|
|
Post by laughter on Nov 15, 2019 0:13:16 GMT -5
The level of ignorance about climate change is shocking. Specifics?  Do you mean the current dialog, or just generally speaking at large? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 15, 2019 4:01:43 GMT -5
What we've noticed in the UK is that it is the Left-wing, traditionally considered to be the guardians of the people that are actually those that want humanity culled the most. Who'd have thunk it eh? Kind of sad, and it seems to me a reflection of guilt. Generally. Yeah I'll buy that possibility. Guilt does go deeper than most ever wanna notice. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 15, 2019 4:05:24 GMT -5
The level of ignorance about climate change is shocking. It totally depends what country you're in. Here's a link to the Canadian branch of Extinction Rebellion. You'll have to suspend your Non-dualese to communicate with them. extinctionrebellion.ca/ |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Nov 15, 2019 7:11:17 GMT -5
The level of ignorance about climate change is shocking. I think in general, most people who are even a little exposed to the data accept climate change. The real debate is whether it's human-caused or just part of a natural cycle of climate change. We probably have a "perfect storm" of both. Most of the CO2 on the planet is ~locked~ in the ground. With global warming, more and more of this will be released, then we're really screwed. Yes, the burning of fossil fuels has to stop. But this will be an economic thing, not ecological. When there is a source of fuel as cheap, or cheaper, we'll stop burning fossil fuels. So the answer is research and brain-power. I've said before here, the answer will be finding a cheap way to separate water into hydrogen and oxygen, then we have unlimited nonpoluting fuel. If I were a conspiracy person I say that has already been done but hidden by oil companies. But I'm not. But it needs to happen in the next ten years. We still have a narrow window to turn things around. |
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Nov 15, 2019 8:43:40 GMT -5
The level of ignorance about climate change is shocking. I think in general, most people who are even a little exposed to the data accept climate change. The real debate is whether it's human-caused or just part of a natural cycle of climate change. We probably have a "perfect storm" of both. Most of the CO2 on the planet is ~locked~ in the ground. With global warming, more and more of this will be released, then we're really screwed. Yes, the burning of fossil fuels has to stop. But this will be an economic thing, not ecological. When there is a source of fuel as cheap, or cheaper, we'll stop burning fossil fuels. So the answer is research and brain-power. I've said before here, the answer will be finding a cheap way to separate water into hydrogen and oxygen, then we have unlimited nonpoluting fuel. If I were a conspiracy person I say that has already been done but hidden by oil companies. But I'm not. But it needs to happen in the next ten years. We still have a narrow window to turn things around. How would separating water into oxygen and hydrogen solve the problem? Doesn;t the combustion of hydrogen create CO2? I suspect that Laughter's hope for fusion has more potential. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Nov 15, 2019 8:59:15 GMT -5
I think in general, most people who are even a little exposed to the data accept climate change. The real debate is whether it's human-caused or just part of a natural cycle of climate change. We probably have a "perfect storm" of both. Most of the CO2 on the planet is ~locked~ in the ground. With global warming, more and more of this will be released, then we're really screwed. Yes, the burning of fossil fuels has to stop. But this will be an economic thing, not ecological. When there is a source of fuel as cheap, or cheaper, we'll stop burning fossil fuels. So the answer is research and brain-power. I've said before here, the answer will be finding a cheap way to separate water into hydrogen and oxygen, then we have unlimited nonpoluting fuel. If I were a conspiracy person I say that has already been done but hidden by oil companies. But I'm not. But it needs to happen in the next ten years. We still have a narrow window to turn things around. How would separating water into oxygen and hydrogen solve the problem? Doesn;t the combustion of hydrogen create CO2? I suspect that Laughter's hope for fusion has more potential. The combustion of hydrogen has only water as a byproduct, no CO2 (third paragraph in link). www.weforum.org/agenda/2019/06/it-s-clean-powerful-and-available-are-you-ready-for-hydrogen-energy/We have virtually unlimited water. The problem is that presently it costs too much to separate water into hydrogen and oxygen. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Nov 15, 2019 9:07:55 GMT -5
..........bumped...... My hope/guess is that before we reach the point of no return, say in the next 30 years, some genius scientist will discover a relatively inexpensive way to separate hydrogen and oxygen in/as water and earth will use hydrogen as its predominate source of energy rather than burning fossil fuels. If we wait for people to simply wise up and go green at the expense of greed, we are pretty doomed. Dollars rule. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Nov 15, 2019 9:12:30 GMT -5
I think in general, most people who are even a little exposed to the data accept climate change. The real debate is whether it's human-caused or just part of a natural cycle of climate change. We probably have a "perfect storm" of both. Most of the CO2 on the planet is ~locked~ in the ground. With global warming, more and more of this will be released, then we're really screwed. Yes, the burning of fossil fuels has to stop. But this will be an economic thing, not ecological. When there is a source of fuel as cheap, or cheaper, we'll stop burning fossil fuels. So the answer is research and brain-power. I've said before here, the answer will be finding a cheap way to separate water into hydrogen and oxygen, then we have unlimited nonpoluting fuel. If I were a conspiracy person I say that has already been done but hidden by oil companies. But I'm not. But it needs to happen in the next ten years. We still have a narrow window to turn things around. How would separating water into oxygen and hydrogen solve the problem? Doesn;t the combustion of hydrogen create CO2? I suspect that Laughter's hope for fusion has more potential. Laughter, could you link me. |
|
|
|
Post by roydop on Nov 15, 2019 10:23:28 GMT -5
The level of ignorance about climate change is shocking. I think in general, most people who are even a little exposed to the data accept climate change. The real debate is whether it's human-caused or just part of a natural cycle of climate change. We probably have a "perfect storm" of both. Most of the CO2 on the planet is ~locked~ in the ground. With global warming, more and more of this will be released, then we're really screwed. Yes, the burning of fossil fuels has to stop. But this will be an economic thing, not ecological. When there is a source of fuel as cheap, or cheaper, we'll stop burning fossil fuels. So the answer is research and brain-power. I've said before here, the answer will be finding a cheap way to separate water into hydrogen and oxygen, then we have unlimited nonpoluting fuel. If I were a conspiracy person I say that has already been done but hidden by oil companies. But I'm not. But it needs to happen in the next ten years. We still have a narrow window to turn things around. |
|
|
|
Post by roydop on Nov 15, 2019 10:28:19 GMT -5
It's far too late. The self-enforcing feedback loops are well underway. We should have gotten on this 30 years ago.
And on the BIG picture, the process of transitioning to the next iteration of the cycle of Samsara began with the first use of symbol 100,000 years ago. There are huge forces at work here.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 15, 2019 10:40:50 GMT -5
The level of ignorance about climate change is shocking. I think in general, most people who are even a little exposed to the data accept climate change. The real debate is whether it's human-caused or just part of a natural cycle of climate change. We probably have a "perfect storm" of both. Most of the CO2 on the planet is ~locked~ in the ground. With global warming, more and more of this will be released, then we're really screwed. Yes, the burning of fossil fuels has to stop. But this will be an economic thing, not ecological. When there is a source of fuel as cheap, or cheaper, we'll stop burning fossil fuels. So the answer is research and brain-power. I've said before here, the answer will be finding a cheap way to separate water into hydrogen and oxygen, then we have unlimited nonpoluting fuel. If I were a conspiracy person I say that has already been done but hidden by oil companies. But I'm not. But it needs to happen in the next ten years. We still have a narrow window to turn things around. I'm of the ilk that believes this is a crisis. It doesn't take much to realize the effect of warming. We went to Ventura Beach, a few years back, my wife's old stomping ground, steps cut in the stone to reach the sand are mostly under water now. She remembers when the water rarely touched them. The funny thing about the climate deniers was that the "hotter" argument was a "hoax." Now they claim it's not caused by human activity. To me it's better to err on the side of caution on this one. But Laffy is right. Dire, outlandish and unsubstantiated predictions like the ones in Gore's movie, that are proved false, create more skeptics. Cause great harm. |
|
|
|
Post by Peter on Nov 15, 2019 11:19:18 GMT -5
How would separating water into oxygen and hydrogen solve the problem? Doesn't the combustion of hydrogen create CO2? I suspect that Laughter's hope for fusion has more potential. Right, it's a zero sum game just like growing trees and burning wood for heat. It - at least - doesn't make the problem any worse. All this talk about going carbon neutral by the year X doesn't deal with the excess CO2 that's currently in the atmosphere and that will be added between now and whenever we stop adding it. I'm keen to see more carbon negative projects. I read about sucking carbon out of the air and using it to manufacture vodka. Here, take my money. But I'd love to see it used to create carbon fibre we could use for building houses, cars, space elevators. That would really start sinking some tonnage. I'm also keen to see fusion power go mainstream, but again it just doesn't make the problem any worse. Or it might do actually, because whatever that power gets used for, it's eventually converted to heat. Also, hello! I've so little to say these days but I am still reading. Exploring a deeper sense of connection with the universe. And by deeper I mean it's stretching all the way down to my tummy  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 15, 2019 11:46:59 GMT -5
"The physical realm manifests from the non-physical self-enforcing feedback loop of consciousness focusing on it's own existence." May I suggest that you have not fully understood your own words. The accompanying link to the video shows how this works. How can a video show what is happening in your direct experience? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 15, 2019 11:50:52 GMT -5
It's far too late. The self-enforcing feedback loops are well underway. We should have gotten on this 30 years ago. And on the BIG picture, the process of transitioning to the next iteration of the cycle of Samsara began with the first use of symbol 100,000 years ago. There are huge forces at work here. |
|
|
|
Post by roydop on Nov 15, 2019 12:15:51 GMT -5
The accompanying link to the video shows how this works. How can a video show what is happening in your direct experience? |
|
Do you mean the current dialog, or just generally speaking at large?
