Scientific American Counsels People to ‘Chill Out’ over Global Warming

Post Reply
User avatar
LeJizzOfMatoub
Posts: 1300
Joined: Tue May 16, 2017 7:55 am
Karma: 999

Scientific American Counsels People to ‘Chill Out’ over Global Warming

Post by LeJizzOfMatoub » Tue Mar 13, 2018 10:11 am

Apocalyptic scenarios attributed to global warming are simply false and the human race will be able to accommodate whatever “climate change” throws at us, claims a remarkably sober new essay in Scientific American.
The essay, penned by John Horgan, the director of the Center for Science Writings at the Stevens Institute of Technology, analyzes two recent reports by “ecomodernists” who reject climate panic and frame the question of climate change and humanity’s ability to cope with it in radically new terms.



One of the reports, a work called “Enlightened Environmentalism” by Harvard iconoclast Steven Pinker, urges people to regain some much-needed perspective on climate, especially in the context of the overwhelming material benefits of industrialization.

Image

Pooh-poohing “the mainstream environmental movement, and the radicalism and fatalism it encourages,” Pinker argues that humanity can solve problems related to climate change the same way it has solved myriad other problems, by harnessing “the benevolent forces of modernity.”

Separating himself from environmentalists who seem to detest modernity, Pinker asserts that industrialization “has been good for humanity.”

“It has fed billions, doubled lifespans, slashed extreme poverty, and, by replacing muscle with machinery, made it easier to end slavery, emancipate women, and educate children. It has allowed people to read at night, live where they want, stay warm in winter, see the world, and multiply human contact. Any costs in pollution and habitat loss have to be weighed against these gifts,” he says.

And just as human ingenuity has allowed us to overcome countless obstacles in the past, he notes, it is more than reasonable to suppose it will do so in the future as well.

The second report put forward by Horgan is a recent article by Will Boisvert titled “The Conquest of Climate,” which contends that the “consequences for human well-being will be small” even if human greenhouse emissions significantly warm the planet.

Boisvert, who has been described as a “left-wing environmental expert, is no “climate denier,” yet he calls for climate alarmists to take a deep breath and step back from doomsday forecasts that likely have little to do with what will actually take place in the future.

As an example, the author pokes fun at a 2016 Newsweek article announcing that “Climate change could cause half a million deaths in 2050 due to reduced food availability.”

The story, based on a Lancet study, made dire forecasts regarding the effects of climate change on agriculture, while failing to note that the study actually predicts much more abundant food availability in 2050 thanks to advances in agricultural productivity. These advances will “dwarf the effects of climate change,” he contends, and the “poorest countries will benefit most.”

Like Pinkers, Boisvert tries to factor in what climate alarmists ignore: the capability of human beings to react to changing scenarios in remarkably ingenious ways.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government ... l-warming/

Finally somebody tells these damn ecologists to chill out! What's the worst case scenario? Losing Singapore under water? Oh well shit happens!
Alan should hire a real admin to fix the board and sack the commie mod.

User avatar
jeanV
Posts: 3748
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2014 8:25 pm
Karma: 2483

Re: Scientific American Counsels People to ‘Chill Out’ over Global Warming

Post by jeanV » Tue Mar 13, 2018 10:19 am

Pinker argues that humanity can solve problems related to climate change the same way it has solved myriad other problems, by harnessing “the benevolent forces of modernity.”

Separating himself from environmentalists who seem to detest modernity, Pinker asserts that industrialization “has been good for humanity.”
See, Fryer, we're getting there:

-1- science: the fact climate change is caused by human activity is gaining ground.

-2- politics: the solutions do not have to be those of leftists environmentalists.

Again, good old papa V was showing the path to reason.

:twisted:
Benedict Arnold Trump is a conceited idiot: Lock him up!!

User avatar
LeJizzOfMatoub
Posts: 1300
Joined: Tue May 16, 2017 7:55 am
Karma: 999

Re: Scientific American Counsels People to ‘Chill Out’ over Global Warming

Post by LeJizzOfMatoub » Tue Mar 13, 2018 10:25 am

You seriously need to chill out dude, the science guy was very clear about that.
Alan should hire a real admin to fix the board and sack the commie mod.

User avatar
Mikgof
Posts: 1894
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2016 12:26 am
Karma: 1175

Re: Scientific American Counsels People to ‘Chill Out’ over Global Warming

Post by Mikgof » Tue Mar 13, 2018 1:43 pm

So some on the American right are finally conceding that climate change is real. Although it is generally the right that rejects modernity, it is nice to hear some in praise of it. Science and the technology derived from it is the only game worth playing. It will solve our problems. Geo-engineering will quite cheaply solve climate change, but as the left and the centre has long said it would be better to not pollute our air, water and land in the first place. Hence renewables and the movement towards eradicating conventional agriculture.
Surrealism is the new normal

User avatar
Slappy
Posts: 1816
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2017 5:36 pm
Karma: 2108
Location: Lymes backyard shed

Re: Scientific American Counsels People to ‘Chill Out’ over Global Warming

Post by Slappy » Tue Mar 13, 2018 5:38 pm

people have been bailing on Scientific American for years over their global warming religious beliefs. bout time they cut it out and went back to science

User avatar
jeanV
Posts: 3748
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2014 8:25 pm
Karma: 2483

Re: Scientific American Counsels People to ‘Chill Out’ over Global Warming

Post by jeanV » Tue Mar 13, 2018 6:41 pm

Slappy wrote:
Tue Mar 13, 2018 5:38 pm
people have been bailing on Scientific American for years over their global warming religious beliefs. bout time they cut it out and went back to science
Fryer, fryer, fryer, I told you, it's going to be OK, nobody's taking your money.

Meanwhile, the fact humans cause a warming of the earth is a scientific fact.

Two separate issues, no need for you to chant slogans like a crazed Berkeley SJW.

:twisted:
Benedict Arnold Trump is a conceited idiot: Lock him up!!

User avatar
Mikgof
Posts: 1894
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2016 12:26 am
Karma: 1175

Re: Scientific American Counsels People to ‘Chill Out’ over Global Warming

Post by Mikgof » Tue Mar 13, 2018 9:26 pm

Slappy wrote:

"people have been bailing on Scientific American for years over their global warming religious beliefs. bout time they cut it out and went back to science"

It's not going to cost you money. Subsidies for renewables are being slashed, whilst those for fossil fuels keep going up. Save money by slashing the subsidies to fossil fuels as well. Let's have a level playing field. Scrap all subsidies for everything that have been in place for 5 years or more. If your industry needs a subsidy after 5 years then it is either not viable at the present, it is obsolete or the practitioners are grossly incompetent. That covers all bases. No need for subsidies. As a bonus, it would finally get rid of the fusion scam. 60 years, 100's of billions and still not enough electricity produced to power a light bulb.
Surrealism is the new normal

User avatar
jeanV
Posts: 3748
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2014 8:25 pm
Karma: 2483

Re: Scientific American Counsels People to ‘Chill Out’ over Global Warming

Post by jeanV » Tue Mar 13, 2018 11:53 pm

Mikgof wrote:
Tue Mar 13, 2018 9:26 pm
As a bonus, it would finally get rid of the fusion scam.
60 years, 100's of billions and still not enough electricity produced to power a light bulb.
100's of billions? if the "'s", means more than one, that would be at least 200Bn.

And that would be off the mark by at least 90%. ITER will end up costing 20Bn+

Experimenting being needed as there's no computer modelling for 'burning' plasma.

Plus the engineering lessons in protecting the reactor materials from the neutrons flux.


To put things in perspective, ITER will cost less than 2% of GW's Iraq War.

with practical lessons of a far greater value than learning Fallujah and Kerballah exist.

:twisted:
Benedict Arnold Trump is a conceited idiot: Lock him up!!

User avatar
Mikgof
Posts: 1894
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2016 12:26 am
Karma: 1175

Re: Scientific American Counsels People to ‘Chill Out’ over Global Warming

Post by Mikgof » Wed Mar 14, 2018 12:58 am

jeanV wrote:
Tue Mar 13, 2018 11:53 pm
Mikgof wrote:
Tue Mar 13, 2018 9:26 pm
As a bonus, it would finally get rid of the fusion scam.
60 years, 100's of billions and still not enough electricity produced to power a light bulb.
100's of billions? if the "'s", means more than one, that would be at least 200Bn.

And that would be off the mark by at least 90%. ITER will end up costing 20Bn+

Experimenting being needed as there's no computer modelling for 'burning' plasma.

Plus the engineering lessons in protecting the reactor materials from the neutrons flux.
Fusion is a technology that would have been beneficial just a few decades ago. Now it is pretty pointless and way too expensive and no longer needed. Today a new power plant running on solar is far cheaper and faster to build than a gas or coal-fired plant and its output is now cheaper as well as being cleaner. So what is the point of pursuing fusion?

To put things in perspective, ITER will cost less than 2% of GW's Iraq War.

with practical lessons of a far greater value than learning Fallujah and Kerballah exist.

:twisted:
ITER is just the latest in spending spanning over 60 years. And scam it is. For all of that 60 years fusion has been "just around the corner". If improbable as it is, fusion is actually achieved tomorrow, it would still be a non-starter. The cost of the plant will make it prohibitive and the cost of storing the radioactive waste although less than with fission adds to costs.

"A fusion power plant produces radioactive waste because the high-energy neutrons produced by fusion activate the walls of the plasma vessel. The intensity and duration of this activation depend on the material impinged on by the neutrons. Special low-activation materials, therefore, were and are being developed for fusion.

During its approximately 30-year lifetime, a fusion power plant will depending on its type, produce between 60,000 and 160,000 tons of radioactive material. It has to be put into interim storage after the power plant is shut down. The activity of the waste quickly declines: after about 100 years to a ten-thousandth of the initial value. After a decay time of one to five hundred years the radiotoxic content of the waste is comparable to the hazard potential of the total ash from a coal plant, which always contains natural radioactive substances."

Fusion is a technology that would have been beneficial just a few decades ago. Now it is pretty pointless and way too expensive and no longer needed. Today a new power plant running on solar is far cheaper and faster to build than a gas or coal-fired plant and its output is now cheaper as well as being cleaner. So what is the point of pursuing fusion?
Surrealism is the new normal

User avatar
jeanV
Posts: 3748
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2014 8:25 pm
Karma: 2483

Re: Scientific American Counsels People to ‘Chill Out’ over Global Warming

Post by jeanV » Wed Mar 14, 2018 2:18 am

Mikgof wrote:
Wed Mar 14, 2018 12:58 am
Fusion is a technology that would have been beneficial just a few decades ago. Now it is pretty pointless and way too expensive and no longer needed. Today a new power plant running on solar is far cheaper and faster to build than a gas or coal-fired plant and its output is now cheaper as well as being cleaner. So what is the point of pursuing fusion?
I'm surprised you ask "what is the point of pursuing fusion?"

What's the point of fundamental research generally?

It's only once research has been done succesfully that implementation happens.

Which is what a few private companies are starting to look into
The early 2000s saw the founding of a number of privately backed fusion companies pursuing innovative approaches with the stated goal of developing commercially viable fusion power plants. Secretive startup Tri Alpha Energy, founded in 1998, began exploring a field-reversed configuration approach. In 2002, Canadian company General Fusion began proof-of-concept experiments based on a hybrid magneto-inertial approach called Magnetized Target Fusion. These companies are funded by private investors including Jeff Bezos (General Fusion) and Paul Allen (Tri Alpha Energy).[156] Toward the end of the decade, UK-based fusion company Tokamak Energy started exploring spherical tokamak devices.
And, to go back to your initial question "what is the point of pursuing fusion?",

from a practical point of view, if harnessed, fusion would provide 'limitless' energy,

allowing, for example, to fuel transportation to and engineering on other planets.

:idea:
Benedict Arnold Trump is a conceited idiot: Lock him up!!

User avatar
Mikgof
Posts: 1894
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2016 12:26 am
Karma: 1175

Re: Scientific American Counsels People to ‘Chill Out’ over Global Warming

Post by Mikgof » Wed Mar 14, 2018 4:11 am

Fusion is a dead end. Nice in theory but economically impracticable. It will not be widely used on Earth even if they make it work tomorrow. I agree with basic research and fusion should be confined to that. Come up with some new theories that will or might produce electricity at an affordable price. Then build their plants to test the new theories. Meanwhile, the idea of unlimited energy is pointless if every country that ran on fusion went bankrupt doing it.

As for the planets, fission or photovoltaic is a much cheaper alternative. Sometime in the distant future fusion will be needed for whenever we travel to the stars. In the meanwhile, it's just a wasteful boondoggle.
Surrealism is the new normal

User avatar
WilyB
Posts: 1234
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2014 3:33 am
Karma: 1628
Location: High up down town

Re: Scientific American Counsels People to ‘Chill Out’ over Global Warming

Post by WilyB » Wed Mar 14, 2018 2:25 pm

Warren Buffett’s vice chairman Charlie Munger told a small meeting of investors in 2017 that Gore is 'not very smart' and 'an idiot' but he was still able to amass a personal fortune in the investment world. 'Al Gore has hundreds of millions [of] dollars in your profession. And he’s an idiot. It’s an interesting story.' Munger added, 'he’s not very smart. He smoked a lot of pot as he [coasted] through Harvard with a gentleman’s C.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/28109/ne ... benshapiro

gore.jpg
Lots of guys watch Bruce Lee movies, doesn’t mean you can do karate.

User avatar
jeanV
Posts: 3748
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2014 8:25 pm
Karma: 2483

Re: Scientific American Counsels People to ‘Chill Out’ over Global Warming

Post by jeanV » Wed Mar 14, 2018 8:47 pm

WilyB wrote:
Wed Mar 14, 2018 2:25 pm
Warren Buffett’s vice chairman Charlie Munger told a small meeting of investors in 2017 that Gore is 'not very smart' and 'an idiot' but he was still able to amass a personal fortune in the investment world.
It's as if Young Charlie was suddenly discovering the big, vast world.

Heads of State being complete fools? 'not very smart' and 'an idiot'?

I wonder if he ever met François Hollande?

Or Donald Trump?

:lol:
Benedict Arnold Trump is a conceited idiot: Lock him up!!

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests