Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. Other Discussions
  3. The Soapbox
  4. For the Climate Change Nazis

For the Climate Change Nazis

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Soapbox
com
81 Posts 11 Posters 0 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • J jschell

    Munchies_Matt wrote:

    Global birth rate is down to 2.4 kids per family. That is maintenance levels.

    Again - that is not the same as maintenance. The global population is going up and it will continue to go up for some time. It is possible that at some point it will actually reach the level that you are claiming it is already at but that has not happened yet.

    M Offline
    M Offline
    Munchies_Matt
    wrote on last edited by
    #64

    Maintenance isnt the same as maintenance? WTF? Are you mad?

    jschell wrote:

    you are claiming it is already at but that has not happened yet

    Are you stupid? I stated that todays low birth rate will cause the population to level of in 20 or 30 years, ie, when THSOE kids become parents.

    J 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • J jschell

      Munchies_Matt wrote:

      Green policies are killing people. Right now. In europe.

      According to the following taxes on the fuel bill are 15%. All taxes. Five reasons why energy bills are so high – and still rising | The big energy debate | The Guardian[^] Even presuming that that 15% could be entirely eliminated as per your contention it would still leave a heating bill (where 15% is 110) of 623 and, based on history, that would continue to go up. So one can certainly presume that if that extra 110 now, then in a couple of years 50 would still be a problem. Following is more recent and suggests that the total cost is only about 30 more than in 2009. Infographic: Bills, prices and profits | Ofgem[^] Additionally it seems unlikely, per one google link that that extra 110 would be the difference between heating one room in a house and the entire house. Cold homes caused 9,000 deaths last winter, study suggests - BBC News[^] Also the above does not fit the following Fuel poverty: An anatomy of a cold home - BBC News[^] Per the above "Hayley estimates they spend £15 to £20 on electricity and £15 on gas per week....They can't afford to keep the heating on during the night" So at 15 per week even it went to 100 per week, to warm it at night, most of that would still not be taxes. And if 15 is a problem then a percentage of that is unlikely to be a differentiater. If anything it seems likely that if people are dying from the cold it is due to the total energy costs and not the taxes on those.

      M Offline
      M Offline
      Munchies_Matt
      wrote on last edited by
      #65

      the extra cost pushes people over the edge. Dont you understand that? That some people have very little income, and are on a fine edge, and can just afford to live?

      J 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • J jschell

        Brent Jenkins wrote:

        But seriously, you're telling me that you can say with 100% accuracy what will happen in 5 or 10 years time? The only fact on the table is that our population is approximately 8 times more now than it was 100 years ago and it's still increasing. Other than that, you're in the realm of guesswork.

        Based on that one would not discuss anything because nothing is known. But the trend line that his statistics actually represent suggest that that population of the world will reach a plateau sometime in the future. But his claim that it has reached it already is incorrect.

        L Offline
        L Offline
        Lost User
        wrote on last edited by
        #66

        jschell wrote:

        But the trend line that his statistics actually represent suggest that that population of the world will reach a plateau sometime in the future. But his claim that it has reached it already is incorrect.

        Ah, you see the point then. I'll guarantee you two things: 1. The world population will decline at some point. 2. Nobody has any idea when that will happen or what the total population will reach before that point. "Suggests" is the keyword. It's a guess, doesn't mean it'll be any more accurate than my or your guesses. Take it with a pinch of salt.

        Now is it bad enough that you let somebody else kick your butts without you trying to do it to each other? Now if we're all talking about the same man, and I think we are... it appears he's got a rather growing collection of our bikes.

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • M Munchies_Matt

          Oh, so you have moved the argument from what people eat to all animals? The earth is 25% greener since 1980 due to CO2. That is what the animals will eat.

          L Offline
          L Offline
          Lost User
          wrote on last edited by
          #67

          Ok, you asked what a 2 degree C temperature change effects.. here you go for starters: [Marine problems: climate change | WWF](http://wwf.panda.org/about\_our\_earth/blue\_planet/problems/climate\_change/) [Global Warming Effects on Salt Water Species](http://www.climatehotmap.org/global-warming-effects/salt-water-species.html) [Impacts of Climate Change on Marine Organisms and Ecosystems](http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960982209011816) [Insects feel the heat: scientists reveal rise in temperature affects ability to reproduce](https://www.sheffield.ac.uk/news/nr/insects-effected-by-rise-in-temperature-1.672122) This is the natural food chain - without these creatures, we (and lots of other larger animals) don't eat. It's all well documented.

          Now is it bad enough that you let somebody else kick your butts without you trying to do it to each other? Now if we're all talking about the same man, and I think we are... it appears he's got a rather growing collection of our bikes.

          M 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • M Munchies_Matt

            How old are you?

            L Offline
            L Offline
            Lost User
            wrote on last edited by
            #68

            Mid 40's.. old enough to not take some things seriously, be cynical about most stuff and trust my instincts and experience over other people's vague opinions.

            Now is it bad enough that you let somebody else kick your butts without you trying to do it to each other? Now if we're all talking about the same man, and I think we are... it appears he's got a rather growing collection of our bikes.

            M 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • L Lost User

              Ok, you asked what a 2 degree C temperature change effects.. here you go for starters: [Marine problems: climate change | WWF](http://wwf.panda.org/about\_our\_earth/blue\_planet/problems/climate\_change/) [Global Warming Effects on Salt Water Species](http://www.climatehotmap.org/global-warming-effects/salt-water-species.html) [Impacts of Climate Change on Marine Organisms and Ecosystems](http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960982209011816) [Insects feel the heat: scientists reveal rise in temperature affects ability to reproduce](https://www.sheffield.ac.uk/news/nr/insects-effected-by-rise-in-temperature-1.672122) This is the natural food chain - without these creatures, we (and lots of other larger animals) don't eat. It's all well documented.

              Now is it bad enough that you let somebody else kick your butts without you trying to do it to each other? Now if we're all talking about the same man, and I think we are... it appears he's got a rather growing collection of our bikes.

              M Offline
              M Offline
              Munchies_Matt
              wrote on last edited by
              #69

              Supposition, over simplification, ignorance of the facts, and fear mongering. That is what your links contain. A few points: 1) Coral bleaching. This is due to many factors, land run off of agricultural/industrial waste. Water level falling (as happens to the GBR in an el nino), rapid rise and fall in temperatures, and predation. 2) What is 'optimal'? So what if species move to higher latitudes? Why is that a bad thing? 3) The planet earth has consistently had an average temperature 7C higher than today, yet life evolved quite happily. Why is a rise of 2C necessarily bad?

              L 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • L Lost User

                Mid 40's.. old enough to not take some things seriously, be cynical about most stuff and trust my instincts and experience over other people's vague opinions.

                Now is it bad enough that you let somebody else kick your butts without you trying to do it to each other? Now if we're all talking about the same man, and I think we are... it appears he's got a rather growing collection of our bikes.

                M Offline
                M Offline
                Munchies_Matt
                wrote on last edited by
                #70

                I find it surprising then that you cant not differentiate between the past, and its effect on today, and today, and its effect on tomorrow. Todays birth rate is the population in 30 years, since that is when those kids grow up and have families. With the birth rate at 2.4 globally, down from 7 30 years ago, the result is obvious.

                L 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • M Munchies_Matt

                  I find it surprising then that you cant not differentiate between the past, and its effect on today, and today, and its effect on tomorrow. Todays birth rate is the population in 30 years, since that is when those kids grow up and have families. With the birth rate at 2.4 globally, down from 7 30 years ago, the result is obvious.

                  L Offline
                  L Offline
                  Lost User
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #71

                  I find it surprising that you think what's happening today is what will happen tomorrow. How do you know that in 5 or 10 years time, young adults won't be back having large families again?

                  Now is it bad enough that you let somebody else kick your butts without you trying to do it to each other? Now if we're all talking about the same man, and I think we are... it appears he's got a rather growing collection of our bikes.

                  M 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • M Munchies_Matt

                    Supposition, over simplification, ignorance of the facts, and fear mongering. That is what your links contain. A few points: 1) Coral bleaching. This is due to many factors, land run off of agricultural/industrial waste. Water level falling (as happens to the GBR in an el nino), rapid rise and fall in temperatures, and predation. 2) What is 'optimal'? So what if species move to higher latitudes? Why is that a bad thing? 3) The planet earth has consistently had an average temperature 7C higher than today, yet life evolved quite happily. Why is a rise of 2C necessarily bad?

                    L Offline
                    L Offline
                    Lost User
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #72

                    Munchies_Matt wrote:

                    Supposition, over simplification, ignorance of the facts, and fear mongering.

                    Ah, so scientific evidence doesn't suit your opinion.. I'll offer you this option then: get out into the countryside (in various countries) and take a look for yourself. If you haven't spent a lifetime out there, you probably won't notice anything, but that doesn't mean that it's not happening.

                    Now is it bad enough that you let somebody else kick your butts without you trying to do it to each other? Now if we're all talking about the same man, and I think we are... it appears he's got a rather growing collection of our bikes.

                    M 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • L Lost User

                      I find it surprising that you think what's happening today is what will happen tomorrow. How do you know that in 5 or 10 years time, young adults won't be back having large families again?

                      Now is it bad enough that you let somebody else kick your butts without you trying to do it to each other? Now if we're all talking about the same man, and I think we are... it appears he's got a rather growing collection of our bikes.

                      M Offline
                      M Offline
                      Munchies_Matt
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #73

                      Because the factors behind the long term decline in birth rates arent going to change. What do you think they are?

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • L Lost User

                        Munchies_Matt wrote:

                        Supposition, over simplification, ignorance of the facts, and fear mongering.

                        Ah, so scientific evidence doesn't suit your opinion.. I'll offer you this option then: get out into the countryside (in various countries) and take a look for yourself. If you haven't spent a lifetime out there, you probably won't notice anything, but that doesn't mean that it's not happening.

                        Now is it bad enough that you let somebody else kick your butts without you trying to do it to each other? Now if we're all talking about the same man, and I think we are... it appears he's got a rather growing collection of our bikes.

                        M Offline
                        M Offline
                        Munchies_Matt
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #74

                        Brent Jenkins wrote:

                        Ah, so scientific evidence

                        I just gave it to you. Those are the reasons coral bleaches. Oh, and the countryside isnt changing. Hasnt done in the 50 years of my life.

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • M Munchies_Matt

                          Maintenance isnt the same as maintenance? WTF? Are you mad?

                          jschell wrote:

                          you are claiming it is already at but that has not happened yet

                          Are you stupid? I stated that todays low birth rate will cause the population to level of in 20 or 30 years, ie, when THSOE kids become parents.

                          J Offline
                          J Offline
                          jschell
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #75

                          Munchies_Matt wrote:

                          Maintenance isnt the same as maintenance?

                          Maintenance level is not based solely on the birth rate. The impact of the birth rate on the maintenance level varies by country and region. Until the maintenance level, not the birth rate, of the entire world reaches a stage of equilibrium then the population of the world will continue to rise. That equilibrium does not exist now and will not exist for at least decades.

                          Munchies_Matt wrote:

                          I stated that todays low birth rate will cause the population to level of in 20 or 30 years, ie, when THSOE kids become parents.

                          You said "In 20 years the worlds population will decline." That will not happen in that time period based on current trends. Projection of the World Population by Level of Education - Our World in Data[^] First it must reach equilibrium then there will be a period where it levels off, then presumably after that it will decline. There is no way that will happen in 20 years.

                          M 1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • J jschell

                            Munchies_Matt wrote:

                            Maintenance isnt the same as maintenance?

                            Maintenance level is not based solely on the birth rate. The impact of the birth rate on the maintenance level varies by country and region. Until the maintenance level, not the birth rate, of the entire world reaches a stage of equilibrium then the population of the world will continue to rise. That equilibrium does not exist now and will not exist for at least decades.

                            Munchies_Matt wrote:

                            I stated that todays low birth rate will cause the population to level of in 20 or 30 years, ie, when THSOE kids become parents.

                            You said "In 20 years the worlds population will decline." That will not happen in that time period based on current trends. Projection of the World Population by Level of Education - Our World in Data[^] First it must reach equilibrium then there will be a period where it levels off, then presumably after that it will decline. There is no way that will happen in 20 years.

                            M Offline
                            M Offline
                            Munchies_Matt
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #76

                            jschell wrote:

                            The impact of the birth rate on the maintenance level varies by country and region.

                            Sigh. And 2.4 is the GLOBAL maintenance level. And I said it wil start to level off in 20 to 30 years. Thought about the driving forces behind the massive reduction in birth rate yet?

                            J 1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • M Munchies_Matt

                              the extra cost pushes people over the edge. Dont you understand that? That some people have very little income, and are on a fine edge, and can just afford to live?

                              J Offline
                              J Offline
                              jschell
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #77

                              Munchies_Matt wrote:

                              the extra cost pushes people over the edge. Dont you understand that?

                              Yes. First however it is not marginal. It isn't 1 pound but rather 50 that does it. Second the majority of the cost is not in taxes (all taxes) but rather in the rest of the cost. A percentage increase in that, is a substantial increase to the consumer. Third there are other factors such as the income and other living expenses which impact that.

                              M 1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • J jschell

                                Munchies_Matt wrote:

                                the extra cost pushes people over the edge. Dont you understand that?

                                Yes. First however it is not marginal. It isn't 1 pound but rather 50 that does it. Second the majority of the cost is not in taxes (all taxes) but rather in the rest of the cost. A percentage increase in that, is a substantial increase to the consumer. Third there are other factors such as the income and other living expenses which impact that.

                                M Offline
                                M Offline
                                Munchies_Matt
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #78

                                Bored. Point proved. Bye.

                                J 1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • M Munchies_Matt

                                  Who cares how you interpret the effect of 4C of warming, the take home message from this paper is that models run way too hot.

                                  J Offline
                                  J Offline
                                  jschell
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #79

                                  As I said, the authors provided a conclusion that contradicts the intent of the article. I need not interpret the authors statement because it is clear.

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • M Munchies_Matt

                                    Bored. Point proved. Bye.

                                    J Offline
                                    J Offline
                                    jschell
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #80

                                    Munchies_Matt wrote:

                                    Point proved.

                                    I agree that I proved my point, that taxes, of any sort, are inconsequential to the actual problem.

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • M Munchies_Matt

                                      jschell wrote:

                                      The impact of the birth rate on the maintenance level varies by country and region.

                                      Sigh. And 2.4 is the GLOBAL maintenance level. And I said it wil start to level off in 20 to 30 years. Thought about the driving forces behind the massive reduction in birth rate yet?

                                      J Offline
                                      J Offline
                                      jschell
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #81

                                      Munchies_Matt wrote:

                                      And I said it wil start to level off in 20 to 30 years.

                                      I quoted exactly what you said. And what you said does not match what anyone else is saying who actually studies it.

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      Reply
                                      • Reply as topic
                                      Log in to reply
                                      • Oldest to Newest
                                      • Newest to Oldest
                                      • Most Votes


                                      • Login

                                      • Don't have an account? Register

                                      • Login or register to search.
                                      • First post
                                        Last post
                                      0
                                      • Categories
                                      • Recent
                                      • Tags
                                      • Popular
                                      • World
                                      • Users
                                      • Groups