Page 4 of 13 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 247

Thread: Climate Change

  1. #61
    Quote Originally Posted by Troublemaker View Post
    So we're going to have a (still ongoing) 2018 Midterms thread, a 2020 Presidential thread, a thread for Brexit, and now this. Didn't I propose just bringing back the PPB forum like a year or so ago? How is this thread different from any you would find on a politics board? Everything seems so familiar.

    To make this thread work, I probably would've just titled it something like "Ideas to Improve the Environment" and made no mention of global warming at all, with a warning that any reference to global warming would receive an infraction. Which is probably too restrictive for some to enjoy/participate. Which brings us back to how DBR doesn't see a need for political threads, and there are plenty of forums elsewhere to discuss this...
    Should any mentions of vaccines or the Moon landings on DBR also receive an infraction? We really need to move away from the false idea that the established science of climate change should be considered a PPB issue that is open for political debate.

    Now, discussing things like a carbon tax, cap-and-trade, how to conduct diplomacy with heavy oil producing countries, etc. is a PPB issue and is a different story.

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Undisclosed
    Woodrow Wilson didn’t believe in global warming. Just sayin’


    Seems like some want to sabotage this thread, not sure why.

  3. #63
    Quote Originally Posted by OldPhiKap View Post
    Seems like some want to sabotage this thread, not sure why.
    IMO, we should just have the same rules as we have for any other thread. If the topic isn't something you're into, that's fine, but maybe just avoid the thread. It's like people going out of their way to post in baseball threads about how boring they find the sport.

  4. #64
    Quote Originally Posted by elvis14 View Post
    I'm going to suggest that we move forward with more of the OP intent of discussing what we can do to help with what's basically a known issue and not try to convince anyone about the science. This will help keep us out PP area. When someone posts a link to the dailycaller web site, at that point, you have to realize and move on. The xkcd visualization is amazing and frightning, BTW, thanks for posting that.

    I've already learned a few things reading this thread and that alone has made it worth reading. Our family is always looking for ways we can minimize our impact.
    Thank you for this- my goal was what can I (or anyone) do to have a positive impact.

  5. #65
    Quote Originally Posted by Wander View Post
    Should any mentions of vaccines or the Moon landings on DBR also receive an infraction?
    What is the general public agreement levels on vaccines, moon landings, and global warming (both from a "does it exist" and "what should we do about it?" perspective)?

    Quote Originally Posted by Wander View Post
    We really need to move away from the false idea that the established science of climate change should be considered a PPB issue that is open for political debate.
    From a practical perspective, can this thread avoid that debate? It doesn't look like it.

  6. #66
    Quote Originally Posted by fuse View Post
    Thank you for this- my goal was what can I (or anyone) do to have a positive impact.
    A lot of organizations have personal environmental or carbon footprint calculators. Here's one from TNC

    If your concern is climate change, then the name of the game is living a low greenhouse gas lifestyle. Couple thoughts come to mind --- flying is one of the most GHG intense activities that we do. You've already referenced dietary choices. As other have noted, eating low on the food chain is more environmentally friendly than eating high on the food chain. If you can't install PV on your property, talk to your utility about purchasing it. Renewable energy is getting pretty close to grid price parity in some parts of the county. Consume less, of everything. Own a small home and don't or limit use of major energy appliances like AC, dryers, etc. Hire an energy professional to come see how much energy is leaking out your windows, etc and take steps to make your home more efficient.

    Here's a nice site on the footprint of some of our average activities:

    https://www.livescience.com/13835-ca...ctivities.html

    Good luck!

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    North of Durham
    Quote Originally Posted by Wander View Post
    IMO, we should just have the same rules as we have for any other thread. If the topic isn't something you're into, that's fine, but maybe just avoid the thread. It's like people going out of their way to post in baseball threads about how boring they find the sport.
    I agree completely. I am all for constructive discussion but just being argumentative for the sake of being the turd in the punchbowl does not help anyone and is against the spirit of DBR.

    As far as I am concerned, the fact that there is climate change and it is impacting earth is settled fact. Kind of like gravity (except perhaps with relation to Zion). As an alum of Duke, I like to think of DBR as an offshoot of the university and assume that it is largely populated by educated people with a respect for science. Some people acknowledge that it is happening but just don't really seem to care very much. I think there is a full spectrum - some people don't care at all, some completely alter their lives to help the earth (and make it their life's work), and most of us are somewhere in between.

    I do my best to have an impact. I honestly wasn't that aware of the impact that beef has, but as a gout sufferer, I minimize my beef consumption anyway. I am fortunate to live in an apartment building with recycling bins right outside my door, so it makes it really easy to recycle. And I live in New York City so take public transit most places. I have other thoughts on the matter but they might start getting too close to PPB so I will leave it at that...

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Raleigh
    Quote Originally Posted by OldPhiKap View Post
    Ymm, Beer gets pretty testy at times too.
    Indeed, especially if/when someone claims they don't like IPAs/IIPAs () or whether bourbon barrel-aging is better than rum or brandy barrel-aging (double ).
    [redacted] them and the horses they rode in on.

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Raleigh
    I'll ASSume the cow issues do not apply to milk/milk products as they're "renewable" resources/products () and I'll answer accordingly.

    Out of 21 meals/week, we rarely have meat with breakfast, 4/7 lunches (2 with chicken, 1 with pork and an occasional taco/enchilada or burger) and 6/7 dinners (or supper if you prefer), including chicken twice, seafood twice, pork once and beef once and meatless once or twice, eliminating beef most commonly if we have a large salad or a veggie plate. We produce about 1 paper grocery bag full of trash weekly, sometimes less. That almost always consists of a food-soiled item napkin/tissue that we're not allowed to/can't recycle (cardboard/tinfoil) and something styrofoam or a plastic not allowed (with a 6 inside a triangle) in our 65 gallon curbside container. That container is about 3/4 filled every 2 weeks with about everything else that exits our house, including bottles, cans, plastics, paper products, cardboard, etc. Plastic grocery bags go back to the grocery store about monthly. Could we do better? Yes, by avoiding anything that can't be recycled as categorized above. Manufacturers could help, too, by producing much less of those products.

    We have 3 vehicles: an old Ford crossover (paid for; highway miles only now w/reasonable MPG; used for grandparent and some granddoggie chauffering), an Accord (also paid for w/good but not great MPG) and a Prius (also paid for-YAY!) that gets 45-50 MPG. We'll move to 2 vehicles when one dies, likely getting another hybrid of some kind and perhaps an e-car, not to be confused with eFG%.
    [redacted] them and the horses they rode in on.

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Thomasville, NC
    More on polar bear figures, from the IUCN. Hope this is good enough.
    http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/22823/0

    Or this one?
    https://arcticwwf.org/species/polar-bear/population/

  11. #71
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Albemarle, North Carolina
    Quote Originally Posted by Troublemaker View Post
    So we're going to have a (still ongoing) 2018 Midterms thread, a 2020 Presidential thread, a thread for Brexit, and now this. Didn't I propose just bringing back the PPB forum like a year or so ago? How is this thread different from any you would find on a politics board? Everything seems so familiar.

    To make this thread work, I probably would've just titled it something like "Ideas to Improve the Environment" and made no mention of global warming at all, with a warning that any reference to global warming would receive an infraction. Which is probably too restrictive for some to enjoy/participate. Which brings us back to how DBR doesn't see a need for political threads, and there are plenty of forums elsewhere to discuss this...
    Lol yeah it does seem like we sort of have a PPB in a way. However this one thread shouldn't be treated any different than a flat earth thread. It's just a matter of science, whereas politics can get very opinionated.


    As long as we keep our opinions to our selves regarding politics and just stick to updates of what's going on with current events then the political threads should be fine too.




    ***Besides, the real damage is done in the Post Game Duke threads... More so after a loss.
    "The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge" -Stephen Hawking

  12. #72
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Albemarle, North Carolina
    Quote Originally Posted by Troublemaker View Post
    What is the general public agreement levels on vaccines, moon landings, and global warming (both from a "does it exist" and "what should we do about it?" perspective)?



    From a practical perspective, can this thread avoid that debate? It doesn't look like it.


    I would say it's irrelevant in regards to your first point on what the public thinks. What matters there are the facts, if one chooses to deny those facts and in the process deny reality then they shouldn't chime in unless it's to genuinely question something they don't understand.


    I'm regards to the 2nd point I think my first response takes care of it too. I could see a healthy or heated debate arising from solutions and changes we think should be implemented. It doesn't seem too bad though from the little we've started.



    Quote Originally Posted by Wander View Post
    IMO, we should just have the same rules as we have for any other thread. If the topic isn't something you're into, that's fine, but maybe just avoid the thread. It's like people going out of their way to post in baseball threads about how boring they find the sport.
    I think I may have been guilty of that when I first arrived here �� and no my opinion hasn't changed ��
    "The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge" -Stephen Hawking

  13. #73
    Quote Originally Posted by Devilwin View Post
    More on polar bear figures, from the IUCN. Hope this is good enough.
    http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/22823/0

    Or this one?
    https://arcticwwf.org/species/polar-bear/population/
    FYI, the WWF gets its population info from IUCN, so you're linking the same info twice.

    From your IUCN link:

    Overall, our analysis highlights the potential for large reductions in Polar Bear abundance if sea-ice loss continues over the long-term, which is forecasted by climate models and other studies (IPCC 2013). It also highlights the large amount of uncertainty in even simple statistical projections of Polar Bear subpopulations, and the sensitivity of these projections to plausible alternative assumptions. Across the six scenarios in Table 4 that projected Polar Bear abundance forward in time using the median and 95th percentile of GL, the median probability of a reduction in the mean global population size greater than 30% was approximately 0.71 (range 0.20-0.95). The median probability of a reduction greater than 50% was approximately 0.07 (range 0-0.35), and the probability of a reduction greater than 80% was negligible. The IUCN Red List Guidelines suggest that assessors consider nearly the full range of uncertainty in potential outcomes, and adopt a precautionary but realistic attitude toward risk tolerance (Section 3.2.3, IUCN 2014). In light of the significant probability, across scenarios, of a reduction greater than 30%, and the relatively low probability of a reduction greater than 50%, we conclude that Polar Bears currently warrant listing as Vulnerable under criterion A3c (IUCN 2014).
    Also

    Estimating Polar Bear abundance is expensive and difficult because the animals often occur at low densities in remote habitats. Although abundance estimates have generally improved in recent decades (Obbard et al. 2010), information remains poor or outdated for some subpopulations. Summing across the most recent estimates for the 19 subpopulations (Table 3 in the Supplementary Material) results in a total of approximately 26,000 Polar Bears ( 95% CI = 22,000-31,000 )
    Does this link discuss the population in the 70s? Regardless, there have been significant conservation efforts since the 70s (as your two links both discuss) and population data across time periods is difficult to compare since methodologies have been refined and improved, even in the last few years.

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Thomasville, NC
    It was merely an effort to show that the bear is doing better than people are led to believe. We can agree to disagree. I think for one thing, there are other creatures with a much worse situation than the polar bear, yet nothing is ever said about them. Lions, for example. Over 70% of sub Saharan populations have disappeared in the last two decades. The Indian lion has a population of only around 400, all in the Gir Forest. Plans are to establish another population, but the area chosen contains Bengal tigers, which being endangered themselves, would constitute a threat to the lions, as the tigers are bigger and more powerful and could kill the lions, if met in a one on one scenario.
    Someone referenced Bill Nye. He's not a scientist...

  15. #75
    Quote Originally Posted by Devilwin View Post
    Someone referenced Bill Nye. He's not a scientist...
    What is he then?

    FWIW, Nye has an Engineering degree from the Sibley School of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering at Cornell. He worked at Boeing and is credited with inventing a hydraulic resonace suppressor tube used on 747's. He was CEO of the planetary society and helped develop sundials used on the Mars Rover. He currently holds 3 US patents, and is a fellow on several science related organizations. He's also written two books on science.

    Of course he is best known for his career advocating for and teaching science on a TV show which ran for 5 seasons, and for his many appearances in public circles advocating for science.

    IMO, it's pretty impressive resume.
    "There can BE only one."

  16. #76
    Quote Originally Posted by Devilwin View Post
    Someone referenced Bill Nye. He's not a scientist...
    Neither is Neil deGrasse Tyson. Don't let that PhD in Astrophysics fool you.

  17. #77
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Thomasville, NC
    I could write a book on jet aircraft but that does not make me a pilot..Nye once actually claimed not to be a scientist, but rather a science advocate.

  18. #78
    Quote Originally Posted by Devilwin View Post
    It was merely an effort to show that the bear is doing better than people are led to believe. We can agree to disagree. I think for one thing, there are other creatures with a much worse situation than the polar bear, yet nothing is ever said about them. Lions, for example. Over 70% of sub Saharan populations have disappeared in the last two decades. The Indian lion has a population of only around 400, all in the Gir Forest. Plans are to establish another population, but the area chosen contains Bengal tigers, which being endangered themselves, would constitute a threat to the lions, as the tigers are bigger and more powerful and could kill the lions, if met in a one on one scenario.
    Someone referenced Bill Nye. He's not a scientist...
    Gotcha. But your links make clear that the polar bear is indeed "vulnerable"* to extinction and its population is in decline because of global warming. It is *likely* that polar bear population will decline by 30% or more within 3 [bear] generations (or about 30 years) because of global warming. But yes, there are more critically endangered species than the polar bear.




    * The risk level "Vulnerable" means "high risk of unnatural (human-caused) extinction without further human intervention". Btw, this is the same assessment they give to the sub saharan lion.

  19. #79
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Thomasville, NC
    The lions were not threatened by global warming, but the killing of entire prides to protect livestock, targeting of maned males for trophies, and many died from a feline parvo epidemic, and other diseases. A drought folloed by heavy rains saw a ballon in tick infestations, adding to the problems.

  20. #80
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Rougemont Nebulae
    Quote Originally Posted by OldPhiKap View Post
    Woodrow Wilson didn’t believe in global warming. Just sayin’


    Seems like some want to sabotage this thread, not sure why.
    It would seem that Mr. Wilson didn't believe in his own reality which would pose some sort of existentialistic conundrum for the man. Just to keep our terms straight, the mechanism of global warming is what makes the Earth habitable--the ability of tri-atomic molecules (and various poly-atomic ones like CH4) to capture IR energy. H2O is really good at capturing IR, CO2 (with its longer residence time in the atmosphere) quite a bit better and the positive feedback loop (warmer air promotes evaporation) over time can affect climate. I'm sure everyone commenting in this thread learned the basic facts of atmospheric chemistry in their intro to environmental science class but the terms often get tossed around haphazardly which doesn't really promote a good understanding of the phenomenon of climate change (the point being it's really not that "phenomenal" at all.) Global warming is real. Why? Because you exist.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •