Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

The world after 2100 .....
Quote | Reply
.....is f*cked. I genuinely believe in what this scientist is suggesting.

https://ourworld.unu.edu/...t-happens-after-2100
Quote Reply
Re: The world after 2100 ..... [cerveloguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
cerveloguy wrote:
.....is f*cked. I genuinely believe in what this scientist is suggesting.

https://ourworld.unu.edu/...t-happens-after-2100

So is it ok for anyone to point to any number of past predictions of the global calamity that was suppose to happen by now?

Or are we to just ignore all these past doom and gloom predictions (that were supposed to have already come to fruition) and now consider this particular prediction to be serious?

Weren't we all supposed to have flying cars by the year 2000 (which were then supposed to fall out of the sky because of the Y2k bug?).

Wasn't milk going to be $12 per gallon and gasoline $9 per gallon by 2015?...

(Watch this fucking video!!!!)....

http://www.newsbusters.org/...-climate-change-june

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb
Quote Reply
Re: The world after 2100 ..... [Duffy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
That is hilarious!
Quote Reply
Re: The world after 2100 ..... [cerveloguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Thanks Trump!!
Quote Reply
Re: The world after 2100 ..... [cerveloguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
... is different than anything we can imagine.

Global warming is real and is a significant problem, if we do nothing. But we won't do nothing.

By 2100 you won't recognize our transportation, energy production, industry, ...

And the seas might be a few feet higher if we don't get our shit together.

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.
Quote Reply
Re: The world after 2100 ..... [cerveloguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The ice caps were all gone in 2012, think about it. While GW is real, alarmism is also real and unhelpful.
Quote Reply
Re: The world after 2100 ..... [cerveloguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply

Quote Reply
Re: The world after 2100 ..... [racin_rusty] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
racin_rusty wrote:
The ice caps were all gone in 2012, think about it. While GW is real, alarmism is also real and unhelpful.

I agree with your statement that alarmism is real and unhelpful but the opposite is also true. Sitting back and doing nothing will make matters worse but as a nation we just kick the can down the road and hope someone else fixes the mess we've made.

_____
TEAM HD
Each day is what you make of it so make it the best day possible.
Quote Reply
Re: The world after 2100 ..... [Duffy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I won’t believe in man-made global warming until:

(1) The scientists proposing it stop manipulating data (and always in their favor);
(2) Accurate data is used (satellite data didn’t start until 1979);
(3) Scientists begin incorporating cloud cover (a major factor) in their computer models;
(4) Politicians stop using it as a reason to redistribute wealth to undeveloped countries;
(5) The mainstream news media stops publishing only one side of the argument (it's not "settled science"); and
(6) The proponents (Algore et. al.) stop trying to profit from it (while they hypocritically burn more fossil fuel in one hour in their private jets than most of use in a year’s time).

Over the last 40 years, I’ve seen enough alarmist predictions (overpopulation, running out of oil, etc.) turn out to be so wildly wrong that I’m skeptical of anyone making claims about the world decades from now. Even shorter-term predictions about the global warming have proven wildly inaccurate.
Quote Reply
Re: The world after 2100 ..... [Jim @ LOTO, MO] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I won’t believe in man-made global warming until:

(1) The scientists proposing it stop manipulating data (and always in their favor);


Can you show us an example of a climate scientist censured or convicted of manipulating data? The closest I can think of is Spencer and Christy, what do you think of that?

(2) Accurate data is used (satellite data didn’t start until 1979);

Wrong. A lot of satellite data go back well before 1979. And besides, there's a lot of data besides satellite data.

(3) Scientists begin incorporating cloud cover (a major factor) in their computer models;

Wrong again. Climate models have incorporated clouds since their inception.

(4) Politicians stop using it as a reason to redistribute wealth to undeveloped countries;

Huh? You're going to decide whether you "believe in man-made global warming" based on what politicians are doing? Wouldn't it make more sense to base your belief on the science?

(5) The mainstream news media stops publishing only one side of the argument (it's not "settled science"); and

Why don't you show us some credible sources for the other side? And since you have issues with the mainstream media, why don't you just show us some references from the scientific literature for your unsettled science?

(6) The proponents (Algore et. al.) stop trying to profit from it (while they hypocritically burn more fossil fuel in one hour in their private jets than most of use in a year’s time).

Oh, so now you're going to tie your beliefs to Al Gore's behavior? That doesn't make a whole lot of sense.[/quote]
Quote Reply
Re: The world after 2100 ..... [cerveloguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
cerveloguy wrote:
.....is f*cked. I genuinely believe in what this scientist is suggesting.

https://ourworld.unu.edu/...t-happens-after-2100

I think the one thing we will be able to count on is there will be a Slowtwitch and there will be a guy called cerveloguy, posting about all things political that involve the USA.

Now onto my response to you about your post for the immediate future.



************************
#WeAreTheForge #BlackGunsMatter

"Look, will you guys at leats accept that you are a bunch of dumb asses and just trust me on this one? Please?" BarryP 7/30/2012
Quote Reply
Re: The world after 2100 ..... [cerveloguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Oh man get the fuck outta here with that. I think we have bigger problems that will end us before that.

1. Machines taking over and killing us or using us as a power source for one.

2. Meteor crashing into the earth.

3. Plague or pandemic on a massive scale.

4. Inferility of the more intelligent and successful.

5. My favorite, economic collapse that leads to a Hobbesian society where most worried about climate change will get murdered anyways for being weak.


"In the world I see you are stalking elk through the damp canyon forests around the ruins of Rockefeller Center. You'll wear leather clothes that will last you the rest of your life. You'll climb the wrist-thick kudzu vines that wrap the Sears Towers. And when you look down, you'll see tiny figures pounding corn, laying stripes of venison on the empty car pool lane of some abandoned superhighway." T Durden
Quote Reply
Re: The world after 2100 ..... [cerveloguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
cerveloguy wrote:
.....is f*cked. I genuinely believe in what this scientist is suggesting.

https://ourworld.unu.edu/...t-happens-after-2100

I'm an optimist and generally believe a lot of the doom and gloom is alarmist in nature trying to get people off their asses to change. Worst case scenarios.
Quote Reply
Re: The world after 2100 ..... [TheForge] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
TheForge wrote:
Oh man get the fuck outta here with that. I think we have bigger problems that will end us before that.

1. Machines taking over and killing us or using us as a power source for one.

2. Meteor crashing into the earth.

3. Plague or pandemic on a massive scale.

4. Inferility of the more intelligent and successful.

5. My favorite, economic collapse that leads to a Hobbesian society where most worried about climate change will get murdered anyways for being weak.

You probably should stop watching TV and movies if you think any of those are more likely to cause big problems. With the possible exception of the infectious disease threat but I think even that is greatly exaggerated.
Quote Reply
Re: The world after 2100 ..... [ThisIsIt] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
What is the worst case scenario for climate change in 100 years? The world becomes like where I live? The coasts flood killing millions? Worldwide famine? Regional collapses of civilization? Hobbesian societies?

I don't see a problem with any of the above.


"In the world I see you are stalking elk through the damp canyon forests around the ruins of Rockefeller Center. You'll wear leather clothes that will last you the rest of your life. You'll climb the wrist-thick kudzu vines that wrap the Sears Towers. And when you look down, you'll see tiny figures pounding corn, laying stripes of venison on the empty car pool lane of some abandoned superhighway." T Durden
Quote Reply
Re: The world after 2100 ..... [TheForge] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
TheForge wrote:
What is the worst case scenario for climate change in 100 years? The world becomes like where I live? The coasts flood killing millions? Worldwide famine? Regional collapses of civilization? Hobbesian societies?

I don't see a problem with any of the above.

Yeah, yeah we know. You can't want for your misanthropic fantasies to become reality so you can demonstrate how awesome you are in your Mad Max fantasy world.
Quote Reply
Re: The world after 2100 ..... [ThisIsIt] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ThisIsIt wrote:
TheForge wrote:
What is the worst case scenario for climate change in 100 years? The world becomes like where I live? The coasts flood killing millions? Worldwide famine? Regional collapses of civilization? Hobbesian societies?

I don't see a problem with any of the above.

Yeah, yeah we know. You can't want for your misanthropic fantasies to become reality so you can demonstrate how awesome you are in your Mad Max fantasy world.

...heart attack killed him in his sleep that night

And so castles made of sand
Slips into the sea
Eventually

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb
Quote Reply
Re: The world after 2100 ..... [ThisIsIt] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ThisIsIt wrote:
cerveloguy wrote:
.....is f*cked. I genuinely believe in what this scientist is suggesting.

https://ourworld.unu.edu/...t-happens-after-2100


I'm an optimist and generally believe a lot of the doom and gloom is alarmist in nature trying to get people off their asses to change. Worst case scenarios.

I'm a total optimist and the over-selling of gloom and doom alarm-ism only works on a minority segment of the population.
Quote Reply