General Discussion

FarCenter

(19,429 posts)

69. There is no chance of ruining other worlds

Sat Jun 1, 2013, 10:25 AM

Jun 2013

The amount of energy required to lift a human out of earth's gravity field is too large for any significant percentage of the population to leave earth. Humans spread over the earth by walking or by rowing or sailing boats, which all have very modest energy requirements.

Besides, there planets in the solar system are not particularly agreeable as human habitations. The lack of atmosphere on the moon and Mars results in too high a radiation level at the surface for long time habitation.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

88 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

We Fucked the Jetstream...BIG TIME..... [View all] Junkdrawer May 2013 OP

I'm sorry, but this is NOT the time for wackadoodle woo & bull. AverageJoe90 May 2013 #1

You might want to think about that "step away from the computer" advice yer own self, "AverageJoe" villager May 2013 #2

I'm not taking sides here Major Nikon May 2013 #12

I'm simply saying that those who freely advise others to "step away from the computer," villager May 2013 #16

I know I would step away from my computer, but truedelphi May 2013 #25

Hard drives can not be trusted MattBaggins May 2013 #33

"I can feel my mind slipping, Dave..." villager Jun 2013 #48

The story so far... Junkdrawer Jun 2013 #58

It's certainly not the time for denial, either... Cooley Hurd May 2013 #3

I was intending to refer just to Junkdrawer's "Mitigation is making it worse comment". AverageJoe90 May 2013 #6

Are you really applauding "climate change mitigation" via "The Faustian Bargain"???? Junkdrawer May 2013 #4

Gotta do what we can, TBH. AverageJoe90 May 2013 #7

Words fail. n/t Junkdrawer May 2013 #8

You're either completely in the dark, or in denial of reality. AverageJoe90 May 2013 #9

Two Points: Junkdrawer May 2013 #13

I never said, or IMPLIED, that I was in favor of coal, not at all. WTF? AverageJoe90 May 2013 #14

I asked a fair, simple question in post #4 Junkdrawer May 2013 #17

You did precisely that in post #7 Occulus May 2013 #24

No, I did not. AverageJoe90 May 2013 #29

No, in fact, you CAN'T add a caveat after the fact. Occulus May 2013 #30

Well, I admit I made a mistake in not being clear enough. AverageJoe90 May 2013 #32

You made no mistake and your clarity was flawless Occulus May 2013 #35

Now you're just being an idiot, Occulus. AverageJoe90 May 2013 #38

As a low post-count member, I give people the BotD. SamReynolds Jun 2013 #73

Truth is, Sam, I think I really did. AverageJoe90 Jun 2013 #78

I'm over it. SamReynolds Jun 2013 #87

Heh, thanks, I guess. AverageJoe90 Jun 2013 #88

What DO you think "The Faustian Bargain" is? Junkdrawer May 2013 #31

And? AverageJoe90 May 2013 #36

Don't you DARE conflate the switch from coal to natural gas as "The Faustian Bargain"... Junkdrawer May 2013 #40

Well, to be honest, I didn't know the whole story behind that, and besides...... AverageJoe90 Jun 2013 #51

All I have to say to you is one word: "Penny-Pritzker". Obama's Mit Romney. rhett o rick Jun 2013 #47

How did I know you'd be here? XemaSab May 2013 #18

Lucky guess. AverageJoe90 May 2013 #20

We had some seriously screwn storms the last two summers... DCKit Jun 2013 #55

I have no idea... babylonsister May 2013 #5

I don't doubt there's a jet stream issue. AverageJoe90 May 2013 #10

I think the intent was to express that mitigation is enabling further pollution. mattclearing Jun 2013 #52

Matt, I think 99% of us share a certain opinion with you, myself included. AverageJoe90 Jun 2013 #53

As I see it... Veilex Jun 2013 #71

Nobody would necessarily HAVE to give up creature comforts because of a switch to green energy. AverageJoe90 Jun 2013 #72

"There is really no doubt whatsoever that we can have our cake and eat it, too" Veilex Jun 2013 #81

..... AverageJoe90 Jun 2013 #82

"We need to shove myths like this, as well as certain other things, aside, and focus only on facts" Veilex Jun 2013 #83

Except that Matt is right. SamReynolds Jun 2013 #74

Sam, I didn't intend to do that. AverageJoe90 Jun 2013 #75

Mother Nature has been schooling the Republican South lately upi402 May 2013 #11

Last time I checked, tornadoes don't give a damn about how you voted. xmas74 May 2013 #26

That's not what the poster was saying. MADem May 2013 #37

But, sadly, many won't. Especially not the Teabaggers. AverageJoe90 May 2013 #39

And that is some sad truth...it would be grand if MADem May 2013 #43

When was the last time a "blue state" had a tornado? xmas74 May 2013 #41

Oh, come on--we can play that little back and forth game, but you know what I meant. MADem May 2013 #42

+1 davidpdx May 2013 #44

It won't matter. Incitatus Jun 2013 #49

um... not really ProdigalJunkMail Jun 2013 #59

Probably one of the most flawed stats in weather... Junkdrawer Jun 2013 #60

so now stats from the national weather service don't count? ProdigalJunkMail Jun 2013 #64

Speaking of tornadoes, your spin of my words is on display.... Junkdrawer Jun 2013 #65

the most flawed stat in weather... ProdigalJunkMail Jun 2013 #66

Your clip of my words. Junkdrawer Jun 2013 #67

so your words don't say what they mean? ProdigalJunkMail Jun 2013 #70

The jetstream is changing bigtime coldbeer May 2013 #15

We're all a little worried(as we should be)..... AverageJoe90 May 2013 #19

The way I describe Sandy - "The eye of a huricane passed by Buffalo on it's way to Canada." Spitfire of ATJ May 2013 #22

My prediction (or hope) is that we are heading for an eventual mini-Ice Age. Which will help slow KittyWampus May 2013 #21

You do understand that the qualifying word "mini" refers to a geological time line, about 5 centuries Egalitarian Thug May 2013 #27

The possible result of too much CO2 in the atmosphere/altered Jet Stream is a mini Ice Age. KittyWampus May 2013 #28

So the answer is no. Egalitarian Thug Jun 2013 #54

Canada will become the new super-power ErikJ May 2013 #23

I've always thought that, too. caseymoz May 2013 #34

Well let's see- ruffburr May 2013 #45

Too clever by half.... Junkdrawer May 2013 #46

Shishkebab on a rotating rutabaga! ananda Jun 2013 #50

No real mitigation? Really? NickB79 Jun 2013 #56

First cfc's THEN CO2.... Junkdrawer Jun 2013 #57

Are you *really* claiming that burning coal in China is an attempt to mitigate climate change? muriel_volestrangler Jun 2013 #61

You're right. Hansen doesn't say that. He says "Doubling Down on our Faustian Bargain" Junkdrawer Jun 2013 #63

Global population is already above the threshold for inevitable collapse FarCenter Jun 2013 #62

That is the root problem. roamer65 Jun 2013 #68

There is no chance of ruining other worlds FarCenter Jun 2013 #69

Overpopulation may be a problem, but not the only one. AverageJoe90 Jun 2013 #77

"likely less than 1 billion"? I don't fucking think so. AverageJoe90 Jun 2013 #76

The Australians were able to kill over 90% of the rabbits with two different agents. FarCenter Jun 2013 #79

So? Apples and oranges, my friend, accept it or not. n/t AverageJoe90 Jun 2013 #80

Recommend..thanks! KoKo Jun 2013 #84

Interesting. I have often thought about what cutting out the rain forests have done to the climate? jwirr Jun 2013 #85

It takes a while to go through, but the Skeptical Science article linked in the OP is excellent. Junkdrawer Jun 2013 #86