For the Climate Change Nazis
-
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.
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?
-
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.
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.
-
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.
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.
-
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?
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.
-
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.
Because the factors behind the long term decline in birth rates arent going to change. What do you think they are?
-
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.
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.
-
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.
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.
-
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.
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?
-
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?
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.
-
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.
Bored. Point proved. Bye.
-
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.
-
Bored. Point proved. Bye.
-
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?