Will this convince those with their heads in the sand?

Re: Will this convince those with their heads in the sand?

by oo DAWG oo » Thu Jun 29, 2017 5:17 pm

DAN38 wrote:You related to Pat ?

You didn't read that either did you?
All-Star
 
Posts: 1900
Joined: Sun Dec 13, 2015 5:44 am

Re: Will this convince those with their heads in the sand?

by OttSens » Thu Jun 29, 2017 5:21 pm

oo DAWG oo wrote:
DAN38 wrote:You related to Pat ?

You didn't read that either did you?



He says he is not convinced, but I guess for that he needs the kind of evidence that you don't have to read.
Last edited by OttSens on Thu Jun 29, 2017 5:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Starter
 
Posts: 103
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2014 10:53 pm

Re: Will this convince those with their heads in the sand?

by DAN38 » Thu Jun 29, 2017 5:48 pm

OttSens wrote:
oo DAWG oo wrote:
DAN38 wrote:You related to Pat ?

You didn't read that either did you?



He says he is not convinced, but I guess for that he needs to kind of evidence that you don't have to read.


Right on Dawg !

He won't go back and read what I wrote but expects me to read his battology.
Si vis pacem... para bellum
All-Star
 
Posts: 4184
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 9:50 am

Re: Will this convince those with their heads in the sand?

by Aerial » Wed Jul 05, 2017 6:22 am

Interesting storyline going on with this.

Appeals Court Says EPA Can't Keep Delaying Obama-Era Methane Rules

An appeals court in Washington, D.C., has blocked an attempt by the Environmental Protection Agency to delay Obama-era methane regulations, rejecting claims by the EPA that the oil and gas industry wasn't allowed to comment on the rules.

The agency could choose to rewrite the rules, but it overstepped in trying to delay them for years, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit decided.
...

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/ ... hane-rules
Resilience is accepting your new reality, even if it's less good than the one you had before - Elizabeth Edwards
User avatar
All-Star
 
Posts: 2917
Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2015 12:22 pm
Location: Hamilton, ON

Re: Will this convince those with their heads in the sand?

by PTBO Dave » Thu Jul 06, 2017 4:18 pm

Here's a positive story about reforestation in India (and other countries):

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/02/india-plants-trees-breaks-world-record/?utm_content=bufferc1d5b&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer

These are great kinds of initiatives and should pay off for environment for centuries. :thup:
What all men speak well of, look critically into; what all men condemn, examine first before you decide.
-Confucius

When people are fanatically dedicated to political or religious faiths or any other kind of dogmas or goals, it's always because these dogmas or goals are in doubt. -Robert M. Pirsig
User avatar
All-Star
 
Posts: 1629
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 6:17 am

Re: Will this convince those with their heads in the sand?

by TravelPat1 » Mon Jul 10, 2017 4:30 pm

Hopefully some of stuff being done in those good news stories can help alleviate some of the bad news stuff that keeps pouring out in studies like this just published today in a National Academy of Sciences publication .
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/sixth-mass- ... ihilation/

Earth faces "biological annihilation" in sixth mass extinction, scientists warn

Over the last half-billion years, scientists say there have been five mass extinction events on Earth in which a wide diversity of species on this planet suddenly died off. Now, there's growing evidence that a sixth mass extinction is unfolding, according to scientists who track species around the globe. In a new study, researchers say the current mass extinction is even "more severe than perceived" and amounts to "biological annihilation" affecting thousands of species.


Humans are to blame
Earth's previous mass extinctions were often associated with sudden, cataclysmic natural events: abrupt changes in climate, massive volcanic eruptions, giant meteor strikes (like the one that wiped out the dinosaurs approximately 66 million years ago).

The current mass extinction stands apart because it's largely caused by humans, researchers say. From pollution to deforestation, overpopulation, poaching, warming oceans, and extreme weather events tied to global warming, human activity is the primary fuel behind this new era of irreversible species loss.


Though periodic extinctions have long played a role in life on Earth, the current scope and rate of extinctions is anything but normal. The Earth has lost 200 species of vertebrates in the past 100 years alone, the researchers behind the new study noted. If the trends of the past two million years had held up, those losses should have unfolded gradually over 10,000 years rather than a single century.
All-Star
 
Posts: 2946
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2016 7:07 pm

Re: Will this convince those with their heads in the sand?

by RedandWhite » Mon Jul 10, 2017 4:49 pm

TravelPat1 wrote:
Humans are to blame

The current mass extinction stands apart because it's largely caused by humans, researchers say. From pollution to deforestation, overpopulation, poaching, warming oceans, and extreme weather events tied to global warming, human activity is the primary fuel behind this new era of irreversible species loss.



...they forgot guns
There is no dark side of the moon really. Matter of fact it's all dark.
Site Staff
 
Posts: 15113
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 9:34 am
Location: Calgary

Re: Will this convince those with their heads in the sand?

by RedandWhite » Mon Jul 10, 2017 4:51 pm

...interesting that they bury 'overpopulation' amidst the other stuff...are these scientists suggesting mass genocide as a solution?
There is no dark side of the moon really. Matter of fact it's all dark.
Site Staff
 
Posts: 15113
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 9:34 am
Location: Calgary

Re: Will this convince those with their heads in the sand?

by TravelPat1 » Mon Jul 10, 2017 4:52 pm

I think that is sort of covered under poaching.
All-Star
 
Posts: 2946
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2016 7:07 pm

Re: Will this convince those with their heads in the sand?

by RedandWhite » Mon Jul 10, 2017 4:53 pm

...that's boiling eggs, it raises the earth's temperature...
There is no dark side of the moon really. Matter of fact it's all dark.
Site Staff
 
Posts: 15113
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 9:34 am
Location: Calgary

Re: Will this convince those with their heads in the sand?

by RedandWhite » Mon Jul 10, 2017 5:00 pm

...I think cooking food should be studied as a contributor to climate change...yesterday it was bloody hot here in Calgary, stifling...and my wife had to cook something in the stove for dinner while I bbq'd....we must've contributed to the overall heat load through that...

...all that worldwide boiling rice, frying bacon, cupcakes, etc....

...and where is BC paying their carbon penalty for their stupid forest fires?...
There is no dark side of the moon really. Matter of fact it's all dark.
Site Staff
 
Posts: 15113
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 9:34 am
Location: Calgary

Re: Will this convince those with their heads in the sand?

by RedandWhite » Mon Jul 10, 2017 5:02 pm

...oh look, good news Pat, previously unknown vertebrates discovered...

http://www.iflscience.com/plants-and-an ... iscovered/

...I think those dour scientists just need to get out of the lab and away from their doomsday calculations and just find some new wiggly guys running around the jungle...
There is no dark side of the moon really. Matter of fact it's all dark.
Site Staff
 
Posts: 15113
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 9:34 am
Location: Calgary

Re: Will this convince those with their heads in the sand?

by Aerial » Mon Jul 10, 2017 6:13 pm

:thup:
Resilience is accepting your new reality, even if it's less good than the one you had before - Elizabeth Edwards
User avatar
All-Star
 
Posts: 2917
Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2015 12:22 pm
Location: Hamilton, ON

Re: Will this convince those with their heads in the sand?

by pigseye2015 » Tue Jul 11, 2017 6:04 pm

On average 18,000 new species are discovered every year. Considering only 5% of the worlds oceans have been explored.....well you do the math.
User avatar
Starter
 
Posts: 387
Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2015 2:38 pm

Re: Will this convince those with their heads in the sand?

by TravelPat1 » Tue Jul 11, 2017 9:12 pm

Just 100 companies are responsible for about 70% of global emissions.

https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable ... ate-change

ExxonMobil, Shell, BP and Chevron are identified as among the highest emitting investor-owned companies since 1988. If fossil fuels continue to be extracted at the same rate over the next 28 years as they were between 1988 and 2017, says the report, global average temperatures would be on course to rise by 4C by the end of the century. This is likely to have catastrophic consequences including substantial species extinction and global food scarcity risks.

While companies have a huge role to play in driving climate change, says Faria, the barrier is the “absolute tension” between short-term profitability and the urgent need to reduce emissions.

A Carbon Tracker study in 2015 found that fossil fuel companies risked wasting more than $2tn over the coming decade by pursuing coal, oil and gas projects that could be worthless in the face of international action on climate change and advances in renewables – in turn posing substantial threats to investor returns.


There is a “growing wave of companies that are acting in the opposite manner to the companies in this report,” says Brune. Nearly 100 companies including Apple, Facebook, Google and Ikea have committed to 100% renewable power under the RE100 initiative. Volvo recently announced that all its cars would be electric or hybrid from 2019.

And oil and gas companies are also embarking on green investments. Shell set up a renewables arm in 2015 with a $1.7bn investment attached and a spokesperson for Chevron says it’s “committed to managing its [greenhouse gas] emissions” and is investing in two of the world’s largest carbon dioxide injection projects to capture and store carbon. A BP spokesperson says its “determined to be part of the solution” for climate change and is “investing in renewables and low-carbon innovation.” And ExxonMobil, which has faced heavy criticism for its environmental record, has been exploring carbon capture and storage.
All-Star
 
Posts: 2946
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2016 7:07 pm

PreviousNext

Users browsing this forum: traciefw60 and 12 guests