So back to global warming, seriously, what's so bad in actually decreasing pollution? If we plant a lot of trees, push for higher efficiency for vehicles (and maybe electronics too), and, I don't know, walk(?) if you can. Let's say we merely contribute 5 degrees more to what is naturally occurring, isn't it still better to cut that down? Being in denial and choosing to admit that we can't do anything about it because God forbid we actually cut down on stuff is idiotic. But then maybe telling to a bunch of people who's lifestyles include so much power guzzling electronics from videogame systems to PCs and entertainment systems is like talking to brick wall. People here even admit they leave their systems open even when they don't use them. I think that pretty much says it all.

I guess it's just another typical scenario of everybody else doing the heavy lifting while the other group won't lift a finger. To keep the standard quo of a water tank for example, the rest will have to drink less to compensate for those who unwaveringly consume more.

questworld

Null-Python

Knukleur

Captain Impulse

Captain Impulse

You know, I keep hearing these arguments all the time. People forget that we really have only been able to accurately measure temperature for what, 100 years?

battra92

Harteex

I was never much for empty gestures like 'earth day' or that dark hour they did a few weeks ago. To me these are things designed to make those who are part of the problem feel like part of the solution. And in the end, this does more damage than not having these events, as it encourages these people to not change their ways.

Cloral

If you argue that global-warming has no merit (and I won't get into that debate), does that give you the right to be pointlessly wasteful? Drive your SUV walking-distances? Leave the AC on so cold that you need a sweater? Leave on all your electronics that otherwise do nothing because you're too lazy to go "start"-"shutdown"?

Why do some people take this level of apathy? It's not that the "environmentalists" are asking you to start living in a tent. In the grand scheme of things, a single person turning off their monitor when not in use may not matter. But think about the effect when every person who thinks it'll make no difference does it.

And who knows, you may just save some money on electricity while you're at it.

Ber'Zophus

McKack

So I look at who's lined up on either side of the debate. On the one hand, the vast majority of reputable scientists. On the other, disreputable studies that seem to always turn out to have been funded by the oil companies, scientists mostly at the fringe of their professions, submitting flawed papers and then making loud noises when they don't get published, and entities like Big Oil and Fox News...

erlik

CheekyLee

Interstella5555

Tiber

+ Watch video

Tiber

Tiber

Tiber

The only thing is, no matter how much people may say to conserve, the fact of the matter is the damage we do to the environment will still increase. All conservation will do is slow it down. What we need to do is invest in technology that can reverse the damage.
For instance, if the ozone layer is getting thinner, make some more. Ozone is made naturally when UV rays from the sun separate a pair of oxygen molecules. Occasionally when they go to rejoin, you'll get a trio instead of a pair. That's ozone. So get a big 'ole container of O2, and bomb it with UV, and release it.

I'll admit I'm not much on conservation, but there are a couple of things that are easy for me that I should do.

Lastly, this looks pretty interesting.

Tiber

Donutta

Dragoness_Muir

As I said in my first post, there is no doubting that global warming is fact. AGW, on the other hand, is not; especially given as that any paper to say otherwise is denied publication. I once met a very nice man who sold his science to multiple companies -- including "green" ones -- worldwide. This science, however, was not published because it disagreed with the current hive mind on global warming. As I said, politics, not science.

It's easy to claim that my stance is based on ignorance (despite the fact that I spend countless hours of procrastination exploring both sides of the debate) because ad hominem attacks make it easier to prove a point. Shall we start a links war? I'm confident in my evidence. ;)

Donutta

HertzaHaeon

Turning your lights off or switching to low energy lights can make a difference. The ozone hole was defeated one fridge at a time (somewhat simplified). But if you imply that such changes pale in comparison to big emitters, I completely agree. They don't make switching lights meaningless, however.

I don't see any problem at all that people, including Al Gore, are making money off going green. In fact, profitable green tech and organization is likely what will stop the worst effects of AGW.

HertzaHaeon

I'm all for conservation, waste not want not and all that, but what I do not like is when people try to substitute conservation for growth. Economies grow and conservation will only get you so far.

Would I buy a car that costs me pennies a day to run? Of course! The Chevy Volt is looking pretty interesting (though not at its projected $48K price tag) I'd be all for us using half the power we do now as that means costs go down. Efficiency is great and a necessity for growth, but it does not induce growth on its own.

battra92

If you sacrifice enough of the things people value, if you hurt enough people and hold them back from health and prosperity, you get to go to environmental heaven. There will be a virgin forest with 72 trees there to greet you.

Kohath

elronathon

Captain Impulse

For example, there was an article on CNN about a massive ice shelf in Antarctica that is breaking away from the rest of the continent due to global warming. Yes, that is likely true. However, the "experts" then claimed that because of global warming, the entire ecosystem of Antarctica was in danger. Their reasoning behind this was based on the fact that krill populations in Antarctica had seen a decline in recent years. They attributed this decline to global warming.

Krill are one of the bottom-of-the-food-chain species, and their disappearance WOULD have a HUGE effect on the ecosystem there. However, the "experts" claimed that the marginal rise in average ocean temperature was the cause of the krill population decline. They seemed to forget the fact that krill exist in every ocean on Earth, so temperature has jack shit to do with it. But hey, that doesn't matter, as long as they can spin it to those who don't know any better.

As others have said before, there have been times when Earth had no ice anywhere. The reason we have glaciers now is because we are still in an ice age (albeit at the end of one). Even if the glaciers melt, the cycle of life will continue. It's not as if life is going to grind to a halt because it's a few degrees warmer.

Captain Impulse

Bottom line is that global warming and global cooling happen with or without humans, and turning off your console at night isn't going to do shit except maybe reduce your power bill.

Donutta

elronathon

Anyway, you said pretty much everything I would have said, so we're in total agreement. Thanks for preventing me from getting involved in the debate directly. ;)

Captain Impulse

elronathon

My biggest beef with global warming is that the "experts" (read: climatologists) don't look at Earth's history; they just look at a small portion of it. 4.5 billion years and two massive extinction events and the capitalist, industrial society is the one to be the undoing of Mother Earth?

Meh, gaming. I feel like playing that old Captain Planet game on the Amiga. That was cool.

Donutta

No, I hate the enviroment with a passion...

Anyway we have to admit there are like 30 millon species on this planet, and that is a system. A system that everywhere is in decadency.. dying. As we can't live withouth it, we are dyiing to. We as in.. the humanity.

.., and while some are a little fiddly (like upgrading to "green" components), others you should be able to manage, including setting your PC to sleep mode more often and actually turning your console and TV off, instead of leaving them on standby.

Or NOT upgrading to Vista, that is a new OS that need much more hardware to run smooth, so you have to buy new components.

You can buy more components, like RAM, because is good for your computing. But the corporations make it hard to buy green components, and even these that do provide green components are not very green to me.

Tei

erlik

I_Hate_This_Place

Oh, and Gore was almost certainly not making money off of green companies 20 years ago, when he first started talking about this.

erlik

Since installing a solar hot water system, switching to energy efficient products and turning off stand-by my electricity bill is down from $400 to $75 per quarter.

It's not hard, unless you are mentally uncapable off flicking a switch.

marleycat

I turn my PC to standby mode since there's something weird going on with it. Oh well, just another month or so till my tax check comes in and I will get a new PC. ;)

And I switched to an LCD HDTV to uhh draw less current when I game ... or something. Yeah, let's go with that.

battra92

Although, I find it ironic that no one has realised that Mr I-serve-an-endangered-species-at-my-daughter's party Gore is invested in a lot of companies that will make money from "reduction" of climate change.

Not everyone on an Internet forum is a moron that's education came from sending four coupons and a proof of purchase off to Kellogs. ;)

Donutta

discotom

Furthermore, I find it tragically amusing that some people are so ready to believe one sort of bias against critics, but have trouble imagining that immensely rich and powerful industries with vested interests in keeping the status quo can do anything to cover up proof of AGW.

Such are the internets, I guess.

HertzaHaeon

I_Hate_This_Place

HUmonster

My favourite quote comes from Greenpeace co-founder Patrick Moore: "In its essence, eco-extremism rejects virtually everything about modern life. We are told that nothing short of returning to primitive tribal society can save the earth from ecological collapse. No more cities, no more airplanes, no more polyester suits. It is a naive vision of a return to the Garden of Eden."

That said... *puts on Kevlar suit*

Donutta

I always feel my best evidence comes from Greenpeace co-founder Patrick Moore who says: "In its essence, eco-extremism rejects virtually everything about modern life. We are told that nothing short of returning to primitive tribal society can save the earth from ecological collapse. No more cities, no more airplanes, no more polyester suits. It is a naive vision of a return to the Garden of Eden."

I'm not saying we should shit in our own nest. I'm just saying it's pretty naive to think that turning off your LCD screen is suddenly going to solve a natural cycle that has been going on for longer than Homo Homo Sapiens have populated the planet.

That said... *puts on Kevlar suit*

Donutta

I_Hate_This_Place

Donutta

ShaggE

Chef

will

I try and save as much power as possible. Feels damn good.

dead_red_eyes

Ahmunnaeetchoo

Dannon

archibaldleech

Jaymz

Libo

If it offsets it at all the house has fluorescent lights everywhere and we don't use the air conditioning that much, preferring to leave the windows open.

kylo4

I already turn my 360 off before I sleep or when I leave home. For other reasons though. I'm afraid it'll burn my house down.

Shinryoma

vln

Bard to the Bone

I agree on the 360 power hog, it doesn't help that most of my playtime is during off peak hours; therefore adding useless fees.

As ghetto as it is, I still have a clap-on bedside lamp. Eat it if you find it funny, its the staple of home shopping network product.

Fyren

I make an effort to turn my consoles and TV off, though my PS3 is currently in standby mode as I've been trying out remote play, but I have to admit my PC never gets turned off, my internet isn't the quickest so it's on 24/7 downloading this, that and the obligatory other

Dannon

Ghirofelgo

Does the PS3 in standby mode draw any power?

kylo4