Denial site

Cabbagesandking

Council Member
Apr 24, 2012
1,041
0
36
Ontario
What some of the naysayers fail to recognise is that it is climate change that is already killi8ng people off. In the last decade some 500,000 have died as a direct consequence of that change. How many indirectly one can only surmise at the probable millions.

That number is increasing each year. Just imagine what will be the consequences for the lives of the 50 million climate refugees that there are already. Certainly many will have shortened life expectancy. Is that not death by climate and a "culling" since it could be prevented? How many will die when that figure reaches hundreds of millions?
 

L Gilbert

Winterized
Nov 30, 2006
23,738
107
63
70
50 acres in Kootenays BC
the-brights.net
I think it was Praxius who wants to kill off all scientists, I think it's important to be clear that mass murder is a bad thing.
lol Um, jeeez, professor ..... really? We had no idea.



We're not helpless in a democracry, my credo is plan for the best then work as hard as you can to make it a reality.
Like I said, we don't live in a democracy; we live in an oligarchic and corporatocratic plutarchy. Decent credo, but that's only my SOP or methodology.



I think it's a by-product of letting lobbyists and private interests decide what public policy is.
And where do lobbyists and private interests have their interests? Mainly in business.
Of course they're going to look out for themselves first and leave the rest of us to fight over what's left. With just a little oversight and accountability the last economic meltdown wouldn't have occured.
Business engineered the entire thing and gov'ts allowed it and enabled it.
Business doesn't have to be corrupt to be successful, it's just what happens when the more socially retarded amoung us start calling the shots.
No, it doesn't have to be, but profit drives business and the people that "call the shots" are not necessarily corrupt or retarded, just dismissive.



Ah, since about 1867 I think more or less,
Only according to hypothesis and democratic theory.
and while it's not perfect it's better than other systems where you take what you're given.
Ah, so you think anything other than the representative, pseudo-democratic system we have is no good? roflmao That's funny.
Of course if we let things continue to slid the way they have in the last 20-30 years then we won't have a democracy much longer.
I have yet to see you show how we live in a democracy in the first place, and not a oligarchy/plutocracy/corporatocracy.

How many will die when that figure reaches hundreds of millions?
My guess would be the same hundreds of millions.
 

Cabbagesandking

Council Member
Apr 24, 2012
1,041
0
36
Ontario
How many died in African droughts we never heard about in the days before television?
Far less than now. Far less. The area afflicted by drought now includes hundreds of thousands of sq. mls that were productive until the climate began warming and drying, The whole of the Horn of Africa and the great desertification of the sub Sahara are new.

Oddly the drought in the Horn began with a different cause. It was the cleaning of the air and lessening of pollution in Europe that began the zonal shift of rains. That is now a fixture and the drought is growing in the whole region.
 

Redmonton_Rebel

Electoral Member
May 13, 2012
442
0
16
lol Um, jeeez, professor ..... really? We had no idea.

If they're saying it then they're thinking about it, it not like these things don't happen or there isn't a certain percentage of the population just waiting for the chance to let the destructive side out.

Like I said, we don't live in a democracy; we live in an oligarchic and corporatocratic plutarchy. Decent credo, but that's only my SOP or methodology.

Not by choice.

Most people would prefer to have input into laws and policies that deeply affect their lives, it takes a concerted effort to deny that. As long as the process is still there then there's hope of change.

And where do lobbyists and private interests have their interests?Mainly in business

It's not all equal, if your main intent is to maximize your short term profits and exagerate your value to manipulate the share price then you're not even working in the best interests of your shareholders let alone the broader community if jobs are being lost or sent oversees and "profits" accumulated in fewer and fewer hands. There needs to be some sort of overall standard set that prevents the more destructive side of capitalism from dominating as we've been seeing for the last several decades in North America. Profits and share prices don't mean much if in the process communities and entire regions suffer economic devastation as a few individuals get rich. ERON was one of the worst examples of this as the people in charge vastly inflated the companies value and allowed the energy trading floor to create chaos in states like California. Pretty clearly if lobbyists and insiders are working for their own interests in a way that impoverishes others on a large scale then the system isn't going to be sustainable, the very communities they're supposed to be working to build up are in fact being torn down.


Business engineered the entire thing and gov'ts allowed it and enabled it.

Not all business, just those individuals who are willing to exploit the vulnerabilities in the system for their own short term gain. That's why appropriate oversight is necessary.

No, it doesn't have to be, but profit drives business and the people that "call the shots" are not necessarily corrupt or retarded, just dismissive.

Once again profit is a relative not an absolute term. You can increase short term profit by slashing jobs or services, but in the end if you're destroying the overall health of a company or worse the social structure it's part of, in the long term many "profits" are in fact loses. It's why lobbyists representing narrow short-sighted interests shouldn't be writing laws and implementing policies.

Only according to hypothesis and democratic theory.

It's still a relativity issue, Canada has had much more citizen input than say, the old USSR, China or North Korea. And we have the means to implement important and necessary changes that may conflict with the oligarchies interests that you state really run things. The next goverment could bring about a large change in policy direction, we're not forced to go along with arbitrary choices, it may be hard to assert that right sometimes, but it's there.

Ah, so you think anything other than the representative, pseudo-democratic system we have is no good? roflmao That's funny.

People in many other nations can be jailed or even executed for even stating opinions in opposition to the ruling power. I don't think our freedoms are something to be laughed at, they're something to demand respect for from the government and people who would like to see them removed.

I have yet to see you show how we live in a democracy in the first place, and not a oligarchy/plutocracy/corporatocracy.

Once again you seem to want to place this in absolute not relative terms, our system isn't perfect and it's had the crap kicked out of it in recent decades due to the sovereignty fight and the current government which does seem to see democracy in the same terms you do, as something to exclusively be manipulated for selfish interests. I see there as being far more health in the underlying political structure you do, I guess we'll find out in the coming years.

btw you remind me of a character from a movie from the eighties whose philosophy was "life sucks so be a schmuck", the world doesn't just come as it is with no choices, to a large degree it's what we make of it. And if we believe that we have no choices then we make that part of our reality.
 
Last edited:

L Gilbert

Winterized
Nov 30, 2006
23,738
107
63
70
50 acres in Kootenays BC
the-brights.net
If they're saying it then they're thinking about it, it not like these things don't happen or there isn't a certain percentage of the population just waiting for the chance to let the destructive side out.
lol Again, Professor, no-one had a clue about that either until you pointed it out.



Not by choice.
Which is the SOP for a nation built upon (or converted to) a plutocratic and oligarchic corporatocracy (as well as dictatorships and other forms). Choice is taboo.

Most people would prefer to have input into laws and policies that deeply affect their lives, it takes a concerted effort to deny that. As long as the process is still there then there's hope of change.
Ya think? And that happens even in places that have had the habit of eliminating choices; hence the upsrisings in Egypt and other countries.



It's not all equal, if your main intent is to maximize your short term profits and exagerate your value to manipulate the share price then you're not even working in the best interests of your shareholders let alone the broader community if jobs are being lost or sent oversees and "profits" accumulated in fewer and fewer hands. There needs to be some sort of overall standard set that prevents the more destructive side of capitalism from dominating as we've been seeing for the last several decades in North America. Profits and share prices don't mean much if in the process communities and entire regions suffer economic devastation as a few individuals get rich. ERON was one of the worst examples of this as the people in charge vastly inflated the companies value and allowed the energy trading floor to create chaos in states like California. Pretty clearly if lobbyists and insiders are working for their own interests in a way that impoverishes others on a large scale then the system isn't going to be sustainable, the very communities they're supposed to be working to build up are in fact being torn down.




Not all business, just those individuals who are willing to exploit the vulnerabilities in the system for their own short term gain. That's why appropriate oversight is necessary.



Once again profit is a relative not an absolute term. You can increase short term profit by slashing jobs or services, but in the end if you're destroying the overall health of a company or worse the social structure it's part of, in the long term many "profits" are in fact loses. It's why lobbyists representing narrow short-sighted interests shouldn't be writing laws and implementing policies. .
...... stating the obvious again.



It's still a relativity issue, Canada has had much more citizen input than say, the old USSR, China or North Korea.
Perhaps, but not as much as before. And its the reason I used to say we live in an oligarchic plutocracy but recently changed that to oligarchic and plutocratic corporatocracy.
We aren't as much so as the US of A but we're working on it.
And we have the means to implement important and necessary changes that may conflict with the oligarchies interests that you state really run things.
And on a rare occasion we do, when we aren't being apathetic.
The next goverment could bring about a large change in policy direction, we're not forced to go along with arbitrary choices,
No but often our voices aren't loud enough, heard, or paid attention to.
it may be hard to assert that right sometimes, but it's there.
Like I said, I expect the worst and hope for the best. The hope is always there.



People in many other nations can be jailed or even executed for even stating opinions in opposition to the ruling power. I don't think our freedoms are something to be laughed at, they're something to demand respect for from the government and people who would like to see them removed.
Our gov't isn't that brave or stupid yet.



Once again you seem to want to place this in absolute not relative terms, our system isn't perfect and it's had the crap kicked out of it in recent decades due to the sovereignty fight and the current government which does seem to see democracy in the same terms you do, as something to exclusively be manipulated for selfish interests. I see there as being far more health in the underlying political structure you do, I guess we'll find out in the coming years.
I guess we will as we have no choice but to wait and see.

btw you remind me of a character from a movie from the eighties whose philosophy was "life sucks so be a schmuck", the world doesn't just come as it is with no choices, to a large degree it's what we make of it. And if we believe that we have no choices then we make that part of our reality.
Yeah? So? I remind wifey of Winnie the Pooh. I remind some my rugby mates of a gorilla. etc. etc.
There's a difference between letting hopes without an eye on reality run thoughts and letting hopes with an eye on reality run them and I'm extremely short on blind optimism. I can hope to my heart's content for a Utopia, but I know it's unachievable.

Thanks, but I see a growing tendency for political and corporate domination of people and the culprit is thirst for profit. Ever watch Food, Inc., for example? Ever listen to Terry o'Reilly's The Age of Persuasion? Ever read anything from Marshall McLuhan?
 
Last edited:

Redmonton_Rebel

Electoral Member
May 13, 2012
442
0
16
Only idiots or psychopaths keep claiming this isn't happening and/or that we're not responsible.

Arctic Connections: Arctic Sea Ice Reaches Record Low | Vancouver Sun

It’s official: with a few weeks of melting left to go, the extent of sea ice remaining in the Arctic this summer has already passed the record low set in 2007.

By both of the most common measures, the extent of Arctic sea ice has reached a minimum never before seen since scientists began measuring it back in the late 1970s. In fact, it’s likely not been seen for centuries, if not millennia.

We hear a lot about “the melting Arctic.” The truth is, the Arctic melts every summer – at least to a certain extent. It’s a regular pattern of freezing for about nine months and melting back for about three. There is always ice remaining at the end of the summer; it doesn’t all melt away – yet.

Arctic sea ice extent now at record low levels | Bad Astronomy | Discover Magazine

I’ll be honest: this map and graph are making me unhappy. The fantastic website Skeptical Science has more about this. The most worrisome aspect of this to me is how this accelerates. Ice is bright white, so it reflects sunlight. Sea water is much darker and absorbs that light. So the more ice you lose, the darker overall the arctic gets, and the faster it melts.

Look at this map:

http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_daily_extent_hires.png

A few more years like this one- which is the well defined trend- and there won't be ice cover on the Arctic Ocean in the summer.

A lot of what gets posted on this site and particularly in this sub-forum isn't science based, a lot of it isn't even reality based.
 

skookumchuck

Council Member
Jan 19, 2012
2,467
0
36
Van Isle
 

beaker

Electoral Member
Jun 11, 2012
508
0
16
thepeacecountry
For the completely brain/soul dead there's no point in trying to talk reason, they're well past that.

But for those who still think life is a good thing, think about the implications of this.

http://neven1.typepad.com/.a/6a0133f03a1e37970b0176176f80eb970c-pi

This is how radically our world is changing because of our influence.

good graphic illustration. Can you give a time line for it? There will be some, with mentalities like Putin for example who will see this as an opportunity to explore for more fossil fuels in the Arctic.

For me the implications are more storms, causing more problems on rigs up there, more pollution in the form of leaks and CO2, more cold winters for Europe, well the full range of problems coming from the cause of the ice melt, AGW.
 

EagleSmack

Hall of Fame Member
Feb 16, 2005
44,168
96
48
USA

beaker

Electoral Member
Jun 11, 2012
508
0
16
thepeacecountry

MapleDog

Time Out
Jun 1, 2012
1,791
0
36
St Calixte Quebec Canada
Only idiots or psychopaths keep claiming this isn't happening and/or that we're not responsible.

Arctic Connections: Arctic Sea Ice Reaches Record Low | Vancouver Sun



Arctic sea ice extent now at record low levels | Bad Astronomy | Discover Magazine



Look at this map:

http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_daily_extent_hires.png

A few more years like this one- which is the well defined trend- and there won't be ice cover on the Arctic Ocean in the summer.

A lot of what gets posted on this site and particularly in this sub-forum isn't science based, a lot of it isn't even reality based.
After looking at the arctic map in your post,i see that a part of the world no one wanted,which was kinda given to Canada,now that there is a possibility to navigate and explore more,the other nations USA Russia etc,wants to take control of it,which i guess will be easy since our military forces is a joke for the world.
 

beaker

Electoral Member
Jun 11, 2012
508
0
16
thepeacecountry
After looking at the arctic map in your post,i see that a part of the world no one wanted,which was kinda given to Canada,now that there is a possibility to navigate and explore more,the other nations USA Russia etc,wants to take control of it,which i guess will be easy since our military forces is a joke for the world.

Hopefully it won't come to that.... There are international agreements concerning territorial claims, international courts, recognized means of resolving disputes.... But I take your point, if we have to fight off China, the US, Russia, and Denmark it could start to strain our resources.
 

EagleSmack

Hall of Fame Member
Feb 16, 2005
44,168
96
48
USA
Hopefully it won't come to that.... There are international agreements concerning territorial claims, international courts, recognized means of resolving disputes.... But I take your point, if we have to fight off China, the US, Russia, and Denmark it could start to strain our resources.

Strain?
 

Redmonton_Rebel

Electoral Member
May 13, 2012
442
0
16
Denial site is the wrong term, deranged site is probably better.

We're already putting billions of tons a year of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere with dramatic changes on climate already. There are trillions of tons of a very powerful greenhouse gas methane held in ice in tundra and seafloor deposits. As the entire Arctic region warms significantly after the melting of the ice pack then inevitably some of that methane is going into the atmosphere. We're already looking at significant species loss due to current climate change, I guess you can hold with the psychopaths here that hold that destruction of man and the natural world is good, because that's exactly what we're creating.