NPR

[brenthutch 444]

Just listened to NPR refer to the perpetrators of a smash-n-grab robbery of a store in Philadelphia as “youngsters”

Then a piece on how higher levels of CO2 causes poison ivy to use water more efficiently and grow faster (ignoring the fact that it has the same effect on all other plants).  In the past they reported higher levels of CO2 will hurt barley, grape and arabica production, threatening our beer, wine and coffee but the same thing will result in the unchecked spread of poison ivy. I smell an agenda.

[billvon 2,991]

4 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

I smell an agenda.

Reality does have a well-known liberal agenda.  No matter how many speeches republicans give, the climate keeps warming.  No matter how many FOX News specials on how bad solar power is, it keeps working - and growing.  No matter how many times conservatives deny it happens, women keep being born with male DNA.  No matter how many Trump supporters take livestock dewormer, they continue to die at much higher rates than people who get vaccinated.

That's why so many conservatives need a steady diet of FOX, OAN, Alex Jones and Newsmax.  It protects them from the evils of science, math and reality itself.

[wmw999 2,447]

News flash. The fact that shit in liberal houses smells does not, in fact, mean that conservative shit is like the finest perfume. 

Wendy P. 

[brenthutch 444]

35 minutes ago, billvon said:

Reality does have a well-known liberal agenda.  No matter how many speeches republicans give, the climate keeps warming.  No matter how many FOX News specials on how bad solar power is, it keeps working - and growing.  No matter how many times conservatives deny it happens, women keep being born with male DNA.  No matter how many Trump supporters take livestock dewormer, they continue to die at much higher rates than people who get vaccinated.

That's why so many conservatives need a steady diet of FOX, OAN, Alex Jones and Newsmax.  It protects them from the evils of science, math and reality itself.

I guess that is why the planet continues to burn fossil fuels no matter how many environmentalists glue themselves to the floor or how folks continue to prefer F150s over EVs no matter how much taxpayer money is thrown at them or how offshore wind remains uneconomical no matter how many whales are slaughtered.

[JoeWeber 2,720]

16 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

I guess that is why the planet continues to burn fossil fuels no matter how many environmentalists glue themselves to the floor or how folks continue to prefer F150s over EVs no matter how much taxpayer money is thrown at them or how offshore wind remains uneconomical no matter how many whales are slaughtered.

How many ppm CO2 are you comfortable with? I'll assume you are taking into account feedback loops and every other chicken little talking point.

[brenthutch 444]

4 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

How many ppm CO2 are you comfortable with? I'll assume you are taking into account feedback loops and every other chicken little talking point.

Don’t forget that each additional increment of CO2 has less and less impact.  One hat keeps your head warmer, ten hats don’t make your head ten times warmer.  I see nothing catastrophic in a doubling of our current levels.

[JoeWeber 2,720]

1 minute ago, brenthutch said:

Don’t forget that each additional increment of CO2 has less and less impact.  One hat keeps your head warmer, ten hats don’t make your head ten times warmer.  I see nothing catastrophic in a doubling of our current levels.

I should have asked what your max comfort level is.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

1 minute ago, Slim King said:

If you are truly GREEN you would want CO2 levels at 840ppm... The planet earth would be greener than at any time in your lifetime. Plants would provide more food than ever in our lifetime. Starvation could easily be avoided.

If starvation could so easily be avoided, why are people starving today in the US and around the world? Availability of food is not the issue.

[wmw999 2,447]

1 minute ago, Slim King said:

If you are truly GREEN you would want CO2 levels at 840ppm... The planet earth would be greener than at any time in your lifetime. Plants would provide more food than ever in our lifetime. Starvation could easily be avoided.

All that “green” requires increasing support from fertilizers and the like. Dirt gets played out, and becomes less hospitable. Try just eating vitamins and ice cream to satisfy your nutritional needs, and see where it gets you in the long run. Works for awhile, but eventually you start to feel like crap. It takes longer with dirt, but there’s a reason why even industrial farmers rotate their crops. The Navy tried an experiment in WW2, hypnotizing sailors to think they’d slept when they hadn’t. They thought they were up to par, but task performance proved them wrong.

The earth isn’t much different. Take, take, take, and eventually it gets played out

Wendg P. 

[brenthutch 444]

1 hour ago, wmw999 said:

All that “green” requires increasing support from fertilizers and the like. Dirt gets played out, and becomes less hospitable. Try just eating vitamins and ice cream to satisfy your nutritional needs, and see where it gets you in the long run. Works for awhile, but eventually you start to feel like crap. It takes longer with dirt, but there’s a reason why even industrial farmers rotate their crops. The Navy tried an experiment in WW2, hypnotizing sailors to think they’d slept when they hadn’t. They thought they were up to par, but task performance proved them wrong.

The earth isn’t much different. Take, take, take, and eventually it gets played out

Wendg P. 

Agreed, the earth has been removing CO2 from the atmosphere at an unsustainable rate, if the trajectory of ever sequestered CO2 were to continue, our planet would die.  Thankfully we have these creatures called humans which are capable of returning some of that vital CO2 back into our atmosphere.

[wmw999 2,447]

Thank goodness for humans. How did the earth ever survive without us

Wendy P. 

[brenthutch 444]

34 minutes ago, wmw999 said:

Thank goodness for humans. How did the earth ever survive without us

Wendy P. 

Is that all you have?  Please tell me you are able to contribute something more substantive.

[JoeWeber 2,720]

1 minute ago, brenthutch said:

Is that all you have?  Please tell me you are able to contribute something more substantive.

You are so sexy when you attack. Stepping back, for just a minute from your solipsistic nature, which do you consider the most valuable? Would it be the human race or the planet earth?

[brenthutch 444]

Given planet Earth is much more robust than the human race I will go with the underdog and the underdog has never thrived more than when it has started to exploit fossil fuels.  I say keep a good thing going.

[lippy 918]

Just now, brenthutch said:

Given planet Earth is much more robust than the human race I will go with the underdog and the underdog has never thrived more than when it has started to exploit fossil fuels.  I say keep a good thing going.

Just imagine if, at any/every point along the way until now, we'd just stopped at the current greatest thing instead of moving forward.  

[billvon 2,991]

19 minutes ago, lippy said:

Just imagine if, at any/every point along the way until now, we'd just stopped at the current greatest thing instead of moving forward.  

Horses let the human race underdogs WIN and I say keep a good thing going!  Ban cars!

[olofscience 480]

7 hours ago, brenthutch said:

if the trajectory of ever sequestered CO2 were to continue, our planet would die.

I don't agree with lefty environmentalists who keep saying this "planet is dying" crap, then you pull the same thing? After making fun of them too.

 

Coal beds were created in the Carboniferous period because plant lignin and cellulose was non-biodegradable to the organisms back then. This caused a huge reduction in atmospheric CO2.

However, it stopped reducing in the Permian period, not because of humans (there were no humans 250 million years ago) but because of fungi evolving. Fungi are still here, so coal beds similar to the Carboniferous will never form again.

 

So humans aren't doing shit, except making things shittier for ourselves. I would not like to live in a climate similar to the Carboniferous, because I'm not a fucking dinosaur or frog.

 

But with your support of coal burning you really seem to be pining for those days...

 

[olofscience 480]

6 hours ago, lippy said:

Just imagine if, at any/every point along the way until now, we'd just stopped at the current greatest thing instead of moving forward. 

Well one person here has certainly fossilized...he's still championing the F150 even when its own manufacturer has committed to going full EV.

[brenthutch 444]

5 hours ago, olofscience said:

Well one person here has certainly fossilized...he's still championing the F150 even when its own manufacturer has committed to going full EV.

An enterprise that has cost them $4.5 billion just this year, causing them to re-evaluate their EV plans. You might ask, How can they afford to lose so much money?  Good question. The answer?

“Worldwide, demand for Ford’s fresh lineup of trucks, SUVs and commercial vans pushed second-quarter revenue up 12%, to $45 billion”

 

Edited September 29, 2023 by brenthutch

[brenthutch 444]

9 hours ago, lippy said:

Just imagine if, at any/every point along the way until now, we'd just stopped at the current greatest thing instead of moving forward.  

That is a common problem with progressives, they often confuse change with progress.

[Phil1111 1,149]

3 hours ago, olofscience said:

Well one person here has certainly fossilized...he's still championing the F150 even when its own manufacturer has committed to going full EV.

Yep.

7 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

That is a common problem with progressives, they often confuse change with progress.

As compared to conservatives who only want to move backwards. To about 1965.

Edited September 29, 2023 by Phil1111

[olofscience 480]

1 hour ago, brenthutch said:

An enterprise that has cost them $4.5 billion just this year, causing them to re-evaluate their EV plans. You might ask, How can afford to lose so much money?  Good question. The answer?

“Worldwide, demand for Ford’s fresh lineup of trucks, SUVs and commercial vans pushed second-quarter revenue up 12%, to $45 billion”

 

Ford isn't going to love you back, brent.

Fossil fuels won't either 

[ryoder 1,590]

2 hours ago, Phil1111 said:

Yep.

As compared to conservatives who only want to move backwards. To about 1965.

More likely 1963. Because the Civil Rights Act came along in 1964, and it has all been going to hell since then. :-(

[Phil1111 1,149]

3 hours ago, Phil1111 said:

Yep.

As compared to conservatives who only want to move backwards. To about 1965.

 

57 minutes ago, ryoder said:

More likely 1963. Because the Civil Rights Act came along in 1964, and it has all been going to hell since then. :-(

OK we need a final decision on this issue. How far back in time do republicans really want to go back?....Brent will know. Brent doesn't know much but he knows about how backward republicans think!

[gowlerk 2,192]

6 minutes ago, Phil1111 said:

 

OK we need a final decision on this issue. How far back in time do republicans really want to go back?....Brent will know. Brent doesn't know much but he knows about how backward republicans think!

Like most people believe I would suspect about 8 years after he was born is the best time of his life.