Are humans really responsible for climate change?

[eyeball]

4 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

I identified it.  You dismissed it.

It looks more like you surrendered and gave up...why bother you said.

[Guest]

Just now, eyeball said:

It looks more like you surrendered and gave up...why bother you said.

Ah, I see what you're getting at.  That said, not bothering only solves the problem of suffering for no reason.  It does nothing for AGW.

[eyeball]

23 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

Ah, I see what you're getting at.  That said, not bothering only solves the problem of suffering for no reason.  It does nothing for AGW.

Burning all the Tar Sands oil that is currently recoverable by today's technology will release 22 billion tons of CO2 into our atmosphere.  It is a far greater source of CO2 than any other conventional source of oil in the world.  If humanity must continue to burn oil to get out of the inaction pickle its in then surely it shouldn't be burning the worst oil available to do so.

That's just plain stupid.

 

Quote

 If all the bitumen in those sands could be burned, another 240 billion metric tons of carbon would be added to the atmosphere and, even if just the oil sands recoverable with today's technology get burned, 22 billion metric tons of carbon would reach the sky. And reserves usually expand over time as technology develops, otherwise the world would have run out of recoverable oil long ago.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/tar-sands-and-keystone-xl-pipeline-impact-on-global-warming/?redirect=1

 

Edited May 26, 2019 by eyeball

[Army Guy]

Quote

 

You are doing some stereotyping and for the most part you are totally wrong.   Now get this; I am a guy who spends most of his spare time in nature, climbing mountain peaks, fishing or looking for wildlife to take pictures of.  I do have a job, do not smoke pot and never had, do not smoke cigarettes and never had, I drive a small car, but can happily ride a bike too if everyone else would do the same (for safety reasons). I pick up garbage after those that do not care.  Just this night I spent another 3 hours work destroying a trailer than someone dumped by my popular trail to the river.  Garbage is still a small offense compared to a spill but it all adds up.

So this is where I live, and this is my dog (pictures attached)   In those pictures you will see the Thompson river by Spences Bridge.   The same river that Kinder Morgan is so bent on destroying after its steelhead run was destroyed by the fishing industry and the total lack of care of DFO.

I hope you understand that if someone wants to shove a pipeline through my paradise to ship dilbit to China, I might tell them to go and shove that same pipeline up their asses.

As to terrorism, it is a very broad subject.  To me Trump, Jason Kenney, McKenna and the oil and gas sector are all terrorists.

 

My assessment is bang on, the people I was referring to were the protestors on the pipeline site, you know the ones the professional ones , like the ones Justin hired this summer.....now if you were one of them then fine, this is directed at you, if not I was trashing eyeball who we have this running bitch fest for years now...Just because you enjoy the great outdoors like nature, pick up some garbage does not make you a tree hugger, it makes you a reasonable Canadian, most people in my area do the same thing and devote many hours on the weekend working on improving our back country....doing the same things....I love to fish, hunt, ATV, camp when ever I can....does not make me a tree hugger...

Nice pictures, nice country....but like I said tree huggers are looking for a hand out, nothing more. You claim that kinder Morgan is bent on destroying what is left of your river system.....you are aware that kinder Morgan already has a pipeline there and all they want is to twin it to increase flow....which begs the question, Has the existing pipeline killed your fishing industry ? forest  industry ?, any industry? has it prevented you from enjoying the great outdoors you have come to love ?  I ask because you have already pointed out the guilty parties here....Fishing industry, and mismanagement by DFO...any protestors headed that way ? 

I hope you understand that this great nation of ours is an OIL producing nation, it is one that our economy is based on well one of the resources, the main player so to speak....Our GDP depends on producing these natural resources, it is what makes our nation go around...it produces wealth for our entire country, including BC.....Why should we let one province hold the rest of the country hostage ?

Today or tommorrow we will still be heavily reliant on fossil fuels...it makes your car move, it heats your home, it provides the electrical power we "all" rely on....and there is no simple solution to the next power source in the near future....many in the science world are saying not until atleast 2050....30 plus years from now... I get it in BC they want to stop producing fossil fuels NOW....and while that might make sense to BC's tree huggers and followers from the green party....the rest of the country like how things are running right for now, we are not ready for our cities to go dark, or to live with out electricity , I know this excites you....and ....I get it your not happy....but this pipeline is in the nations interests....and your opinion does not mean squat when compared to what the rest of the country wants...And that is to twin an already existing pipeline, get it there is already one in place....where I might add has already been paying out dividends to all those along the route...including the chiefs where all the protestors are from....they want more thats the problem they want a bigger slice of the pie....First nations have already announced they want to purchase the same pipeline....you know the keepers of the land, they are one with mother earth, what do you think is motivating them...money or environment concerns....or your great back country you are so fond of....

 

[Army Guy]

1 hour ago, Zeitgeist said:

Well I don’t disagree with your take on mass migration pressures. We already know the right wing response: walls, restricted and reduced immigration, and militarization.   Canada will feel the fallout from these pressures and it’s no accident why Canada is building over a dozen new coastguard ships.  Expect more militarization as many countries seek to protect their assets.  

Canada will suffer losses in terms of flooding and coastal settlement damage, but it will gain thousands of hectares of arable land as well as a Northwest Passage.  Basically the current tundra will become more accessible and liveable, which is one of the reasons we need policies to promote northern settlements.  I do think we should fight climate change sensibly without crippling our economy.   I like cap and trade.  Carbon taxes hurt poor consumers more than anyone else.  The cost of living is already too high for Millennials who are on the most part having to accept that home ownership for future generations in Canada’s largest cities is over.  

It is a liberal promise made out of desperation, do you really think that those ships are going to survive the cons attempts to balance the budget.....even the coast guard knows it will only get a fraction of those ships if all the stars align........unless Canada wins the Lotto MAX...and the militarization, in Canada thats funney.....it only took us a decade to buy simple trucks....Justin spent all the bank and the cons are going to bring it all under control , you heard Scheer's speech, want something new you have to find something to cut....

[Guest]

58 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Burning all the Tar Sands oil that is currently recoverable by today's technology will release 22 billion tons of CO2 into our atmosphere.  It is a far greater source of CO2 than any other conventional source of oil in the world.  If humanity must continue to burn oil to get out of the inaction pickle its in then surely it shouldn't be burning the worst oil available to do so.

That's just plain stupid.

 

 

Well,  if one notes that China is going to build hundreds of coal fired power plants around the world, and combines that with the almost absolute certainty that any hydrocarbon not recovered from the oil sands will be replaced at point of use by one extracted from a source not as well regulated in terms of general environmental protection, and not significantly less of a source of greenhouse gases (what they save in CO2 by accident of location and source they generally make up for in CH4 emissions just because it's not worth producing) then it's not as stupid as trying to solve the problem all by one's lonesome.

[ReeferMadness]

3 hours ago, Shady said:

I just don’t see the urgency.  So climate change will lead to something like a one degree rise in the earths temperature by 2070.  If we do nothing.  Well, I highly doubt that with technology advancing the way it has over the last few decades they we’ll still be using fossil fuels in 2030 or 2040.  We won’t be.  And CO2 levels will plummet.  Problem solved.

and you've come to this happy conclusion.... how? 

[ReeferMadness]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

That's just plain stupid.

That's never stopped right wingers before.  In fact, they probably view it as a plus.

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, ReeferMadness said:

That's never stopped right wingers before.  In fact, they probably view it as a plus.

Not a plus.  Just wrong.

[bush_cheney2004]

4 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

Not a plus.  Just wrong.

 

Why is it "wrong" ?   How have such smug judgements worked so far in winning the climate change day ?

[Michael Hardner]

8 hours ago, OftenWrong said:

1) It does not inspire peoples confidence if the "range of predictions" is too great. One might also visit a psychic to get predictions.

2) Blip in the graph. Weather. Climate is measured over longer data sample.

1) I don't think they are.  There's a fallacy wherein people simultaneously say that predictions are wrong, then only quote the outside of the range.

2) If it's weather, then low and high temperature records should be set at the same rate.  Do you think that increased temperatures aren't happening ?  

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Why is it "wrong" ?   How have such smug judgements worked so far in winning the climate change day ?

I spent an entire post explaining why it was wrong.

[bush_cheney2004]

Just now, bcsapper said:

I spent an entire post explaining why it was wrong.

 

Wow...one whole post...so how important can it be compared to the actual choices that billions of people make.

Shame on them !

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Wow...one whole post...so how important can it be compared to the actual choices that billions of people make.

Shame on them !

You're not reading my posts, are you?

[bush_cheney2004]

6 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

You're not reading my posts, are you?

 

Neither are they.   Explain to them why they are so wrong in terms that don't take away their choices.

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Neither are they.   Explain to them why they are so wrong in terms that don't take away their choices.

Who?  If you're not going to pay attention, at least admit it.  I really don't care. 

[bush_cheney2004]

1 minute ago, bcsapper said:

Who?  If you're not going to pay attention, at least admit it.  I really don't care. 

 

Then all is well...neither do they.   So what is all this climate change excitement about ?

[Guest]

Just now, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Then all is well...neither do they.   So what is all this climate change excitement about ?

Obfuscation won't help you here.  You responded to one of my posts without knowing what the hell I was talking about.  You still don't, I suspect.

[bush_cheney2004]

4 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

Obfuscation won't help you here.  You responded to one of my posts without knowing what the hell I was talking about.  You still don't, I suspect.

 

I understand your general jist on the matter, but not your moral condemnation(s).    That part remains a mystery.

OK...it's wrong to you, but that doesn't matter much to billions of people, nor should it.

 

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

I understand your general jist on the matter, but not your moral condemnation(s).    That part remains a mystery.

OK...it's wrong to you, but that doesn't matter much to billions of people, nor should it.

 

Eyeball was wrong.

[Shady]

58 minutes ago, ReeferMadness said:

and you've come to this happy conclusion.... how? 

Logic and reason.  

[ReeferMadness]

1 minute ago, Shady said:

Logic and reason.  

And drugs?  Good drugs?

I'll bet all those scientists who wasted their time on degrees and research are gonna feel pretty silly when they realize that all they need is logic and reason. 

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, bcsapper said:

Well,  if one notes that China is going to build hundreds of coal fired power plants around the world, and combines that with the almost absolute certainty that any hydrocarbon not recovered from the oil sands will be replaced at point of use by one extracted from a source not as well regulated in terms of general environmental protection, and not significantly less of a source of greenhouse gases (what they save in CO2 by accident of location and source they generally make up for in CH4 emissions just because it's not worth producing) then it's not as stupid as trying to solve the problem all by one's lonesome.

Canadian asbestos miners and manufacturers of weapons sold to Saudi Arabia probably lull themselves to sleep at night murmuring whaddabout this and that and its not our fault if our product is used irresponsibly as well.  Bet they sleep like babies too.

You remind me of Trudeau trying peddle climate change action and one of the biggest threats to the climate out of both sides of his mouth at the same time.

Edited May 26, 2019 by eyeball

[eyeball]

51 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

Eyeball was wrong.

About what?

[eyeball]

2 hours ago, Army Guy said:

I was trashing eyeball who we have this running bitch fest for years now...

There it is, that unmitigably poisonous attitude that stands in the way of so many right wingers.  Being concerned with or taking action against anything that goes along with what people they've invested so much time in detesting are saying is just not on.

The stubborn pigheaded bastards would sooner watch it all burn.