Let us hang the bar high: We need to achieve a carbon neutral way of life

Climate-Debate.com > Discussion Forum > Climate debate in general > Let us hang the bar high: We need to achieve a carbon neutral way of life

Let us hang the bar high: We need to achieve a carbon neutral way of life10-12-2019 01:39
zeroCOtwo ☆☆☆☆☆ (2)	Hello to all the climate debaters, considering the urgency, I believe it is important to set very ambitious goals. That way the pressure for more radical technology leaps and more ambitious policies will persist. We need as many good ideas and discussions as possible to achieve a carbon neutral way of life. Greets, zeroCOtwo, check out my blog: 0co2.home.blog
10-12-2019 01:46
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	zeroCOtwo wrote:...more radical technology leaps ... And most technological advances have a lot of benefits beyond the original goal. We may set out to reduce CO2 emissions and end up with free energy.
10-12-2019 02:01
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14413)	zeroCOtwo wrote: considering the urgency, I believe it is important to set very ambitious goals. Urgency? What are you talking about? zeroCOtwo wrote: That way the pressure for more radical technology leaps and more ambitious policies will persist. What? Explain. zeroCOtwo wrote:We need as many good ideas and discussions as possible to achieve a carbon neutral way of life. First we need a convincing argument some need for carbon-neutrality. . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist. The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank :sigh* Not the "raw data" crap.* - Leafsdude IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
14-12-2019 18:10
Third world guy ★☆☆☆☆ (88)	Hi, zeroCOtwo: You start badly. There is no climatic urgency to consider, so there is no reason to set any ambitious and fanciful goals. Policies may be dictated - in a neurotic way - to reduce what you call 'the carbon footprint', but they will only serve to throw society's money in the trash. I feel that you have been a victim of the propaganda of nefarious people like Al Gore and the Swedish puppet (Greta Thunberg). Relax, live in peace and meditate: CO2 is a blessing and we must pay it homage. Have a good and thoughtful weekend. There are three kinds of climate change: that generated by natural factors; that generated by man; and that generated by economic interests.
14-12-2019 18:52
James___ ★★★★★ (5513)	tmiddles wrote: zeroCOtwo wrote:...more radical technology leaps ... And most technological advances have a lot of benefits beyond the original goal. We may set out to reduce CO2 emissions and end up with free energy. Would this be considered free energy? They have gotten smaller units to work. The issue has been how hot it gets. It uses tritium (H3O I think it is) to generate electricity. There is a lake in Europe that is supposed to have a 10,000 year supply of it. https://www.iter.org

14-12-2019 19:23
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14413)	tmiddles wrote: zeroCOtwo wrote:...more radical technology leaps ... And most technological advances have a lot of benefits beyond the original goal. We may set out to reduce CO2 emissions and end up with free energy. Of course. Since we deny the 1st law of thermodyanmics applies in the case of Global Warming, we might as well presume that it won't apply "beyond" Global Warming. I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist. The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank :sigh* Not the "raw data" crap.* - Leafsdude IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
15-12-2019 20:45
Into the Night★★★★★ (21599)	zeroCOtwo wrote: Hello to all the climate debaters, considering the urgency, I believe it is important to set very ambitious goals. That way the pressure for more radical technology leaps and more ambitious policies will persist. We need as many good ideas and discussions as possible to achieve a carbon neutral way of life. Greets, zeroCOtwo, check out my blog: 0co2.home.blog First, define a 'neutral way of life'. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
15-12-2019 23:25
HarveyH55★★★★★ (5197)	zeroCOtwo wrote: Hello to all the climate debaters, considering the urgency, I believe it is important to set very ambitious goals. That way the pressure for more radical technology leaps and more ambitious policies will persist. We need as many good ideas and discussions as possible to achieve a carbon neutral way of life. Greets, zeroCOtwo, check out my blog: 0co2.home.blog Does setting any goals, actually accomplish the task? Goals are meaningless, without motivation. To motivate the masses, you have to hurt them, twist some arms, tax the hell out of them. More ambitious goals, would require stronger motivation, like breaking legs, or mass murder, seizing wealth and property. Which is worse? The cure, or the charade?
16-12-2019 07:55
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	HarveyH55 wrote:...breaking legs, or mass murder, ... Isn't Making America Great Again a goal?
16-12-2019 11:11
HarveyH55★★★★★ (5197)	tmiddles wrote: HarveyH55 wrote:...breaking legs, or mass murder, ... Isn't Making America Great Again a goal? No, is removing the democrat/socialist goals, so we can get back to living as we should.
16-12-2019 12:28
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	HarveyH55 wrote: tmiddles wrote: HarveyH55 wrote:...breaking legs, or mass murder, ... Isn't Making America Great Again a goal? No, is removing the democrat/socialist goals, so we can get back to living as we should. Ok that actually makes sense. Enforced action by a government to achieve anything is rooted in violence. But I think two "goals" that involved no arm twisting or mass murder are relvant: 1- Recycling 2- Littering People don't litter because it's considered rude, not because they'll be clubbed over the head for doing it.
16-12-2019 19:34
Into the Night★★★★★ (21599)	tmiddles wrote: HarveyH55 wrote: tmiddles wrote: HarveyH55 wrote:...breaking legs, or mass murder, ... Isn't Making America Great Again a goal? No, is removing the democrat/socialist goals, so we can get back to living as we should. Ok that actually makes sense. Enforced action by a government to achieve anything is rooted in violence. But I think two "goals" that involved no arm twisting or mass murder are relvant: 1- Recycling 2- Littering People don't litter because it's considered rude, not because they'll be clubbed over the head for doing it. They'll be clubbed over the head for doing it. If you are caught littering, you will face a pretty hefty fine. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
16-12-2019 20:31
HarveyH55★★★★★ (5197)	tmiddles wrote: HarveyH55 wrote: tmiddles wrote: HarveyH55 wrote:...breaking legs, or mass murder, ... Isn't Making America Great Again a goal? No, is removing the democrat/socialist goals, so we can get back to living as we should. Ok that actually makes sense. Enforced action by a government to achieve anything is rooted in violence. But I think two "goals" that involved no arm twisting or mass murder are relvant: 1- Recycling 2- Littering People don't litter because it's considered rude, not because they'll be clubbed over the head for doing it. Guess you've never seen a homeless camp... Or do any volunteer work, to feed the homeless. Part of the job, is to make sure and get the mess they leave cleaned up. I'm talking about the set up a tent in the park, feed the homeless. People are lazy and sloppy, not just the homeless. I don't know about nationwide, but several cities in Florida, stopped collecting recyclables at the curb years ago. The city I live in still does, but they closed down the recycle center a bout 6 blocks from my house, where you could drop off bulk paper, plastic, and cans, yard waste. Recycling isn't cost effective, people don't sort properly, and much of it goes to the landfill. China stopped buying much of it, probably wouldn't take much of it, if delivered free of charge. Vast majority need motivated to not litter, and to recycle...
16-12-2019 22:43
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	Into the Night wrote:If you are caught littering, you will face a pretty hefty fine. But that's NOT why people don't litter. HarveyH55 wrote: Guess you've never seen a homeless camp... No doubt there are still people who litter. In some countries/cultures it's common place for the average person to litter. To simply through the trash from lunch out the bus window. The reason people don't litter is because it's considered by them, and those around them, to be lame. NOT because they will suffer consequences from the law. In that respect it's a useful example of how something can be accomplished in society without government enforcement.
16-12-2019 23:11
Into the Night★★★★★ (21599)	tmiddles wrote: Into the Night wrote:If you are caught littering, you will face a pretty hefty fine. But that's NOT why people don't litter. HarveyH55 wrote: Guess you've never seen a homeless camp... No doubt there are still people who litter. In some countries/cultures it's common place for the average person to litter. To simply through the trash from lunch out the bus window. The reason people don't litter is because it's considered by them, and those around them, to be lame. NOT because they will suffer consequences from the law. In that respect it's a useful example of how something can be accomplished in society without government enforcement. So people don't litter and people do litter???? Irrational. Which is it, dude? The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan

17-12-2019 01:32
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	Into the Night wrote: So people don't litter and people do litter???? Irrational. Which is it, dude? Ah another gem from ITN. The answer is : YES Welcome to the imperfect, impure and thoroughly varied universe we all share ITN. I guess in ITNese the amount of littering is UNKNOWABLE! But for normal people it's easy to understand the distinction between less and more. Edited on 17-12-2019 01:33
17-12-2019 02:23
Into the Night★★★★★ (21599)	tmiddles wrote: Into the Night wrote: So people don't litter and people do litter???? Irrational. Which is it, dude? Ah another gem from ITN. The answer is : YES Paradox. Irrational. Which is it, dude? tmiddles wrote: Welcome to the imperfect, impure and thoroughly varied universe we all share ITN. Yours seems to be universe of paradox and irrationality. tmiddles wrote: I guess in ITNese the amount of littering is UNKNOWABLE! Not what anyone is talking about. Contextomy fallacy. tmiddles wrote: But for normal people it's easy to understand the distinction between less and more. Not what anyone is talking about. Contexomy fallacy. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
18-12-2019 01:23
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	Into the Night wrote: tmiddles wrote: Welcome to the imperfect, impure and thoroughly varied universe we all share ITN. Follow along here ITN: In the US people litter (throw trash out there window into the street for example) far less than in some other countries due to our social values and not because you will get arrested or a $1000 fine. Sometimes people do still litter though, just far less. You see it's not about Everything or Nothing, 0 or 1, because it's the real world. The real world is about relative comparison, ranges of value, and refuses to offer purity or absolute precision. Let me see if Grover can help you out with an example: See Grover is "Near" and then he is "Far". It's in COMPARING one thing to the other that you have a RELATIVE difference between the two. Do I need to know exactly where Grover is when he is "Near" and "Far" to know that he is close in the first and further in the latter? No, no I do not.
18-12-2019 01:54
Into the Night★★★★★ (21599)	tmiddles wrote: Into the Night wrote: tmiddles wrote: Welcome to the imperfect, impure and thoroughly varied universe we all share ITN. Follow along here ITN: In the US people litter (throw trash out there window into the street for example) far less than in some other countries due to our social values and not because you will get arrested or a $1000 fine. Sometimes people do still litter though, just far less. So you think the $1000 fine is completely pointless? Why is there such a law then? tmiddles wrote: You see it's not about Everything or Nothing, 0 or 1, because it's the real world. False equivalence fallacy. You are not describing a range. You are still in paradox. Which is it, dude? tmiddles wrote: The real world is about relative comparison, ranges of value, and refuses to offer purity or absolute precision. You must clear your paradox. Which is it, dude? tmiddles wrote: Let me see if Grover can help you out with an example: See Grover is "Near" and then he is "Far". It's in COMPARING one thing to the other that you have a RELATIVE difference between the two. [quote]tmiddles wrote: Do I need to know exactly where Grover is when he is "Near" and "Far" to know that he is close in the first and further in the latter? No, no I do not. Irrelevance fallacy. You are not making comparisons. You created a paradox. Which is it, dude? The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
18-12-2019 02:34
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	Into the Night wrote: Irrelevance fallacy. Just going through the motions with you ITN to reduce the degree to which you pollute this board. I know you're hopeless.
18-12-2019 07:40
keepit ★★★★★ (3060)	Comparing the near and the far. Isn't that how this whole thing started --- the difference engine. Does anybody remember that?
18-12-2019 16:15
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14413)	tmiddles wrote: Into the Night wrote: Irrelevance fallacy. Just going through the motions with you ITN to reduce the degree to which you pollute this board. I know you're hopeless. Any rational observer will notice that the one feeling obligated to inject Grover into the conversation is just polluting the board. . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist. The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank :sigh* Not the "raw data" crap.* - Leafsdude IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
18-12-2019 23:21
Into the Night★★★★★ (21599)	tmiddles wrote: Into the Night wrote: Irrelevance fallacy. Just going through the motions with you ITN to reduce the degree to which you pollute this board. I know you're hopeless. YALIFNAP The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
18-12-2019 23:21
Into the Night★★★★★ (21599)	keepit wrote: Comparing the near and the far. Isn't that how this whole thing started --- the difference engine. Does anybody remember that? Contextomy fallacy. No one is talking about the difference engine. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan

Join the debate Let us hang the bar high: We need to achieve a carbon neutral way of life:

Threads	Replies	Last post
Maximizing Carbon Sequestration in Terrestrial Agroecosystems	838	26-04-2024 01:59
Happy fourth of July. I wonder how many liberals are eating carbon cooked burgers	1	06-07-2023 23:52
Uses for solid carbon	30	06-07-2023 23:51
Maximizing Carbon Sequestration in Wetlands	96	23-06-2023 14:49
Biden wants to force 'carbon capture'	8	21-06-2023 12:55