minor in the larger picture, except freaking micro plastics. All the focus should be on not killing our oceans instead of moaning about cyclical planetary temperature variations that aren’t changeable by man.
Here is a great explanation from NASA:Like one of my professors in college said,"The liberals don't want people to know that the earth not only rotates but it has a wobble as well that tilts in an angle closer to the sun and, over a period of time, tilts back from the sun. This process generates warmer temps for years and then reverses and becomes cooler for years. People like Al Gore and other liberals get involved in government, raise false concerns over this natural occurance like humans have something to do with it, Americans are such gullible fools that some believe the lies, the government spends money for 'green' countermeasures, Gore and the liberal bunch go into the 'green' business and suck in the cash getting rich".
The built world is there and always has been. Building codes are 99% of the time industry generated standards my code by jurisdictions. They offer some amendments, but usually it's just another years standard they want to substitute. Only state I know that completely does it's own code is North Carolina. Even california and floridas extra steps are industry generated codes.
Not to mention the added expense of repair those things cause. They have a high relative failure rate and lead to a lot of down time.I agree that rolling coal is stupid but so are the emissions requirements on diesels.
Get rid of the particulates filters, egr and def fuel economy would be 50% better or more.
Because we know climate has changed in the past due to a lot of different reasons. I would expect that we would want to know how this time is different if we want to say we are the ones doing it this time. If that's the case we would need to be able to look at the data now and compare it to the extrapolated data from back then that were all computed via the same methods.First off, I'm not a scientist, and I don't believe I ever claimed to be one.
Second, determining whether the observed warming is due to human activity shouldn't require 10 million or more years of data because it's principally an energy balance problem rather than a trending problem. We only need the trends to determine that the climate is changing, and it's not clear why we need more than 150 years of good data to do that.
The way I read that is that we are only responsible for a little more than half of the CHANGE.The proposed European Climate Law includes a border adjustment on their carbon tax, which is something I’ve also suggested on this board. But what I would do differently is make it a revenue-neutral carbon tax or fee and dividend program such as the Baker-Schultz plan advocated by young conservatives at CPAC.
From AR5, “It is extremely likely [95-100% confidence] that more than half of the observed increase in global average surface temperature from 1951 to 2010 was caused by the anthropogenic increase in greenhouse gas concentrations and other anthropogenic forcings together. The best estimate of the human induced contribution to warming is similar to the observed warming over this period.”
That is, the percentage of warming that humankind is responsible for is approximately 100%. More specifically, it’s actually about 110%. That’s because a small fraction of the warming has been offset by human aerosol emissions, which have a cooling effect. An even smaller fraction of the warming has been offset by natural cycles (see Fig 10.5). Because if there were no human influences on climate, orbital mechanics predict we would continue the slow long-term cooling trend that started around 6000 years ago.
That's a rather bassackward way of doing it dont you think?Perhaps western countries ought to facilitate poorer countries adopting greener technologies rather than bitching about how much they pollute in comparison.