Jump to content
Thailand Visa Forum by Thai Visa | The Nation
webfact

The myth of melting ice and rising seas

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

What's not intellectually challenging is a signed letter by thousands of scientists saying climate change is real.  And a real problem.  Impossible to argue with them.  Though some try....perhaps these people are also members of the Flat Earth Society? LOL

LOL. No serious person denies C C. Happened ever since the earth formed from a gas cloud.

I agree with thousands of scientists saying C C is real. The thing I disagree with is that mankind can ever manipulate the climate in a beneficial way. Even if they extract and sequester CO2 till it is the same as in 1900, there will still be just as many hurricanes, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, plagues, and species extinctions as at present.

The REAL reason humans are at risk of extinction ( the planet will carry on regardless without a single human being on it's surface ), is self caused- overpopulation. Without recognising that the problem is our inability to restrict our breeding, and returning the population level to that of 1900, nothing will change, regardless of CO2 ppm in the atmosphere, and continuing to ignore it, as every government on the planet is doing, nullifies any action taken to resolve the CO2 level.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't believe in 'overpopulation' because you could have twice the current population of the world and twice as good land management.  I'm from Long Beach near LA, the entire Bangkok would fit between LA & Long Beach and not even stretch into Santa Monica.. and Bangkok is pretty sprawled, look at Hong Kong and how many people live in it, you can build UP like they do here in Bangkok and fit more people in a small area and then build subways all over the place, it's easier to get around.  In America they waste alot of land so they can build these suburban houses all over the place and then the only transportation is every one has to have their own car.  They could take the entire Southern California population and make LA & SD like Hong Kong and then there would be all this empty space for agriculture or even a nature reserve..  People can live much closer together than they do now.  Obviously in America they feel that they still have enough empty space so they can keep sprawling all over the place..  

Edited by pkspeaker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, canuckamuck said:

It is not such a difficult thing to headhunt people in a field who are the most likely to bend to an agenda for personal gain and then promote them to be leaders of their field. There are just as many scientists without conscience as there are other people without conscience, who will do whatever it takes to get one step higher.  All of the major climate change authorities are projects of the UN, NASA, NOAA or other major Institutions and foundations that are infested by socialists, liberals, and Marxists. You can have a thousand honest graduate students doing correct science but when the stats get manhandled by the agenda machine the results always comply with the politics funding the work.

Translation: You reject any science you don't like because you didn't do the analysis yourself, and you don't trust people who tell you things you don't want to believe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Translation: You reject any science you don't like because you didn't do the analysis yourself, and you don't trust people who tell you things you don't want to believe.

Please break down how you got to that conclusion based on what I wrote.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, pkspeaker said:

I don't believe in 'overpopulation' because you could have twice the current population of the world and twice as good land management.  I'm from Long Beach near LA, the entire Bangkok would fit between LA & Long Beach and not even stretch into Santa Monica.. and Bangkok is pretty sprawled, look at Hong Kong and how many people live in it, you can build UP like they do here in Bangkok and fit more people in a small area and then build subways all over the place, it's easier to get around.  In America they waste alot of land so they can build these suburban houses all over the place and then the only transportation is every one has to have their own car.  They could take the entire Southern California population and make LA & SD like Hong Kong and then there would be all this empty space for agriculture or even a nature reserve..  People can live much closer together than they do now.  Obviously in America they feel that they still have enough empty space so they can keep sprawling all over the place..  

And how will you feed them and employ them? There is plenty of land for physical bodies to occupy. Fresh water is already at a premium unbeknown to most of the world. There are far bigger problems associated with increased population than accommodation. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, canuckamuck said:

Please break down how you got to that conclusion based on what I wrote.

You posted:

 

" All of the major climate change authorities are projects of the UN, NASA, NOAA or other major Institutions and foundations that are infested by socialists, liberals, and Marxists. "

 

Do you agree with the conclusions of these major institutions?  If not, why not?  Do you have evidence that their political leanings influence their conclusions?

 

This is an aside, but "socialists, liberals, and Marxists" in NASA?  Please provide evidence of this.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course they are there, universities have been churning out left wing acolytes for decades now. It is no secret that an important element to fast career path is to be as political correct and progressive as humanly possible.  

That being said I am not about to do a census of NASA. You will likely find some conservatives in the hard science areas, but I can assure you that the more opinion driven and political areas of study like climate are staffed by fully triggered SJW's. Those under the age of 60 at least.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, canuckamuck said:

Of course they are there, universities have been churning out left wing acolytes for decades now. It is no secret that an important element to fast career path is to be as political correct and progressive as humanly possible.  

That being said I am not about to do a census of NASA. You will likely find some conservatives in the hard science areas, but I can assure you that the more opinion driven and political areas of study like climate are staffed by fully triggered SJW's. Those under the age of 60 at least.

In other words, you have no evidence for your claim, you just have preconceived notions and biases.  It's something you want to believe; just as you want to disbelieve climate science. 

 

The Economist news magazine, my primary source of news (but not my only source), accepts human driven global warming as accepted science.  It is a pro-free market publication that advocates minimal regulation and small government; it is definitely not Marxist.  However the editors accept data driven science and obvious conclusions.

 

SJW's?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, heybruce said:

In other words, you have no evidence for your claim, you just have preconceived notions and biases.  It's something you want to believe; just as you want to disbelieve climate science. 

 

The Economist news magazine, my primary source of news (but not my only source), accepts human driven global warming as accepted science.  It is a pro-free market publication that advocates minimal regulation and small government; it is definitely not Marxist.  However the editors accept data driven science and obvious conclusions.

 

SJW's?

From Wikipedia:

Quote

The Economist takes an editorial stance of classical and economic liberalism that supports free trade, globalisation, free immigration, and cultural liberalism (such as supporting legal recognition for same-sex marriage or drug liberalisation).[2] The publication has described itself as "...a product of the Caledonian liberalism of Adam Smith and David Hume".[15] It targets highly educated, cultured readers and claims an audience containing many influential executives and policy-makers.[16] The publication's CEO described this recent global change, which was first noticed in the 1990s and accelerated in the beginning of the 21st century, as a "new age of Mass Intelligence".[17][18]

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Canuckamuck: 
"All of the major climate change authorities are projects of the UN, NASA, NOAA or other major Institutions and foundations that are infested by socialists, liberals, and Marxists."

is that a bad joke?  You can't refute the science, so you make up labels for the scientists, and attack that?  Scraping the barrel, my fellow Chiang Raiian.   

 

The inventor of the transistor was a white-supremacist. Are we supposed to disdain anything with a transistor in it, because of that factoid? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, pkspeaker said:

I don't believe in 'overpopulation' because you could have twice the current population of the world and twice as good land management.  I'm from Long Beach near LA, the entire Bangkok would fit between LA & Long Beach and not even stretch into Santa Monica.. and Bangkok is pretty sprawled, look at Hong Kong and how many people live in it, you can build UP like they do here in Bangkok and fit more people in a small area and then build subways all over the place, it's easier to get around.  In America they waste alot of land so they can build these suburban houses all over the place and then the only transportation is every one has to have their own car.  They could take the entire Southern California population and make LA & SD like Hong Kong and then there would be all this empty space for agriculture or even a nature reserve..  People can live much closer together than they do now.  Obviously in America they feel that they still have enough empty space so they can keep sprawling all over the place..  

Wow, we so disagree, I hardly know where to start.  Have you ever been to downtown Kowloon, HK?  Have you heard of migrants tumbling in to Grecian islands and southern Italy?  Have you heard of migrants risking their lives to get to Malaysia or Australia or the USA. 

 

They're not traveling as tourists, sipping mint juleps and playing shuffleboard.   They're fleeing overpopulated regions where there's not a vege garden for dozens of square miles.  In Beijing, the can be 40 young men hanging in a hotel-sized room with no running water, no kitchen, and the bathroom is a hole in the floor.

 

Overpopulation goes hand in hand with dearth of resources.  Same if you had a patch of garden and started with a male and female rat - and tossed in a bit of bread and water each day.  Within a short time, you wouldn't be able to see the dirt floor, and rats would be eating each other.

 

As for empty space:  sure, there are deserts and mountains and swamps.  You can be the first to reside there.  We'll see how well it works for you, and maybe we'll come and be your neighbors.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, boomerangutang said:

 

is that a bad joke?  You can't refute the science, so you make up labels for the scientists, and attack that?  Scraping the barrel, my fellow Chiang Raiian.   

 

The inventor of the transistor was a white-supremacist. Are we supposed to disdain anything with a transistor in it, because of that factoid? 

A transistor is a thing, apocalyptic climate change is propaganda. Most transistors today are made by non white supremacists.

Edited by canuckamuck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, boomerangutang said:

Wow, we so disagree, I hardly know where to start.  Have you ever been to downtown Kowloon, HK?  Have you heard of migrants tumbling in to Grecian islands and southern Italy?  Have you heard of migrants risking their lives to get to Malaysia or Australia or the USA. 

That's not due overpopulation, it's because a) war B) people are looking for better life.

 

The Rohingyas have been fleeing the mass killings by the Myanmar Buddhist for years. Some of them did come to Thailand, which had camps to contain them. This lead to different kind of human trafficking issues. 

 

I believe the real reason for Myanmar army to occupy the Rohingyas land was the natural resources found there. 

 

Greed, not the overpopulation. The obvious reason it often is. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   2 members

BANGKOK 18 November 2017 21:08
Sponsors
×