We have angered the gods

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by jpietrzak8, Sep 5, 2017.

  1. jpietrzak8 macrumors 65816

    jpietrzak8

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2010
    Location:
    Dayton, Ohio
    #1
    Now that it appears that the second most expensive hurricane to hit the mainland in US history is about to be immediately followed by an even more powerful hurricane, I believe it is time to stop talking about climate change. No, the fundamentalists here in America don't believe in climate change, so we need to tell them the truth in a form they understand.

    In short, you have angered God, and he is now punishing you.

    To make things right with God, we need to immediately stop filling up the world with pollution. (You would think that conservatives would understand conservation, but apparently not.)

    I think the best first step would be an additional tax on the country purely to pay for all the damages these hurricanes have been causing. Maybe once it hits citizens in the pocketbook, they'll start to have a better appreciation of how much stronger these modern storms are than they were in the past...
     
  2. MadeTheSwitch macrumors 6502a

    MadeTheSwitch

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    #2
    I'd say sacrafice a virgin into a volcano, but probably not many of them around anymore, so your idea sounds reasonable. We cannot afford the tab for repeatedly rebuilding in the same spots.
     
  3. citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #3
    God's mood now matches that of the people.

    This should be fun.
     
  4. MacAndMic macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2009
    #4
    You could always turn off your electric, car, phone, computer and other luxuries to help reduce angering the gods.
     
  5. jpietrzak8 thread starter macrumors 65816

    jpietrzak8

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2010
    Location:
    Dayton, Ohio
    #5
    The funny thing is, back when people burned wood to survive, they were probably causing more pollution per capita than we do in the modern world. :)

    The issue is to cause less pollution, not use less energy. These are two different concepts...
     
  6. sorcery macrumors regular

    sorcery

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2016
    Location:
    Ring of Fire
    #6
    Much of it caused by too many humans. We cull other species, either deliberately, or by loss of environment. Would it really be unacceptable to stop medical research into longevity, for example, and let we old guys die of our coronary arrests?
     
  7. Zenithal macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2009
    #7
    Yes, but most edible animals are delicious.
     
  8. steve knight macrumors 68030

    steve knight

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
  9. sorcery macrumors regular

    sorcery

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2016
    Location:
    Ring of Fire
    #9
    As are humans, if you happen to be a large cat.:)

    Edit: Come to think of it human flesh was available in some African markets as recently as the 1970s, from personal observation. Don't know about this century.
     
  10. jpietrzak8 thread starter macrumors 65816

    jpietrzak8

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2010
    Location:
    Dayton, Ohio
    #10
    I don't think the raw quantity of humans (or, more broadly, of any living material in general) is the issue here. Single-cell organisms have thoroughly occupied the entire surface of this planet for billions of years, utterly transforming it.

    The issue, in the end, is of pollution; and you don't need very many humans for that. It is a question of how we choose to act, more than how many of us exist at any one time.
     
  11. statik13 macrumors regular

    statik13

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2008
    #11
    Absolutely agree with you. The difference back then is not only a far smaller population, but also that those individuals carbon footprint was pretty much restricted to their lifetimes.

    As of 2016, each of us produced 1700lbs of garbage per year, 200lbs of which is plastic. That doesn't go away when we die. It's the gift that keeps taking. If you live to be 80 you'll generate 16,000 lbs of plastic waste; much of eventually migrates down to the oceans.

    Love plastics, but man we need a way to clean up after ourselves.
     
  12. sorcery macrumors regular

    sorcery

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2016
    Location:
    Ring of Fire
    #12
    Yup, those organisms gifted, to us, oxygen. But we are trying to kill their descendants, through oceanic acidification.
    Agreed but having 20 billion humans, respiring, metabolizing, using energy, etc cannot be a favorable prospect, somewhere in the future.
     
  13. Gutwrench Contributor

    Gutwrench

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2011
    #13
    I'm not fond of Florida or Texas so I lit my fireplace and idling my car all night.
     
  14. LIVEFRMNYC macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2009
    #14
    Christ himself could slowly float down to earth from the heavens with thousands of giant angels at his side, and warn the world to pay attention to the effects of pollution. They would just call him a SJW and shun him.
     
  15. jbarley, Sep 5, 2017
    Last edited: Sep 5, 2017

    jbarley macrumors 68040

    jbarley

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2006
    Location:
    Vancouver Island
    #15
    I still heat my house with wood and I don't feel the least bit guilty about it. Modern wood stove technology has kept up with the times and my stove is extremely efficient.
    When I'm burning wood I'm not using heating oil or electricity.
    Besides I more then compensate for what little pollution I create by drinking the water from my household plumbing via a good water filter and not adding to the plastic water bottle waste.
     
  16. Gutwrench Contributor

    Gutwrench

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2011
    #16
    Too hard. You tried way too hard.
     
  17. LIVEFRMNYC macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2009
    #17
    Doesn't matter how hard I tried, I could have thrown in the Care Bears. We all know the result I stated it exactly what would happen.
     
  18. obeygiant macrumors 68040

    obeygiant

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Location:
    totally cool
    #18
    This thread has no real point I'm afraid.

    Many believe in climate change the rub is the cause and if we can do anything about it.

    So its "OMG TWO BIG HURRICANES?! I TOLD YA SO ABOUT GLOBAL WARMING! I WAS RIGHT!"

    How is that even close to being constructive?
     
  19. ThisBougieLife, Sep 5, 2017
    Last edited: Sep 7, 2017

    ThisBougieLife macrumors 68000

    ThisBougieLife

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2016
    Location:
    SF Bay Area, California
    #19
    I agree with this, and I'm a "believer" in climate change. But this isn't how you convince people of supporting certain environmental policies. For me supporting climate change policies isn't some prevention of the apocalypse with vague references to recent climatic events, it's supporting the development of and investment in alternative fuel sources and improving and protecting the environment. I would support these things even if there were no climate change at all.
     
  20. yaxomoxay macrumors 68040

    yaxomoxay

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Location:
    Texas
    #20
    We sacrificed jkcerda.
     
  21. jpietrzak8 thread starter macrumors 65816

    jpietrzak8

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2010
    Location:
    Dayton, Ohio
    #21
    Oh, but that is the key! We've now completely left the realm of being constructive. It is far too late for that. We have now entered the world of being destructive; warmer seas and warmer atmosphere now combine to create stronger storms than we have experienced in the past.

    We can no longer avoid the death and destruction of climate change. It is already upon us. Our job now is merely to record the ever increasing price of extreme weather.

    In short, we can now update the old saying: "everybody always talked about the weather, but nobody ever did anything about it."
     
  22. LIVEFRMNYC macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2009
    #22
    Simple ... The water temperatures are averaging higher than the previous norms. Sure you can point to certain storms in the past or certain years that multiple big storms formed. But this is starting to become a constant, unlike the 20th century. You don't have to care about warmer waters, but big storms love it.
     
  23. Rigby macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2008
    Location:
    San Jose, CA
    #23
    That may be true. But in terms of climate change mitigation, burning wood is actually a very good idea, since it is carbon neutral and renewable (as long as you make sure it doesn't lead to permanent deforestation). A new tree that grows in place of the old one that you cut down and burn sequesters as much CO2 as you released. ;)
     
  24. jpietrzak8 thread starter macrumors 65816

    jpietrzak8

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2010
    Location:
    Dayton, Ohio
    #24
    You can make the exact same argument for coal: if you wait long enough, eventually the liberated carbon will become sequestered in plants or on the ocean floor, and in half a billion years, will be turned into a new layer of coal.

    The problem, as you point out, is that these sequestration methods do not match our current consumption patterns. Releasing energy from burning wood is so amazingly inefficient that there's really no way we could live off it today...
     
  25. MadeTheSwitch macrumors 6502a

    MadeTheSwitch

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    #25
    Nah...just do it Logans Run style for all the 30 year olds in a big fiery proof. Us old guys of course will be behind the scenes sitting on the secret council watching things. :D
     

Share This Page

66 September 5, 2017