Jump to content
Due to a large amount of spamers, accounts will now have to be approved by the Admins so please be patient. ×
IGNORED

My bet to a workmate over the future of cars


danny_galaga

Recommended Posts

The climate has been changing from the dawn of time, (Including 5 ice ages), Once lush tropical forests now lay barren wastelands, While other tropical forests are now covered in ice. While I don't know the specific history of Easter Island I would be hard pressed to believe it's demise was industrial overindulgence, Especially considering the falsified manipulation of data from the NNOA, Lithium runoff in the ground water or byproducts from the atomic batteries for the sake of argument could also destroy a civilization...The very nature  of energy is it cannot be created or destroyed just changed from one state to another...So just drive a EV if it gives you a warm glow of righteousness I guess, But 23 pages in It would seem you lost the bet, and should just pony up and pay the man.

Edited by CandyLand
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We are too stupid to make our own stuff. Remember a certain pm shutting down our last car factory? 

Zzap is exactly right though. It's the same planet. We happen to be one of the largest exporters of coal. By your logic Australian coal only causes 1.2 % of the world's pollution.. But coal supplies hundreds of millions of people electricity at present. Hundreds of millions of people is not 1.2% of the world. 

Just from a economic point of view, what is Australia going to do when no one wants our coal anymore?  Your 'comfort' of only being 1.2% of the problem goes out the door when the rest of the world doesn't make stuff to suit us.

Just to be clear, I think I've said this before- I'm a whisky priest. I can see what the problem is, but I keep being part of it. I've just moved into a two bedroom unit. On my own, with no plans to change. In most of the world, that basic dwelling would house a family of four. Right now my garage is so full of stuff ( that much of the world will never own) that I can't get to my bicycle easily. Because it's not easy, I'm just driving to work. Ten minutes- the same time as it takes to ride! Again, in most of the world, most people walk, ride or take public transport to work. 

I am a human, and part of the human condition is to better ourselves. Everyone wants a better life. But it's silly to deny we are changing the climate drastically just because we want a better life. And it's silly not to at least TRY to do something about it.

For my part I resolve to get my bike going again. Any month now...

 

Candyland, I dig you and if I ever get stateside again we need to have a drink together. But the argument about climate changing since the dawn of time stuff is boring and irrelevant. In dawn of time there were no humans. Most of Earth's life was inhospitable to humans. And much of the rest of the time, only suitable to nomads. Certainly not suitable for freeways and golf courses and pizza ovens and pinball machines and insurance. We can live in a warmer wetter super cyclone environment but it's gonna be Mad Max world. Also I don't lose my bet until 2031. Double or nothing baby!

 

 

Edited by danny_galaga
  • Like 2
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Man hasn't conditioned the planet to suit his needs, so the dawn of time, solar data, cosmic impacts, volcanic activities are relevant to the concept of climate changes, not just fossil fuels, or the last century of industrial revolution, so ya boring, perhaps inconvenient to the dire consequences crowd but also part of the big picture...Shutting down coal is a ugly thing to witness, seen it happen here devastating entire towns and regions, and the ripple effects are that of extreme poverty, careful what you wish for.

Edited by CandyLand
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, CandyLand said:

It's not hug worthy, we are all friends here...Or at least I would like to think so.

I rue the day that this planet that we inhabit isnt worth a hug 

and for a somebody to say it is not worth worth a hug  needs a hug more than any thing it costs nothing but gives so much both to the the one receiving the hug and the one giving it

I know it wont change the predicament our planet is currently in but it sure as shit wont affect global warming climate change or the price of iron ore 

CANDYLAND i have lived and worked in more than one  mining town so i know exactly  what the consequences are of  loosing a mine of any sort

when a mine closes it affects not only the employees of the mine but the entire region and our country

 CANDYLAND if you are ever down under   i can show you exactly just what we will loose that is directly related to human conditioning of the environment

I  suggest you do it sooner rather than later because  if you would like to see a koala a plytapus an echidna or a  kangaroo in their natural habitat all of which we get in our back yard  the time is rapidly approaching when you will only see them if we are lucky in a zoo or a book

THIS PLANET IS DEFINATELY WORTH A HUG IT NEEDS ALL THE HUGS IT CAN GET

AND MAYBE IF THERE WERE MORE HUGGERS THE WORLD WOULD BE A BETTER PLACE

 

  WE WENT FROM THIS TO THIS AND IT  IS DIRECTLY RELATED TO HUMAN CONDITIONING OF THE ENVRIONMENT

 

DSCN2489.JPG

DSCN4124.JPG

Edited by The Big Easy
  • Like 1
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is the kind of thing I was talking about. Those pics are out of context, like gore's book, Yes I get the OMG shock value...But offhand (assuming that's not photoshop of course) They appear at the very least taken at different times of the year...Wait for spring. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators
8 hours ago, CandyLand said:

That is the kind of thing I was talking about. Those pics are out of context, like gore's book, Yes I get the OMG shock value...But offhand (assuming that's not photoshop of course) They appear at the very least taken at different times of the year...Wait for spring. 

The top photo (the green one) is Australian rainforest.  If it ever ends up looking like the photo below it (the brown one) then it really is rooted.  Rainforest is evergreen, it will not recover once it is in the state shown below.  I have no idea if the photos have been tweaked, or even if they are in the same location, but if that is an accurately displayed change you can be sure that ecosystem is dead, as are all of the very delicate Australian native animals that lived there.  Spring will not fix a problem like this. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, CandyLand said:

But back to the Ev future...

 

Owww, that is all we need out here in Australia, another way to start bushfires.

When it was found the high temperatures from catalytic converters were potentially starting fires it was at the manufacturers cost to rectify the problem having to install more heat shields around the converter or not sell anymore of there vehicles on the Australian market.

What is Tesla going to do?. 

Maybe another rocket launch

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, furballx said:

The top photo (the green one) is Australian rainforest.  If it ever ends up looking like the photo below it (the brown one) then it really is rooted.

Same location I would say. Judging by the blackening on some of the tree trunks in the "wet" picture, it burns regularly.

The "dry" picture shows signs of light blackening on the smaller of the trees as well and heat has been on the trees leaves.

Wasn't a major fire or the smaller tress would be burnt flush to the ground.

Clearly a site of a recent controlled burn I would say.

You don't burn such sites regularly in a controlled manner, nature will do it for you in an uncontrolled manner when the weather is fair less suitable.

Neglect "looking after the Australian bush" at your own peril. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most of Western Australia is like the top picture in Winter, then its like the bottom picture in Summer, who knows where those pictures were taken, they could be 1 from QLD and 1 from WA for someone just to prove a point.

Global warming may be a thing or it could be just a cycle the Earth goes through every 10,000 years?, they even show this when they find seashells and fossils of sea creatures in the middle of nowhere thousands of miles from water, it seems it might be a natural evolution of the world, I'm sure us humans don't help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guys, what is happening is that the amount of carbon we have released in just a couple of centuries took MILLIONS of years to sequester. Before I go on, just a tiny science history lesson- 

Maybe 150 years ago, science had advanced enough that some people, after doing the maths couldn't work out how the planet didn't shoot up to 100 degrees Celsius during the day, and plunge to minus 100 degrees Celsius at night. The temperature is much more stable than it should be. Finally a clever chemist realised that carbon dioxide created a greenhouse effect- the molecules have the right makeup to let almost all photons through. A photon is light. A form of energy. When light strikes an object, it can reflect or be absorbed. When it is absorbed by an atom, the outer electrons jump up to a higher energy level. The consequence of which is now the same energy is being radiated out at a different frequency. Now mostly infra red. 

Remember that carbon molecule? It lets ultraviolet radiation through on the way to the ground. But on the way up that energy is now infrared and most of it gets blocked. Glass does the same thing. If you build a house out of it, it traps enough heat inside that you can keep tropical plants all year around in the UK. Hence the term greenhouse.The amount of 'greenhouse' gases in the atmosphere effects the temperature on earth.

I am hoping no one here disputes the greenhouse effect. It is the effect that keeps the planets surface temperature relatively stable.

At different times in the past, it is true there have been more CO2, and other times less. Mostly it changes over the course of millions of years. When it changes quickly, up or down, there are mass extinctions. Also big changes in sea level as you get more, or less polar ice. And many other things.

The point I'm making when I say that the usual line the fossil fuel lobby trots out all the time about the earth's natural cycles is that it is boring and irrelevant as an argument. Several centuries is not enough time for pretty much anything but fruit flies and bacterial to evolve to adapt. And our civilisation is built on this thin wedge of history with conditions just so. Any other conditions will wreak havok on everything we know and love.

Anyway, where were we? 😃

 

 

 

Edited by danny_galaga
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Judging from the monolithic structures found around the world, advanced civilization is far older than the last couple centuries, potentially tens of thousands if the research of water damage on the spinx alone is credited...But I regress, Until the scientific model includes all data points the science is incomplete and consequently irrelevant.

Edited by CandyLand
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

12 hours ago, CandyLand said:

That is the kind of thing I was talking about. Those pics are out of context, like gore's book, Yes I get the OMG shock value...But offhand (assuming that's not photoshop of course) They appear at the very least taken at different times of the year...Wait for spring. 

I took those photos on my property at mount coxcomb (a volcanic plug) in upper lansdowne  on the mid north coast of new south wales i can assure everybody they have not been photoshoped tweaked or messd with in any way shape or form it is sub tropical rain rainforest and the  photos were taken at exactly the same location  of exactly the the same creek bed if  anybody cares to see it send me a message and i will take you to that exact location it was a rather nice camping spot

the photos were not intended to shock anybody but to  illustrate to the ignorant the plight this planet is in the photos were taken 2 years apart the green one in 2017 just before the drought hit us when we had 2 years of bugger all rainfall in an area  that averages well over 1000 mils a year the second   the burnt one is from 2019  when the bloody bushfires smashed us

this was not  a small bushfire nor was it a controlled recent burn this bushfire started from well over 20 ks away and decimated huge areas of the mid north coast our place and the neighboring properties always conducted controlled hazard reduction burns to try and reduce the impact of what eventually happened but in the 2 years of drought nobody could burn because it was just to risky and thumped us anyway people who have lived up there for over 60 years and been thru many more bushfires than us had never seen anything like the one that hit us in 2019

furballx is spot on those rainforest areas on our property are rooted and will never recover nor will  many  of the  native flora and fauna  quite a few of which are endangered  are now gone i  know our property its seasons its dangers  better than anyone and we did all we could to prepare for what eventually smashed us 

I am not a scientist im just a disgruntled veteran that was just trying to preserve an extremely unique biodiverse part of our country for future generations to enjoy the photos i posted show in perfect context what can and is happening with more and more frequency and ferocity and thats just within space of 2 years 

sorry about the rant Danny BUT I WILL BE BUGGERED IF THIS PLANET IS NOT WORTH SAVING OR AT THE VERY LEAST A HUG

  • Like 2
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yer sorry mate, looked like a controlled burn to me. The two years leading up to the major fire is the only time you could have burnt with any degree of safety and I've been down the same path being told you can't burn.

I also know the feeling seeing a major fire coming and thinking if only I had of done more preventative burning.

Irrespective of what you are being told by who regarding back burning, it is perfectly legal to burn on any day providing it isn't a total fire ban day and you can conduct such burning without notifying the local RFS if you keep the fire under 4 meters square in size and are present during the whole burn.

Under 4 meters deems the fire a "recreational fire" although at times I'm quite happy keeping the fire to under 2 square meters, have water on hand and monitor the weather continuously. 

Simply being legal is not go out and start burning on a windy day or when it simply is stupid to conduct such a fire because of weather conditions.

You also need to factor in if your fire takes off over the fence line, you are responsible no matter what the fire rating.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nobody is saying your pics were fake B/Easy, and with some context it seems unfortunate circumstances. But if you been following this since the beginning you kind of understand where we come from...It is not that we don't love the planet (*Jennifer does big hug), But the falsified data has to be addressed. 

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I just looked up Tom Harris. He is a mechanical engineer. He is not a climate scientist. So what he has to say is opinion. That's fine, we all have opinions. 

But when I see his organisation is funded by the Heartland Institute, you can pretty much discount what he has to say anyway. The Heartland Institute was founded in the 80's as a oil and tobacco lobby group.

Funny how Fox News NEVER interviews actual climate scientists. Or even, since they love to interview lobbyists,  EV lobbyists for example...

  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, CandyLand said:

I am not trying to drive a wedge between this camp or that, But there are actually other opinions on the subject that just banning Carbon across the board.

But on the subject of man made climate change, we can all agree 😃

I'm looking forward to the day Fix News interviews some climate scientists not funded by fossil fuel lobby groups. Since, as you say, there are other opinions on the subject. Why not interview some relevant experts 😉

Here's some science, from relevant scientists that Fox could report on 

https://www.cnet.com/science/climate/features/hunting-antarcticas-holy-grail-deep-beneath-the-ice/

 

Edited by danny_galaga
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well it could also  be said if it wasn't for the NNOA falsifying data to scare leaders into the Paris accord, we might have faith in the science...But if you think about it it really doesn't make any sense, since co2 levels are actually 1300% less than what they once were...Geology man, the planet doesn't lie, or have an agenda...Look it up of you want.

Screenshot_20221014-003755_Gallery.jpg

Edited by CandyLand
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...