First thing that has to happen to change human influenced climate changes is REDUCE the human population.
This planet can not support the amount of humans currently inhabited on it.
So.... Who are you planning to kill off, and are you personally willing to pull the trigger?
That would take too long.
Be realistic.
Try again.
First thing that has to happen to change human influenced climate changes is REDUCE the human population.
This planet can not support the amount of humans currently inhabited on it.
You first...
Agreed.
I do not fear death, I welcome it.
You think a life of pain and poverty is worth living?
Pain is a normal part of life...
Poverty is subjective...
I think life is a gift...
Hypocrisy will get you now where.
Try again.
*Hint* It has nothing to do with me personally.
Interesting thoughts. I haven't read up enough, but how do they propose to deal with the "jerk" problem? Ideal societies like that work on paper until some guy decides to be a jerk. Even communism has good points, until people come into the equation and realize they get the same benefits regardless of how hard they work and/or don't work. I'll watch their videos when I'm not at work though.
Physical pain like I have is NOT normal.
Poverty is my inability to work.
Do you know the response you get when you hobble into a place on a cane and ask for a employment?
Physical pain like I have is NOT normal.
Poverty is my inability to work.
Do you know the response you get when you hobble into a place on a cane and ask for a employment?
Incongruent...........only in the perfect world.
Yes, the law is designed to protect, but it is very easy for an employer to work around.
I do however believe you have a higher success rate with government, state, fed or university types of jobs.....especially universities.
There is also a local firm in my area that does ADA surveys, they exclusively hire folks with a disability.
Newsbot is not only violating forum rules by posting on topics that have resulted in members being banned in the past, but it is also posting absolute crap. The geoengineering ideas in the linked article are mostly garbage. Does it make more sense to cut back our CO2 emissions, or to try to create a sunshade for the entire earth in space --- a project the article says would require 270 delta launches every day for 50 years in order to get the material into space? Which makes more sense?
Is it possible to make an ad hominem attack against Newsbot? I don't think Newsbot is an actual hominem, so... Newsbot, you are a moron. Your ideas stink! When are you going to pull your head out of your News-butt? Beat it, bot! We don't like your kind around here! You are not the droid we're looking for!
Ditto, the idea is trash, but that's at the fault of the article publisher. How does Newsbot know if it's valid or not, and why should it have a crap filter when there's supposed to be peer review and stuff?
I had already posted the fix but it was deleted from the 49ers thread (at least the mods kept my "hot bacon" post). In any case, here's the cure: https://energy.gov/articles/scientists-accidentally-turned-co2-ethanol.
If the source of electrical power is a power generator that runs on fossil fuel, then you are not getting ahead on either CO2 or energy.
You do not know if this is true or not. This depends on the efficiency of the transformation of CO2 to Ethanol in large scale, commercial applications.
It's true because of thermodynamics. You can't take one source of potential energy, like a fossil fuel, burn it, use the heat to run a generator and create electricity, then use the electricity to create another form of potential energy, and come out ahead. Each step is less than 100% efficient, so in the end, you have less energy available to use than you started with.
Enter your email address to join: