Do you worry about climate change?

[Heartstrings]

22 minutes ago, SKL said:

dunno about you all, but my parents live in a house that is over 100 years old (that we moved to when I was 12).  Their previous house is also almost 100 years old.  Neither is a "mcmansion," I assure you.

McMansion was coined in the 80s and popularized in the early 90s.  Who was buying those houses?  I was 5 in 1990. Surely you realize that while your mother, a wonderful lady I’m sure, chose to live in a 100 year old house, others in this country at the time were making other choices? A lot of them. It’s not those original buyers fault, in a moral sense, that those houses were built, but they were built. Leading to longer commutes, more car emission, more urban sprawl, loss of habitat for bees and whatever else. 
 

24 minutes ago, SKL said:

not an ozone scientist.  I remember them saying that issue was caused by aerosol spray cans, so they stopped making those.  My mom used to use hair spray before she got on the bus to go to work each day.  I suppose you would say that makes her the cause of climate change.  Like she was supposed to know that spraying her hair was going to cause babies in poor tropical countries to be displaced decades later

This is why generations are useful.  Did your mother personally cause a hole in the ozone?  Of course not, that’s absurd.  The chemicals in air conditioners, car air conditioners and yes, hair spray, were what caused a hole in the atmosphere.  People using the ACs and the hairspray, etc. were the mechanism that released those chemicals though.   Was it the consumers fault?  Not in a moral sense. Blame, fault, causality, whatever you want to call that. Humans did X, Y resulted.  
 

You’re personalizing this in a very strange way.     

[Heartstrings]

42 minutes ago, SKL said:

ost adults in their generation (including my parents) weren't even high school graduates.  Internet and cable news didn't exist, and local news sources had limited information.  Yet we fault them all for not knowing what the climate scientists were theorizing?

I was 8 or so watching Earth Day celebrations  on Nickelodeon and MTV in the early 90s.  I was able to get the gist of pollution=bad, green house gases causing warming=bad, use less disposable stuff, reduce, recycle, reuse, cut the rings on Coke cans to save turtles, etc.  My parents and all of the adults at the time should have been able to get the general idea.  Maybe your parents did, and that’s great! They were awesome, but so so many did not.  
 

Personally, I lived the suburban sprawl.  My dad commuted 2 hours to work each way because he wanted us out of the violence of the city. (Early 90s Los Angeles).  Did he contribute to the climate issue.  Yes, of course.  A 2 hour each way commute in LA traffic?!   Is he personally responsible for all of climate change.  Of course not.  

Edited April 26, 2023 by Heartstrings

[SKL]

30 minutes ago, SHP said:

Average car gas mileage. Note that white flight and sleeper communities were in full force and people had to commute to cities. In many places public tansportation was almsot nil outside of major cities. 

1970s:11.9 MPG

2021: 25.4 miles per gallon

But sure, blame the younger generation.

Most people still did live in cities with a relatively short commute.  Many walked or used the city bus.  And a pretty low % of women worked outside the house at all.

It's not actually my dad's fault that it took time to develop the technologies that increased MPG.

The fact that MPG improved is testament to the fact that companies did make efforts to reduce energy use, and that there was a market for fuel-efficient cars.

Which was actually a big deal when I was growing up, as there was an oil supply crisis due to geopolitical issues.

[SKL]

26 minutes ago, Heartstrings said:

With leaded gasoline.  Ah, those low carbon footprint great American Road Trips.  
 

I think frugal is being conflated with being good for the environment.  

LOL considering we could only afford McDonalds about once a year, we weren't going on any Great American Road trips.  😛

[SKL]

11 minutes ago, Heartstrings said:

I was 8 or so watching Earth Day celebrations  on Nickelodeon and MTV in the early 90s.  I was able to get the gist of pollution=bad, green house gases causing warming=bad, use less disposable stuff, reduce, recycle, reuse, cut the rings on Coke cans to save turtles, etc.  My parents and all of the adults at the time should have been able to get the general idea.  Maybe your parents did, and that’s great! They were awesome, but so so many did not.  
 

Personally, I lived the suburban sprawl.  My dad commuted 2 hours to work each way because he wanted out of the violence of the city. (Early 90s Los Angeles).  Did he contribute to the climate issue.  Yes, of course.  A 2 hour each way commute in LA traffic?!   Is he personally responsible for all of climate change.  Of course not.  

That's cute that you were watching cable TV telling you about pollution.

Did you shut off the TV and the house lights and the a/c as soon as you heard that?

[Heartstrings]

9 minutes ago, SKL said:

That's cute that you were watching cable TV telling you about pollution.

Did you shut off the TV and the house lights and the a/c as soon as you heard that?

At 8 I would have had a sore bottom if I had tried.  Were you allowed that sort of access and control as an 8 year old?   Am I suppose to feel some sort of retro active guilt for my parents buying cable TV or are you just trying to be nasty here?
 

I did start cutting plastic rings and caring about recycling and trees and pollution.  I was a total pain in the butt tree hugger child, my parents can attest to that.  
 

And again I say, you are personalizing this whole thing to a very strange degree.  

Edited April 26, 2023 by Heartstrings

[Pawz4me]

1 hour ago, SHP said:

Average car gas mileage. Note that white flight and sleeper communities were in full force and people had to commute to cities. In many places public tansportation was almsot nil outside of major cities. 

1970s:11.9 MPG

2021: 25.4 miles per gallon

But sure, blame the younger generation. 

 

This thread is starting to get absurd, but I'll add my bit for funsies and nostalgia --

In 1970 my parents were driving a VW Bug. I'm quite sure it got waaaay more than 11.9 mpg. Heck, when we were going down hill my dad would push the clutch in and let 'er coast to save a bit of gas. That was quite an adventure at times.

They also bought soft drinks in glass bottles and took them back to the store so the drink companies could re-use them.

 ETA: And we had home delivered milk in glass bottles that got returned and re-used.

 

Edited April 26, 2023 by Pawz4me

[Annie G]

1 hour ago, SHP said:

 

1970s:11.9 MPG

 

 

That reported mpg surprises me. I bought a gently used 1975 VW Rabbit that easily got 30 mpg putting around town.  Most of my friends got similar mpg and even my dad, who drove a VW van got around 25.  Sure, my teen friends driving muscle cars got  crummy mpg. 
We walked a whole lot more than than many folks do today. I don’t recall there being a pick up line at our elementary school or junior high like I see now. We rode bikes to friends’ houses- our folks rarely drove us.  
Cars had lower mpg but I wonder if folks lived closer to their jobs than many do today. I grew up in metro Atlanta and while there were plenty who lived in Marietta and worked in Atlanta, it wasn’t  common to commute from more distant suburbs. 

[Innisfree]

Most people didn’t have the information, or the scientific literacy, to be held responsible for the situation we’re in now. Even up to the early nineties, there was widespread uncertainty about climate change among the general public.

Some people did know that fossil fuel use was causing climate change, even a century ago. They were largely employed by the fossil fuel industry. Others have benefited politically from an affiliation with that industry. Those are the people I hold responsible, along with those who are in denial today. 

The whole sad history has much in common with the story of big tobacco.

People who didn’t mean to do any harm have been played for dupes by those who continue to profit in money and/or power. There’s no point arguing over who is more to blame, unless you put those who profit from the status quo squarely in the center. 

A pertinent read: Merchants of Doubt, by Naomi Oreskes and Erik Conway.

[prairiewindmomma]

Right, Innisfree. Great post. If I were to make a parallel to a current issue, which is pollution and not climate related, I would point to micro plastics. We all can probably agree that the fact that we are all carrying around roughly a credit card’s worth of plastic in our bodies is bad. We can say that plastic in our blood and in gestating pregnancies = bad. We can point to some specific harms that are likely related to that. We know that micro plastics are in our water supply. We can even pinpoint where a lot of that micro plastic comes from. But getting us from Point A (recognition of the problem) to Point B (greatly reducing the problem) is a long haul. While we can make some individual choices (like drinking tap water which has typically 5 particles per 16 oz bottle compared to drinking from a plastic bottle which has 300-400 particles), real change needs to happen at the systemic versus the individual level. That is much more difficult to accomplish. 

[kokotg]

48 minutes ago, Annie G said:

That reported mpg surprises me. I bought a gently used 1975 VW Rabbit that easily got 30 mpg putting around town.  Most of my friends got similar mpg and even my dad, who drove a VW van got around 25.  Sure, my teen friends driving muscle cars got  crummy mpg. 
We walked a whole lot more than than many folks do today. I don’t recall there being a pick up line at our elementary school or junior high like I see now. We rode bikes to friends’ houses- our folks rarely drove us.  
Cars had lower mpg but I wonder if folks lived closer to their jobs than many do today. I grew up in metro Atlanta and while there were plenty who lived in Marietta and worked in Atlanta, it wasn’t  common to commute from more distant suburbs. 

My dad commuted from Canton (well, almost)  to Atlanta in the 70s/80s. And my mom drove me to private school in Sandy Springs for several years. They were not role models of environmentalism for sure. 

[kokotg]

32 minutes ago, Innisfree said:

Most people didn’t have the information, or the scientific literacy, to be held responsible for the situation we’re in now. Even up to the early nineties, there was widespread uncertainty about climate change among the general public.

Some people did know that fossil fuel use was causing climate change, even a century ago. They were largely employed by the fossil fuel industry. Others have benefited politically from an affiliation with that industry. Those are the people I hold responsible, along with those who are in denial today. 

The whole sad history has much in common with the story of big tobacco.

People who didn’t mean to do any harm have been played for dupes by those who continue to profit in money and/or power. There’s no point arguing over who is more to blame, unless you put those who profit from the status quo squarely in the center. 

A pertinent read: Merchants of Doubt, by Naomi Oreskes and Erik Conway.

The big tobacco comparison keeps coming to my head as well. And I think having people arguing about whose parents/grandparents/kids/neighbors used the most fossil fuels is probably exactly the kind of distraction a lot of the people in these industries love to see.

[ArteHaus]

No, absolutely not. “Climate change” is nonsense. The Earth goes through cyclical weather patterns, and always has. I find it absurd that “climate change” is blamed on the people (from the political and scientific communities). If people wouldn’t eat, drive cars…if there weren’t so many people…fossil fuels….too many meat eaters. It’s hogwash.

I do find it interesting that the “climate change” industry, if you will, rakes in close to a billion dollars a year. Hmm. I was also 5 years old in 1990. I am sure that trillions of dollars have gone towards this “cause” in the last 37 years, and that is just my lifetime. I mean, even my husband and I considered buying a Tesla (not out of righteousness towards the green movement, but I don’t think Tesla would mind). Ah, there is always a money trail. And what has come of it? Here we are, hearing the same story in 2023. It will certainly open the door for superfluous taxation (and really already has). Didn’t “they” want to tax breathing at one point? You know, carbon emissions…

Also, Climate Change/Global Warming is an appeal to fear (the Earth is not going to “end”, and certainly not because of cars and hairspray….it is nearly comical). The push to make people believe is also an appeal to authority. Scientists are not Elohiym, they are not gods, but people must believe they are to buy into this. In actuality, there is evidence contrary to “global warming”. The Earth is healthy-. 

I think that it is really sad that anyone really believes that the world is going to face an “apocalypse” over a political concept/tool/conjecture. Have anyone of you actually seen a hole in the ozone? I haven’t. Like, that is sad. No! Why go through life thinking and worrying over this? 

With that said, we can use common sense. Humanity and Nature can live in symbiosis, as we are made to do just that. Humans can disrupt that symbiosis, of course. We can cause harm, on the land or in the waters. However, the Earth is an able to recover and replenish. We should certainly act responsibly, but global warming? No, not a worry. It is a bit presumptuous of humanity to think it can cause the Earth to downfall. We can’t destroy it, we didn’t create it.

 

Edited April 27, 2023 by ArteHaus

[Ellie]

9 hours ago, KSera said:

You disbelieve that increased carbon dioxide in the atmosphere increases temperature on the Earth?

I guess that would be accurate.

[Annie G]

34 minutes ago, kokotg said:

My dad commuted from Canton (well, almost)  to Atlanta in the 70s/80s. And my mom drove me to private school in Sandy Springs for several years. They were not role models of environmentalism for sure. 

Canton to Atlanta was a commute back then! But likely didn’t take more time than now since traffic is nuts.  When we moved to Marietta (from Connecticut) so Dad could work at Lockheed in the mid 60’s, it was booming like crazy because everyone wanted to live close. Perhaps  because at the time Lockheed didn’t have enough parking for everyone and they encouraged carpooling.

 

[KSera]

1 hour ago, Ellie said:

I guess that would be accurate.

Are you interested in why it's that way? It's something you are open to learning why it's so, there are of course lots of resources to do so, but here's one 2 minute You Tube video that shows it in a concrete way:

Or for a read (I prefer reading myself), here's an explanation from NASA:

Carbon Dioxide

Quote

Key Takeaway:

Carbon dioxide in the atmosphere warms the planet, causing climate change. Human activities have raised the atmosphere’s carbon dioxide content by 50% in less than 200 years.

This Nasa kids one is good: Why is Carbon Important?

Quote

Carbon is in carbon dioxide, which is a greenhouse gas that traps heat close to Earth. It helps Earth hold some of the heat it receives from the Sun so it doesn't all escape back into space. But CO₂ is only good up to a point – beyond that point, Earth's temperature warms up too much. NASA research satellites such as OCO-2 and OCO-3 are studying how carbon moves around the planet.

There's no question about carbon dioxide helping Earth hold onto its heat--as said above, it prevents Earth from being an icy ball incompatible with life. But since carbon dioxide helps the Earth stop heat from escaping, a large and persistent increase in carbon dioxide emissions means even more heat trapped=warming the planet beyond where it would otherwise have warmed.

And a graph:

[KSera]

1 hour ago, ArteHaus said:

I mean, even my husband and I considered buying a Tesla (not out of righteousness towards the green movement, but I don’t think Tesla would mind). Ah, there is always a money trail.

I'm not understanding--are you trying to say internal combustion engine vehicle manufactures are not for profit companies as well?

[Ellie]

1 hour ago, KSera said:

Are you interested in why it's that way? It's something you are open to learning why it's so, there are of course lots of resources to do so, but here's one 2 minute You Tube video that shows it in a concrete way:

Or for a read (I prefer reading myself), here's an explanation from NASA:

Carbon Dioxide

This Nasa kids one is good: Why is Carbon Important?

There's no question about carbon dioxide helping Earth hold onto its heat--as said above, it prevents Earth from being an icy ball incompatible with life. But since carbon dioxide helps the Earth stop heat from escaping, a large and persistent increase in carbon dioxide emissions means even more heat trapped=warming the planet beyond where it would otherwise have warmed.

And a graph:

Please do not try to make me out to be an idiot. I have read the stuff.

[KSera]

6 minutes ago, Ellie said:

Please do not try to make me out to be an idiot. I have read the stuff.

I'm sorry, that was definitely not my intention.

[SHP]

8 hours ago, SKL said:

Most people still did live in cities with a relatively short commute.  Many walked or used the city bus.  And a pretty low % of women worked outside the house at all.

It's not actually my dad's fault that it took time to develop the technologies that increased MPG.

The fact that MPG improved is testament to the fact that companies did make efforts to reduce energy use, and that there was a market for fuel-efficient cars.

Which was actually a big deal when I was growing up, as there was an oil supply crisis due to geopolitical issues.

Have you not heard of white flight?! Suburban Sprawl?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_flight

https://www.washington.edu/news/2017/06/29/as-metro-areas-grow-whites-move-farther-from-the-city-center/

 

The companies didn't improve gas mileage out of the goodness of their hearts. It was legislated. Literally.

https://www.transportation.gov/mission/sustainability/corporate-average-fuel-economy-cafe-standards

 

 

I am starting to think that you are trolling. 

[SHP]

6 hours ago, kokotg said:

The big tobacco comparison keeps coming to my head as well. And I think having people arguing about whose parents/grandparents/kids/neighbors used the most fossil fuels is probably exactly the kind of distraction a lot of the people in these industries love to see.

I think the issue of scientific illiteracy is a huge problem. People lack the basics to understand the issue and instead of admitting they do not know and taking steps to rectify their ignorance they deny it and cling to a view that anything they do not understand is a political agenda/conspiracy/whatever excuse instead of demanding legislative action. 

 

 

Sadly, I don't think it is just scientific illiteracy that is the problem. Many are lacking a basic grasp of other topics. The mass ignorance is terrifying.

[ArteHaus]

14 hours ago, KSera said:

I'm not understanding--are you trying to say internal combustion engine vehicle manufactures are not for profit companies as well?

Of course not. That would be silly. I just think that people don’t consider that the green industry is just that, industry. Fear-for-profit industry. Blaming individuals for environmental issues (referencing the generation contribution disagreement) is bizarre. I believe that is also a desired result. Fear and guilt (if one allows it) over the idea of climate change is…weird. There isn’t anything inherently wrong with business/profit, but fear-mongering is suspect. 

Again, I am specifically talking about climate change. Being conscious of our environment is wise. But I think I would have to buy into a lot of environmental sensationalism to believe that a Tesla or billions of dollars to “research” global warming is apropos.

Edited April 27, 2023 by ArteHaus

[SKL]

9 hours ago, SHP said:

Have you not heard of white flight?! Suburban Sprawl?

I was born in 1966 and lived through busing.  I don't have to read spin about it.

The percent of Americans living urban increased continuously throughout the 20th century.

You might be over-generalizing a minority life experience.  Most American families never could afford to go buy a big house in the suburbs far from work.  Also, not everyone who lives in the suburbs has a long, gas-hogging drive to work.

[ArteHaus]

9 hours ago, SHP said:

I think the issue of scientific illiteracy is a huge problem. People lack the basics to understand the issue and instead of admitting they do not know and taking steps to rectify their ignorance they deny it and cling to a view that anything they do not understand is a political agenda/conspiracy/whatever excuse instead of demanding legislative action. 

 

 

Sadly, I don't think it is just scientific illiteracy that is the problem. Many are lacking a basic grasp of other topics. The mass ignorance is terrifying.

A person could be highly “literate” (or not!) and still come to the conclusion something like global warming is nonsensical. 

Climate change brings a lot of issues to the table. One of the main strategies to curb “climate change” is depopulation/population control. So, one would have to have a new conversation about the ethics of population control. Malthusianism is wicked in my view. But we can’t talk about climate change without understanding that “idea” as well. 

Science isn’t always right or ethical. Have you heard of the Tuskegee Experiment? I mean, come on. 

This is a deeper issue than learning about greenhouse gases from Bill Nye or Nickelodeon, or wherever. 

By the way, not having the wisdom to see that the government is not your friend, and that yes, there is always an agenda is dangerous.

[KSera]

6 minutes ago, ArteHaus said:

A person could be highly “literate” (or not!) and still come to the conclusion something like global warming is nonsensical. 

Climate change brings a lot of issues to the table. One of the main strategies to curb “climate change” is depopulation/population control. So, one would have to have a new conversation about the ethics of population control. Malthusianism is wicked in my view. But we can’t talk about climate change without understanding that “idea” as well. 

Science isn’t always right or ethical. Have you heard of the Tuskegee Experiment? I mean, come on. 

This is a deeper issue than learning about greenhouse gases from Bill Nye or Nickelodeon, or wherever. 

By the way, not having the wisdom to see that the government is not your friend, and that yes, there is always an agenda is dangerous.

It seems several people on this thread are conflating whether or not something is happening as being inextricably connected with whether they find any solutions to that problem palatable. It would be analogous to thinking people don’t die from being shot just because you don’t agree with gun control legislation. It’s nonsensical to believe carbon dioxide doesn’t trap heat just because you think all the solutions to that are an evil agenda. Carbon dioxide itself isn’t capable of having an agenda. 

[ArteHaus]

2 minutes ago, KSera said:

It seems several people on this thread are conflating whether or not something is happening as being inextricably connected with whether they find any solutions to that problem palatable. It would be analogous to thinking people don’t die from being shot just because you don’t agree with gun control legislation. It’s nonsensical to believe carbon dioxide doesn’t trap heat just because you think all the solutions to that are an evil agenda. Carbon dioxide itself isn’t capable of having an agenda. 

I don’t think so at all. Some have chimed in on whether they are worried about it. One is only worried if they believe it is happening. Whether or not something is happening (and presumably needs to be fixed) is inextricably linked to solutions, palatable or not. It deserves…thought…and understanding.

Carbon dioxide possessing the ability to trap heat is irrelevant to climate apocalypse. 

I didn’t say Carbon dioxide had an evil agenda, lol. I said that climate change is literally a political agenda with some not-so-great consequences/solutions. Malthusianism is an evil concept (IMO),  and it is entrenched in government philosophies. That is what I said.

Do you think that the government has ever had ill intent? Is “it” capable of wrongdoing? I think yes. This doesn’t mean anyone has to fear the government, but we can have a better, well-rounded thought process when considering the information it feeds the general population. We must consider why we are receiving certain bits of information, why certain things are pushed and others are not. Everything is everything and it all works together. 

You think that what you are given is because government loves you. It does not, it claims authority over you. So, with that said, consider all things-

 

[regentrude]

36 minutes ago, ArteHaus said:

Science isn’t always right

Science is an intellectual process where theories are tested against observation and experiment - as such, it cannot be "right" or not "right".  Such a statement makes no sense. 

[regentrude]

9 minutes ago, ArteHaus said:

I said that climate change is literally a political agenda with some not-so-great consequences/solutions.

So you are saying that climate change does not actually exist, and that politicians are making up the temperature charts that show the warming and inventing the increase in severe weather events? And none of it actually happens?
Wow, that would be a great international conspiracy orchestrated across world boundaries...(but wait, there are people who believe Covid was invented like that, too.... and the entire world played along)

Edited April 27, 2023 by regentrude

[ArteHaus]

26 minutes ago, regentrude said:

So you are saying that climate change does not actually exist, and that politicians are making up the temperature charts that show the warming and inventing the increase in severe weather events? And none of it actually happens?
Wow, that would be a great international conspiracy orchestrated across world boundaries...(but wait, there are people who believe Covid was invented like that, too.... and the entire world played along)

Not in a catastrophic sense, no-absolutely not. The Earth changes over time, climate patterns are cyclical. It’s simple. Weather events happen, yes, even severe weather events. Guess what? They always have. Things change. It is natural. 

It isn’t a conspiracy, as there is nothing secretive about it. Yes, Western society is pushing the concept heavily. It is orchestrated, obviously. 

You do realize that many, many scientists and medical experts would highly agree that Covid was a hoax in the truest sense of the word? Yikes, I thought most people got that by now? Some governments played along, a few did not, actually. And the people, well…some were duped, some were not. It is what it is. It was interesting to watch the experiment.

I think that the older generation (50 plus), compared to the younger (40 below) are certainly more susceptible to these things (political scare tactics, patriotism, etc.). My generation appears to be much quicker to question and be circumspect (not saying one is better, just an observation). Interesting though-

Edited April 27, 2023 by ArteHaus

[regentrude]

3 minutes ago, ArteHaus said:

You do realize that many, many scientists and medical experts would highly agree that Covid was a hoax in the truest sense of the word? Yikes, I thought most people got that by now?

I will bow out of this thread because I do not think we can have a meaningful discussion if this is your opinion. If you consider millions of dead and sick a hoax, we do not need to engage further.
And voicing this opinion here on this board where countless members have lost loved ones to Covid? Wow.

[kokotg]

31 minutes ago, regentrude said:

So you are saying that climate change does not actually exist, and that politicians are making up the temperature charts that show the warming and inventing the increase in severe weather events? And none of it actually happens?
Wow, that would be a great international conspiracy orchestrated across world boundaries...(but wait, there are people who believe Covid was invented like that, too.... and the entire world played along)

If you dig a bit, you'll find there are quite a few things artehaus thinks we're all being duped about. 

[ArteHaus]

33 minutes ago, regentrude said:

Science is an intellectual process where theories are tested against observation and experiment - as such, it cannot be "right" or not "right".  Such a statement makes no sense. 

I disagree.

“Right” by definition means: 1. Morally good, justified, or acceptable. 2. True or correct as a fact.

We must accept climate change (or any other scientific concept) as true or correct as a fact. It is either factual or not, right or wrong. 

Science in years past concluded that Africans were not human. That is factually and morally, wrong. 

 

[Pawz4me]

5 minutes ago, regentrude said:

I will bow out of this thread because I do not think we can have a meaningful discussion if this is your opinion. If you consider millions of dead and sick a hoax, we do not need to engage further.
And voicing this opinion here on this board where countless members have lost loved ones to Covid? Wow.

ArteHaus has also posted in the past that the Holocaust was a hoax.

It definitely seems wise to not engage.

[ArteHaus]

13 minutes ago, regentrude said:

I will bow out of this thread because I do not think we can have a meaningful discussion if this is your opinion. If you consider millions of dead and sick a hoax, we do not need to engage further.
And voicing this opinion here on this board where countless members have lost loved ones to Covid? Wow.

If we were to suppose a virus were man-made (which many people believe [even the educated ones *gasp*], and I think isn’t far-fetched)…then it is still literally, by definition, a hoax. 

Many people died from (and were adversely affected by) the vaccines, too.

I also believe that many cancers are man-made, or a hoax, if you will. Both of my parents died from cancer (I don’t feel offended by the fact some cancers are a hoax), so I don’t understand your issue, but hey-

 

 

Edited April 27, 2023 by ArteHaus

[livetoread]

I wish everyone would take the advice given on multiple other threads to just not engage with that poster. It always derails things and never goes anywhere productive, no matter the topic. It's okay to let their postings stand ignored, no matter how out there or provocative they are.

[kokotg]

1 minute ago, livetoread said:

I wish everyone would take the advice given on multiple other threads to just not engage with that poster. It always derails things and never goes anywhere productive, no matter the topic. It's okay to let their postings stand ignored, no matter how out there or provocative they are.

I think a lot of people aren't aware of the history...if I take a week off from the chat board I can feel hopelessly out of the loop! But, yes. There are things about which reasonable people can disagree, and then there are...things that are not like that. 

[ArteHaus]

It isn’t provocative to have a different opinion.

I am not sure how I derailed anything, as I didn’t introduce covid into the conversation, but gave my opinion on it. That isn’t provocative. By all means, ignore my post and don’t engage. That’s your perogative:) I still may be moved to say what I think:)

I do think that it is interesting that the only way a thread flows is if everyone is a yes-man, if you will.

And lastly, I didn’t say the Holocaust was a hoax, per se. I said that there were some questionable political motivations, and all is not as it seems:)

 

 

 

 

 

Edited April 27, 2023 by ArteHaus

[frogger]

As someone who lived off the land as a child, I have seen first hand the our climate is changing and has already changed. I don't mean just weather but actually changes in the things able to live and grow in places. I realize it is more drastic at the poles than near the equater so this is not everywhere. I also understand that most people get their info from a screen in their house not the real world in a very Orweillian fashion. Pretty much if you repeat anything enough, it becomes true to them regardless of reality.

 

My mother's family were all fisherman. We lived off fish, clams, caribou, and moose all winter long.  My children have never been clam digging. By the time I was a young adult, the clams were babies but people still took them not realizing. I quit long before they closed beaches entirily but it didn't stop others from wiping them out and the gov't waited too long. It was too late. In places where clams still survive there are so many red tides, I'd be scared to eat them anyway. That was never a thing when the waters were cold. Salmon are dying in the stream BEFORE spawning, starfish wasting away. I go to the ocean and if feels dead. People who have never seen it full of life don't realize how different it looks.

 

Trees are moving into the tundra, invasive species from the lower 48 are talking root in the warmer climate, homes are sinking into the ground because permafrost is melting, the villiage ice routes over water become dangerous way earlier, and over land impassible earlier.

The glaciers I go to shrink so fast that I sometimes think, "I will never be able to take my grandkids here."

All living creatures change their enviroment, even the atmosphere though some more than others. The exchange of gasses, the ariation of soil and changing the land also affects the atmosphere. It seems incredulous to me that people don't believe 8 billion humans wouldn't affect the atmosphere even without the burning of fossil fuels. Sure, one human wouldn't but 8 BILLION. 

I once rode 180 miles by bike through Alabama and Georgia on bikes in 93-99 degree weather. It was fine in the trees. The only time it felt like hell was on the asphalt. The man made enviroments were excuse the phrase, "hotter than hell". Man has seperated himself off from the enviroment so much that they don't recognize anything. Their reality comes from staring at a computer screen. 

I don't think blaming others helps. Looking for solutions, contributing, problem solving does. And there isn't one solution but many little pieces.

Edited April 27, 2023 by frogger

[Ting Tang]

Did anyone ever watch Wall-E?  I sometimes think that is becoming our reality.  

 

[prairiewindmomma]

1 hour ago, Ting Tang said:

Did anyone ever watch Wall-E?  I sometimes think that is becoming our reality.  

 

Don’t Look Up seems more apt. 😂🫣

[Ting Tang]

2 hours ago, prairiewindmomma said:

Don’t Look Up seems more apt. 😂🫣

Oh dear, yes.  

[Melissa Louise]

Don't Look Up - my feeling is the asteroid is coming, there's almost nothing I can do about it, and so I am going to have some focus-on-other-things-while-other-things-still-exist time, while waiting for it to hit.

Even though I hate the generational stuff, I guess the above is a pretty classic Gen X way to deal. Curate an end of the world mix tape kind of vibe.

 

[Eos]

*  

Edited May 1, 2023 by Eos

[Eos]

*

Edited May 1, 2023 by Eos

[Eos]

*

Edited May 1, 2023 by Eos

[Eos]

On 4/27/2023 at 2:59 PM, regentrude said:

I will bow out of this thread because I do not think we can have a meaningful discussion if this is your opinion. If you consider millions of dead and sick a hoax, we do not need to engage further.
And voicing this opinion here on this board where countless members have lost loved ones to Covid? Wow.

I hadn't read the whole thread before replying, and hadn't seen this poster here yet.  Sigh.  Out.

[Carol in Cal.]

For those who don’t find the science convincing in holding that observed climate changes are caused by human behavior, OK, fine.  I disagree with you but I acknowledge that there are other factors in the mix as well, and that the scientific consensus has shifted enough over the years to contribute to a certain amount of skepticism.  I, too, remember reading about ‘the year there was no summer’ and predictions of nuclear winter.  So I get it, even though I come down in the ‘yes, we’re doing this’ camp personally.

Please consider this, though.

In the past hundred years or so we collectively have burned a staggering amount of fuels that it took many millennia to form and bury, releasing the effluents into the atmosphere at an increasingly high rate to make energy for our consumption.  Any way you look at things, we can’t keep this up indefinitely.  So regardless of whether one believes in human induced climate change, energy conservation and work to develop alternative energy sources are going to be increasingly valuable and ultimately necessary.  

[Innisfree]

6 hours ago, Carol in Cal. said:

For those who don’t find the science convincing in holding that observed climate changes are caused by human behavior, OK, fine.  I disagree with you but I acknowledge that there are other factors in the mix as well, and that the scientific consensus has shifted enough over the years to contribute to a certain amount of skepticism.  I, too, remember reading about ‘the year there was no summer’ and predictions of nuclear winter.  So I get it, even though I come down in the ‘yes, we’re doing this’ camp personally.

Please consider this, though.

In the past hundred years or so we collectively have burned a staggering amount of fuels that it took many millennia to form and bury, releasing the effluents into the atmosphere at an increasingly high rate to make energy for our consumption.  Any way you look at things, we can’t keep this up indefinitely.  So regardless of whether one believes in human induced climate change, energy conservation and work to develop alternative energy sources are going to be increasingly valuable and ultimately necessary.  

All this. Also, hard-eyed, pragmatic, unsentimental types like insurance actuaries and military planners are already acting on the knowledge that significant climate change is happening now, and will increase without major changes in our behavior. Concern about it is neither unrealistic, nor unwarranted catastrophizing.

Edited May 1, 2023 by Innisfree

[Wheres Toto]

Even if you think it's a natural cycle and not human caused, isn't it pretty clear at this point that it's going to change things?  Desertification, increased flooding, etc.   So shouldn't we be thinking about ways to mitigate that regardless of what's causing it?

[OH_Homeschooler]

On 4/27/2023 at 1:53 PM, ArteHaus said:

You do realize that many, many scientists and medical experts would highly agree that Covid was a hoax in the truest sense of the word? Yikes, I thought most people got that by now? Some governments played along, a few did not, actually. And the people, well…some were duped, some were not. It is what it is. It was interesting to watch the experiment.

"Many" is a vague descriptor. Certainly not the majority of scientists and medical experts believe this. This supposed belief of "many" scientists and medical experts was not the consensus.