The Save the Planet thread

[jtakeda]

Originally Posted by makoti

Just got one. Which forum?

Facebook group is the best comedy. I dont have Fabo but my girlfriend does and shows me the highlights.

As far as new IP owners, congrats, Can I make a suggestion? Get a bunch of the silicone top rings (different colors ideally) for different applications.

We have brown for sweet things
clear for stocks
orange for savory

You get the idea. The rings will soak up the odors and make things taste like other things

[makoti]

Originally Posted by jtakeda

Facebook group is the best comedy. I dont have Fabo but my girlfriend does and shows me the highlights.

As far as new IP owners, congrats, Can I make a suggestion? Get a bunch of the silicone top rings (different colors ideally) for different applications.

We have brown for sweet things
clear for stocks
orange for savory

You get the idea. The rings will soak up the odors and make things taste like other things

Good tip. Thanks!

[rain dogs]

Originally Posted by AngryScientist

So to get back to marciero's original post, what are some of the micro things we can do as cyclists specifically?

The best thing anyone can do as a cyclist to combat climate change is ride their bike, ride their bike, ride their bike.

Anytime we're about to get into a car, truck, bus, train, plane, ask ourselves: Why am I not going by bike? And go by bike or walk.

The second best thing anyone can do as a cyclist is sell all their cars.

Fretting over lubes is trivial... riding your bike may even be trivial but it is thousands of magnitudes more effective than fretting the small things of cycling like materials, and liquids and such.

Ride your bike. Eat healthy. Collect less crap. Live small. Be happy. The planet and your body will thank you.

[fiamme red]

I've always felt guilty on long rides about buying bottled water at a gas station and then tossing the bottle in the trash. The depressing truth is putting plastics in a recycling bin doesn't help save the planet, it just makes us feel better.

https://www.theguardian.com/environm...s-your-rubbish

...If you look at plastics, the picture is even bleaker. Of the 8.3bn tonnes of virgin plastic produced worldwide, only 9% has been recycled, according to a 2017 Science Advances paper entitled Production, Use And Fate Of All Plastics Ever Made. “I think the best global estimate is maybe we’re at 20% [per year] globally right now,” says Roland Geyer, its lead author, a professor of industrial ecology at the University of California, Santa Barbara. Academics and NGOs doubt those numbers, due to the uncertain fate of our waste exports. In June, one of the UK’s largest waste companies, Biffa, was found guilty of attempting to ship used nappies, sanitary towels and clothing abroad in consignments marked as waste paper. “I think there’s a lot of creative accounting going on to push the numbers up,” Geyer says.

“It’s really a complete myth when people say that we’re recycling our plastics,” says Jim Puckett, the executive director of the Seattle-based Basel Action Network, which campaigns against the illegal waste trade. “It all sounded good. ‘It’s going to be recycled in China!’ I hate to break it to everyone, but these places are routinely dumping massive amounts of [that] plastic and burning it on open fires.”

[AngryScientist]

Originally Posted by fiamme red

I've always felt guilty on long rides about buying bottled water at a gas station and then tossing the bottle in the trash. The depressing truth is putting plastics in a recycling bin doesn't help save the planet, it just makes us feel better.

https://www.theguardian.com/environm...s-your-rubbish

yea, and what's worse is that, if you've been following local news, several towns in north jersey, including sections of Newark have been testing positive for lead content in water, and the cities temporary solution is to hand out free bottled water. not gallons of water but 16 oz bottle of water. this is a unsustainable tragedy and a complete and utter waste of resources.

unfortunately with stories like this in the news, more and more people are fearful of their tap water, and are buying into bottled water more and more, which is not only a plastic waste issue, but a transportation issue, what a waste to transport thousands of gallons of individually packaged water when a pipe comes into every person's home.

ugh, not good.

[pobrien]

The Truth About Global Warming

Published on Oct 21, 2018

Dr. Patrick Michaels, director of the Center for the Study of Science at the Cato Institute, provides insight into the debate over climate change and the political games played to create policy.

You can copy the link below into your Google browser to watch a very interesting interview of Dr. Patrick Michaels on the topic of climate change.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fA5sGtj7QKQ

I expect that any serious person interested in the truth may find the interview very much worth your time watching.

Patrick

[makoti]

Originally Posted by pobrien

The Truth About Global Warming

Published on Oct 21, 2018

Dr. Patrick Michaels, director of the Center for the Study of Science at the Cato Institute, provides insight into the debate over climate change and the political games played to create policy.

You can copy the link below into your Google browser to watch a very interesting interview of Dr. Patrick Michaels on the topic of climate change.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fA5sGtj7QKQ

I expect that any serious person interested in the truth may find the interview very much worth your time watching.

Patrick

Seriously? The Cato Institute on Fox News? Any serious person will look somewhere else for actual science.

[ftf]

Originally Posted by pobrien

The Truth About Global Warming

Published on Oct 21, 2018

Dr. Patrick Michaels, director of the Center for the Study of Science at the Cato Institute, provides insight into the debate over climate change and the political games played to create policy.

You can copy the link below into your Google browser to watch a very interesting interview of Dr. Patrick Michaels on the topic of climate change.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fA5sGtj7QKQ

I expect that any serious person interested in the truth may find the interview very much worth your time watching.

Patrick

Just so everyone is fully aware, The Cato Institute, is a well known libertarian thinktank.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cato_Institute

On environmental policy

Cato scholars have written about the issues of the environment, including global warming, environmental regulation, and energy policy.

PolitiFact.com and Scientific American have criticized Cato's work on global warming.[96][97] A December 2003 Cato panel included Patrick Michaels, Robert Balling and John Christy.[citation needed] Michaels, Balling and Christy agreed that global warming is related at least some degree to human activity but that some scientists and the media have overstated the danger.[citation needed] The Cato Institute has also criticized political attempts to stop global warming as expensive and ineffective:

No known mechanism can stop global warming in the near term. International agreements, such as the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, would have no detectable effect on average temperature within any reasonable policy time frame (i.e., 50 years or so), even with full compliance.[98]

Cato scholars have been critical of the Bush administration's views on energy policy. In 2003, Cato scholars Jerry Taylor and Peter Van Doren said the Republican Energy Bill was "hundreds of pages of corporate welfare, symbolic gestures, empty promises, and pork-barrel projects".[99] They also spoke out against the former president's calls for larger ethanol subsidies.[100]

With regard to the "Takings Clause" of the United States Constitution and environmental protection, libertarians associated with Cato contend that the Constitution is not adequate to guarantee the protection of private property rights.[101]

Also the entire, "teaching the debate" is a method employed to muddy the waters in a lot of issues in which there really is little to no actual debate on.

[ftf]

Originally Posted by pobrien

The Truth About Global Warming

Published on Oct 21, 2018

Dr. Patrick Michaels, director of the Center for the Study of Science at the Cato Institute, provides insight into the debate over climate change and the political games played to create policy.

You can copy the link below into your Google browser to watch a very interesting interview of Dr. Patrick Michaels on the topic of climate change.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fA5sGtj7QKQ

I expect that any serious person interested in the truth may find the interview very much worth your time watching.

Patrick

More info on On Patrick Michaels himself.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrick_Michaels

July 27, 2006 ABC News reported that a Colorado energy cooperative, the Intermountain Rural Electric Association, had given Michaels $100,000.[35] An Associated Press report said that the donations had been made after Michaels had "told Western business leaders ... that he was running out of money for his analyses of other scientists' global warming research" and noted that the cooperative had a vested interest in opposing mandatory carbon dioxide caps, a situation that raised conflict of interest concerns.[36]

Michaels said on CNN that 40 per cent of his funding came from the oil industry.[37] According to Fred Pearce, fossil fuel companies have helped fund Michaels' projects, including his World Climate Report, published every year since 1994, and his "advocacy science consulting firm", New Hope Environmental Services.[38]

A 2005 article published by the Seattle Times reported that Michaels had received more than $165,000 in fuel-industry funding, including money from the coal industry to publish his own climate journal.[9]

[verticaldoug]

Originally Posted by pobrien

The Truth About Global Warming

Published on Oct 21, 2018

Dr. Patrick Michaels, director of the Center for the Study of Science at the Cato Institute, provides insight into the debate over climate change and the political games played to create policy.

You can copy the link below into your Google browser to watch a very interesting interview of Dr. Patrick Michaels on the topic of climate change.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fA5sGtj7QKQ

I expect that any serious person interested in the truth may find the interview very much worth your time watching.

Patrick

I think he is making several misrepresentations.

First, he makes it sound like the climate models being wrong and tuned is some secret the climatologists don't want to disclosed. (he doesn't say it like this, but the tone of his talk is accusatory). Every climate model has discussion papers on historical inaccuracies and the corrections that are being made to better fit the data. This is a very open discusion.

Second, the quick chart he uses to show how the climate models predict a much higher temperature increase than observed, may be a tricky misrepresentations. The models usually are working with a high median and low value for greenhouse gas increases which drive the temperature increases. It looks like he is using the highest growth greenhouse estimates and comparing those climate predictions versus observed. Since greenhouse gas increases have been below those estimates, the temperatures will be below. In scientific literature, even earlier models by Hansen from the 80's are not this inaccurate, so I think this is the likely explanation.

Third, he admits the climate is warming and about 1/2 is from humans. In some of his writings, he claims this is not a worry because although there are downsides to climate warming, there are also potential upsides. So nothing to see here.

He may be right and the climatologist concerned about global warming may be playing with some of the data, but at the very least, he is playing the same game.

[ftf]

Originally Posted by verticaldoug

He may be right and the climatologist concerned about global warming may be playing with some of the data, but at the very least, he is playing the same game.

I'm pretty sure that the 97% of scientists that work in this field are crooked, or could it be the guy taking huge amounts of money from the people who are going to benefit from the position held by the 3% are crooked?


https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

Every climate model has discussion papers on historical inaccuracies and the corrections that are being made to better fit the data. This is a very open discusion.

This is wrong, again 97% of doctors think you have stage 3 cancer, please listen to the 3%. As for the rest of the sentence, you either don't understand how science works, which is a constant refinement, or are attempting to intentionally mislead.

[pobrien]

Hi all,

It is good to see a somewhat open dialogue taking place wrt the video. I am no expert on climate modelling but found it interesting and perhaps a good point to bring to the thread.

One point that I have not heard raised was the importance of sunspot activity on our climate. I believe that we are going into a period of low activity which may be reflected in global cooling.

Patrick

[ftf]

Originally Posted by pobrien

Hi all,

It is good to see a somewhat open dialogue taking place wrt the video. I am no expert on climate modelling but found it interesting and perhaps a good point to bring to the thread.

One point that I have not heard raised was the importance of sunspot activity on our climate. I believe that we are going into a period of low activity which may be reflected in global cooling.

Patrick

I'm glad you have a theory, luckily we have looked in to it:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...limate-change/

Many climate scientists agree that sunspots and solar wind could be playing a role in climate change, but the vast majority view it as very minimal and attribute Earth’s warming primarily to emissions from industrial activity—and they have thousands of peer-reviewed studies available to back up that claim.

Peter Foukal of the Massachusetts-based firm Heliophysics, Inc., who has tracked sunspot intensities from different spots around the globe dating back four centuries, also concludes that such solar disturbances have little or no impact on global warming. Nevertheless, he adds, most up-to-date climate models—including those used by the United Nations’ prestigious Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)—incorporate the effects of the sun’s variable degree of brightness in their overall calculations.

[Mikej]

Originally Posted by makoti

Don't blame dogs. They are doing just fine.

Where’s all of that dog $h!t going. Oh yeah, landfills in plastic bags. Why is this never an issue? Dogs are not environmentally friendly, as my dog watches...

[Kirk007]

Originally Posted by rain dogs

The best thing anyone can do as a cyclist to combat climate change is ride their bike, ride their bike, ride their bike.

Actually the best thing a cyclist, and every other person, can do is to vote for political representatives who understand and are willing to act to address the most significant existential threat that homo sapiens have ever encountered. The little decisions we make as individuals are not trivial but they are not going to get our children and grandchildren and those already in harms way out of this.