Poll: How much of your own money would you be willing to personally spend each month to reduce the impact of climate change?

Advertise with us
shop deals on amazon
The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

How much of your own $ would you be willing to spend monthly to reduce the impact of climate change?

  • $0

  • $1-$10

  • $11-$20

  • $21-$30

  • $31-$40

  • $41-$50

  • $51-$75

  • $76-$100

  • Greater than $100

Results are only viewable after voting.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Zeta said:
Prove to me that humans could accurately measure the temperature of the earth and extrapolate the data out.... I doubt it. Anyone notice how global warming was first suppose to alarm us into action over a half a degree of change. That didn't work so they just keep upping the ante. Further more all this talk about sea level rise ???? Haven't seen it.... Why ...physics. Put ice and water in a glass and mark the side of the glass where water line is. Wait for the ice to melt... check the water level....guess what ..no change ... why? Physics.
Click to expand...

Ever heard of thermometers? Google it.

Seriously, weather and temperature data are tracked globally every day by thousands and thousands of weather stations around the world, plus satellites, balloons, and other instruments. Have you ever seen a weather forecast? Where do you think they get that information? People have been tracking weather data for hundreds of years.

Also, since you brought up physics, I’m sure you understand how heat causes materials to expand. Even if no new water were to flow into the oceans, they would still expand due to heating. And the oceans really are expanding due to temperature inncreases. That’s a big part of sea level rise. And of course water is also flowing into the oceans too due to ice on land melting — glaciers, ice sheets, etc.
 
Zeta said:
over what time period do you think these "disasters" will happen ? and why is "change" so scary and bad ? .....I'll give it another 10,000-20,000 years
Click to expand...

If it were going to take 10,000 to 20,000 years, then it would not be a problem. That’s normal. The problem is the changes are happening extremely fast — faster than at any point in human history. Too fast to adapt to.
 
Tides rise and fall, glaciers advance and recede, droughts come and go. Has always been, will always be. Men don't cause this, men can't change this. To be a denier of realty is much more dangerous than denying some made up BS. We live in clown world where people actually believe that, men can get pregnant and have a menstrual cycle. Why would I believe anything that these people say. It's lunacy. Controlling the weather is a plot point in a James Bond or Sci Fi channel movie. While entertaining at times, it's not meant for grown ups in the real world. I'm so thankful that I don't need to be concerned about such ridiculous things. Now as for the mass delusions that plague us, I am concerned about the people who believe them. These are the real
"Deniers".
 
Just a bunch of fools rushing in where thinking people dare not tread. But thankfully they are condemning their descendants to their ignorance.
Well played!
 
bwayne64 said:
Tides rise and fall, glaciers advance and recede, droughts come and go. Has always been, will always be. Men don't cause this, men can't change this. To be a denier of realty is much more dangerous than denying some made up BS. We live in clown world where people actually believe that, men can get pregnant and have a menstrual cycle. Why would I believe anything that these people say. It's lunacy. Controlling the weather is a plot point in a James Bond or Sci Fi channel movie. While entertaining at times, it's not meant for grown ups in the real world. I'm so thankful that I don't need to be concerned about such ridiculous things. Now as for the mass delusions that plague us, I am concerned about the people who believe them. These are the real
"Deniers".
Click to expand...

Not sure where you got the idea anyone thinks men can have menstrual cycles and get pregnant? Lol! You funny! But it’s definitely off topic.

But the idea that humans can change the climate is well established fact. It’s not hard to understand, the mechanism is well known, and the fact it is happening is well proven.

  • Burning fossil fuels has released CO2 into the atmosphere — 100% proven fact.
  • CO2 from fossil fuels has accumulated and increased the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere — 100% proven fact.
  • CO2 is a greenhouse gas that traps heat in the atmosphere — 100% proven fact.
  • The added accumulation of CO2 from fossil fuels in the atmosphere has increased the amount of heat retained in the atmosphere — 100% proven fact.
  • The global surface temperature has increased since CO2 levels have risen — 100% proven fact.
  • Sea levels have risen as global temperatures have risen — 100% proven fact.
  • Extreme weather events have increased as global temperature has risen — 100% proven fact.
 
ThirstyBarbarian said:
But the idea that humans can change the climate is well established fact.
Click to expand...
It’s actually ancient, if you can believe that. The ancient Greeks knew that draining marshes made those areas more prone to freezing as early as the 4th century BC.

Let us also not forget that periods of rapid change in Earth’s geological history were invariably accompanied by mass extinctions. One of them, at the end of the Permian period, was so destructive that it’s known today as The Great Dying. Some regions took 10 million years to recover, and the quickest ones only recovered after several hundred thousand years.
 
jderimig said:
So we only have 80 years for our 120,000 civil engineers to figure out how to mitigate a 10" sea level rise in coastal areas? (FYI Amsterdam is about 80" below sea level)
Click to expand...

The rate is increasing, so it’s likely to be a much shorter timeframe than that.

You seem to love to point out that any proposed solution to these problems is stupid and doomed to fail, but here you are saying that solutions will obviously be found. Because engineers.

Anyway… When you get a chance, go ahead and ask a civil engineer if there is any difference between Amsterdam and Miami. Is there any reason why a system of dikes might work with the soil conditions there but not work for a major city (or entire state) built on porous limestone that water easily passes through? Ask a civil engineer how realistic it’s going to be to save the trillions of dollars of real estate and infrastructure vulnerable to a sea level rise of about a foot. Then ask about what if it’s 3 feet. And for the projects that are realistic, ask how much it’s likely to cost.

I’m not a civil engineer, so I don’t know. But I think it’s going to be extremely difficult and costly. A huge problem. And I think in some cases it’s not going to be realistic at all, and some very valuable assets are just going to have to be removed, relocated, or abandoned.
 
ThirstyBarbarian said:
Not sure where you got the idea anyone thinks men can have menstrual cycles and get pregnant? Lol! You funny! But it’s definitely off topic.
Click to expand...
You know very well where I get this idea. Unless you've been living under a rock these last 10 years or so. As for on or off topic, don't care.

time.jpg

P.S. Very encouraged by the results of the poll. Only a few gullible people in the thread. There's still hope ; )
 
jderimig said:
Not at all Thirsty. Lets stipulate there is an impact. The impact can reduced only 1 way. That is adapting and mitigating the effects with civil engineering and infrastructure hardening. Decarbonizing will not reduce the impact of climate change unless its stops climate change. That is not reducing the impact of climate change, that is reducing climate change, which I believe impossible to change the course of.
Click to expand...

So if that’s how you want to frame the poll, what is your answer for the number? Presumably when you posted it, you expected people to answer it, and people did. Considering how many people have obliged you, you should probably return the favor and be able to give a better answer than non-zero dollars.
 
bwayne64 said:
You know very well where I get this idea. Unless you've been living under a rock these last 10 years or so. As for on or off topic, don't care.

View attachment 552214

P.S. Very encouraged by the results of the poll. Only a few gullible people in the thread. There's still hope ; )
Click to expand...

Lol! That’s a hoax. What we’re you saying about gullible people?
 
ThirstyBarbarian said:
So if that’s how you want to frame the poll, what is your answer for the number? Presumably when you posted it, you expected people to answer it, and people did. Considering how many people have obliged you, you should probably return the favor and be able to give a better answer than non-zero dollars.
Click to expand...
My answer would still be “zero”. I’m doing zero to change the climate for the good. I’m doing it so all those climate scientists will have a job. That is my contribution to there work! It makes them feel better about their profession and improves their self esteem. In fact, I’m glad I can help. I’ll be starting an effort soon to bring back the styrofoam Big Mac box as well. I’m thinking a Go Fund Me page so you all can contribute. Maybe a Patreon too for monthly donations… 🤣
 
bwayne64 said:
Yea ok. I'll get the thread locked if I say anything else on this subject so , I'll just leave this, carry on !

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna1328
Click to expand...

That’s not the guy on the fake magazine cover you posted. That article is about a trans man. Trans men can get pregnant because they are born with a female reproductive system. The guy on the magazine cover is not trans — he’s a hoax.

As far as I know, the only cis-gendered male to ever get pregnant and have a baby is Hormone Monster Maury who got pregnant by Hormone Monstress Connie and shot little baby Hormone Monster Montel out of his butt during Season 6 of Bigmouth. That’s real, the Time cover is not.

Anyway… I’m not sure the point you were trying to make about climate change with this, but I’m ok with not knowing. ‘Nuff said. Thanks!
 
ThirstyBarbarian said:
I expect less than zero from you!
Click to expand...
Will you donate today? Only $.99 a day and you can help save a climate scientist job! Your contribution will help ensure those meteorologist activist have carbon emissions and water levels to study for years to come! Please call today! Operators are standing by. Call within the next 10 minutes and will send you your very own can of R12 Freon and a new My Pillow. Hurry supplies won’t last….
 
kuririn said:
Global warming due to anthropomorphic forcing was minimal a 100 years ago compared to today. So the question is irrelevant. More relevant is what scientists see as the top five cities at the most risk for flooding due to climate change.

​

Click to expand...
we can agree to disagree.
at least i will.

ive read of weather events all over the world due to climate change. cities everywhere effected by climate change related weather events.

except buffalo. 6 feet of snow and its business as usual. :)
 
ThirstyBarbarian said:
I think the concern is more about how many will be flooded in the next hundred years. The two American cities that immediately come to mind are Miami and New Orleans, but there are definitely many others that are threatened. Some are already spending lots of money to deal with it and prepare for the future. There are trillions of dollars of US real estate and infrastructure that will need to be upgraded, relocated, removed, or abandoned. People are already struggling with it because their homes were located based on historical flood maps that don’t apply anymore. Maybe you bought your home knowing it was in a 500 or 1,000-year floodplain, but now it’s flooded twice since you’ve owned it and likely to flood again. And now you have trouble insuring it, refinancing it, or selling it, because everyone knows it’s doomed. That’s going to be a problem for millions of people in flood-prone areas, and coastal neighborhoods where the property is literally falling into the sea.
Click to expand...

i think you touched on my point. cities 1000 years ago were built in areas they shouldnt have( i think out of ignorance- they didnt know any better) and now under water- some rather deeply under water. that had to be massive climate change to put a city a 200 feet under water.
i know i know- it doesnt count because anthroblahblahblah :)

miami and NO were destined to fail from the beginning. huge engineering catastrophes waiting to happen.

gonna build in a natural flood plain? gonna flood.
gonna build in the middle of the forest? just might burn.
gonna build in a desert? just might have water issues.
gonna build in buffalo? better get a bigger shovel. :)
gonna build in seattle? gonna be sunny and 75 the majority of the year.
whoops... no climate change there yet. :)

climate changes. thats a fact. been changing for millions of years. it will continue to change no matter what humans do.

what do the climate change people want the end result to be?
 
ThirstyBarbarian said:
Ever heard of thermometers? Google it.

Seriously, weather and temperature data are tracked globally every day by thousands and thousands of weather stations around the world, plus satellites, balloons, and other instruments. Have you ever seen a weather forecast? Where do you think they get that information? People have been tracking weather data for hundreds of years.

Also, since you brought up physics, I’m sure you understand how heat causes materials to expand. Even if no new water were to flow into the oceans, they would still expand due to heating. And the oceans really are expanding due to temperature inncreases. That’s a big part of sea level rise. And of course water is also flowing into the oceans too due to ice on land melting — glaciers, ice sheets, etc.
Click to expand...
Nothing said there proves the point. When the global warming scare began they said if the Earth temperature rises by 1 degree bad things will happen........

Here is the problem .... accuracy .... the ability to accurately measure temperature :

Accuracy is a definition of how ‘accurate’ an instrument is, compared with the known temperature. It is usually accompanied by a reference to a tolerance, as it is very unlikely that anything will be exactly accurate, i.e. accuracy = zero.

Tolerance corresponds to the value of inaccuracy that is inherent in the instrument by virtue of its manufacture or capabilities.

"Thus Accuracy will usually be stated as a tolerance, about, or either side of an absolute, or exact temperature. This tolerance may be stated as a measured amount, i.e. ± 0.5°C, or as a percentage, i.e. ±2% (at 50°C the tolerance will be ±1.0°C but at 100°C the tolerance will be ±2.0°C) The tolerance may also be accompanied by a reference to the final digit of the reading, and will therefore be an additional 1° for a 1° instrument or 0.1° for a 0.1° instrument, and so on."https://thermometer.co.uk/content/41-thermometer-resolution-accuracy-and-tolerance-guide

THE SCARE DATA IS WITHIN THE TOLERANCE RANGE .... !!!!
 
bwayne64 said:
Tides rise and fall, glaciers advance and recede, droughts come and go. Has always been, will always be. Men don't cause this, men can't change this. To be a denier of realty is much more dangerous than denying some made up BS. We live in clown world where people actually believe that, men can get pregnant and have a menstrual cycle. Why would I believe anything that these people say. It's lunacy. Controlling the weather is a plot point in a James Bond or Sci Fi channel movie. While entertaining at times, it's not meant for grown ups in the real world. I'm so thankful that I don't need to be concerned about such ridiculous things. Now as for the mass delusions that plague us, I am concerned about the people who believe them. These are the real
"Deniers".
Click to expand...
Why would you ever think man cannot change the climate on Earth or possibly even another world? The Earth and atmosphere is not as big as you probably think. To scale, the atmosphere is like an apple skin to an apple. The fact that we can launch a hobby rocket right though the majority of the atmosphere should give your intuition a hint of how small it is. The diameter of the Earth is about 4,000 miles and the majority of the air is within 5-10 miles, So roughly 1/1000 of the radius is all the atmosphere we have. With several billion people all contributing to a gas release, it should not surprise anyone that change is possible.
 
ThirstyBarbarian said:
Not sure where you got the idea anyone thinks men can have menstrual cycles and get pregnant? Lol! You funny! But it’s definitely off topic.

But the idea that humans can change the climate is well established fact. It’s not hard to understand, the mechanism is well known, and the fact it is happening is well proven.

  • Burning fossil fuels has released CO2 into the atmosphere — 100% proven fact.
  • CO2 from fossil fuels has accumulated and increased the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere — 100% proven fact.
  • CO2 is a greenhouse gas that traps heat in the atmosphere — 100% proven fact.
  • The added accumulation of CO2 from fossil fuels in the atmosphere has increased the amount of heat retained in the atmosphere — 100% proven fact.
  • The global surface temperature has increased since CO2 levels have risen — 100% proven fact.
  • Sea levels have risen as global temperatures have risen — 100% proven fact.
  • Extreme weather events have increased as global temperature has risen — 100% proven fact.
Click to expand...
How about burning rocket fuel, or using glue, paint, epoxy, fiberglass etc etc..... how many of you who have said you would contribute $$$ to save the planet would STOP DOING ROCKETRY, and go put more plants in the ground instead.
 
Can I ask people on this thread a basic question.....**Why risk it??** Seriously, why would you want to take a chance with the Earth's atmosphere? My response here is a bit off topic, but it seems appropriate none-the-less. I agree with jderimig that mitigating the effects is probably all we can do given the global political situation, but not at least trying to do better is completely foolish in my opinion. It is worth noting that fossil fuels have dramatically improved the physical condition of mankind and there are plenty of people world-wide that deserve the same benefits the first world received from them. Furthermore it worth noting that plenty of people and politicians are using climate change to push other agendas so I agree the problem is complicated. But again, messing with the atmosphere is really precarious and not trying to innovate solutions would be a travesty.
 
Bravo52 said:
🤣🤣🤣 I'm from around there and the city would be underwater if it weren't for the people of NOLA picking that place to live. That has zero credibility given it was a swamp before the French invaded and we kicked them out in 1812.

In fact, "modernization" is probably the reason the cities you listed are dry now. Has nothing to do with climate. Now, if you are saying that because we came in and dried them up and didn't do or aren't doing a very good job, you might have a point. 🤣
Click to expand...

It's the level of effect that you have to look at. What does the Army Corp of Eng. have to say?

Are the means & methods to keep you dry just improving - or are they also increasing because
the demands are greater? Are the demands greater because more people are wanting to live
there - greater land mass to protect? Or are the means to keep you dry increasing because there
is a greater water volume in some known areas?

When you look at Climate change, you have to look at the current rate of change
compared to what the rate of change during the eons of climate change.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

ThirstyBarbarian
  • Locked
  • Poll
Climate Change – Happening or not?
2 3
Replies
60
Views
9K
cwbullet
cwbullet
GuyNoir
NAR Prez on Feedback
2
Replies
35
Views
3K
illini
illini
D
Notes from the UK on foreign adventures
Replies
12
Views
2K
Jerry Irvine
Jerry Irvine

Latest posts

Back
Top