If I hear "Just doing my bit for the environment" one more time then I'm going to flip.

[JDLY]

To: The_root_of_all_evil.

The reason that Earth Hour took up more energy is because everbodys' thoughts went something like this. "Gee, I'm not supposed to use any power from 8 till 9. BUT sence it's only 7 I think I'll do the dishes and cook dinner and do the laundry and watch my favorite move with the radio blaring while on the phone to my friend right now."

Mabey not to that extreme but oh well.

If you look back at your sources the DAY they did Earth Hour it was more because of said event. But the actual HOUR used less energy.

And turning of the lights for an hour uses more than leaving them on?
WTF are you reading. Turning off a light CUTS OFF the power. Leaving them on USES POWER.

I don't know where you live but you obviously don't get Mythbusters on your t.v.

 

[Nugoo]

Well, this is from TIME magazine:

The average American produces about 20 tons of the major greenhouse gas carbon dioxide (CO2) every year. That might sound like a lot ? and Americans do have among the biggest carbon footprints in the world ? but the entire world emits around 27 billion tons of CO2 each year, through transportation, electricity use, deforestation. Look at those numbers for a moment, and you'll realize there's very little that any of us can do on an individual level to stop climate change. Live like a monk, take away your 20 tons ? stop breathing if you'd like ? and you'll barely scratch the surface.

20 tons per American times 300 million Americans equals 6 billion tons, which is more than 20% of the world total emissions. There's no way anyone could call that insignificant. Obviously, a single person doing his or her part doesn't make much of a difference. There are six billion people; each person's part is tiny. If everyone did his or her part, the problem would be solved.

If you think that humanity as a whole can't affect the environment, just look at the hole in the ozone layer we were making and then fixed by cutting out CFC's, or the near extinction of Peregrine falcons we caused and then fixed with DDT. Hell, we've put people on the moon, we've launched hunks of metal on to Mars and out of our solar system. Humans get shit done. All it takes is cooperation, and that's the hard part.

PS3fanboy, I agree with all your posts, but please refrain from quadruple posting in the future.

 

[JDLY]

I can't figure out how to put more than one quote in a post.

If you know how please tell me. even if it something so easy it will make me feel stupid.

 

[Larenxis]

Copy and paste my friend, copy and paste. Or just type it up, but that takes a while.

 

[eggdog14]

Right now the Earth is warming up faster than it has ever warmed up before and also right now it is SUPPOSED TO BE COOLING DOWN.

According to. . . God? The spacetime continuum? or. . . You.

 

[WubbaArmy]

Have any of you considered that we would leave Earth and go for other hospitable planets, making this a moot issue?

Anyway, I feel we're trying to run away from ourselves. Why bother recycling until we run out of places to dump our trash? (Morons' houses count. ) And by then, we'll probably have a machine that breaks down trash into their base elements so they can be made into other things. Just do our thing (advances in technology), and eventually the problem will sort itself out, so we concentrate on terrorism, dumb wars, and more entertainment (is that easy?).

 

[The_Major]

More and more people might actually bother their arses to save energy if the words "SAVE MONEY!" were stuck at the begining of everything.

I think the masses would be more interested in cutting their bills rather than saving the planet really.

 

[JDLY]

Right now the Earth is warming up faster than it has ever warmed up before and also right now it is SUPPOSED TO BE COOLING DOWN.

According to. . . God? The spacetime continuum? or. . . You.

According to top scientists who spend their whole lives studying it.

 

[werepossum]

Well, this is from TIME magazine:

The average American produces about 20 tons of the major greenhouse gas carbon dioxide (CO2) every year. That might sound like a lot ? and Americans do have among the biggest carbon footprints in the world ? but the entire world emits around 27 billion tons of CO2 each year, through transportation, electricity use, deforestation. Look at those numbers for a moment, and you'll realize there's very little that any of us can do on an individual level to stop climate change. Live like a monk, take away your 20 tons ? stop breathing if you'd like ? and you'll barely scratch the surface.

20 tons per American times 300 million Americans equals 6 billion tons, which is more than 20% of the world total emissions. There's no way anyone could call that insignificant. Obviously, a single person doing his or her part doesn't make much of a difference. There are six billion people; each person's part is tiny. If everyone did his or her part, the problem would be solved.

If you think that humanity as a whole can't affect the environment, just look at the hole in the ozone layer we were making and then fixed by cutting out CFC's, or the near extinction of Peregrine falcons we caused and then fixed with DDT. Hell, we've put people on the moon, we've launched hunks of metal on to Mars and out of our solar system. Humans get shit done. All it takes is cooperation, and that's the hard part.

PS3fanboy, I agree with all your posts, but please refrain from quadruple posting in the future.

There's no way anyone could call that accurate, either. Figures on the exact man-made contribution to global CO2 levels vary, but they vary between 2% and 5%, with 3% being the figure I personally attribute with the most accuracy. There's no way to exactly know the world's natural production because CO2 is being constantly created and absorbed by myriad natural processes, but man-made contribution is nowhere near 20%. Advocates of CAGW play a shell game by citing theoretical man-made contributions to the increase in CO2 concentration rather than the tiny percentage of man-made contributions. The concept is that Earth is perfectly balanced and can absorb naturally occurring increases in CO2, but not man-made CO2 contributions. (Or that 'Gaea' is sentient and trying to kill us off by not absorbing man-made CO2 contributions - sometimes it's hard to follow the logic. lol)

If you REALLY want to bend your mind, look up the annual increase in CO2 concentration versus annual CO2 production. The two correlate very poorly - and we have no idea why.

Climate science is not that far removed from "throw the virgin in the volcano before the volcano god kills us all."

 

[SilentHunter7]

We look at what we have done to this planet, learn from it, realise that Homo Sapiens is a single entity that behaves like a virus, accept that, embrace it, and set out on the great adventure to INFECT THE GALAXY.................

Your hatred of your own race is slightly frightening...

-edit-
This isn't the first time I've heard an opinion like this. I have a hard time wrapping my mind around this mindset.

I'll understand if people believe the scientists who say it's a myth, and don't want to take action because they would rather people focus their attention on something in their opinion more pressing (IMO they're basing their beliefs off of findings by scientists getting paid millions of dollars by the likes of Dick Cheney...but considering I base my beliefs off of findings by scientists getting paid millions of dollars by the likes of Al Gore, I wont argue ;] ). I wont agree with you, but I'll respect your opinion.

But I have a gripe with people who believe it's happening, but want to do nothing out of some sense of inevitability. That we're fucked, and we might as well just roll over and die. I might be generalizing, but to me that view just comes across as either cowardice, laziness, or self-hatred. Maybe it's just the self-preservation hardwired into our brains that kept our ancestors alive, but the thought of inaction in the face of impending disaster just abhors me. If we have extinction staring at us right in the face, not only is it perfectly natural to try to survive, it's our duty as a species to endure past these hardships.

Compared to a solar storm, a gamma ray burst, a supernova, or even a simple atmospheric disturbance, they're probably right; we may be nothing. But to say we're arrogant for thinking we can do something about it... From where I'm standing, trying to rise above a challenge is not arrogance. Trying to curb the damage on the biosphere we've caused is NOT arrogance. Trying to leave our children a better planet is NOT arrogance.

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

Wrong! Recycling anything uses less energy than making a new one.

Nope. You're sort of leaving out all the melting, work, collecting and additives to reform it; just like the Green Lobby.

As for the rest, I quite like Mythbusters; but have you seen the Ask A Ninja version?

Proof right there my friend.

But seriously, you're missing the point. Your consumption at home doesn't increase, but the consumption at the source increases. I.E. The Dam or whatever you have. The Electric 'spike' that happens at turn on is like a Car switching on. That's why you use less petrol running at a constant speed than by slowing and accelerating.

The reason that Earth Hour took up more energy is because everbodys' thoughts went something like this. "Gee, I'm not supposed to use any power from 8 till 9. BUT sence it's only 7 I think I'll do the dishes and cook dinner and do the laundry and watch my favorite move with the radio blaring while on the phone to my friend right now."

Well, that and some people actually turned all their lights on during Earth Hour.

I'm not saying we shouldn't do something; I'm just saying that
1) No majority of us will, even if it means our own destruction. (Bush and Kyoto?)
2) We don't even know what we're doing wrong.

I mean we can't even accurately predict stuff like Hurricanes yet; how the hell are we meant to work out Global Weather Patterns?

According to top scientists who spend their whole lives studying it.

Average life of a Scientist? 70 years. Average life of a planet? Little longer.
That's not even going into the fact that Geothermal scientists disagree with Biochemical who disagree with Atmospheric Scientists.

Let's take a little known phenomena known as weather fronts. Every 70 years or so, the weather drastically changes as colliding fronts shift places around the Globe. (Sort of like tectonic plate movement and volcanoes). Last one was 2007.

Humans get shit done.

Humans also fuck shit up.

 

[JDLY]

I didn't say that last one.

Wrong! Recycling anything uses less energy than making a new one.

Nope. You're sort of leaving out all the melting, work, collecting and additives to reform it; just like the Green Lobby.

Just look at this link http://www.uoregon.edu/~recycle/TRIVIA.htm
look closely at the Plastics section espcialy this part "Recycling plastics saves twice as much energy as burning them..."

 

[Xhumed]

Ok, i'm a little reluctant to join in on this one, due to the vehemence people are defending their own point of views with. The thing is, everyone can find some scientist that agrees with them, and makes it sound convincing. Which is worrying, since if scientists can't agree what the fuck is going on, how are we going to decide what we're going to do about whatever the fuck is happening, if in fact something is happening?

 

[YuppySlime]

I'm sort of tired of those who are for recycling, conservation, etc. comparing the lack of action of those who disagree with them as "cowardice" and "laziness". First off, I have no idea how not recycling can be classified as being cowardly. Its not like people are too afraid to recycle because they think the recycling bin is going to try and eat them if they get too close.

And the idea of it being laziness, even though probably accurate on many accounts, should not be used to classify those who disagree as a whole. Why? Because if you honestly believe its pointless, why would you expend time and energy participating?

I mean, it could very well be laziness, but, you have to know that its not always the case.


And cowardice? Really?


And the the word arrogance comes into play from people having the idea that they have the power to fix the planet. Wanting to create a better safer world for your kids isn't arrogant, neither is wanting to do some good. Its the idea of people thinking that they can simply "figure out whats wrong and fix it and then its gone and we are awesome like that". The planet is so old and complex and we are much more naive then we think, to believe wholeheartedly that we can overcome this (when we can't really even be sure what the problem is) shows a spot of arrogance. Maybe not arrogant as you would think a star athlete to be, but somewhat arrogant in the idea that you can't see some clear faults.

 

[JDLY]

Isn't this funny.

It started as somebody anoyed with a simple sentence.
But has expanded into a whole debate about global warming.

 

[Isaac Dodgson]

My girlfriend is an anthropology major, and she outright deplores recycling. If you talk to a lot of anthropologist they also tend to dislike the idea. Why you might ask? She puts it the best way:

"The best way to find out about people is going through their trash."

It makes sense if you think about it. Everything we know about ancient civilizations is from the stuff they left behind, and all the important details (Like how they lived, what they did daily, etc...) We discover from the remains of their garbage. Future generations won't have a bloody clue about us comparatively, or if they do it will take a damn long time to figure it out as the resources will be in short supply. Sure we document things now, but so did they, and even now everything is backed up digitally, and is infinitely more likely to be destroyed or unusable in the future compared to a book or parchment.

In short, I'm oddly enough thinking about future generations when I don't recycle, as supposed to the argument that I'm not.

Now if you'll excuse me, I'm gonna grab that kerosene I was offered and go find the nearest Solo Cup plant.

 

[Break]

Come on, Yuppyslime. Who says we have all the answers? Who says we can actually fix the planet? If there's the slightest chance that doing something as easy as putting your coke cans in a different bin can help anything, why the hell wouldn't you? Sure, we can't do anything to prevent ourselves from eventually being baked alive in our own little oven-planet, but it's basic instinct to string that process out for as long as we can.

Sure, we don't know that we're responsible for global warming. But you sure as hell don't know for certain that humans have nothing to do with it. Considering the stakes, and the fact that the sacrifices you're being asked to make mean absolutely nothing to you at all, you may as well er on the side of caution. That's why it's laziness.

But seriously, you're missing the point. Your consumption at home doesn't increase, but the consumption at the source increases. I.E. The Dam or whatever you have. The Electric 'spike' that happens at turn on is like a Car switching on. That's why you use less petrol running at a constant speed than by slowing and accelerating.

That logic doesn't last very long, though. Sure, driving your car at a constant pace is better than playing the gas pedal like a bass drum, but it's not like you're going to leave the engine running when you park it for the night. Things like lightbulbs take little energy to switch on or off, and I can't imagine that it takes long for the energy saved in not having one on to outweigh the energy spent in turning it off.

 

[werepossum]

SNIP
Having said all that, it still pisses me of when I find beer cans in the woods.

Beer cans and worse, bottles in the woods are one of my pet peeves as well. I used to have problems with the neighbor's kids throwing beer bottles (sometimes soft drink bottles too) into the little patch of woods between my house and the next. Because it's a narrow neck of woods the bottles would often wind up in my yard or even on my porch. I suspected it was those kids but never said anything until one night I actually caught them. The next day I gathered up all the cans and bottles in that patch of woods - even down to things buried under leaves since probably before those kids were born - marched my happy ass over and dumped it all in their yard. Problem solved - never again got bothered by empty bottles and cans.

Something about beer that makes people want to throw bottles or cans. When we had block parties in the woods, the beer drinkers always flung the empties out into the woods, knowing we'd all be out there picking them up the next day. WTF? And I'm an avid fisherman and fish collector, and now matter how far from the road you go sooner or later you'll run into an empty beer bottle or can. What's up with that?