Anthropocene, will there be time enough for the science

For topics unrelated to bush walking or to the forums.

Anthropocene, will there be time enough for the science

Postby newhue » Wed 16 Nov, 2016 4:53 am

Perhaps Australias best scientific show came to an end last night. Seems odd and very sad for a counrty where innervation is very much encouraged. Anthropocene is a science consisting of around 30 not related scientist who are saying humans have now matched the earth on climate change. The power is now in our hands. Might be obviouse to some, but the science is need to prove it. Mother nature has proven it can throw us around like match sticks when it come to it. And it may have taken God 40 days to flood the place where nature can so in hours. But us humans now have the command, and choice. Will you stop consuming? It's hard to get your head around, because every thing we do has an impact, and there are so many of us. I post here because I don't want this, not for me, my children, my fiends, or you. I don't want to become the 6th great extinction on planet earth; and no point being an accomplice to it and trying to hide. It's your choice

Great show, take some time, Catalyst's THE ANTHROPOCENE: A NEW AGE OF HUMANS
[url]http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/4574615.htm/url]


Some comments on the winding up of the science show.
http://theconversation.com/what-the-abcs-new-catalyst-could-mean-for-science-on-tv-68161
Last edited by newhue on Fri 18 Nov, 2016 5:21 am, edited 2 times in total.
newhue
Athrotaxis cupressoides
Athrotaxis cupressoides
 
Posts: 205
Joined: Tue 28 Apr, 2015 6:19 am
Location: Brisbane
Region: Queensland

Re: Anthropocene, will there be time enough for the science

Postby newhue » Fri 18 Nov, 2016 5:17 am

seems this subject is possibly to big, or too scary, for us to have almost destroyed the atmosphere, the oceans, and the lands in just 70 years after WW2. Consumption, population, pollutants are rife. Scientist are suggesting a 20 year window before it closes. Just 20 years...how can that be. Many think what can one person do. Many do what they can already. But change is coming far greater than any our worst nightmare, nuclear aggression. Just imagine if it doesn't rain for 10 years, and temperatures are 5deg higher. Where does that leave food production, where do mass populations go. We have already fished out top tier fish, and almost the rest, so we are't eating seafood. It hasn't rained in Syria for a decade now. What about it if was 85% of Australia. All a bit scary and no wonder the government isn't saying much.

But what can one lousy person do, well from on here it seems little or nothing. Can't say there has been any interest to date, so perhaps our fait is sealed.
But I once drove my car across town to go mountain biking in the bush at night. I now walk the dog again in the evenings, and I tied some old bike tunes together and drove a peg into the ground. I now use my pool more and swim away from the peg for excise. I decided to leave the bush to what animals are left if any.

I turned down the filtering hours on the pool which has a 3 speed pump.

I told my friends and family I don't believe in god, or want consumerism for Christmas, your time and conversation is all I need. Imagine if the world did that for just one christmas, it would be like the earth talking a desperate gasp of fresh air.

We are looking at going off grid with electricity, but the more I read, with battery cost, just cancelling the current electricity bill or reducing it to $20 may be the best solution for the planet and one I can afford. I hate all the power poles we use, the whole coal process, the pollution, but am aware I have to consume to gain benefit for the planet. Very frustrating and works my head over.

We replaced the wifes old economical 4cyl car with a hybrid, we halved our fuel consumption over night. She now averages 4lt a 100 around town, and discovered she has less stress by taking her time, but still arrives on time.

I plant trees, I love planting trees and killing weeds.

And we turn lights off, electric stand by off, try to consume less, and educate our children on the effects of consumerism and waste.

All simple stuff, none is ground breaking, but all helps. I have lost friends because I am passionate about my future, perhaps for the children sake alone. But friends come and go also. I get no response from politicians, I have made their junk file. So I talk on here, mostly to myself. Perhaps I'm a nutter, but in the end the race is only with yourself.

God luck friends, we are all going to need it.
newhue
Athrotaxis cupressoides
Athrotaxis cupressoides
 
Posts: 205
Joined: Tue 28 Apr, 2015 6:19 am
Location: Brisbane
Region: Queensland

Re: Anthropocene, will there be time enough for the science

Postby J M » Fri 18 Nov, 2016 7:12 am

No mate, not a nutter, just concerned enough to be doing something tangible for the environment. I've been very conscious of my role as a consumer in the world's current environment and am actively trying to reduce my impact; small things like turning off appliances at the power point, riding instead of driving, only buying second hand goods, trying to reduce the amount of plastic I use and the distance my food has to travel. In the end, governments are, to a degree, controlled by corporations and those corporations are controlled by consumers. Us. We have to be the change we want to see but it's difficult in a world so geared towards endless growth. But difficulty is no reason to not try and each of us have a responsibility to do so.
Only those who live on the edge can see the view
User avatar
J M
Athrotaxis cupressoides
Athrotaxis cupressoides
 
Posts: 109
Joined: Tue 07 May, 2013 9:26 pm
Region: Victoria
Gender: Male

Re: Anthropocene, will there be time enough for the science

Postby Lophophaps » Fri 18 Nov, 2016 9:49 am

The science is unproven to many, but risking this is not to my liking. For a very long time my environmental impact has been tiny. This also costs less, always good.
User avatar
Lophophaps
Auctorita modica
Auctorita modica
 
Posts: 1466
Joined: Wed 09 Nov, 2011 9:45 am
Region: Victoria
Gender: Male

Re: Anthropocene, will there be time enough for the science

Postby neilmny » Fri 18 Nov, 2016 10:25 am

I think a way to reduce a lot of waste and damage is to stop building these ridiculous mansions that have become the norm. Multi bathroom and "family" spaces, ensuites more bedrooms than will ever be required. They are just unnecessary sink holes for energy and materials. But of course mine is bigger than yours is always going to be a problem for the majority.
User avatar
neilmny
Athrotaxis selaginoides
Athrotaxis selaginoides
 
Posts: 1935
Joined: Fri 03 Aug, 2012 11:19 am
Region: Victoria
Gender: Male

Re: Anthropocene, will there be time enough for the science

Postby highercountry » Fri 18 Nov, 2016 10:33 am

Lophophaps wrote:The science is unproven to many...


Except for 98% of the climate science community. What would they know?
For the Andrew Bolts and Murdoch enterprises of this world, well, since when have facts and evidence ever counted for anything.
highercountry
Athrotaxis cupressoides
Athrotaxis cupressoides
 
Posts: 169
Joined: Tue 19 Apr, 2011 8:52 am
Region: Victoria
Gender: Male

Re: Anthropocene, will there be time enough for the science

Postby pazzar » Fri 18 Nov, 2016 1:43 pm

Lophophaps wrote:The science is unproven to many, but risking this is not to my liking. For a very long time my environmental impact has been tiny. This also costs less, always good.


Essentially Pascal's wager, and in the case of the environment I am OK with it. The doubter's may ask, what if you're wrong? If we are wrong, then surely we have still done much good. in this case, action is better than inaction.
"It's not what you look at that matters, it's what you see."
User avatar
pazzar
Lagarostrobos franklinii
Lagarostrobos franklinii
 
Posts: 2304
Joined: Thu 09 Jul, 2009 5:22 pm
Location: Hobart
Region: Tasmania
Gender: Male

Re: Anthropocene, will there be time enough for the science

Postby mark electric » Fri 18 Nov, 2016 3:12 pm

I copied this word for word from Tyson's final conclusion on the TV series Cosmos Episode 9.

"There is nothing like this inter glacial period, one of those balmy intermissions in an ice-age, and the great news is, that this one is due to last for another 50,000 years. What a break for our kind.
Just one problem. We can’t seem to stop burning up all those buried trees from way back in the Carboniferous Age, in the form of coal & the remains of ancient plankton in the form of oil & gas. If we could we'd be home free climate wise. Instead we are dumping carbon dioxide into the atmosphere at a rate the earth hasn't seen since the great climate catastrophes of the past, the ones that lead to mass extinctions. We just can’t seem to break our addiction to the kinds of fuels that will bring back a climate last seen by the dinosaurs, a climate that will drown our coastal cities & wreak havoc on the environment and our ability to feed ourselves.
All the while, the glorious Sun pours immaculate free energy down upon us more than we will ever need. Tyson challenges, “Why can’t we summon the ingenuity and courage of the generations that came before us. The dinosaurs never saw that asteroid coming. What’s our excuse?” The baton is in our hands.
I walk, shuffle then hobble.
User avatar
mark electric
Nothofagus gunnii
Nothofagus gunnii
 
Posts: 36
Joined: Sun 23 Oct, 2016 3:56 pm
Region: Queensland
Gender: Male

Re: Anthropocene, will there be time enough for the science

Postby maddog » Fri 18 Nov, 2016 6:05 pm

Always a glass half empty at BWA. The western world is responsible in its stewardship, learns from its mistakes, consequently things get better not worse. The third world is a little different, but they will catch up as they get richer. So we are on the right track.

The environmental movement itself however has a number of big problems. One is they have based their movement on sin and redemption, fire and brimstone. Things are always the fault of man, on a tipping point towards calamity, the brink of extinction, etc., etc. This stops them acknowledging (and taking some credit) how things have improved because of good management.

Another is appalling ignorance of the natural sciences possessed by so many within the environmental movement. While science is optional, politicised science is favoured and excited fools humoured, so long as you are on the side of the angels. It is no coincidence that support for the Greens is strongest in urban areas far removed from nature. But as each dramatic prophecy fails to materialise the movement loses credibility and status within the broader community. Of course this provides a helping hand to corporate interests. Is this not happening now?

An example? On CO2 and warming it simply cannot all be bad, as many a discredited climatologist, relying on shaky modelling, has foretold. Carbon itself is essential for life, C3 plants evolved in a CO2 rich environment, we now have not enough for them, causing all but a few (C4) grasses to suffer (an ill-equipped stoma hinders photosynthesis). With more CO2 plant life, and consequently other life, will thrive. Warm temperatures are positively correlated with biodiversity, as with rainfall, so Canada should benefit as Australia will. The world will not end as the planet warms, there will be plenty to eat, but we should all fear the cold.

We have a tendency to exaggerate the importance of our species. Termites have a greater influence on Gaia, so perhaps we should name the epoch after them.
maddog
Phyllocladus aspleniifolius
Phyllocladus aspleniifolius
 
Posts: 648
Joined: Sun 07 Nov, 2010 4:10 pm
Region: New South Wales
Gender: Male

Re: Anthropocene, will there be time enough for the science

Postby highercountry » Fri 18 Nov, 2016 6:59 pm

..
highercountry
Athrotaxis cupressoides
Athrotaxis cupressoides
 
Posts: 169
Joined: Tue 19 Apr, 2011 8:52 am
Region: Victoria
Gender: Male

Re: Anthropocene, will there be time enough for the science

Postby Lophophaps » Fri 18 Nov, 2016 7:03 pm

pazzar wrote:Essentially Pascal's wager, and in the case of the environment I am OK with it. The doubter's may ask, what if you're wrong? If we are wrong, then surely we have still done much good. in this case, action is better than inaction.


It's like carrying a PLB, leaving written information about where you are going, wearing a seat belt, or taking out insurance. One hopes never to use these things, but if they are needed the cost-benefit is brilliant. I have three offsite USB backup drives (updated in turn three times a week) plus a deep offsite (updated every six months) plus a spare computer. These are used very rarely. When they are needed it's data that is recovered, often critical data.

I tread lightly in the bush and at home. It's not hard, it's good for the environment, and saves money. Global warming may be a scam, a figment of the imagination, or the like, but I think not. Why take the chance?

In the last 40 years I cannot recall one major conservation issue when we were wrong in the long term. History is on our side.
User avatar
Lophophaps
Auctorita modica
Auctorita modica
 
Posts: 1466
Joined: Wed 09 Nov, 2011 9:45 am
Region: Victoria
Gender: Male

Re: Anthropocene, will there be time enough for the science

Postby maddog » Fri 18 Nov, 2016 7:36 pm

The alleviation of poverty with the provision of cheap power would be one good reason.
.
The prohibition of DDT at the expense of malaria control in the Third World. 1930’s Germany ‘Blood and Soil’ movement. 1970’s predictions of a coming ice age. Ehrlich with his lust for Malthus’s population solutions. Out of control wildfires. Helicopter gunships used to control poachers in Africa funded by the WWF. Often irrational opposition to GM crops and the use of chemicals. I’ll agree that the environmental movement has made many worthy contributions but if you can’t think of any missteps perhaps you need to start thinking a little more.

But we also need to be careful whom we credit for the improvements. While it has often been the case that political pressure from environmentalists has set in train a political process that has required changes to be made. But the actual solutions to problems can rarely be credited to such groups.
maddog
Phyllocladus aspleniifolius
Phyllocladus aspleniifolius
 
Posts: 648
Joined: Sun 07 Nov, 2010 4:10 pm
Region: New South Wales
Gender: Male

Re: Anthropocene, will there be time enough for the science

Postby geoskid » Fri 18 Nov, 2016 8:05 pm

newhue wrote:Perhaps Australias best scientific show came to an end last night. Seems odd and very sad for a counrty where innervation is very much encouraged. Anthropocene is a science consisting of around 30 not related scientist who are saying humans have now matched the earth on climate change. The power is now in our hands. Might be obviouse to some, but the science is need to prove it. Mother nature has proven it can throw us around like match sticks when it come to it. And it may have taken God 40 days to flood the place where nature can so in hours. But us humans now have the command, and choice. Will you stop consuming? It's hard to get your head around, because every thing we do has an impact, and there are so many of us. I post here because I don't want this, not for me, my children, my fiends, or you. I don't want to become the 6th great extinction on planet earth; and no point being an accomplice to it and trying to hide. It's your choice

Great show, take some time, Catalyst's THE ANTHROPOCENE: A NEW AGE OF HUMANS
[url]http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/4574615.htm/url]


Some comments on the winding up of the science show.
http://theconversation.com/what-the-abcs-new-catalyst-could-mean-for-science-on-tv-68161

Ah, newhue, I watched the same show. You are not a nutter for thinking about these things, but you can well go mad thinking about these things if you don't hold your thinking to account.
Critical Thinking.. the awakening of the intellect to the study of itself.
http://www.criticalthinking.org/
geoskid
Phyllocladus aspleniifolius
Phyllocladus aspleniifolius
 
Posts: 847
Joined: Sun 27 Apr, 2008 1:56 pm
Region: Tasmania
Gender: Male

Re: Anthropocene, will there be time enough for the science

Postby geoskid » Fri 18 Nov, 2016 8:35 pm

maddog wrote:Always a glass half empty at BWA. The western world is responsible in its stewardship, learns from its mistakes, consequently things get better not worse. The third world is a little different, but they will catch up as they get richer. So we are on the right track.

The environmental movement itself however has a number of big problems. One is they have based their movement on sin and redemption, fire and brimstone. Things are always the fault of man, on a tipping point towards calamity, the brink of extinction, etc., etc. This stops them acknowledging (and taking some credit) how things have improved because of good management.

Another is appalling ignorance of the natural sciences possessed by so many within the environmental movement. While science is optional, politicised science is favoured and excited fools humoured, so long as you are on the side of the angels. It is no coincidence that support for the Greens is strongest in urban areas far removed from nature. But as each dramatic prophecy fails to materialise the movement loses credibility and status within the broader community. Of course this provides a helping hand to corporate interests. Is this not happening now?

An example? On CO2 and warming it simply cannot all be bad, as many a discredited climatologist, relying on shaky modelling, has foretold. Carbon itself is essential for life, C3 plants evolved in a CO2 rich environment, we now have not enough for them, causing all but a few (C4) grasses to suffer (an ill-equipped stoma hinders photosynthesis). With more CO2 plant life, and consequently other life, will thrive. Warm temperatures are positively correlated with biodiversity, as with rainfall, so Canada should benefit as Australia will. The world will not end as the planet warms, there will be plenty to eat, but we should all fear the cold.

We have a tendency to exaggerate the importance of our species. Termites have a greater influence on Gaia, so perhaps we should name the epoch after them.

Maddog, Gday, you will persist in including the word Gaia in your posts, however, you redeemed yourself by using the word epoch - which was what the show was about.
Critical Thinking.. the awakening of the intellect to the study of itself.
http://www.criticalthinking.org/
geoskid
Phyllocladus aspleniifolius
Phyllocladus aspleniifolius
 
Posts: 847
Joined: Sun 27 Apr, 2008 1:56 pm
Region: Tasmania
Gender: Male

Re: Anthropocene, will there be time enough for the science

Postby geoskid » Fri 18 Nov, 2016 9:10 pm

@newhue - I have read your other thread as well.
I'm pretty certain the reason you are not getting comments has more to do with the presentation of your thoughts, rather that people not caring about what it is you want to say.
Framing a question, whilst not easy, is the first step. Let the question loose in the public domain and you can end up anywhere. Not good. Like most things, you need to do it yourself - but it takes effort.
Here - I don't do it for everyone, but you seem to be suffering:
http://www.criticalthinking.org/

Your welcome !
Mark
Critical Thinking.. the awakening of the intellect to the study of itself.
http://www.criticalthinking.org/
geoskid
Phyllocladus aspleniifolius
Phyllocladus aspleniifolius
 
Posts: 847
Joined: Sun 27 Apr, 2008 1:56 pm
Region: Tasmania
Gender: Male

Re: Anthropocene, will there be time enough for the science

Postby newhue » Wed 23 Nov, 2016 6:45 am

thanks geoshid, astrally I have blown out. Few comment on here until I go, so I have.
I read one article about how VW wants to change the world by 2025 with electric vehicles. The the next article they and Shell are blocking EV's in europe and want biofuel to rain supremo. As a mate said to me the truth is what ever you want it to be.

I may have little tact, know little about science, politics, or business, but as I move around humans are rapidly advancing with small steps that suit them in regards for the environment. However to me overall the environment is getting sicker. It like kemp world for some, but often fails as the sickness it to deep. Weeds prevail, littler. consumption, two birds types that usually bread in my park have not shown up this year. All just observations. I drive out of Aratula to see 2 dozen 100yo trees felled for fence post, 4 post a tree is not a great idea in my book, bit I will get shot down by the defender of farmers. I have come to a point where I don't really care what happens. I survive in a daze, to scared to go to the doctor for anti depressant drugs to *&%$#! me up to escape from a world thats *&%$#! up. Trying to portray a happy dad hoping he doesn't infect his kids with the same disease as mine. Get over it my wife says, others hint cup half empty here on BWA. It is no surprise to me why society has its ills of alcohol and drugs, then what spins off from them. I feel humanity has survived on negativity. It makes them squirm, feel awkward and they don't like it; so they fix it, or try to. They then celebrate being positive. I find useless consumer *&%$#! usually comes from cup half full most times, just look at advances in mobile phones over the past 5 years, nothing but sales really. Maybe faster processors to cope with all the useless carp on them.

Anyway, have a good xmas, I'll be spinning out over all the accepted and celebrated consumerism.

take care
newhue
Athrotaxis cupressoides
Athrotaxis cupressoides
 
Posts: 205
Joined: Tue 28 Apr, 2015 6:19 am
Location: Brisbane
Region: Queensland


Return to Between Bushwalks

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests