- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: If you believe in global warming/climate change, you've been duped.
Posted on 2/13/17 at 12:55 pm to CptBengal
Posted on 2/13/17 at 12:55 pm to CptBengal
quote:
you continue to just ooze stupidity in your replies.
Do you think insulting people will get your point across, or do you not care about persuading anyone?
2
Posted on 2/13/17 at 12:56 pm to CptBengal
:sigh:
I don't know why I even engage you
since we are discussing per capita (which to me seems the most relevant), take a group of people living in rural area with their standard of living (on average) and the resources that they consume and compare that to the same amount of people living in a city and their standard of living and the amount of resources they consume
which is less?
I don't know why I even engage you
since we are discussing per capita (which to me seems the most relevant), take a group of people living in rural area with their standard of living (on average) and the resources that they consume and compare that to the same amount of people living in a city and their standard of living and the amount of resources they consume
which is less?
Posted on 2/13/17 at 12:56 pm to TheIndulger
quote:
or do you not care about persuading anyone?
the facts are the facts...whether I hurt your "fee fees" or not. I know thats a new concept for SJWs.
Posted on 2/13/17 at 12:56 pm to Topwater Trout
quote:
what about cities in California that need electricity and water from nevada...is that efficient?
Bingo. Without taking water from places like the Colorado River, pretty much most of the southern half of California would be an empty desert.
Posted on 2/13/17 at 12:57 pm to bbvdd
The title of your thread was enough.
If you believe in global warming you deserve to be duped.
If you believe in global warming you deserve to be duped.
Posted on 2/13/17 at 12:57 pm to CptBengal
Which tend to have pretty similar wind patterns that circulate with a degree of consistency which is what I was discussing in the first place
Pressure systems are most easily predicted by bodies of water
Pressure systems are most easily predicted by bodies of water
Posted on 2/13/17 at 12:59 pm to torrey225
Ok there's alot of intelligent wealthy people who don't have a go to college and plenty of idiots in college. Just look at Berkeley for example. and to the guy talking about the huge liberal pockets yes, I know that those places are democratic strongholds and that there are plenty of wealthy Democrats but I think if you saw a nationwide poll of income compared to political leanings you would find more financially secure conservatives than liberals
Posted on 2/13/17 at 12:59 pm to Darth_Vader
I love all the people in this thread that are talking about how they can see the results of global warming In 135 years the global temp has increased 1.4 degrees. Let that sink in...
NASA
NASA
quote:
According to an ongoing temperature analysis conducted by scientists at NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS), the average global temperature on Earth has increased by about 0.8° Celsius (1.4° Fahrenheit) since 1880. Two-thirds of the warming has occurred since 1975, at a rate of roughly 0.15-0.20°C per decade.
Posted on 2/13/17 at 12:59 pm to TheIndulger
quote:
Don't you think a place like New York City, with 8 million people living in small apartments and taking up less space, riding the subway or walking to work, and requiring much less extensive gas/water/power lines, uses far less energy than those 8 million being spread somewhere else
You would also have to include construction costs of outside power works, transportation costs, the utilities used to produce things imported into the city. Many more things to consider.
Posted on 2/13/17 at 1:00 pm to Salmon
quote:
which is less?
you said footprint.
footprint not only involves the resources consumed, but also the mitigation of waste by ecosystem services. Any natural ecosystem is capable of mitigating things like heavy metals, eutrophication, etc.
However, when you introduce quantities that are above a break point for the natural ecosystem you begin to get a diminishing return on the processing of that waste by the ecosystem.
Cities, being large point sources with SUPER high density produce SUPER concnetrated wastes, Those wastes are too high to be provessed in any meaningful way and are not able to be mitigated by the local ecosystem.
the same group spread out over an area, however, does not tax the ecosystem services and thereby has the waste products mitigated.
In terms of resources use and acquisition, cities require an extended network to deliver said resources to a location. they require extra construction, lighting, etc. The footprint in a city is actually more than a rural environment...AND you have a diminishing or loss of ecosystem services.
even per capita. The aggregate is even worse.
Posted on 2/13/17 at 1:02 pm to wickowick
for a true meassure of climate change we would need to see this compared to 135 year cycles for thousands of years...which we don't
Posted on 2/13/17 at 1:02 pm to CptBengal
quote:
And that due to paving, increased sheet flow means that things like simple eutrophication arent mitigated and are higher than they would be normally downstream.
Yeah, but cities require less roads per person.
Imagine how many roads you need for a high rise with 1,000 condo units in it. Now compare that to how many roads you would need if you were to build 1,000 homes.
Posted on 2/13/17 at 1:03 pm to TheIndulger
quote:
And that due to paving, increased sheet flow means that things like simple eutrophication arent mitigated and are higher than they would be normally downstream.
Yeah, but cities require less roads per person.
Imagine how many roads you need for a high rise with 1,000 condo units in it. Now compare that to how many roads you would need if you were to build 1,000 homes.
seriously? good god. Where do you think they got the name "concrete jungle" from to describe a city....because it's full of trees and grass?
Posted on 2/13/17 at 1:04 pm to CptBengal
quote:
trees and grass
are bad for the environment
Posted on 2/13/17 at 1:05 pm to bbvdd
Question: why is Venus hotter than Mercury, even though Mercury is closer to the sun?
Posted on 2/13/17 at 1:06 pm to CptBengal
quote:
Where do you think they got the name "concrete jungle" from to describe a city....because it's full of trees and grass?
Because all the concrete is in one place, rather than spread out over everywhere. How is this so difficult?
Posted on 2/13/17 at 1:08 pm to TheIndulger
quote:
Because all the concrete is in one place, rather than spread out over everywhere.
exactly, which means that there are ZERO localized ecosystem services.
quote:
How is this so difficult?
I realize you're just repeating what you were taught about UN Agenda 21 in school. The science shows the opposite.
Posted on 2/13/17 at 1:08 pm to CptBengal
quote:
Cities, being large point sources with SUPER high density produce SUPER concnetrated wastes, Those wastes are too high to be provessed in any meaningful way and are not able to be mitigated by the local ecosystem.
I already stated that locally, cities lose, especially concerning solid waste and water pollution
quote:
the same group spread out over an area, however, does not tax the ecosystem services and thereby has the waste products mitigated.
if we are looking at the ecosystem as a whole, like say air pollution, this doesn't mean anything, it all ends up in the same place, and rural footprint here is higher
Posted on 2/13/17 at 1:09 pm to TheIndulger
quote:
Do you think insulting people will get your point across, or do you not care about persuading anyone?
It's the number one sign that person can't respond in argument form
Posted on 2/13/17 at 1:10 pm to Salmon
quote:
I already stated that locally, cities lose, especially concerning solid waste and water pollution
but that source pollution doesnt stay local. it keeps moving. Maybe you've heard of the water cycle?
quote:
the same group spread out over an area, however, does not tax the ecosystem services and thereby has the waste products mitigated.
if we are looking at the ecosystem as a whole, like say air pollution, this doesn't mean anything, it all ends up in the same place, and rural footprint here is higher
actually, you're wrong again. Localized sources of increased CO2 or heavy metals can be taken up by plants and removed from the atmosphere or water in a matter of a few tens of meters.
Cities being large point sources with no local ecosystem services overwhelm the surrounding ecosystems and then have deleterious effects downstream.
Page 8 of 14
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News