The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Can we survive the 21st Centry? > Comments

Can we survive the 21st Centry? : Comments

By Julian Cribb, published 2/11/2016

Our belief in non-material things like money, politics, religion and the human narrative often diverts and undermines our efforts to work together for survival.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. Page 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. 9
  11. ...
  12. 14
  13. 15
  14. 16
  15. All
Julian Cribb says:” Dozens of species are going extinct every day due to human activity. “
There have been five mass extinctions, the last one about 65 million years ago, and some scientists assert that there is a sixth about to start, or already commenced.
This one is caused by humans, according to some scientists. We could not have caused the previous ones, because we have only been around for 200,000 years., but for a number of spurious reasons, it is asserted that humans have caused this extinction, if it occurs.
The reason is simple enough. The people who assert this have projected their self-loathing on to the human race, and make these ridiculous assertions to give vent to their disgusting feelings
Posted by Leo Lane, Saturday, 5 November 2016 1:28:01 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi Toni,
I hear you! I'm with you when it comes to the general public over-reacting to radiation. Most people don't even realise banana's are radioactive! There are even places that are naturally more radioactive than Chernobyl and Fukushima, please see my page (written by a lay person for lay people) on this subject: "Chernobyl, Fukushima, Radiation - Oh my!"
https://eclipsenow.wordpress.com/radiation/

It's just that my understanding is that general background radiation is different to a particle lodged in your lungs or other organs, constantly attacking organs around it as it decays. Natural radiation, or even external artificial radiation: meh. Has to be *high* level to cause sickness. But one little particle of fallout constantly zapping the surrounding tissue? That's not a good thing.

Anyway, it was just one issue in passing. The real ones are the endocrine disruptors that are changing the gender composition of entire eco-systems. We can and *must* do better. Global warming is a thing. We can and *must* do better. Resource depletion is a thing. We really *can* do better with molecular recycling systems like plasma arc burners.
https://eclipsenow.wordpress.com/recycle/

Coal kills 3 million people a year worldwide. We can and *must* do better. Coal will run out one day. We can already do better right now with waste eating nukes, and you're absolutely right, the Megatons to Megawatts process powered 10% of America for 20 years. That's the equivalent of the WHOLE of Australia being powered by fissioning old Soviet bomb-grade material, taking 16,000 bombs worth of material off the market! We CAN do better!

But are we? Nope. Our government hardly 'believes in' climate change, let alone taking any strong action.
Posted by Max Green, Saturday, 5 November 2016 5:41:46 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
//It's just that my understanding is that general background radiation is different to a particle lodged in your lungs or other organs, constantly attacking organs around it as it decays.//

Natural background radiation necessarily involves particles lodged all over your body, constantly attacking molecules as they decay.

And 'twas ever thus; long before the Trinity Test.

It works like this:

Humans are animals.

Animals are made of cells.

Cells are made of molecules.

Molecules are made of atoms.

Not all atoms are made equal; some them are radioactive. And that's OK. If they weren't, we wouldn't be made of stardust because there'd be no stardust with which to form the solar disk, and this would be a purely academic discussion for Qfwfq and Q.

There are radioactive atoms all throughout your body.

They decay in different ways.

And at different rates.

I like to imagine that if you could get all the numbers just so, you could become a comic book superhero. But that seems unlikely.

Your grandfather's grandfather had lot of those radioactive particles inside him, and he obviously survived. Whether or not that was to the advantage of the human race is left as an exercise for the reader.
Posted by Toni Lavis, Sunday, 6 November 2016 6:57:11 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Once again...

Anyway, it was just one issue in passing. The real ones are the endocrine disruptors that are changing the gender composition of entire eco-systems. We can and *must* do better. Global warming is a thing. We can and *must* do better. Resource depletion is a thing. We really *can* do better with molecular recycling systems like plasma arc burners.
https://eclipsenow.wordpress.com/recycle/

Coal kills 3 million people a year worldwide. We can and *must* do better. Coal will run out one day. We can already do better right now with waste eating nukes, and you're absolutely right, the Megatons to Megawatts process powered 10% of America for 20 years. That's the equivalent of the WHOLE of Australia being powered by fissioning old Soviet bomb-grade material, taking 16,000 bombs worth of material off the market! We CAN do better!

But are we? Nope. Our government hardly 'believes in' climate change, let alone taking any strong action.
Posted by Max Green, Sunday, 6 November 2016 9:01:45 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Max Green says:” Our government hardly 'believes in' climate change, let alone taking any strong action.”
Now that you are aware that there is no scientific basis to assert that there is any measurable human effect on climate, Max,, what action should a government take?
Posted by Leo Lane, Sunday, 6 November 2016 10:35:43 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi Leo Lane,

On my side:
* 97% of the opinions that matter
* The repeatable, demonstrable laws of physics of CO2
* The mathematics of the Radiative Forcing Equation which measures how much incoming radiation warms the planet
* (This works out to be an extra 4 Hiroshima bombs of heat per second!)
* The demonstrable water vapour feedback with the atmosphere getting wetter
* The oceans getting warmer
* the atmosphere getting hotter as measured by both satellites and tens of thousands of ground stations across the planet,
* the top 3 temperature databases from the top 3 most reputable scientific weather organisations on the planet,
* the seasons changing,
* and the peer-review mechanism of the scientific community.

On your side:
* 3% cantankerous contrarians that mutter about uncertainty or go on about 7 day literal Creationism!
* tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy theorists that are so right wing they believe in global conspiracy that would have to go back 200 years to when Joseph Fourier discovered the greenhouse effect!
* no explanation as to why the planet is demonstrably warming
* loonies
* attention-starved and attention seeking internet trolls like yourself!
Posted by Max Green, Monday, 7 November 2016 9:36:14 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. Page 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. 9
  11. ...
  12. 14
  13. 15
  14. 16
  15. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy