Wild fires in BC Canada.

[John Brown]

Just a thought. There are 371 posts on this thread, maybe a few more by the time I have written this. Initially it was informative and useful but has
steadily declined into competing so called facts. They can't all be right.

Has anyone changed their opinion or changed their everyday behaviour because of what they have read here?

I would be interested in how things developed for the OP and their neighbours, if you remember this started as a post about a specific set of wildfires near where they live.

Aside from that, is there any point continuing what has become a pointless argument?

There is little point in continuing, and there was little point in starting. A lot of people simply dig in deeper when presented with evidence that contradicts their beliefs.
This is know as "The backfire effect", and even though some recent studies have cast doubt on the existence of "The backfire effect", I still believe in it, more fervently than before.

 

[paulrbarnard]

Just a thought. There are 371 posts on this thread, maybe a few more by the time I have written this. Initially it was informative and useful but has
steadily declined into competing so called facts. They can't all be right.

Has anyone changed their opinion or changed their everyday behaviour because of what they have read here?

I would be interested in how things developed for the OP and their neighbours, if you remember this started as a post about a specific set of wildfires near where they live.

Aside from that, is there any point continuing what has become a pointless argument?

Why is it pointless? It’s keeping a fair number of grumpy old (and not so old) men off the streets. Look at it as a public service.

 

[Jacob]

Good mental exercise? More interesting than doing a crossword?
Perhaps useful and necessary - this sort of conversation is going on all over the place and the issues are huge. Getting up to speed on the facts must be useful.
Also some trivial issues seem weirdly important to some people. A small adjustment to speed limits and Mark Drakeford is getting death threats and there's a 43k petition! How strange is that!
https://www.itv.com/news/wales/2023...ons-as-petition-reaches-over-43000-signatures

 

[RogerS]

Your example actually makes the point. Your wife overtook at a point where it was not possible for the van following to overtake. The van however attempted to overtake where it was dangerous forcing the situation. If the van had not been capable of breaking the speed limit to squeeze by’ then it most likely wouldn’t have attempted the overtake and put your wife in danger. The issue was caused by someone driving too fast and/or too aggressively. If idiots can’t be trusted to respect other people’s lives then they need to be prevented from speeding in the first place.

Frankly there is no situation where an increase in speed makes a situation safer, well unless you are being chased by a tornado.

Rubbish. It was a dual-lane. So she is overtaking a long line of traffic...within the speed limit...not AT the speed limit. She is unable to pull in until she has finished her overtaking manouvre which will safely end by the end of the dual-lane section. Said manouevre being undertaken safely (although in your world, overtaking would also probably be prohibited). The van comes up behind her...AT the speed limit but faster than her speed. So presumably, if you were her, you'd just have stayed at your own speed and let the van driver go hang? That's nice.

Your proposal is flawed yet you refuse to ignore it. Ah well, there's nowt so strange...

 

[Jacob]

... if you were her, you'd just have stayed at your own speed and let the van driver go hang? ...

Well yes. In fact I often slow down if someone is pushing from behind.
But avoid doing V signs over your shoulder this can wind things up. DAMHIKT!

 

[paulrbarnard]

Rubbish. It was a dual-lane. So she is overtaking a long line of traffic...within the speed limit...not AT the speed limit. She is unable to pull in until she has finished her overtaking manouvre which will safely end by the end of the dual-lane section. Said manouevre being undertaken safely (although in your world, overtaking would also probably be prohibited). The van comes up behind her...AT the speed limit but faster than her speed. So presumably, if you were her, you'd just have stayed at your own speed and let the van driver go hang? That's nice.

Your proposal is flawed yet you refuse to ignore it. Ah well, there's nowt so strange...

So now you are saying she only needed speed up to the limit. Seems your story is changing to fit your narrative.

 

[artie]

Yes it does. If there's a level of CO2 in the atmosphere, a plant uses some of it and grows, then dies and decomposes, the net CO2 level remains the same over time. If CO2 is introduced artificially, the plant grows, dies and decomposes, giving up the CO2 into the atmosphere as it does so, leaving a net gain in CO2 in the atmosphere. Think it through...

I've thought that through again and I think your reasoning is flawed.

The Co2 added to greenhouses is a byproduct of ammonia manufacturing so will find it's way into the atmosphere somehow.

Using it to enhance plant growth just gives added value.

 

[Agent_zed]

I've thought it through.

I was replying to your reply to my comment about plants flourishing presently compared to recent times.

Which was
"Why, given your previous reasoning that plants are now flourishing better than ever? (Unless of course you count all the old growth forest that has disappeared in the last few hundred years.)"

Those old growth forests didn't disappear because of anything to do with Co2

The growth of plants is far more complex than put more CO2 in get more plants out. Tropical Forests May Be Getting Too Hot for Photosynthesis

If there are more heat waves plants will actually photosynthesise less despite increased CO2 levels. Coupled with increased drought and/or flooding destroying crops and damaging soil, whilst increased temperatures allow diseases and pests to spread into new areas. Everything comes with a cost. I regularly see comments like 'I'm glad its heating up as I like hot summers' well I hope those people also like Malaria and Yellowfever and various other things that we don't currently have in the UK due to our currently moderate climage. They will in time make it here.

Let's also clarify that yes life will continue with elevated temperatures and CO2 but there will be an awful lot of destruction and war as resources run out and sea level changes wipe out large areas of land. 'Life' may not necessarily include humans at their current scale. The earth tends to have pretty harsh ways of dealing with population overload.

 

[Cobbs]

But what is the ammonia used for? Enhancing plant growth. It's made from fossil fuels (Fritz Haber process) and excess ammonia is now recognised as not good for the environment. Again, plenty of natural ammonia exists, it's a breakdown product of urine for a start, but we're using far too much artificial fertiliser in farming and horticulture - just look at the problems caused to the water systems by run-off. Given that your original argument was that there is so much CO2 in the atmosphere that it's encouraging rampant plant growth, why add more for the same effect?

 

[artie]

Given that your original argument was that there is so much CO2 in the atmosphere that it's encouraging rampant plant growth, why add more for the same effect?

You have misunderstood.

My point was that higher Co2 levels are not necessarily bad as "they" say the planet is greener now than in recent times.
What harm can a greener planet do.

I never said I was in favour of adding more, just that it happens. I don't add to my polytunnel because I grow totally without artificial fertilizer or pesticides.

Yesterday in my tunnel Co2 was 333ppm. Outside in the fresh air it was 458ppm.

In the long run the greener the planet gets the more Co2 gets used up.

 

[Cobbs]

Yes, I agree, the greener the planet, the more CO2 gets used, but at the moment we're stripping the planet of as much greenery as we can, while pumping more CO2 into the atmosphere, where it creates global warming and encourages the destruction of yet more greenery through forest fires...
I think it has been proven to the satisfaction of virtually all people who understand such things that we have way too much CO2 at the moment.
End of.

 

[artie]

End of.

ok

 

[RogerS]

So now you are saying she only needed speed up to the limit. Seems your story is changing to fit your narrative.

Suggest you read what I posted again and this time understand what I wrote and NOT what you think I wrote.

 

[RogerS]

Well yes. In fact I often slow down if someone is pushing from behind.
But avoid doing V signs over your shoulder this can wind things up. DAMHIKT!

Absolutely. Works most times. Slamming on the brakes not recommended either.

 

[Jacob]

....

My point was that higher Co2 levels are not necessarily bad as "they" say the planet is greener now than in recent times.

No it is not and nobody is saying it except on the usual fringes.
There have been variations but utterly trivial and ineffectual compared to the steady increase in CO2
Half of the world’s habitable land is used for agriculture which has meant clearance of forest and eventually deserts in the earliest farmed areas.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/earth-stopped-getting-greener-20-years-ago/What do you think about climate change and the effects currently reported from around the planet?

 

[Agent_zed]

What do you think about climate change and the effects currently reported from around the planet?

This seems to be part of the problem. We have so far manged to avoid the worst effects, which leads to the lack of enthusiam to change anything. Like being on the top deck of a sinking ship, it's going to effect us much later and at the point our feet are getting wet it is very hard to do anything about.

A balance must be struck though between all out stoppage of oil usage and completely ignoring the problem. Neither approach is going to work. There needs to be a rapid transition to green tech and a circular economy but it must be done by transitioning employees from one sector to the other and the UK becoming a net exporter of the tech. Even if you take climate change out of the equation you can't just keep making more stuff with no regard to the environmental consequences, eventually our country will just be a giant landfill with dead rivers and denuded land.

Read an interesting article on how people don't change their minds as such they just forget what they used to believe and move to the position that they always thought the new position. Like wind power, so many haters a few years ago and once it became clear that it helped us through last winters energy crisis they seemed to forget their opposition to wind power.

 

[Jacob]

.....

A balance must be struck though between all out stoppage of oil usage and completely ignoring the problem. Neither approach is going to work. ....

Nor will "a balanced approach". It's like warfare, there may be no half measures.
All out stoppage as soon as possible seems to be the one essential option. We have no choice and it's very late already.

 

[Adam W.]

Nor will "a balanced approach". It's like warfare, there may be no half measures.
All out stoppage as soon as possible seems to be the one essential option. We have no choice and it's very late already.

Then expect mass civil disobedience, redundancies and bankruptcy. No government is going to risk that....ever.

 

[Jacob]

Then expect mass civil disobedience, redundancies and bankruptcy. No government is going to risk that....ever.

Risks seem to be a bit more severe than that!
https://www.theccc.org.uk/what-is-climate-change/what-are-the-risks/
https://www.channel4.com/programmes/chris-packham-is-it-time-to-break-the-law

 

[Cobbs]

This seems to be part of the problem. We have so far manged to avoid the worst effects, which leads to the lack of enthusiam to change anything. Like being on the top deck of a sinking ship, it's going to effect us much later and at the point our feet are getting wet it is very hard to do anything about.

A balance must be struck though between all out stoppage of oil usage and completely ignoring the problem. Neither approach is going to work. There needs to be a rapid transition to green tech and a circular economy but it must be done by transitioning employees from one sector to the other and the UK becoming a net exporter of the tech. Even if you take climate change out of the equation you can't just keep making more stuff with no regard to the environmental consequences, eventually our country will just be a giant landfill with dead rivers and denuded land.

Read an interesting article on how people don't change their minds as such they just forget what they used to believe and move to the position that they always thought the new position. Like wind power, so many haters a few years ago and once it became clear that it helped us through last winters energy crisis they seemed to forget their opposition to wind power.

Agree with this, but the key word is "rapid" - it doesn't seem to be in the lexicon of most governments, unfortunately...