Remember me
▼ Content

M2C2 - where all or nothing means nothing


M2C2 - where all or nothing means nothing17-10-2015 04:23
trafnProfile picture★★★☆☆
(779)
Okay, so we all know something is going on, and that something seems to be about pollution, the problems it can cause, and the difficulties that arise in trying to clean it up. One of the reasons that pollution is so difficult to deal with is that it is a relative thing. Think of any pollutant that you can and I'll bet you there's someone or something that sees it differently. For example, two of the most historical pollutants we've been dealing with since we learned to walk upright are our own poop and pee. Yes, they're natural, and yes, everybody makes them, but unless you're a tree that would enjoy the nitrogen in our urine, or a dung beetle who'd enjoy rolling up a wad of our poop, if we don't find a way to dispose of all that crap, then our world becomes... well, polluted.

Now the main pollutant we're all talking about with M2C2 is CO2. Yes, it's natural, and yes, everybody makes it, but can there be such a thing as too much CO2? Of course, plants seem to like it a lot, and the oceans seem more than willing to absorb as much as they can get there hands on. What's more, most people who know about the subject seem to agree that if it were missing from our atmosphere altogether, then the world would be a lot colder place. So, obviously, too little CO2 would definitely be a bad thing. But what about too much?

I guess the big problem here isn't whether too much CO2 would be a bad thing or not, for too much of anything is almost always a bad thing. The question is, how much is actually too much CO2 for both us and our atmosphere. Right now, the simple answer to that question is that no one knows. We can guess and we can estimate, but that's still a question looking for an answer. Unfortunately, the one thing you can't do with lonely questions like this is to put it back in the bottle, because just like a Jeanie, once it's out it's out. Nope, one way or another, you just gotta deal with it. But how?

When dealing with any unknown, one place to start is by considering the likely outcomes. In the case of M2C2, though the options are endless, they mostly fall on a spectrum from nothing happens to the world ends. So, to make things easy, let's consider just those two extremes for now. First, if nothing happens, then the last thing you want to do is over-react and waste a lot of time, energy and money preparing for an imaginary enemy who's never going to come charging over the horizon. On the other extreme, if the world's about to end and you still have time to do something about it, you just might want to do something about it. So though we don't currently know if M2C2 will ever really happen or not, at least now we know what our options are: either we're going to do something, or we're going to do nothing so as not to waste a lot of time, energy and money for nothing at all. So which do we choose?

Perhaps the answer lies in what we call today "preventive" medicine where we do things with the hope that nothing ever does happen. Take vaccines, for example, which are the classic example of this medical field. If you take a vaccine, you do so in the hope that a particular disease never occurs. Why? Because you believe that it's an inexpensive way to keep yourself from getting sick. But isn't it also possible that you could have just as well have skipped that shot and still not have gotten sick? Of course, and this is why a lot of people don't get vaccinated: they'd rather save the time, energy and money it would take to get a vaccine, since in the end nothing is going to happen, anyways. On the other hand, you could consider the possibility of not taking the vaccine and getting sick, but that argument never seems to take center stage whenever you ask people to invest in something in the hope that they do get a return of nothing.

So ultimately, there is no one single satisfactory answer which satisfies everyone. The people who believe in vaccines get them, and those who don't believe in vaccines avoid them. The same is true with M2C2, with believers getting it and deniers avoiding it. Yet the momentum today is obviously on the side of the believers, and that momentum appears to be growing stronger every day. So if you are a believer, don't worry, because you're riding on the cusp of a new generation which will likely save the world. And if you're a denier, don't you worry either, because after all, no matter what happens, nothing is going to happen.

Thoughts?


The 2015 M2C2 (Global 9/11) Denialist Troll Awards

1st Place - Jep Branner - Our Stupid Administrator!
2nd Place - IBdaMann - Science IS cherry picking!
3rd Place - Into the Night - Mr. Nonsense numbers!
4th Place - Tim the plumber - The Drivel Queen!

Edited on 17-10-2015 04:27
17-10-2015 04:45
IBdaMann
★★★★★
(4265)
trafn wrote:Now the main pollutant we're all talking about with M2C2 is CO2.

Nope. Pollution is independent of quantity. It does not matter if I only pour one can of motor oil into Lake Mono, I am polluting it.

Whenever you hear something defined as pollution, or poison, if "there is enough of it" then the definition is invalid. Everything is bad if there is "too" much of it, by definition.

CO2 is not pollution. Period. End of story. If a particular religion deems CO2 as pollution then the religion is wrong. Who'd want a religion that mistakes a life necessity as pollution anyway?

I take it that, according to M2C2 dogma, oxygen is pollution as well, yes? By the same reasoning, no?


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

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
17-10-2015 05:19
trafnProfile picture★★★☆☆
(779)
@IBdaMann - too much of anything is a pollutant: something which devalues your world. If you value life, then yes, both CO2 and O2 can be pollutants as we have both shown in other threads that they can be lethal in excessively elevated doses. If you don't believe me, try breathing just pure CO2 or just pure O2 for a half hour.

The real question here is what's the healthy balance. We've already crossed that line many times before with things like smog and acid rain. But those were just warm-ups. Now we've entered the big leagues with M2C2.
17-10-2015 05:22
IBdaMann
★★★★★
(4265)
trafn wrote: @IBdaMann - too much of anything is a pollutant: .

Nope. Pollution is quantity independent.

But for the record, is your official position that oxygen is a pollutant?


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

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




Join the debate M2C2 - where all or nothing means nothing:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
Is M2C2 a matter of the method of interpretation?223-10-2018 02:22
So, how many M2C2 deniers can you fit on the head of a needle?1018-07-2017 05:28
Is the United States doomed to be the global dumb-dumb when it comes to M2C2?5611-03-2017 21:51
When it comes to solving M2C2, is technology our saviour or the ghost in the machine?2724-12-2016 18:15
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.4113-10-2016 23:24
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2019 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact