A thought on climate change
- Locked due to inactivity on Aug 4, '16 4:31pm
Thread Topic: A thought on climate change
-
: p saph you know I agree, but its just not a solution to the environmental problems.
-
How do you that law is to do with welfare? I'm pretty sure its not. I just dislike China, what I know is they have huge factories, pollution and don't treat animals well. I've even read a shocking story about how they leave baby girls in a room to die because the family wanted a boy. The country will never appeal to me.
Yeah alright, the fact we have a population is success but not the amount of population. -
Sorry I've turned this into a thing about China : /
-
Not saying its the solution to all the worlds problems but why would I spend money on a car and fuel to get to my job that's less than a mile away? Just little things over a long period of time can have huge effects. Thats the basic idea of the butterfly effect.
-
The amount is also success. All population is success. Success is measured at a civil level, because it is the civilization that acts. You as an individual didnt succeed or fail. You had nothing to do with it. Its like a hurricane that blows your house down, you cant help it.
But civilization is the collective of living beings. Life wants to live, living intel procreation, procreation intels population.
This is not debatable. By definition, population is success even in excess of sustainable parameters.
Speaking of china now, the law is to do with welfare becauae its to do with welfare. China is a highly socialized economy, and most families recieve money and direction from the governent. You don't qaulify for most of the money if you have more than one child.
The result and cause for this are both obvious.
The country doesnt have to appeal to you, but you obviously know very little about it. -
Perla, yeah I agree with you on spending money, just not the butterfly effect. Your ownership of a car means nothing whatsoever in the global or even coastal scheme
-
My individual choices might not make a big difference. But I'm just saying that small things when practicef by a group of people can have an effect. Like one person using renewable energy might not have a big effect outside of their own personal lives but what if a whole neighborhood (not saying its realistic) used more reneable energy. The surrounding area would probably benefit.
-
How would the surrounding area benefit though, and what renewable energy would they be using? Thats EXACTLY the thing saph. If we had renewable energy that ran even a fraction as efficiently as what we're using, we'd be using it.
-
What we need is that energy solution. And when someone finds it, energy companies will sell it.
-
I think I know enough about it, you seem to talk like you know everything and that's that. The stuff i know - their ways about animals, and even people is enough for me to dislike it.
I'm pretty sure if the one child rule was to do with welfare it would be well known. -
Wind energy and solar power?
-
Lions, Im not talking like I know it all, im talking like I know what im talking about. And when I say that its not up for debate, it literally isnt. This isnt a controversy, its an observable property. Im not copping out, or being ignorant, its just literally as simple as one plus one equals two.
And like I said, you don't have to like china. -
Ooo also, wind and solar energies are currently inefficiently harrnassed. Its just not a viable alternative.
BUT im not saying its unsolvable. Just that what it takes to make a solution is a new energy process -
Alright then... but I disagree, if the amount of population is too high then it's not a success.
I guess you like China -
Lol. Ay mi chavo.
This thread is locked, therefore no new posts can be made.
