THE AGE OF STUPID

[BungaEBiker]

I just finished watching the movie THE AGE OF STUPID. I am unsure how many of you out there have seen it but I think you should. You should get everyone you know to watch it. Even people who you know will not normally watch movies about Climate Change. It helps put into perspective what we are doing and what we are not. Like most of you I myself have started down the road to zero emissions and hope to have a carbon foot print as low as i can. I do many things that I think are helping and so do most everyone who comes onto this site. A question that is often raised when people start debating the environment is "When is it to much? When is it going to far?" My answers to those questions are simple When the Threat of Global Environmental Catastrophe is gone. We have to stand up and make as much noise as we can, rake your tin cups against the bars and rattle the cage as much as we can to get the attention of those in power. As they point out in the film only by massive protest and through massive attention will those in power actually listen. It is a fault in our character as human beings to become lethargic and "oh it's too much for just one person" attitudes set in and prevent us from doing what we know we must do. As I stated in other threads and other topics. We have no where else to go, if we destroy what we have then we are dead. A fellow EV enthusiast once said "You can't breath money" To further that statement we can't eat money either. We can not lose this fight ladies and gentlemen it is a fight to the death. If we lose we die if we win we, our children and our descendent's live. If anyone still doubts the truth about global environmental change just watch the weather for a bit. Look at England right now and how they are currently seeing the worse winter on record. The other side is saying "yes but this is normal and ice ages happen all the time" That statement is true but NOT THIS FAST. in lest then a century and a half we have pushed the normal rate at witch we move towards a global ice age ahead a million fold. We have pushed the GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT CLOCK AHEAD. Through nothing but our own SIMPLE need for MORE AND MORE AND MORE. Well we are now reaping the harvest of that STUPIDITY. We are faced with Death or Life. I think the choice is an easy one to make. I hope you do to, I know there will be one or two comments on this. I hope it becomes lively and full of vim and vigor. Think about all I have said and tell all of us what you are or are not doing to help stop the Global Environmental threat we all live under.


P.S. I'm normally a calm individual but now and then I take a trip to the zoo and this is one of those times.

 

[BungaEBiker]

So here goes, lets start off then.
Well lets see:
I have replaced all the light bulbs in my home with energy saving ones,
I unplug all my appliances (other then the Fridge, my alarm clock and my computer) when I am not using them.
I recycle everything the recycling plant will take.
I cook my own meals from scratch as much as I can.
I ride an E-Bike as much as the weather allows. (currently it is -15, a little too cold to be riding)
I take public transportation.
I try to involve as many people as i can in recycling and to encourage others to not use there gas/diesel vehicles as much,
I make a point of not buying products that are not recycled.
I avoid products that are un-recyclable.
I'm bothering all of you with this thread (lol)
If I think really hard I may find more but not right now.

 

[JEB]

I guess is sort of a game with me- 90+% of all the lights in the house are led's, electric bike to the store, and were ever, going to purchace a led back lighted tv, converting a freezer to use as a ref., thinking of buying a few solar panels.

 

[StudEbiker]

Oh God....not another AGW thread.

Like most of you I myself have started down the road to zero emissions and hope to have a carbon foot print as low as i can.

If you will take a look at the two recent threads on this subject you will find that the thoughts on this issue are not as monolithic as you might believe. Just because it is an EV forum doesn't mean everyone here believes in AGW. Me, I think it's a crock. As far as reducing the size of my carbon footprint. I have my own version of carbon offsets and it goes the other way. I heard someone say recently that the size of a man's carbon footprint is correlated to the size of his......well you know. And jeez dude....you are claiming that the harsh winter is a result of our carbon emissions!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? For the last 30 years we've been hearing about the greenhouse effect and how "the eurthh has a fee-vah" (My print version of an AlGore impression.) Now you're going to come on here and tell us the harsh winter is because of our carbon emissions. I don't even know what to say to that. Good luck in trying to reach your carbon nirvana, and I swear to you I won't get in your way of living the life you want to live as long as you don't get in the way of me living the life I want to live. As Mel said in Braveheart, "FREEDOM!!!!!!"

 

[jag]

I just finished watching the movie THE AGE OF STUPID.

I liked the movie title, but was a bit disappointed with the content.

There's a review of it in Newsweek juxtaposed with the Vouge fashion mogul:
http://www.newsweek.com/id/214836
(The print edition of the magazine had better pictures than the online: An environmental catastrophy scene next to the "dripping of makeup" Vouge editor.)

Oh God....not another AGW thread.

I find it much more informative to read Julesa's, Liveforphysics and others debating on ES than watching mainstream media.

 

[swbluto]

Oh God....not another AGW thread.

Like most of you I myself have started down the road to zero emissions and hope to have a carbon foot print as low as i can.

If you will take a look at the two recent threads on this subject you will find that the thoughts on this issue are not as monolithic as you might believe. Just because it is an EV forum doesn't mean everyone here believes in AGW. Me, I think it's a crock. As far as reducing the size of my carbon footprint. I have my own version of carbon offsets and it goes the other way. I heard someone say recently that the size of a man's carbon footprint is correlated to the size of his......well you know. And jeez dude....you are claiming that the harsh winter is a result of our carbon emissions!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

While your area of the world is getting a "harsh winter", we're experiencing a relatively balmy nirvana with above freezing temps pretty much all of January and no snow on the ground. The typical year is at least a foot on the ground every day and only 2 to 3 days above freezing. So, yes, you've confirmed that at least a semi-significant group of global warming skeptics have a tendency to be short-sighted.

(P.S. the last two winters here have been the worst on record for records extending back past the last century. So, it's definitely volatility we're seeing and you're likely seeing to. )

 

[StudEbiker]

I'm not the one preaching the AGW gospel, but if I were, I'd at least try to keep my story straight. Are carbon emmisions warming or cooling the planet? People that believe in AGW can't even make up their mind about that one simple question yet they are asking us to restructure our entire economies and lives around this 'theory'.

 

[Gregory]

I think most people use Climate Change rather than warming these days to better illustrate that local effects can swing temps either way. Some places hotter some colder, some dryer, some wetter etc.

It's understandable you are confused StudEbiker, the media do tend to over simplify everything and throw out lots of headline grabbing soundbites for us.

 

[dogman dan]

Hey, you want to save the world, do what I did. Don't reproduce.

 

[paultrafalgar]

Let's not argue about whether it's global warming or global cooling - most of the respectable scientists of the world agree it's manmade global warming, but StudEbiker knows better. What we probably agree about is that a world with 9-12 billion people on it is going to suffer from more and more overcrowding, resource depletion, pollution and species extinction. That suggests that we need to consume less, and the StudEbikers of the world deny manmade global warming primarily because they don't want the FREEDOM to consume interfered with. The powers that be have there own, classic means for dealing with this, it's called the BOOM-SLUMP-WAR cycle (aka Capitalism). If they get too many people they'll have a war to reduce the numbers or maybe they'll use modified Swine Flu. Anyway they'll certainly blame it on someone else (Arabs, terrorists etc). And the StudEbikers of this world will cheer them on.
Carry on the good work chaps!

 

[Toorbough ULL-Zeveigh]

think of it as the age of stupendous & yool feel better (so the theory goes).

One other thing.....I do this with my kids....when they call each other stupid. I tell them to take the id out of it. Put a new ending on it. And make it about us. So whenever I hear them say the word stupid, I tell them to say stupendous. Then everybody smiles and its all good. The bad that was before, with stupid, simply vanished all together! Try it for yourself sometime. You'll be amazed at how you feel!

 

[BungaEBiker]

Not sure what AGW means but we can move on. To answer Mr. StudEbiker's questions regarding the appearance of indecisiveness of the environmental debate I will briefly summarize. The world ecology is balanced quite sharply. The worlds weather is dictated by the evaporation of the earths oceans. Water evaporates, comes back as precipitation, gets soaked into the ground, hits the water table and is moved either out to sea or is soaked up by trees. Now thats where the sticky part comes in, the balance needs to be maintained. Salt water evaporates slower then freshwater and therefor the salt content of the ocean needs to be at a specific level. The two polar ice caps are made up, primarily, of fresh water ice formed by ancient glaciers. Carbon dioxide, monoxide and several other gases including methane are always being flirted through the system. If they become more prevalent, say through the burning of fossil fuel, they combine and form what is known as "Greenhouse Gases". These gases thicken the layers of atmosphere keeping more heat in. That coupled with the rather large hole in the atmosphere leads to a worming trend. Not that in and of itself doesn't effect our climate directly. It does, however, effect the premature melting of the polar ice caps. When the caps melt and their fresh water mixes with the salt water the lever of salt decreases. This leads to faster evaporation of the oceans, th roughing the cycle of seasons out of order. Cold high precipitation seasons last longer, warmer dryer seasons shorten and become more erratic. Storms increase , huricans and tsunami's increase. That's pretty much it in a nut shell.

 

[StudEbiker]

Let's not argue about whether it's global warming or global cooling - most of the respectable scientists of the world agree it's manmade global warming, but StudEbiker knows better. What we probably agree about is that a world with 9-12 billion people on it is going to suffer from more and more overcrowding, resource depletion, pollution and species extinction. That suggests that we need to consume less, and the StudEbikers of the world deny manmade global warming primarily because they don't want the FREEDOM to consume interfered with. The powers that be have there own, classic means for dealing with this, it's called the BOOM-SLUMP-WAR cycle (aka Capitalism). If they get too many people they'll have a war to reduce the numbers or maybe they'll use modified Swine Flu. Anyway they'll certainly blame it on someone else (Arabs, terrorists etc). And the StudEbikers of this world will cheer them on.
Carry on the good work chaps!

You all are trying to put this on me. Bungebiker is the one that came on here and said his harsh winter is a result of carbon emmisions. I simply pointed out that his viewpoint is in opposition to what "the respectable scientists" (which I'll assume is the same thing as respected scientists). So in response to an earlier post, I am not confused at all. I know it's crap because you can't keep your story straight. As anyone, (cops in particular) when the story isn't consistent then there are lies being told.

". . .the StudEbikers of the world deny manmade global warming primarily because they don't want the FREEDOM to consume interfered with."

Damn straight. See that's the problem with a "semi-significant portion of liberals" they don't like freedom. I have no problem with bungebiker pursuing his happiness, but now that bungebiker has "seen the light" he wants us all to conform to his view of the world, and that type of viewpoint has, does, and will always lead to Statism. No thank you. That is not the primary reason I deny AGW though. I deny it because I know it is false. Therfore, why would I want to restructure the world around a false premise?? This thread is quickly going to go down the path we went down in another thread recently. I am proud to stand on the same side of this issue with LiveforPhysics and Bigmoose. I'm done. Carry on.

 

[jag]

Hey, you want to save the world, do what I did. Don't reproduce.

Maybe China's 1 child policy is going to make a bigger difference long term than anything western politicians come up with.
Short term there is clearly a lot of wasteful resource use that can be fixed in various ways, but long term I think it is the size of the human population that matters.

 

[Canis Lupus]

No not all respectable scientists agree with the theory of AGW, but there are a lot disrespectful ones who do, and in doing so, disrespect science, other scientists, nature, taxpayers, universities, truth and knowledge.

The mini ice age starts here

The bitter winter afflicting much of the Northern Hemisphere is only the start of a global trend towards cooler weather that is likely to last for 20 or 30 years, say some of the world’s most eminent climate scientists.

Their predictions – based on an analysis of natural cycles in water temperatures in the Pacific and Atlantic oceans – challenge some of the global warming orthodoxy’s most deeply cherished beliefs, such as the claim that the North Pole will be free of ice in
summer by 2013.

According to the US National Snow and Ice Data Centre in Colorado, Arctic summer sea ice has increased by 409,000 square miles, or 26 per cent, since 2007 – and even the most committed global warming activists do not dispute this.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1242011/DAVID-ROSE-The-mini-ice-age-starts-here.html#ixzz0d20KZ2Jb

Sorry, I haven't seen the Age of Stupid, but it appears well named if it is referring in some way to this age which produces shows such as itself.

 

[paultrafalgar]

Here you, ostriches, the very car for you:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb5553/is_200205/ai_n21625432/?tag=content;col1

 

[TPA]

You can't go to work at a job, since most places of employment are the largest energy consumers.
you can't go to any stores for the same reason plus all the moving of goods they do.
you can't live in a house or an apartment because of all the resources used to build them.
you can't eat or drink because your body turns pure substances into pollution.
you can't breath...same reason, but it produces the evil of all evils CO2.


Some of these things you will find a little difficult at first, but with a little practice....

 

[BungaEBiker]

Well it certainly is lively, not quite what I was hoping for but hey lets go with it. StudEbiker brings up a good point, allot of people who are concerned with the environment try to force it on others. I fully believe that if you do not want to do anything about it you don't have to. It's like the old saying goes "But what if I don't want to? Then Don't". When people don't want to take part in this sort of thing then I fully agree they should be let to go on their way with no repercussion and no ill will. Just don't try and stop the rest of us please. I wouldn't want to see people actively trying to make it worse. It's one thing to do nothing it's quite another to actively try and be wasteful just to be wasteful. The other side is that allot of us who are actively trying to do something for the environment are stopped because others don't want us to. Like in the movie when a man wanted to set up a wind farm he was blocked by a group of protesters. The area he wanted to set up the wind farm was an old world war two air base that happened to be within his farm property. Really who would not want to have cheaper electricity. The worst case scenario would be that the electricity costs for that area would go down. I'm still trying to find the bad side on that one. He wasn't expecting to get money from the people who didn't want it, he wasn't allowed to build it because they where concerned of the NOISE, the lack of view and the supposed fall in property value. It's a good thing he didn't wan to build a methane capture plant. That would have really made the folks pissed. Ahh man this new farm Bills building smells like cow and pig shit. What will people think when they smell that? (Bill Pipes up) That I'm fertilizing would be my guess. It's all perspective, if you don't want to take part you don't have to. If it works we all will be able to take part in the rewards. Can you imagine if the man who came up with penicillin said "nope, you can't have any. This is only for the people who thought it was a good idea and to hell with the rest of you". That would be stupid now wouldn't it?

 

[StudEbiker]

It's really refreshing to see that you have that point of view BungaEbiker. You bring up a good point on the turbine issue. Property rights have been so eroded in this country it is dreadful. If you own the property you should have the right to do what you want to on it whether that be putting up a wind turbine, or building a lead smelter. Your neighbors....well they can stay or leave, that's freedom.

 

[FeralDog]

There is no universal definition of what earths' salvation would even be.

Just my humble opinion.

 

[julesa]

When I recently told one of my eco-greenie friends I was building an e-bike, they smugly replied to me that an e-bike was still an energy drain, and that I should only use human power .... and going to work with pedal-power would show others that it should be done and ..... what kind of statement was I making, and ... my answer , "Hey , for what I need, I think it will work, your way won't".

Next time you run into that eco-greenie friend, ask him how much diesel/gasoline was burned to grow and transport the food his pedal bike is powered with.

http://www.ebikes.ca/sustainability/Ebike_Energy.pdf

 

[John in CR]

When I recently told one of my eco-greenie friends I was building an e-bike, they smugly replied to me that an e-bike was still an energy drain, and that I should only use human power .... and going to work with pedal-power would show others that it should be done and ..... what kind of statement was I making, and ... my answer , "Hey , for what I need, I think it will work, your way won't".

Next time you run into that eco-greenie friend, ask him how much diesel/gasoline was burned to grow and transport the food his pedal bike is powered with.

http://www.ebikes.ca/sustainability/Ebike_Energy.pdf

Thanks Julesa, I hadn't seen Justin's term paper before that compares ebikes to pedal power. I've been saying the same thing, and I believe Justin's comparison significantly understates electric's advantage over pedal power. My view is that electrics are more efficient from an energy input point of view, and food costs a hell of a lot more than electricity. I did an analysis once using one of the cheapest food sources possible, peanut butter and jelly sandwiches, and ebikes still won out.

 

[StudEbiker]

I think maybe somebody should do a study on the effects of global warming on Massachusetts senatorial elections.

 

[deronmoped]

I was kinda wondering if there were still any AGW nuts out there.

They seem to be dropping like flies. Buddies of mine that used to be all over that after watching "the movie" are now changing their tunes. Went to a lecture tonight about peak oil and climate change and I was real surprised that the guy that presented it pretty much said that the facts and figures did not add up in the AGW debate. I was expecting some sort of indoctrination on how driving my car over somehow destroyed a portion of Mother Gaia.

Anyways, no one is going to substantially change their lifestyles to supposedly save the Earth from melt down. If anything people are using more energy from year to the next year. China even looks like they will make the US energy use look like Ethiopia's energy use in the not to distance future.

Good luck tilting at windmills, before you know it everyone else will have moved on to the "Next New Improved Crisis".

Deron.

 

[Canis Lupus]

Good luck tilting at windmills, before you know it everyone else will have moved on to the "Next New Improved Crisis".

Deron.

I wonder what it will be. Maybe if a comet is said to be heading straight to earth, the bankers and traders can set up a trading scheme involving caves. Academics who need a buck can slant their studies to understanding the geo-science of living underground. There's plenty of potential out there, so the trough-snorters shouldn't feel too disheartened.

Personally, I liked the scam in the Hitchhikers Guide To The Universe, which used the idea of a doomsday to get rid of all the useless members in society who did jobs of no importance like hairdressers. Everyone was told the world would end and divided into classes to be sent off the planet in space ships. The hairdressers et al were sent first, being told they were very important, which they believed of course because they would believe anything. After they left, the doomsday story was canceled and they were left hurtling away from earth in space eventually wondering why the others never followed.