Climate change

[The Grand Nudger]

It's been as much (perhaps more) of a problem before.  This isn't the first time we've tried to off ourselves with the environment as the blade.  Fewer people, more people, it hardly matters if they're all equally starving, eh? Our problems are not exceptional, there is precedent - they are the same problems we have been grappling with since time immemorial. I only mention this to soften the notion that our problems today are so great that we may have no path to look towards for a solution, and any excuse that may offer to those who would throw in the towel, or excuse us for doing nothing, or doing little, late.

There has never been a point in history, so far as we can tell, that humans have had an environmental free lunch (as you noted). It doesn't take alot of us to royally fuck something up, from the standpoint of it's utilitity -to us-, lol. Truthfully, adding more to the pile doesn;t have a 1/1 increase in damage, just the few of us are capable of wrecking it in a manner totally incommensurate with our tiny numbers......eh?

It's the third worlders, btw, with the pop boom......and those people aren't the big contributors to climate change (though I'm sure they'd like to be), so...in what way are they the problem- as relates to this problem? Eliminating the third world would do, effectively, nothing. Eliminating a tiny fraction - the first world.....would do very much. Breeding aint the problem, on this count, amigo.

(I mention elimination not because you suggested it, only as an example of the most extreme measure I could imagine - and it's non-present effect if applied to those responsible for the "too many people" business, personally, I think that there aren;t enough people. We clearly need a larger pool from which to draw good ideas......... :wink: )

[Minimalist]

So even getting people to worship a toaster at leasts gives them something to visualize

It also gives them life-giving warm bread....which is more than they ever got from any stupid fucking god.

[KevinM1]

Again, Nica, you are referring to the myth of the golden age, that somehow...... things used to be better, and we are now at the precipice of oblivion.  This has been a narrative for some time, it is not an original idea, and it is not, in any way imaginable, true.  It is better now than it has ever been for us, period.  That you see the world, and our situation in it in this manner is indicative of your religious upbringing, not the actual state of the world or the people within it.

Your parents raised you to believe in goblins...............I'm not sure how seriously you ought to take that, or why you would be looking for confirmation in climate science.......as to whether or not goblins exist.  If there really were a golden age, and things used to be better, and we were now on that precipice.......would that mean that goblins existed?

Yup.  If there's one constant with humanity, is that our constant appeals to the pastoral - things used to be simpler, easier, clearer, taste better, feel better back at some arbitrary point (usually the "my day" of whomever is talking) - still has this weird emotional tug on us.  I think it's due to psychology.  We felt things were clearer/better before because we didn't really know what was going on in our lives or in the world when we were younger, which is when our personality forms and important memories start taking hold.  I could be talking out of my ass on that, though.

The LDS teachings seem to have simply grabbed that idea, pressed pause on the time before a global crisis at the start of the previous century, and magnified how awesome that time was, even when, factually, it was actually really shitty for a lot of reasons.  Kind of like how 1950's Americana is still held up as the pinnacle of our culture by many.  Unless you're non-white.  Or a woman.  Or non-straight.  Or not cisgendered.

But, like I said to Nic in the thread in the atheist subsection, by every metric that matters, this is the golden age.  Preventable diseases are being prevented.  Access to clean water, food, shelter, and information has never been more universal.  People are living not just longer lives, but more meaningful lives thanks to modern medical tech (including, but not limited to, wheelchairs, joint replacement, prosthetics, etc.).

That doesn't mean there aren't problems.  That doesn't mean there isn't more work to be done.  But it does mean that, in every way that matters, life in 2015 is better than life in 1914 and earlier.  Objectively speaking.  And, yes, that accounts for climate change.  It accounts for ISIS.  The world wasn't carefree and bloodless before 1914.

[Chas]

And I'm saying there are more important needs for the health and wellbeing of our 10 billion people (by 2100) than the CO2 level - and those are water security; population resettlement; and food security. Those are the things I believe should be prioritised.

Not to mention I think that $90 million could have been much better allocated than chasing the dubious promise of a new form of energy. We could have spent that on foreign aid; on water security; on helping the disadvantaged in our country; or on plenty of other far more deserving causes.

And those all depend on the climate.  Think it through.

[Minimalist]

Indeed.  What shall India do when 120 million Bangladeshi muslims knock on their door and say "can we borrow a towel?"

[The Grand Nudger]

Think they've been answering that question for years, with their weapons program.  

[Won2blv]

Okay... I don't know what you mean by false equivalences.

I don't seem to be helping anymore, so I'll just shut up and leave you alone. I'll be in the corner if you need me

Well I do very much appreciate your input since you have always seemed to be someone that is more reasonable about your points and less emotional. That being said... I just want claims to be backed up by facts or logic. One thing I have learned on this site is that all humans are subject to fallacies and mental roadblocks like cognitive dissonance. Right now, I don't think feel like the world is better than it was 100 years ago. But I am willing to change my belief on that. I just look at all the good things that mankind has accomplished and can't help but notice some unexpected consequences. I don't believe that the 50's were the golden age, I believe that things just go from bad to worse. For me, I see greedy humans rule the day in the end. And I don't say that being naive. I just see that greed leading to humankind being eradicated from this earth

[robvalue]

Sure, I'm always happy to back up what I say with logic. What did I say that you find illogical?

The state of the world is a very complex thing. Some things get better, some get worse. To make an overall judgement, it really depends what weight you put on particular factors. I think general standard of living has gone up, but the amount of damage we're doing to the planet has also gone up. Overall I think we're a blight to the planet, but lucky for you guys that's not my call to make.

Sure, humans can be very greedy and power hungry. I don't think that's anything new, there's just more ways for people to exercise those qualities now. However, I think people in civilised countries are much more free to live their lives how they want without being overtly controlled, and society looks after its less fortunate members better. I'm not in any way saying things are perfect in either regard, far from it, but better I think than in even recent history.

Medical knowledge plays a huge part too. If I was born 100 years ago, I dread to think what would have happened to me. I have two chronic conditions, one of which can't be treated even now, plus depression. My life would be short and very painful, or slightly longer, very painful and I'd go insane.

Animal welfare still has a long way to go (and now Cameron wants to make it worse) but is still better than it has been, in many countries.

[Won2blv]

Sure, I'm always happy to back up what I say with logic. What did I say that you find illogical?

The state of the world is a very complex thing. Some things get better, some get worse. To make an overall judgement, it really depends what weight you put on particular factors. I think general standard of living has gone up, but the amount of damage we're doing to the planet has also gone up. Overall I think we're a blight to the planet, but lucky for you guys that's not my call to make.

Sure, humans can be very greedy and power hungry. I don't think that's anything new, there's just more ways for people to exercise those qualities now. However, I think people in civilised countries are much more free to live their lives how they want without being overtly controlled, and society looks after its less fortunate members better. I'm not in any way saying things are perfect in either regard, far from it, but better I think than in even recent history.

Medical knowledge plays a huge part too. If I was born 100 years ago, I dread to think what would have happened to me. I have two chronic conditions, one of which can't be treated even now, plus depression. My life would be short and very painful, or slightly longer, very painful and I'd go insane.

Animal welfare still has a long way to go (and now Cameron wants to make it worse) but is still better than it has been, in many countries.

IMO, I don't believe that you are brash like some. Many make claims without feeling like any burden of proof is at all needed since they're among like minded friends. I read one post where the guy was asking 3 questions to christians and the 3rd was basically, "you know you're wrong right?" It just seems like many atheist believe that they can come from the presupposition that all of their claims must be true since they are logical evidence based people that always keep abreast of scientific consensus. Maybe that is true, but I just want to hear the logic, the evidence, and the scientific consensus. If you had an everyday Catholic, Protestant, Mormon, and one of Jehovah's Witnesses at your home and you had them explain their beliefs using reason and scriptural basis I guarantee you that 9 times of 10 the Witness would have more scriptural basis and logical reasoning for their belief. Now that doesn't mean much to you but the point is, I have deeply entrenched views and I'm not going disregard them just because someone says, "well, you know you're wrong right?"

I just cringe when I hear the spaghetti monster equivalency. For me it shows someones theological ignorance. And it is a deflection from the overall point usually. For whatever reason, over half the worlds population seems to believe in this god (muslims, christians, and jews) so there was something that got us here. Maybe it is simply just because of tradition and the one god that by chance made it big. I don't really know... So when people tell me, "what does it matter? I could claim that my pet dog told me 9/11 would happen a month before it did" Yeah of course, but if there is some kind of truth to that claim it would have to be explored? And if it is easily dismissed then it is easily dismissed. My bottom line is this, I don't need absolute certainty but I'm not going to let anyone convince me of something just because they said so

[pocaracas]

Climate change is true because I say so!

There! Done.
Well, then there's all these plots I found on google images:
https://www.google.com/search?q=average+...46#imgrc=_

It seems to me to be a definite upward tendency in global average temperature.... and it seems to coincide with an increase in atmospheric CO2 since the industrial age began...

https://www.google.com/search?safe=off&b...ABUr_g-8gg


Of course, correlation does not imply causation.... but it's a good hint.