• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

AZ and NV face mandatory water cuts for the first time

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
China's total is twice as high as the US. Per capita hide this factor as that are 3 to 4 times as many people in China as the US.
Per capita is the main point.
Chinese people didn't make the mess and they aren't the main current problem. If westerners like the USA did what Chinese people have done for centuries, there wouldn't be the current problems.
Tom
 

Shad

Veteran Member
Per capita is the main point.

Which is false representation of which nation pollutes more. For example idiot celebrities create more pollution flying their private jets all over the world to "fight climate change" than I do. Why is a normal citizen being blamed for the excess of fools? Why not just blame the fool instead of catching everyone in your silly stats net? That is what happens when you try to average things that are not to be averaged.


Chinese people didn't make the mess and they aren't the main current problem. If westerners like the USA did what Chinese people have done for centuries, there wouldn't be the current problems.
Tom

China being the top nation on the carbon foot print shows otherwise.

Again all you have is a stats trick while you are ignoring the total by nation which China is double that of the USA. You ignore development, technology, economic status, etc.
 

Mindmaster

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
But Global Warming is just a myth ....

Yes, especially if you understand the 2nd law of thermodynamics. :D (It's impossible to "trap heat" -- it will always equalize to space since it's colder. Though, you can have temporary "warm spots" before that equalization takes effect.)

But, anyway, it's been a desert since the last ice age (10,000 years) and nothing is changing that anytime soon. :D The only time it hasn't been was for a brief time when the glaciers were retreating and providing enough moisture for that to temporarily not be the case.

If you're down with global warming being a temporary localized phenomena then to some extent I can agree. But, saying it's a global event is just non-factual and nonsense... Worse, just pandering to one's own politics and confirmation bias.
 

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
Which is false representation of which nation pollutes more.
Dividing humans up by nation is the false representation.
Chinese people average about 5-6 tons of CO2 each per year. American people average 17-18 tons each.
And Americans have been doing that for decades, as opposed to Chinese people.

No, by my moral lights, we humans are all in this together. Expecting Chinese people to live without electricity in their homes in order to justify US McMansions air conditioned 20F below the outside temperature is appallingly immoral.
Tom
 

Mindmaster

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
China's total is twice as high as the US. Per capita hide this factor as that are 3 to 4 times as many people in China as the US. It is a common stats trick.

It's also worth noting that carbon emissions are really at a low, historically, since we don't all heat our homes with burnt oil or coal. (Which, say 100 years back was the only game in town.) Both of those generated significantly more emissions per capita than anything we do now. (Natural gas burns with 50% less carbon emission.) Coal burning power plants cause most of that problem, but even then there is now "cleaner coal" that produces no where near the old emissions we used to make with lump coal that was used in heating. The streets in cities used to be blackened with coal dust carbon during the winter -- we have nothing like that going on anymore.
 

Altfish

Veteran Member
Yes, especially if you understand the 2nd law of thermodynamics. :D (It's impossible to "trap heat" -- it will always equalize to space since it's colder. Though, you can have temporary "warm spots" before that equalization takes effect.)

But, anyway, it's been a desert since the last ice age (10,000 years) and nothing is changing that anytime soon. :D The only time it hasn't been was for a brief time when the glaciers were retreating and providing enough moisture for that to temporarily not be the case.

If you're down with global warming being a temporary localized phenomena then to some extent I can agree. But, saying it's a global event is just non-factual and nonsense... Worse, just pandering to one's own politics and confirmation bias.
Do you not recognise sarcasm??>
 

Shad

Veteran Member
It's also worth noting that carbon emissions are really at a low, historically, since we don't all heat our homes with burnt oil or coal. (Which, say 100 years back was the only game in town.) Both of those generated significantly more emissions per capita than anything we do now. (Natural gas burns with 50% less carbon emission.) Coal burning power plants cause most of that problem, but even then there is now "cleaner coal" that produces no where near the old emissions we used to make with lump coal that was used in heating. The streets in cities used to be blackened with coal dust carbon during the winter -- we have nothing like that going on anymore.

Sure technology has developed due to need and pressure. Canada use to have coal planets then we switched to hydro for the most part except for areas in Ontario.
 

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Shouldn't people who move to very arid places, then expect water to flow freely, also expect some serious problems resulting from that?
Tom

It depends on the number of people moving here. I didn't really choose to move here myself; that was my father's choice - a choice he made along with millions of others moving away from cold country to the Sun Belt.
 

Shad

Veteran Member
Dividing humans up by nation is the false representation.

As is per capita. If 1 person create more pollution than 50 other people combined per capita hides that factor while shifting blame for excess of 1 to the masses.

Chinese people average about 5-6 tons of CO2 each per year. American people average 17-18 tons each.

Which does not account for other factors like wealth, technology access, etc. For example if millions of people can not afford cars their foot print is lower due to circumstance not choice.

And Americans have been doing that for decades, as opposed to Chinese people.

China footprint is higher twice that of the US. China beat the US in pollution in less time. Think about it.

No, by my moral lights, we humans are all in this together.

Sure as in fixing a problem not sharing blame for that problem. I have no control over people with private jets so I do not share the blame for their pollution. Part of creating solution is identifying the problems thus who creates those problems. That is what I am pointing out. Some of the advocate for fighting climate change are part of the problem. However since they say the right things and culture is becoming obsessed with celebrities they get a pass.

Expecting Chinese people to live without electricity in their homes in order to justify US McMansions air conditioned 20F below the outside temperature is appallingly immoral.
Tom

I never said that. I said blaming individuals by use of per capita is nonsense. Take per capita for murder rates. Do I get to blame everyone in Chicago for murder?
 

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Per capita is the main point.
Chinese people didn't make the mess and they aren't the main current problem. If westerners like the USA did what Chinese people have done for centuries, there wouldn't be the current problems.
Tom

The Chinese made all those babies that caused their population to be over 1.3 billion. That's the main issue we're facing in the desert: More people than the ecosystem can support. The most significant thing that we can do to reduce global warming is to encourage negative population growth for the next 100-200 years.

One way of accomplishing that is by giving tax incentives to those without children and stop giving tax credits to those who have children.
 

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
It depends on the number of people moving here. I didn't really choose to move here myself; that was my father's choice - a choice he made along with millions of others moving away from cold country to the Sun Belt.
I do understand that problem.
I'm a gay atheist who didn't choose to live in southern Indiana.
Tom
 

Mindmaster

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Sure technology has developed due to need and pressure. Canada use to have coal planets then we switched to hydro for the most part except for areas in Ontario.

It's never about "green" it's about more efficient/cheaper. So, if a next-gen energy technology accomplishes this and is clean all other arguments are basically moot. Still waiting for the day that solar isn't generating a bathtub of toxin per panel, but I'm guessing it'll be awhile. :D
 

Shiranui117

Pronounced Shee-ra-noo-ee
Premium Member
Per capita is the main point.
Chinese people didn't make the mess and they aren't the main current problem. If westerners like the USA did what Chinese people have done for centuries, there wouldn't be the current problems.
Tom
Nonsense. Of the 10 rivers which contribute 90% of the amount of plastic flowing into the world's oceans from river systems, 4 of them are in China. China is ranked worst in the world for plastic pollution. The US is only 20th. The smog in some urban areas of China is so bad, there are days when you can't see the sun. They have horrible controls over their pollution. They haven't made any noteworthy attempts to control their CO2 emissions or other pollutants, and they've flatly ignored all climate change summits and protocols that have been made. By contrast, the US has come a long way since Nixon passed environmental legislation here in the US, and we're consciously making efforts to improve our environmental footprint.
 

Shiranui117

Pronounced Shee-ra-noo-ee
Premium Member
Dividing humans up by nation is the false representation.
Chinese people average about 5-6 tons of CO2 each per year. American people average 17-18 tons each.
And Americans have been doing that for decades, as opposed to Chinese people.
Yes, because there are parts of China (especially in Xinjiang Province, Tibet and other areas of Western China) where the people live in abject poverty or live largely according to traditional, pre-industrial lifestyles. Now compare that to the heart of China, where all the industry and commerce is.

No, by my moral lights, we humans are all in this together. Expecting Chinese people to live without electricity in their homes in order to justify US McMansions air conditioned 20F below the outside temperature is appallingly immoral.
Tom
I don't think anyone's proposing anything like that. They're just pointing out the fact that it's unrealistic to blame all of the world's anthropogenic climate woes on the US. It won't help if it's only Western nations which are cutting back on emissions and pollution. We need to get the Asian countries on board too, as they're the ones contributing a far larger share of emissions and pollutants.
 

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
. We need to get the Asian countries on board too, as they're the ones contributing a far larger share of emissions and pollutants.
How about we get the western per capita carbon footprint down to that of the Asian per capita before demanding that the Asians cut theirs?

When we in the USA have a per capita carbon footprint similar to the Chinese, then I would expect everyone to shoulder the load.

Well first, they should get a century of triple our per capita footprint, to make up for the last century.
Then I will agree that expecting Chinese people to follow our "lead" is somewhat reasonable. But by then they'll have left us in the dust. They're already ahead in renewable energy. Because we keep subsidizing fossil fuels and they don't.
Tom
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber

Shad

Veteran Member
It's never about "green" it's about more efficient/cheaper. So, if a next-gen energy technology accomplishes this and is clean all other arguments are basically moot. Still waiting for the day that solar isn't generating a bathtub of toxin per panel, but I'm guessing it'll be awhile. :D

I wasn't talking about going green in itself. Canada just has a silly amount of areas with water that have no major to no human habitation. It is easier to get permission for development as population density isn't a factor. Hence the exception of Ontario which needs gas, wind and nuclear in south as it has the highest population density in the nation.
 
Top