Party protesters

The Homebrew Forum

Help Support The Homebrew Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Interesting philosophical angle on climate change, Justin. Change, in itself, is inevitable and neither good nor bad. We perceive something as bad which threatens our well-being so as continued climate change threatens human existence, we would consider that a bad thing. It would probably be a good thing for the planet though, as it would give the biosphere time to regulate and repopulate itself without further human intervention.

I do not believe it is a good bad thing, change is inevitable, it is how we evolve with change that matters and that is what happens, good or bad is the perception of the individual. Of course many many people hate change and go through life moaning about it. There choice but it is rough ride because nothing stays the same. Climate change threatens human existence? That is dramatic statement. If we can get dramatic then lets populate to oceans. I do not mind a bit of sci fi, some of it evens come true.

Bring on the future. It is a bright place of possibility.
 
If members have proof one way or another please post it as posting "it aint happening" "its all rubbish" with nothing to back it up adds nothing to the discussion, i am now removing any such posts.

.
 
Last edited:
I do not believe it is a good bad thing, change is inevitable, it is how we evolve with change that matters and that is what happens, good or bad is the perception of the individual. Of course many many people hate change and go through life moaning about it. There choice but it is rough ride because nothing stays the same. Climate change threatens human existence? That is dramatic statement. If we can get dramatic then lets populate to oceans. I do not mind a bit of sci fi, some of it evens come true.

Bring on the future. It is a bright place of possibility.
Yes, you're right. We live in dramatic times, sure enough. Extinction results from a species' inability to adapt to change quickly enough.
I'm not sure about populating the ocean, though. Don't see how we could brew beer there.
 
The thing that casts the biggest doubts to me is the apparent lack of interest from the powers that be. Only they can make the drastic steps "needed".
Not unless it's another "population control" agenda...along with all the wars that seem deemed to be essential when it's glaringly obvious the only thing being fought over is oil. Tons of atrocities going on in Africa but not much invasion...
 
IMG_20190426_175527.jpg
I am getting ready for global warming and the threat of a starsan shortage. I have repurposed Mrs Clint's new hanging basket as a multiple use anti climate change hat.
 
Have you noticed in the summer that it is always London that is the hottest in the UK? Maybe that is why there is so much effort to do something about it. If it was some part of Wales that was melting I doubt parliament would even talk about it.
Most London offices are constructed from huge amounts of glass in full sunshine with no shading - so are an ideal greenhouse model. They then use huge amounts of electricity via refrigeration to dump all that heat outside and attempt to cool their greenhouses to 18 degrees c. - Of course the ambient outdoor air temperature will rise.
Kind of a stupid design when you think about it.

If they used the stack effect it would suck hot air up a central column like a chimney and have free air con - like the ancient traditional buildings in some hotter countries. Street level would be cooler too. I wonder what their air conditioning costs them each year? Probably more than lighting now.

Compared to the air pollution in the 1800's, nuclear tests in the 50's the asbestos and lead in the 60's, cheap package holidays and flights in the 80's, overpopulation and plastics in the oceans now - I think getting a bit warm is the least of our worries.
 
Have you noticed in the summer that it is always London that is the hottest in the UK? Maybe that is why there is so much effort to do something about it. If it was some part of Wales that was melting I doubt parliament would even talk about it.
Most London offices are constructed from huge amounts of glass in full sunshine with no shading - so are an ideal greenhouse model. They then use huge amounts of electricity via refrigeration to dump all that heat outside and attempt to cool their greenhouses to 18 degrees c. - Of course the ambient outdoor air temperature will rise.
Kind of a stupid design when you think about it.

If they used the stack effect it would suck hot air up a central column like a chimney and have free air con - like the ancient traditional buildings in some hotter countries. Street level would be cooler too. I wonder what their air conditioning costs them each year? Probably more than lighting now.

Compared to the air pollution in the 1800's, nuclear tests in the 50's the asbestos and lead in the 60's, cheap package holidays and flights in the 80's, overpopulation and plastics in the oceans now - I think getting a bit warm is the least of our worries.

Correct, mate. It is almost bottom of the issues. Too many humans, with too many perceived entitlements to resources that our single planet cannot oblige. This decade is not the tipping point. That came long ago.
 
Some one may find this CO2 producion graph interesting but note when it looks like the US and others are going down there not, its only in relation to China.
 
I admire your persistence.
Well, I'm not at all sure that I really should respond to posts that are almost certainly wind-ups, that seem to be made by people with no real care for truth, logic, or even humanity, but with an apparent bizarre need to proclaim some sort of posturing viewpoint, particularly if it irritates the other people on this or any other forum.
But, in this case, I do not claim persistence. If the claim was that the earth is flat (or flattish, I believe there are variants!!), then so what. Such nonsense does no-one any harm - let it go. If the claim was that the Americans never landed a human on the moon, but it was all faked, then fine. Believe in the ridiculously complex explanation instead of the blatantly obvious one if you must. Again, so what?
But this is different. This is a matter that concerns all of humanity. My children, and grandchildren, will be vastly more affected than me. So, I do not wish to let it go unanswered - for fear that that might be mistaken for complicit agreement. However, neither do I want to enter into an endless pantomime argument of "Yes it is": "No it isn't". Well, I suppose with this issue, no-one can say "It's behind you..."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top