(02-28-2019, 01:48 PM)Rajvik Wrote:Black Aeronaut Wrote:Rajvik.
You know about the guy that lived right under Mount St. Helens? When it was still a beautiful place?
You're being him right now
which one, there were many, some that even survived because they were on the opposite side of the mountain from the blowout?
sorry, sometimes the sarcasm has to be released that said, yes, i realize that in your eyes i'm being deliberately obtuse and willfully blind to a problem that "THE WORLD SEES" my problems are that all i see is a combination of doom and gloom predictions, none of which have come to pass, the so called experts either disagreeing (almost to the point of coming to blows) or being caught red handed in scandal of cooking their books, and a cure that is arguably worse than the disease. So pardon me while i sit here and enjoy the view. That said, i don't think you are lying, at least not knowingly. I just think that you have been duped into believing a lie that was sold so that some scientists could get funding and so that a politician could make a mint.
For one, I was referring to the one most recorded example, the man that lived on a small island in the middle of the lake at the base of the mountain. He absolutely refused to believe that anything was wrong.
He got buried by what's left of the original summit.
And as for the people on the opposite side? You say that like as if they were just fine. Just because you live on the other side of the mountain doesn't mean you don't feel the effects when it blows it's entire summit off. They still lost their homes and legitimately thought they were going to die. The survivor stories are quite harrowing and one scientist has even compiled a book of these stories. (He was originally after scientific data regarding the eruption and was interview people that saw it up close and lived to tell the tale. The stories just happened to come with that data, and he was smart enough to record their stories as well.)
Doom and gloom would be if I thought there was nothing that can be done about it. And it hasn't come to pass because it hasn't quite happened YET. That still means we can do SOMETHING about it. I know there's going to be a future afterwards.
My main issue is that you and yours are intentionally keeping us from taking measures to do anything about it. We can hardly care less about what you personally do. What the rest of us do will probably have little effect on your lifestyle in the long run. No one is going to mandate that you have to buy a new car, or that you have to put solar panels on your roof, or that you have to 'Go Green'.
What they DO want to do is mandate that newer cars meet certain requirements - not that everyone has to buy new ones. The automotive industry actually LIKES THIS because it gives them a much more legitimate excuse to outmode everything. They just don't do it because people like you keep spewing this idiocracy.
No one will force you to put solar panels or wind turbines up because they don't need you to. Instead, they're just gonna build solar and wind farms to generate power and decommission the old coal and oil burners. Which, by the way, means jobs.
They don't need to you 'Go Green' because they won't need you to do that yourself. Recycled materials are inexpensive and effective, and garbage sorting is getting better automation. Pretty soon, you won't even need to bother with a separate recycle bin, except that you seem to be under the impression that it's a waste of money and a cash grab.
And the few restrictions that DO get mandated are done so with very good reason, such as plastic bag bans. Yes, it's annoying, but the effects are obvious and incontrovertible.
All we ask is that the vocal minority that is you quit trying to hobble us over shit that you don't think matters anyways! The money that is being spent is generating jobs.
And on the subject of money and the research that it's going into? I'm gonna have to request that you actually back that up with a reputable source. I'm pretty sure that, yes, some scientists do carry on, quite viciously, over some minor points. This is academic politics, and it makes what goes on up on Capitol Hill look like a koi pond rather than a shark tank. These people stake their careers on this shit, so yeah, it's gonna get a bit nasty.
But the thing is? Most of these scientist agree that Climate Change WILL happen, especially if we don't take measures right now. The only things they're having trouble agreeing on is exactly how much we need to do, and how long we have before we have before we have to start abandoning coastal cities. Scientists that flat-out deny everything are the ones getting kick-backs funding from corporations that flat-out refuse to spend money on changing things - never mind that these changes will be revenue generators in the long run. They're interested only in making as much money as they can in as little of time as possible.
Which, BTW, has already been agreed on elsewhere in this forum that this behavior is having detrimental effects on society and needs to change.