/sci/ - Science & Math

not make up shit

>>1892538
Name something that I made up, I'd love to hear it. I also hope that no one has to tell you "I told you so."

>>1892535
grow a few years older, OP
realize that you're just regurgitating scare tactics
It's not a crisis until it's a crisis. Don't act like it's about to happen when it's really "in 2050...maybe"

>How does this make you feel?
>What are your thoughts on this?
>we're all fucked. royally fucked
>What the fuck are we going to do?
>face the biggest most colossal disaster ever seen by our race

Meh, we'll be fine.

>>1892544
/sci/ is not the place you come to high with your environmentalist conspiracies

>>1892535
I know exactly what we should fucking do.
http://www.marshallbrain.com/manna5.htm

>>1892535

Never underestimate the resourcefulness and adaptability of the human race.

>>1892549
For starters, that was a cute ad hominem. Age has nothing to do this. Second of all, do you realize you're trying to refute scientifically proven ecological destabilization as "regurgitating scare tactics" scare tactics to what end?? It's not like these people are sitting around "hohoho! gonna trick them into caring about the planet! it'll be so funny!" Also,
>It's not a crisis until it's a crisis
do you realize how fucking retarded that sounds? Preventive measures are a waste of time? we'll deal with it when it's kicking down our front door?

>>1892560
>3. Nothing is anonymous
And I'm out.

>>1892576
Eh, I would actually ignore that rule.

>>1892579
Nice.
I'm back in.

>>1892552
Why? Science has the most to say on the subject.
>>1892568
Why the fuck not? We're such an incredibly young species and we're already on the brink, just because we've risen to dominance quickly doesn't mean we're some super successful master species that can survive any test, we've hardly faced any real tests that actually pose themselves at a global level. All of that is besides the point, I'm not saying humans will go extinct but our entire way of life faces complete obliteration. So far I'm exceptionally disappointed with /sci/'s reaction, no one has addressed any of my points and I've gotten people just straight up denying it's happening and thinking that justifies as an argument.

>>1892586
>So far I'm exceptionally disappointed with /sci/'s reaction, no one has addressed any of my points and I've gotten people just straight up denying it's happening and thinking that justifies as an argument.
I'm having a derp hurr day today, so how exactly do you want us to react?

>>1892594
In something outside of blatant ignorance. Something that answers the questions presented in the original post.

>>1892586
Don't wworry OP, you are just over reacting because you are losing your faith in the almighty GOD. Do you underestimate Him to stop anything that would hurt us? Aliens were supposed to attack us yesterday and do you know why they didnt? God put up a giant force field around the earth just like he did for the egyptions when they were building the pyriamids. L2read hyroglyphics if you dont believe me. Even mentioning that you think the world will end proves that you are a non-believer and i can 100% gaurentee that you will be going to hell now. Burn in flames and i pray that your diseased mind be cleansed by the lord and our savior, Jesus Christ

>>1892603
OP here, I see you post all the time, Aether. I know you're trolling.

Oil isn't exactly a finite resource. It can and is manufactured in a lab and on an industrial scale. It's called bio-diesel. It is just much cheaper to drill for it than to manufacture it. Think 3$ a gallon instead of 6. Fresh water is an even easier nut to crack. It's called desalinization and it's not even new technology. We face no great emergency, a small sustained infrastructure improvement program for 20 or so years and few will even notice.

i have to agree with OP on this one, we're fucked
here's my theory on what's going on:
ever done a titration test in chemistry?
it's a lot like that with the environment, for the last 100 years or so we've been putting more and more crap into the environment, and it's not too noticeable because the equilibrium stays on one side. But the more you put in the more and more unstable it gets, like with phph and something else, i don't remember, the solution stays pinker a bit longer after each drop and this can be seen as something like the current polar ice cap situation etc. but basically we're nearing the brink where if a single more drop is put in the solution turns from white to pink in a second and that's what it's going to be like. We're gonna tip the equilibrium, everything will be very different and very noticeable, and simply said, shit's gonna get fucked up.

>>1892611
bio-diesel is actually widely considered to use more energy than it produces. Besides, if you were to take out all the drilled oil, we're not able to produce bio-diesel on nearly the scale necessary. On top of that, fossil fuels is only further screwing us into the ground.

We're killing the trees, we're killing the ecosystems,
> we will realize our mistakes, trees can be regrown. Yes, it will take many years but it can be fixed.
we're killing the oceans. Our entire society, and I mean literally the whole thing nearly from the ground up is based wholly on a finite and dwindling resource. We face an end to fresh water in the developed world. How will we possibly overcome this?
>Ocean water will be able to be purified and consumed. Although this is still a "finite" resource it can be conserved to a point.
Population crash is the only real hope any of us have, but even then life and science will never obtain the levels it is at without oil. If we can't transfer to a new sustainable energy source VERY. . . VERY FUCKING SOON, we're all fucked. royally fucked.
> GOOD, once oil is all used up then we stop burning most of our fossil fuels and poisoning the air. Although the sacrifice is shutting down industry for a short while, the human race can't go that long without finding a way to get a new energy source. Hell, everything could be electric.
How does this make you feel? What are your thoughts on this? What the fuck are we going to do?
> Meh, we can handle it.

>>1892602
>If we can't transfer to a new sustainable energy source VERY. . . VERY FUCKING SOON, we're all fucked. royally fucked. How does this make you feel? What are your thoughts on this? What the fuck are we going to do?

Build lots of solar panels.
Build lots of wind turbines.
Build lots of geothermal plants.
Build lots of biomass (sewage/methane?) plants.
Build lots of cellulose-eating ethanol plants.
Build lots of carbon nanotube battery electric cars.
Build lots of HVDC electricity lines.

TAH DAAAAAAAHHH

>>1892624
Step One:
Convincing the oil companies to let you

>>1892630
OP said oil is all gone now, remember?

>What the fuck are we going to do?

Thorium, bitches.

>>1892630
Annnnnd there's the conspiracy bullshit. Basic economics says they will, but I bet that's inadequate for you, so let's just blame the Jews!

>>1892610
aw wtf OP it took me so long to write that and u didnt even rage..fuck you i hope the global warming fairies get you first

>>1892630
My version of step one doesn't involve me dealing with them at all.
>>1892631
OP accidentally the WHOLE oil reserves?

>>1892586

I never said that we were some "super species capable of surviving any test." All I said was that you shouldn't so quickly write off the resourcefulness of people.

It seems like you're saying (though, perhaps you're not) that basically, fossil fuels run out, all hell breaks loose, people run around like chickens with their heads cut off, and then everybody dies. The reality is that even in the worst-case scenario, where suddenly and instantaneously all the fossil fuel sources disappear, all that will happen is a reversion to (basically) pre-automobile society. Yes, that's a big pill to swallow, a big setback, and a lot of change will have to happen, but it's very much survivable.

The worst-case scenario isn't realistic, though. We have estimates and models telling us when we expect our supply of oil to run out. We already have scientists and engineers laying the technological foundations for alternate energy sources. People are aware that the time horizon for oil isn't infinite.

When the time comes, we'll be prepared.

Just chill out.

>>1892620
I'm afraid the math disagrees with that assessment. As for scale it can be easily scaled up using plankton farms. Also bio diesal is not really a "fossil fuel" the fossil bit refers to energy stored in the material in the distant past aka fossil. This energy is from recent plant growth who when alive pulled carbon out of the air to grow. Burning that is no net increase in CO2 into the atmosphere. There is only a net increase when you take reserves stored in rock and release it into the atmosphere.

>>1892621
> we will realize our mistakes, trees can be regrown. Yes, it will take many years but it can be fixed.
Trees can't be regrown if we are inducing desertification the areas in which they grow.
>Ocean water will be able to be purified and consumed. Although this is still a "finite" resource it can be conserved to a point.
Ocean water takes a significant amount of fossil fuel and inefficient use of energy to desalinize.
> GOOD, once oil is all used up then we stop burning most of our fossil fuels and poisoning the air. Although the sacrifice is shutting down industry for a short while, the human race can't go that long without finding a way to get a new energy source. Hell, everything could be electric.
Okay, I don't think you realize how long the human species went without massively abundant energy sources and how instrumentally key to the industrial rise of modern society oil actually is. We're literally built entirely on the stuff. How do you think we generate the vast majority of the electricity we use? Oil plays a huge role in any item you could reach out and touch right now.
> Meh, we can handle it.
How?

>>1892635
Okay, for starters, that isn't me (OP) but he is entirely correct. ExxonMobile has leaked documents that exclusively outline how to convince the public that global warming isn't a pressing issue (despite being almost unanimously agreed by the scientific community) and paying off media sources to present it as a conflict. THIS IS PROVABLE.

>>1892635
put it this way, all those alternative energy sources can be made and used, but using them on a large scale will be difficult. people like money, alternative energy would decrease the already plentiful reserves of the oil companies and this would make them rage.
then they would lobby the shit out of washington and from there you don't have the good stuff on a large scale. Unless, they are backed in to a corner where they have no more oil to drill and they have to before crowds come and rape them and their family. Other than that oil companies wouldn't generally support large scale alternative fuel sources, again unless, if they plan to make big profits out of it, which i doubt they will

Trees can't be regrown if we are inducing desertification the areas in which they grow.
> Im sure we can do some sort of soil nutrition and do un-desertification, it's only that the situation to do it hasnt come up.

Ocean water takes a significant amount of fossil fuel and inefficient use of energy to desalinize.
> All of the fossil fuels wont be used up instantly, it will be seen before it happens, which obviously isn't right now. Countries are still drilling for oil everywhere, once it is truly scarce actions will be taken.

Okay, I don't think you realize how long the human species went without massively abundant energy sources and how instrumentally key to the industrial rise of modern society oil actually is. We're literally built entirely on the stuff. How do you think we generate the vast majority of the electricity we use? Oil plays a huge role in any item you could reach out and touch right now.
> same as above, the entire oil supply/reserves won't be used up instantly.
How?
> Thats what i was talking about ^^.

>>1892647
I respect your post and can see you are taking a moderate approach, but that isn't the way societal change happens. Pre-industrial (aka pre-oil) populations were less than one billion people, now we have 6.6 billion people. 6.6 billion people don't just go back to farming, 6.6 billion people riot, burn, and seize because they are hungry and need energy. Natural ecosystems can't even come close to supporting that many people.

>>1892660
lets see a source. i'd like to read.

I always love how morons from the east coast talk about fossil fuels providing electricity. Out west we use mostly hydroelectric and nuclear. Why don't you guys in the east build a freakin dam or two and quit your bitching.

>>1892686
> Im sure we can do some sort of soil nutrition and do un-desertification, it's only that the situation to do it hasnt come up.
That isn't how this sort of thing works. These are natural processes that don't get fixed that easy. We're pumping aquifers at fifteen times the rate at which they are being restored and continuing development in places naturally prone to drought (I.E. Phoenix AZ, Los Angeles CA) and as a result are displacing water tables and creating deserts. You think if you were to go put some nutrients in the middle of the Sahara desert tons of big trees would just start popping out? We're creating new deserts and that type of fix doesn't work in a desert.
> All of the fossil fuels wont be used up instantly, it will be seen before it happens, which obviously isn't right now. Countries are still drilling for oil everywhere, once it is truly scarce actions will be taken.
To put it plainly desalinization doesn't even come close, not even within the same stadium in the same town that it needs to be at to sustain our fresh water needs.
> same as above, the entire oil supply/reserves won't be used up instantly.
Okay, but all of society before oil doesn't even come close to what it is today. It isn't like oil is just some regular old source of energy, it is the most high yield source of energy known to mankind, with our current technology nothing else even comes slightly close to the output of oil.

>>1892708
http://arstechnica.com/science/news/2010/10/google-puts-its-weight-behind-extensive-offshore-wind-sy
stem.ars

>>1892708
I live in Arizona. You think all your electricity comes from hydroelectric and nuclear, wow that's wrong. These are secondary and marginal sources, and they don't even come close to what oil is producing every single day at every minute.

>>1892707
I googled "ExxonMobile Global Warming coverup" and got 10+ links. It's not hard information to find.

>>1892729
Are those REALLY credible? Or are they infowars shit?

>>1892742
I don't know. It's not beyond belief though, that the most profitable corporation in the known universe would do whatever it takes to secure it's most profitable asset. Take the beach cleanups for the Exxon Valdez spill, they were literally obliterating the beach ecosystems with steaming hot water sprayers, their own scientists told them this, they said they didn't give a fuck, as long as it looks like they're doing something. These are the true world powers. When the most powerful and affluent society and earth is deeply capitalist, it makes sense that leaders would be chosen monetarily, whether our political systems recognize them as such or not, they have the money, they have the power.

>>1892729
find a credible source. its on you to provide evidence, not me.

>>1892680

Indeed, that's why I said the worst-case scenario is a big pill to swallow. People will die, wars will happen, governments will be toppled. The population will drop off like crazy for a bit. It's not pretty. Again, though, an instantaneous disappearance of every usable fossil fuel on earth is, virtually, an impossibility, and it's not something to lose sleep about.

I also agree that society doesn't change on a dime, but I'm not saying that's what needs to happen nor am I saying that is what IS happening, right now. In fact, I think I insinuated quite the opposite. We are in the midst of a gradual change towards the minimization of oil's impact on daily life. Some things won't change at all until the price of oil reaches a critical premium; however, at that time, the principles of economics dictate that the transition will be rather smooth from oil-based products to alternates.

In the end, believe it or not, it's the sheer fact that people like money, fundamental business practice, that will ensure a full transition away from oil when supplies start to run thin. Even if this thinning of supply is rather sudden, people are resourceful, and new supply lines and entirely new markets will open up to fill the gap that oil left behind.

>Okay, but all of society before oil doesn't even come close to what it is today. It isn't like oil is just some regular old source of energy, it is the most high yield source of energy known to mankind, with our current technology nothing else even comes slightly close to the output of oil.
Obviously nothing comes close, but we have adapt some how. Of course nuclear power is no better in waste terms, solar power from plants on the moon maybe, who knows?
Now im not advocating "it's not a crisis until it's a crisis" ,but the entire human race, all countries of the world cannot agree on something 50 years in advance, oil will remain dominant until it is scarce.

>>1892773
it only posted like 1/4th of my post, and im too lazy to type it again. but
tl;dr the human race can adapt when needed, countries cant get along 50 years in advance, oil will remain until it is scarce.

>>1892768
Burden of proof is on the believer.

>>1892768
Well, I could site several documentaries but they are hardly from objective standpoints. Outside of that I don't have evidence for this particular case. However, there are literally reporters coming forward claiming that Exxonmobile has pressured them into presenting a story of facts as a story of opinion, essentially telling them to report objectively on something that has already come to a verdict and been decided to be empirically true.
>>1892771
I hope you're right.

>>1892788
Whats your point? thats why i'm asking him.

>>1892798
No, just reinforcing your side. It's his business to provide credible sources, or at least to give a decent article.

>>1892798
OP here, headed out for the night. I'm fairly sure this thread will be dormant by the time I get back.
Goodnight, /sci/.

1. Nuclear Power
2. Population control
3. Vegetarian diet (I'm not veggie, and dread the day when people are forced to give up meat, but it might be the only sustainable way of living)
4. Localized production of goods, foods

(Basically James Lovelock's ideas)

More or less, revert back to pre-industrialized communities, but with the added benefit of nuclear power, if possible. Mandatory population control may be necessary. It may take many generations, but humans can make it. Even if we have altered our environment past certain points-of-no-return, it doesn't mean that we're fucked. We adapt.

>>1892560
>>1892560
>>1892560
>>1892560
I just finished reading that story in the link provided and in the end when it goes on about a perfect virtual world with your brain disconnected from your body... at first i was 'no way' my life would be all fake and shit, but then i realized how much this life does suck and rethought my decision to go ahead with it.

>>1893110
What if I told you that my life goal was to make this at least a little bit of a reality? The wonderful automated system shit, not the Vertebrane.

We stop being fucking hippies and go nuclear.

There are two different outcomes if oil runs out.

Case 1: We all come to a sudden realization that we are destroying the planet and what have you and decide to all invest money in hippy shit like solar panels.

Case 2: We find something else to burn.

Hint: Its gonna be case 2

>>1893130
NUKULAR?

Our race?

If you mean by "our race" White Race then this bizarre mix of social liberalism and capitalism is clearly the biggest disaster ever to set upon White countries.

Anyway a solution to overpopulation is simple.

1. Spay and neuter nonwhites.

Going one step further, think of all the additional resources which would be available to us(the white population) if the populations of Africa, Asia, the Middle East and South/Central America were to - vanish.

>>1893161
>>>/new/

>>1893161

Yes, until we are the entirety of 6.6 billion people, and then the whole problem begins again.

Then there will be more radical race guys saying that every (white) person that doesn't have, oh, I dunno, pale blue eyes for example, should be spayed and neutered.

If you didn't notice, America is mostly white, and look where it is now.

>>1893124
Providing you are not trollin:
I would fund your project with everything i have to spare!

>>1893174

>>1893168

The demographic number of the White population has leveled off and is beginning to decrease(it is around 1 billion if I remember correctly).

1 billion is certainly sustainable with most modern comforts.

The populations that are expanding are nonwhites. America is certainly not mostly White, it was White originally and has since been bastardized. If you look at which populations are increasing its the spics, niggers and chinks.

Ours actions should be to secure the maximum number of resources possible. Once our own well being is assured we can work towards finding alternative sources for fuel.

Step 1 : Transfer brains into robots
Step 2 : Cover 50% of the earth with solar panels
Step 3 : continue destroying the world, since we only need raw energy to survive now.

ZE ENDO.

>>1893209
I guess now we know the backstory for the Matrix.

I'm working on saving your asses. Give me time.

everything will be fine, when you look at it logically, we will just have a whole lot more whales.