Our Rising Oceans: VICE on HBO

a reply to: interupt42
Seed more fact driven than political to me.
Claim: The increase in Antarctic sea ice shows that global warming is not happening.
Fact: Um...no.

originally posted by: Greven
a reply to: interupt42

They literally looked at what the skeptics claimed, then went to Antarctica to see if these claims were valid.

What more do you want?

I would have liked actual scientist with opposing views discus the claims, not what someone said.

Then they have Rubio and the other idiot Cruz representing the sceptics, like they have any clue or aren't politically driven.

Like I said, I just didn't care how the show was presented

a reply to: Phage

Seed more fact driven than political to me.

Well you have every right to be wrong with your opinion.


I guess I wish they left the politics out of it all together.

However. from the start I guess the host came across to me as a bit snarky and politically driven .

originally posted by: Flatfish

originally posted by: Bilk22
OK I started to watch the video and saw Joe Biden in the first few seconds. I almost thew up my really good sushi dinner. Ain't doing' it. Maybe tomorrow - that is if we don't live in Water World without electricity.

You're going to miss out on a lot of information if you keep tuning out every time you see someone you don't like.

It's someone I don't trust with the truth. It's why he was chosen.

originally posted by: Bilk22
OK I started to watch the video and saw Joe Biden in the first few seconds. I almost thew up my really good sushi dinner. Ain't doing' it. Maybe tomorrow - that is if we don't live in Water World without electricity.

Mercury poisioning perhaps?

originally posted by: greencmp

originally posted by: FyreByrd

originally posted by: greencmp
a reply to: RickinVa

Great, now that the doomsday scenario is realized, can we have an informed conversation about realistic mitigation?

No amount of anti-fossil fuel quackery will do want you want it to so, let us now stop being fools and working against our own best interests with the myriad totalitarian absurdities incessantly put forward as 'solutions'.

An aside to those who starred this post: the author said nothing in these two sentences. Is there any point here?

Nice phasology "Realistic Mitigation", "Anti-Fossil Fuel Quackery" , "Totalitarian Absurdities".

I'll guess the meanings (the in Author's mind)

Realistic Mitigation = Geo-Engineering
Anti-Fossil Fuel Quackery = Climate (not Weather) Science
Totalitartian Abusuridites = Taxes and such as motivators.

Not only do I think you know exactly what I mean but, you should probably address the content of the thread, I did.

There was NO CONTENT in your post. My point entirely.

Double post.

originally posted by: FyreByrd

originally posted by: greencmp

originally posted by: FyreByrd

originally posted by: greencmp
a reply to: RickinVa

Great, now that the doomsday scenario is realized, can we have an informed conversation about realistic mitigation?

No amount of anti-fossil fuel quackery will do want you want it to so, let us now stop being fools and working against our own best interests with the myriad totalitarian absurdities incessantly put forward as 'solutions'.

An aside to those who starred this post: the author said nothing in these two sentences. Is there any point here?

Nice phasology "Realistic Mitigation", "Anti-Fossil Fuel Quackery" , "Totalitarian Absurdities".

I'll guess the meanings (the in Author's mind)

Realistic Mitigation = Geo-Engineering
Anti-Fossil Fuel Quackery = Climate (not Weather) Science
Totalitartian Abusuridites = Taxes and such as motivators.

Not only do I think you know exactly what I mean but, you should probably address the content of the thread, I did.

There was NO CONTENT in your post. My point entirely.

Allow me to translate for you. Please forgive to self-quotations but, I see no better way to clarify than to paraphrase myself since you are being so intentionally obtuse.

Great, now that the doomsday scenario is realized, can we have an informed conversation about realistic mitigation?

OK, so the conversation can now turn to methods of repair rather than ways to interdict critical commodity usage and attempts to enact the inevitable rationing of necessary goods and services associated with interventionism.

No amount of anti-fossil fuel quackery will do want you want it to so, let us now stop being fools and working against our own best interests with the myriad totalitarian absurdities incessantly put forward as 'solutions'.

All attempts to gain control over the lives of individuals have failed, recognizing your failure to subjugate humanity to your plan, are you capable of discussing possible solutions that do not require the dominance of the state over all of humanity?

I have to admit, I don't see that I have made my message any easier to understand with this forced reworking of my statement.

I have to assume that my assessment of your defiant and belligerent wackiness was initially and, now in retrospect, correct.

a reply to: greencmp

Now that you've splaned .... it reads sorta like

"now that I see there is a problem, all you a*hats that have been proposing solutions (which have to include everyone) for decades must come up with something that meets my singular requirements. And no, I don't have any ideas myself - everybody else get to work on it."


I still don't see any useful content.

a reply to: FyreByrd

Oh dear, I did try.

I am only repeating what I have been saying the whole time and no, like you, I do not know what the the best course of action is.

The only difference is that I recognize that fact.

It's already too late. Fossil fuels are too cheap & too efficient for industries to abandon them, even though renewable energy makes sense, especially long term. But it won't matter as long as there's cheap & profitable fossil fuels.

Truthfully, I hate what we're doing to the Earth. But I don't have enough faith in people to expect a concerted global shift to only renewable energy. And the consequences are already being seen in other places not mentioned in the video. Off the top of my head, i know Nigeria & some of the indigenous people in the Arctic (like Alaska and Canada) are having problems with coastal erosion. And the major superpowers are salivating at the new shipping lanes & untouched oilfields & mineral deposits in the Arctic. Russia, the US, and I think Denmark & Canada have already been posturing over who gets to exploit different Arctic areas.

originally posted by: Flatfish

originally posted by: greencmp
a reply to: Flatfish

Good, you are walking back the claims a bit.

I am confident that the ocean floor is not any warmer due to human activity. I don't know how much frozen methane is actually in tundra, I haven't investigated that yet.

Your confidence is going to let you down on this one.

There are enormous amounts of methane trapped in the frozen tundra and I've seen documentaries where they're lighting flames, (some quite large) from leaking methane coming out of thawing tundra.

Furthermore, as the oceans surface warms causing variations and at times cessation of normal currents, it also warms the oceans depths. Not a lot, but it only takes a minor change at depth to disrupt the balance, melting and releasing vast amounts of frozen methane hydrates.

I absolutely agree that natural methane releases may very well end up being a larger "immediate" threat. But that's only because we ignored the CO2 problem to the point that the resulting warmer global temp. Is now causing the methane releases.

That's why I said it's like a snow ball going down a hill, the farther it's allowed to go unchecked, the bigger and faster it gets.

On one hand you say it is unchecked on the other hand claims are made that humans barely account for a lot of the threat.

Just what do you propose is going to CHECK something that is not only caused by humans.

I get irritated by the incredible amount of LACK in the logic of these people.... THINGS CHANGE, what you gonna DO about it.

a reply to: FyreByrd

Your content looks entirely useless as well, it is as if you guys think that by proclaiming something, you have actually pushed forward a solution.

I submit that NOTHING in the normal realm of science and technology is going to do a dam thing about the changes, and JOE PUBLIC is getting sick of hearing the claims that "we the people" are responsible and to be punished by your intellectualism complex.

For my whole life I have been seeing things run by greedy elites, this has not changed, others are in control STOP telling ME that I have anything to do with the holding back of REAL information, and PARDON ME for not believing in every dam thing you guys do hook line and sinker about what is happening, and ABOUT to happen.

For INSTANCE, HOW did the methane get TRAPPED LOL.

DO NOT make me laugh at the logic that says sea levels can rise here or there DIFFERENTLY because of currents, that is WAY stupid and incomplete.

The ocean has not moved AT ALL where I am this whole time, forgive me for laughing at these particular sets of FACTS.

I am not saying that they cannot, I am saying that all of the data sets are beyond useless, offer NOTHING, and do not look at the REAL "EIGHT HUNDRED POUND GORILLA", that being, WE ARE NOT TOLD THE TRUTH, EVER.

UNTIL, the stakeholders of so many variables are muzzled and real honesty comes to play, NOTHING you are saying means a dam thing!!

So much more is not known, or ALLOWED to be known about a good many things on this PLANET, and I for one am beyond amused at the complete lack of thoroughness of these people, the scientists are like kindergarteners looking for causations, NEVER looking at enough, or through the right lenses, they are not going to either.

originally posted by: greencmp
a reply to: FyreByrd

Oh dear, I did try.

I am only repeating what I have been saying the whole time and no, like you, I do not know what the the best course of action is.

The only difference is that I recognize that fact.

To say what, exactly? I cannot (nor, I suspect can others) read your mind.

Recognize what fact (FACT - not feeling) exactly?

Here is a factual statement from you, "I do not know what the best course of action is". Why not just say that from the onset which you DID NOT.

Finally some actual content. Words are not content unless they communicate something coherent. You are just now communicating something understandable.

Here's my question, how is this being measured? Are these scientists following the scientific method or are they letting they're personal opinions influence their research?. I used to be a heavy vice watcher but they have gotten very political in the last couple yrs.

a reply to: avgguy
Easy way to answer that.
Watch the video.

In a word, yes. Science is being used. Fancy science.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: interupt42
Seed more fact driven than political to me.
Claim: The increase in Antarctic sea ice shows that global warming is not happening.
Fact: Um...no.

If people just watch the video they will understand that we as a world, especially people in places like Florida are in deep crap.

3 to 5 meter sea level rise is beyond catastrophic.

Well since I am on my phone and dont want to use my data, I am going on the replies.

Yes a 3-5 meter increase will create havoc on the coastal cities.

But my main question is other than ports, which can be built farther inland, WHY DO PEOPLE LIVE ON THE COAST, THEN CRY WHEN THE EARTH CHANGES?

History has shown us that you can go to known underwater cities that were once the center of trade and civilization. WHAT MAKES EVERYONE THINK THAT IT SHOULD BE DIFFERENT NOW?

There is a reason why ancients were nomads, there is a reason why people arent today. We have gotten way to comfortable in the awesomeness that mother nature has afforded us.

Why must we "CHANGE" the environment to our likings. Why can't people realize that the climate will not stay the same for us forever?

Why do peoplethink we need to fix it.

We do need to change our ways, but I put the blame solely on corporations. We do not have economically sound alternatives to energy and transportation.

a reply to: liejunkie01

We do need to change our ways, but I put fhe blame solely on corporations.

Did corporations invent agriculture?
Because that's what cut back on the hunter/gatherer thing. Sort of led to the civilization and cultural thing.

Then the industrial revolution came along...after a long time of feudalism and stuff.

a reply to: liejunkie01

WHY DO PEOPLE LIVE ON THE COAST,

Where are the ports?

I guess you could have everything flown in nowadays, but coastal areas sprouted up for good reasons. That is basic history if you ever look into it.