Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Go Back   Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community > Main Forums > The Off Topic Forum
Ivrnet

View Poll Results: What role do humans play in contributing to climate change?
Humans are the primary contributor to climate change 255 66.06%
Humans contribute to climate change, but not the main cause 101 26.17%
Not sure 21 5.44%
Climate change is a hoax 9 2.33%
Voters: 386. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 07-11-2019, 07:21 PM   #641
Mr.Coffee
damn onions
 
Mr.Coffee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Exp:
Default

I think there are some truths to what you say #-3, but it’s more like putting these people into defensive positions to protect their lives and futures and families. That’s probably more of what is going on and motivating behaviours and commentary such as the one at the end of your post. We live in a very individualistic society and are surprised when we have a huge existential threat that requires a group effort to solve that there are some not buying in.

Weird, eh?
Mr.Coffee is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Mr.Coffee For This Useful Post:
Old 07-11-2019, 08:57 PM   #642
GGG
Franchise Player
 
GGG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Snuffleupagus View Post
Did any of these other life forms do global climate change in a 150 years? That's all it took for us.
Closer to 66 million.

It would be like not starting Cyanobacteria destruction of earth until after all of the Oxygen sinks were Depleted. The start of the Human Extinction event would be geologically when the first “man” existed. Also if you want to look at mass extinction I’d be will to bet it would take at least millennia to have humans be fully extinct even with a difficult climate.

The other issue is that I don’t think any of the mainstream climate models point towards human extinction as a consequence of global warming.

We are going to force a lot of species into extinction and the carrying capacity of the earth may drop but it’s unlikely global warming causes humans to be unable to technologically adapt.

Nuclear War, Pandemics, bio weapons, perhaps even AI is what you should be looking at when considering extinction.
GGG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2019, 10:34 PM   #643
photon
The new goggles also do nothing.
 
photon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Even if humans are unable to technologically adapt or mitigate, we're still talking about displacement, wars over resources, poverty, stuff like that. Nasty, but not extinction level.
__________________
Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position.
But certainty is an absurd one.
photon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2019, 11:33 PM   #644
#-3
Powerplay Quarterback
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuzz View Post
Albertan's are no more responsible than New Yorkers or Torontonians are. Come on. I'm tired of getting blamed for the climate problems. Take Alberta away and there would be zero difference. This is on everyone. Pointing fingers at Albertans and trying to expose us as some sort of hypocrite, while consuming just as much as us is not helping anything.
That's actually exactly the problem I'm talking about. it's not the fault of Albertans or New Yorkers. It a system problem that need to be addressed with mass cooperative action. Blame any individual for following the incentives laid out before them is a category error.

The problem here is people feeling they're lifes work cannot be judged retrospectively as having harmed the world around them, so they put blinders on the fires burning around them. And since this is a problem that can only be addressed with collective action, having people with their blinders on undermines everything.
#-3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2019, 11:38 PM   #645
#-3
Powerplay Quarterback
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee View Post
I think there are some truths to what you say #-3, but it’s more like putting these people into defensive positions to protect their lives and futures and families. That’s probably more of what is going on and motivating behaviours and commentary such as the one at the end of your post. We live in a very individualistic society and are surprised when we have a huge existential threat that requires a group effort to solve that there are some not buying in.

Weird, eh?
I think there is a streak of truth in this, but there are allot of people who have moved onto some other industry/life but still have the blinders on.

These are not purely rational opinions something is coming from personal identity too.
#-3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2019, 06:31 AM   #646
New Era
Franchise Player
 
New Era's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by #-3 View Post
That's actually exactly the problem I'm talking about. it's not the fault of Albertans or New Yorkers. It a system problem that need to be addressed with mass cooperative action. Blame any individual for following the incentives laid out before them is a category error.

The problem here is people feeling they're lifes work cannot be judged retrospectively as having harmed the world around them, so they put blinders on the fires burning around them. And since this is a problem that can only be addressed with collective action, having people with their blinders on undermines everything.
For the most part, humans are terrible at thinking about large complex problems, especially those that exceed their lifetime. Much of what we know is experiential, so if we have not personally experienced something we are skeptical of the effects of something. We can empathize, but when it comes to having understanding and a belief is the effects of something, we more often than not have to experience it ourselves. That is another thing that makes climate change so hard for people to grapple with. They don't experience or observe the changes around them from a global perspective, they only have that local or regional experience to fall back on. That is why so many rely on their experience with weather and conflate that as proof of climate change's existence. Its part of being human and one of weaknesses as a species.
New Era is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2019, 01:22 PM   #647
corporatejay
Franchise Player
 
corporatejay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by photon View Post
Even if humans are unable to technologically adapt or mitigate, we're still talking about displacement, wars over resources, poverty, stuff like that. Nasty, but not extinction level.
Fortunately before climate change none of these things existed.
__________________
corporatejay is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2019, 01:44 PM   #648
Azure
Had an idea!
 
Azure's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuzz View Post
Albertan's are no more responsible than New Yorkers or Torontonians are. Come on. I'm tired of getting blamed for the climate problems. Take Alberta away and there would be zero difference. This is on everyone. Pointing fingers at Albertans and trying to expose us as some sort of hypocrite, while consuming just as much as us is not helping anything.
I don't think it is even right to blame the common person.

The most we can do is recycle better and perhaps not buy a SUV when we don't need one.

Governments and corporations are at fault. Government more so because they can encourage common sense ideas that help.

Like encouraging CLT construction and banning single use plastics.
Azure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2019, 02:28 PM   #649
Fuzz
Franchise Player
 
Fuzz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Exp:
Default

I'm just tired of getting #### on by the rest of Canada while we pass them cheeseburgers to stuff their faces with.
__________________
Air Canada - We're not happy until you're not happy.
Telus - Almost as bad as Winnipeg.
Calgary Roads Dept - Ya, we'll get to that.
Fuzz is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2019, 04:00 PM   #650
Robbob
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by #-3 View Post
i'm might go with, motivated reasoning?

Think allot of it is attribution error in reality, that turns into motivated reasoning, which drives confirmation bias. Every developing country has heavily participate and personally profited from climate damaging industries. They also know and understand themselves to be generally good people. In a subconscious way its hard for them to accept the things that have been so good for such a good and thoughtful person as themselves could be drive existential risk. They are unknowingly attributing responsibility for large structural problems to their own identity and jumping on any opportunity to justify something that is objectively harmful in an effort to reconcile the harm with the fact that they believe themselves to be a good person. This is what causes a very smart engineer to stand in front of me with a straight face and tell me we propbably can wait untill CO2 reaches 7000ppm to start worrying.
fyp
Robbob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2019, 05:47 PM   #651
GGG
Franchise Player
 
GGG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Azure View Post
I don't think it is even right to blame the common person.

The most we can do is recycle better and perhaps not buy a SUV when we don't need one.

Governments and corporations are at fault. Government more so because they can encourage common sense ideas that help.

Like encouraging CLT construction and banning single use plastics.
If common people wanted to they could elect a government that would fight climate change and refuse to invest / shop at corps who aren’t doing more. The demand doesn’t exist for a corporation or government to do any more than lip service for the environment.
GGG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2019, 10:37 PM   #652
photon
The new goggles also do nothing.
 
photon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by corporatejay View Post
Fortunately before climate change none of these things existed.
__________________
Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position.
But certainty is an absurd one.
photon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2019, 07:05 AM   #653
New Era
Franchise Player
 
New Era's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by corporatejay View Post
Fortunately before climate change none of these things existed.
40% of the world's population lives within 100km of a coast. The potential for massive migration because of sea level rise is an existential threat the United States military sees as one of the greatest risks to peace and political stability around the globe. Imagine if sea levels rise and force a displacement of that population. What would a forced migration of 3 billion people look like and how would it impact other regions? These would be people who would have lost everything and would be starting over with very few resources at their disposal. The Mad Max scenario seems unlikely IMO, but this definitely has a bit of a World War Z feel to it. This is a scale unlike anything the planet has ever seen. The forced expulsion of Germans after WWII was seen as humanitarian disaster, so imagine an event like that, but on a global scale and a thousand times larger, would ultimately look like?
New Era is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to New Era For This Useful Post:
Old 07-13-2019, 02:49 PM   #654
The Fonz
Our Jessica Fletcher
 
The Fonz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by New Era View Post
40% of the world's population lives within 100km of a coast. The potential for massive migration because of sea level rise is an existential threat the United States military sees as one of the greatest risks to peace and political stability around the globe. Imagine if sea levels rise and force a displacement of that population. What would a forced migration of 3 billion people look like and how would it impact other regions? These would be people who would have lost everything and would be starting over with very few resources at their disposal. The Mad Max scenario seems unlikely IMO, but this definitely has a bit of a World War Z feel to it. This is a scale unlike anything the planet has ever seen. The forced expulsion of Germans after WWII was seen as humanitarian disaster, so imagine an event like that, but on a global scale and a thousand times larger, would ultimately look like?



If this were legitimately the track we were on, the most powerful people in the world would not be investing in coastal properties. If we were 50-100 years away from 40% of the planet’s population migrating further inland, we’d see coastal property values plummeting today, while Canadian Prairie & American Midwest property values skyrocket, today.

And yet...
The Fonz is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to The Fonz For This Useful Post:
Old 07-13-2019, 02:51 PM   #655
The Fonz
Our Jessica Fletcher
 
The Fonz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Exp:
Default

You need to get out of the city, Lanny. The world does not have a World War Z feel to it.
The Fonz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2019, 04:08 PM   #656
chubeyr1
Scoring Winger
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by corporatejay View Post
Fortunately before climate change none of these things existed.
Sure it did!

What ever happened to Global Warming?

We are all supposed to be dead right now!

In ten years the term climate change will be replaced with another term.

Dont get me wrong, millions will die in China. That is pollution. You gas your own population what do you think happens?
chubeyr1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2019, 04:21 PM   #657
chubeyr1
Scoring Winger
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GGG View Post
If common people wanted to they could elect a government that would fight climate change and refuse to invest / shop at corps who aren’t doing more. The demand doesn’t exist for a corporation or government to do any more than lip service for the environment.
Yet our government cripples our economy and buys dirty oil from countries without let say a carbon tax.

As far as I am concerned tax oil companies to death on the enviroment.

Yet if a ship from overseas is coming to port with oil, that better be clean oil too. It must be as clean as ours. It has to be better too after transporting it across the world.

We buy oil from countries that dont care about the enviroment. Yet Canadian companies have to follow all the rules. Foreign oil does not follow these rules.

Make it a level playing field.

We tax Canadian companies, we want them to meet our standards. They have too. Then me buy dirty oil from other nations that dont meet our standards.
chubeyr1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2019, 07:10 PM   #658
New Era
Franchise Player
 
New Era's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Fonz View Post



If this were legitimately the track we were on, the most powerful people in the world would not be investing in coastal properties. If we were 50-100 years away from 40% of the planet’s population migrating further inland, we’d see coastal property values plummeting today, while Canadian Prairie & American Midwest property values skyrocket, today.

And yet...
Yeah, that's how you gauge the track we're on. Who is investing money in what.

Or we can look at the major cities at risk right now.

https://www.theguardian.com/cities/n...global-warming

http://sealevel.climatecentral.org/u...ces-Report.pdf

https://www.epa.gov/climate-indicato...astal-flooding

https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/fe...st-risk-floods

https://qz.com/africa/997384/lagos-a...limate-change/

https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/...te-change.html

https://19january2017snapshot.epa.go...al-areas_.html

https://news.nationalgeographic.com/...rming-science/

https://www.livescience.com/38956-mo...-flooding.html

https://www.usatoday.com/story/money...ater/39533119/

https://www.npr.org/2019/07/10/73946...recasters-warn

https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...surged-in-u-s/

https://toolkit.climate.gov/topics/coastal-flood-risk

Yup, just a figment of people's imagination. Have you been to New Orleans, New York, or Miami lately? All three are great examples of the effect of sea level rise from climate change, right now. This is a real existential threat, no matter how much you wish to ignore it or try to laugh it off.
New Era is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2019, 07:46 PM   #659
Fuzz
Franchise Player
 
Fuzz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Exp:
Default

New Orleans is sinking because the delta is eroding because they over managed the Mississippi. It has virtually nothing to do with sea level rise. It's about the worst example you could come up with.


I'm not sure about Miami, but it is probably an example of where a city shouldn't have been built in the first place. I don't think flooding is anything new there, either.


But yes, sea level changes. We should probably be prepared to adapt to it.
__________________
Air Canada - We're not happy until you're not happy.
Telus - Almost as bad as Winnipeg.
Calgary Roads Dept - Ya, we'll get to that.
Fuzz is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2019, 08:48 PM   #660
New Era
Franchise Player
 
New Era's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuzz View Post
New Orleans is sinking because the delta is eroding because they over managed the Mississippi. It has virtually nothing to do with sea level rise. It's about the worst example you could come up with.
The compaction of the delta is problem, but rising sea levels in the gulf are a much greater threat to New Orleans than anything. The continued sea level rise associated with climate change will see the levees swamped in the next couple decades. Or maybe all this information is wrong?

https://theweek.com/articles/852411/...climate-change

https://www.markey.senate.gov/Global...eworleans.html

https://expo.nola.com/news/erry-2018...ana-south.html

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/b...g-away-by-2050

https://www.govtech.com/fs/How-New-O...te-Change.html

https://tulanemagazine.com/new-orlea...crescent-city/

https://www.choices.edu/video/how-ha...limate-change/

https://web.tplgis.org/nola_csc/

https://www.nrdc.org/sites/default/f...wOrleansLA.pdf

If that isn't good enough, maybe New Orleans city government is a reasonable authority?

http://resilientnola.org/

https://www.nola.gov/nola/media/Clim...ew-Orleans.pdf
New Era is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:42 PM.

Calgary Flames
2017-18




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Calgarypuck 2016