Jump to content

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Lord Fellatio Nelson said:

Some truth in this, cannot be denied.

A greater truth is that, much of the areas of the world that have been most affected have also had utterly fucking pointless civil wars, ethnic cleansing and governments that have furnished it's leaders with fabulous riches while the people eat, basically, fuck all.

All those billions in aid, the Blue Peter appeals, Oxfam and all that, here we all are, still at square one.

 

 

Jesse ventura said it best with regards to foreign aid. It's like taking money from poor people in rich countries and giving it to rich people in poor countries. Africa being reliant on charity and AID means they can never develop their own independence.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

3 hours ago, Lord Fellatio Nelson said:

Some truth in this, cannot be denied.

A greater truth is that, much of the areas of the world that have been most affected have also had utterly fucking pointless civil wars, ethnic cleansing and governments that have furnished it's leaders with fabulous riches while the people eat, basically, fuck all.

All those billions in aid, the Blue Peter appeals, Oxfam and all that, here we all are, still at square one.

 

 

Not quite at square one. The reversal has taken us back a certain way, but we're still not as badly off as we were (the number of people in the world who are undernourished has risen from 784 million in 2015 to 821 million in 2017, but between 2005 and 2015 it was falling year on year from 945 million). On the other hand you're right, of course, that conflict also played a role alongside climate change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, the_engineer said:

 

Jesse ventura said it best with regards to foreign aid. It's like taking money from poor people in rich countries and giving it to rich people in poor countries. Africa being reliant on charity and AID means they can never develop their own independence.

 

In many sub-saharan african countries, the two biggest economic inputs are still aid and remittances (much of the better educated population going abroad, earning money, and sending a good share of what they earn back to their families).  Trade and tourism generally lag a long way behind, and are even more controlled by the wealthy and powerful than aid. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, paddyfool said:

Personally, I'm not anticipating mass mortality from climate change very soon. But I think we should note that world hunger is on the rise again, after a long period of having been on the way down, and climate change disrupting harvests is among the reasons cited: http://www.fao.org/state-of-food-security-nutrition/en/

 

Meanwhile, on the subject of weather, Tornadoes kill at least 23 in Alabama: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-47444663

No. There will be at least six billion deaths within twenty years. Every climate scientist knows this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, bladan said:

No. There will be at least six billion deaths within twenty years. Every climate scientist knows this

Name them all.

Edit: Don't bother.

Here is a list of 'climate scientists' who have ventured alternative opinions to the popular one.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_who_disagree_with_the_scientific_consensus_on_global_warming

See, ultimately, the ones that shout the loudest tend to get heard by shouting down all dissenters so any chance of a balanced debate goes out of the window.

A familiar tale of the world we now live in.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, bladan said:

No. There will be at least six billion deaths within twenty years. Every climate scientist knows this

 

You're giving climate scientists a bad name there.  The kind of catastrophist nonsense you're talking about is almost as fringe as climate change denial. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 27/10/2018 at 06:19, charon said:

 

 

Almost a month earlier this year.

 

IMG_20181027_070004.thumb.jpg.5db29c745d8383e6430b4471a4e100b0.jpg

 

 

deathstick.gif~c200

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And now......

 

 

IMG_20190310_154321.thumb.jpg.045a5c7cc75366f9fbfda37786734ddd.jpg

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 05/03/2019 at 00:15, paddyfool said:

 

You're giving climate scientists a bad name there.  The kind of catastrophist nonsense you're talking about is almost as fringe as climate change denial. 

What catastrophist nonsense? Professor Barrau (physicist, expert on relativity and black holes and eco-activist) says there will be at least 6 billion deaths. He's not talking about 2100 but near future. Professor Bardi (physical chemist and a member of the club of Rome) agrees. Professor Patzek says that our planet can support a maximum of 8 million humans making a living as hunter gatherers. Professor Brown agrees. These guys are top scientists. We are on the brink of 7.5 billion deaths.
    The earth might support 2.5 billion people assuming an 1800’s equivalent life expectancy (32 years) , lifestyle, slavery, and conflict. If we assume today’s life expectancy (71 years) the maximum drops to 1.1 billion people. Adjusting for our increased standard of living decreases the maximum to 500 million people. If we assume a peaceful life without wars the maximum sustainable population drops to 250 million people. This means we have overshot by the 30 times the carrying capacity of the planet by using fossil fuel subsidies.
    Patzek clarifies that if we assume an American or German lifestyle, the maximum sustainable population is 90 million without fossil energy.

 

Thus 90 % of us will die by 2040.

 

We MUST soon get rid of fossil energy. Therefore we MUST get rid of over 7 billion humans. There are many ways to do it. We could feed them McDonalds or Burgerking hamburgers until they die etc. Or play pop muzak until they commit harakiri.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we accept this premise

56 minutes ago, bladan said:

...says there will be at least 6 billion deaths. He's not talking about 2100 but near future.

Then this

56 minutes ago, bladan said:

Therefore we MUST get rid of over 7 billion humans

Will pretty much sort itself.

 

On the basis there's no pretty way to kill off billions of humans over a few years, this would seem to play straight into the very hands of the people who want to see little or no drastic change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's always The Voluntary Human Extinction Movement.    I actually agree with Bladen to a point; human population left unchecked and spiraling out of control will inevitably lead to a cataclysm of immense proportions. However I'm not sure a mass cull is necessary quite yet.

 

That said, nobody can be held responsible for their own birth, or for the evolution of their forefathers and this raises interesting questions about how liable we can be held, individually or collectively, for ruining the planet. 'Antinatalist' philosopher David Benetar's seminal work Better Never To Have Been: The Harm of Coming Into Existence explores these troubling conundrums in more detail.  

 

P.S Sorry, I didn't realise this was the Weather thread

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Earth's carrying capacity is hardly a certain thing; you can find a ridiculous number of highly divergent opinions on it out there. No need to assume the most catastrophic. 

 

Although yes, we should probably have slightly fewer children. And move this debate to another thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Whilst looking and failing, to find the Belushi sketch from St Paddy's thread, I did find this, which appropriate as 16° perhaps next week up here.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Picture this.

 

Spring time in Chicago. Flowers blooming, buds forming on trees, sunshine, warm weather.

 

Last week was just like that. We reached 74°F (23°C) on Monday and nearly the same on Tuesday.

Felt like summer, spent a lot of time outdoors, listening to good tunes.

 

And then, yesterday morning, I wake up at noon with my hangover and... on God - several fucking inches of snow on the motherfucking ground.

It continued throughout the day, including with gusty winds, and the official measurement at nearby O'Hare Airport was 5 inches.

 

Pretty annoying. I was really enjoying the nice weather and it looked like the leaves were about to show up on trees.

 

Last year it snowed several times throughout April, which resulted in no green until mid-May.

This year was looking to get green early, but now this fucking snowstorm will probably delay it. Flowers all died too I'm assuming.

 

But it's bi-polar ass Chicago weather, so winter isn't back for long. Snow already melted today, and tomorrow it's gonna be 67°F (18°C) and about the same for the rest of the week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, RadGuy said:

Picture this.

 

Spring time in Chicago. Flowers blooming, buds forming on trees, sunshine, warm weather.

 

Last week was just like that. We reached 74°F (23°C) on Monday and nearly the same on Tuesday.

Felt like summer, spent a lot of time outdoors, listening to good tunes.

 

And then, yesterday morning, I wake up at noon with my hangover and... on God - several fucking inches of snow on the motherfucking ground.

It continued throughout the day, including with gusty winds, and the official measurement at nearby O'Hare Airport was 5 inches.

 

Pretty annoying. I was really enjoying the nice weather and it looked like the leaves were about to show up on trees.

 

Last year it snowed several times throughout April, which resulted in no green until mid-May.

This year was looking to get green early, but now this fucking snowstorm will probably delay it. Flowers all died too I'm assuming.

 

But it's bi-polar ass Chicago weather, so winter isn't back for long. Snow already melted today, and tomorrow it's gonna be 67°F (18°C) and about the same for the rest of the week.

Sounds just like Scotland. 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's absolutely tropical in the east coast highlands. I need more thin clothes. Most I have on me are for the west. I keep meeting folk saying, "Cold! Wind!" I'm all wft, it isn't!

Take your coat off, it's glorious! T shirt weather cuntos.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Boudicca said:

It's absolutely tropical in the east coast highlands. I need more thin clothes. Most I have on me are for the west. I keep meeting folk saying, "Cold! Wind!" I'm all wft, it isn't!

Take your coat off, it's glorious! T shirt weather cuntos.


Probably posted this: Numerous times in west Texas in 'winter/spring' I would arise and attend the 5:30am safety meeting at the rig.....in t-shirt.  Say 40-45F (7-8C).  Damn Mexicans and half the rest in three layers hooded and gloves.  I'd ask the cuntos if they were cold or summat.  SMH 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I was in Uganda, one of my ugandan colleagues said "jesus christ it's cold" when the temperature hit 15 degrees celsius. And I'm told that in siberia, 0 degrees celsius is t-short weather.  A lot of what constitutes "hot" or "cold" depends on what you're used to.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Boudicca said:

It's absolutely tropical in the east coast highlands. I need more thin clothes. Most I have on me are for the west. I keep meeting folk saying, "Cold! Wind!" I'm all wft, it isn't!

Take your coat off, it's glorious! T shirt weather cuntos.

 

T-shirt and light fleece weather (circa 40C to -40C)  I think you'll find, Bou. :D

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Warmest Easter on record possible in UK?

 

25.5c in Hampshire yesterday. Mind you it was Gosport (god awful place). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×

Important Information

Your use of this forum is subject to our Terms of Use