Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Supreme Court: Are You Tired Of Winning...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by seer View Post

    Hehe, but I think the Remain policy was an executive order - correct?
    i'd have to look it up but I think this was a law enacted by congress when the republicans were in control that Trump signed into law and then enforced it.
    Last edited by RumTumTugger; 06-30-2022, 04:37 PM.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
      Given that carbon monoxide indirectly contributes to the build-up of some greenhouse gases, the following is from a serious article on why even temporarily going beyond a 2oC rise could cause permanent damage to the species on this planet, including of course, our own.

      https://theconversation.com/climate-...species-185929

      [...] Unless urgent action is taken, emissions are expected to cause the planet to continue heating rapidly over the next few decades, prompting the global average temperature to overshoot the Paris agreement’s target, which aimed to limit warming to between 1.5░C and 2░C. A period of higher temperatures will occur in the middle of this century as a result. Then, the idea goes, new but yet unproven technologies and techniques for pulling greenhouse gases from the atmosphere will eventually bring temperatures back down to a safer level.

      Until now, scientists were unsure what temporarily overshooting (and then boomeranging back below) the Paris agreement’s temperature target would entail for nature. So, for the first time, we studied the consequences of allowing Earth’s temperature to exceed these precautionary limits, then fall below them again, for marine and land-based life. In other words, we looked at how damaging the journey of overshooting the 2░C temperature target would be, and not just the destination itself.

      The results suggest that a temporary overshoot would cause waves of irreversible extinctions and lasting damage to tens of thousands of species. This is what the world can expect if humanity fails to make deep emission cuts this decade, and relies instead on future technologies to remove emissions later.

      Harm arrives fast and leaves slowly

      Our study modelled the impact of global temperatures exceeding 2░C for around 60 years between 2040 and 2100 on over 30,000 species that live on land and in the sea. We looked at how many of them would be exposed to temperatures that could hinder their reproduction and survival, and how much time they would be exposed to this risk.





      Harm would be fast to arrive and slow to disappear for nature, even after temperatures fall again. Just a few years of global temperatures above 2░C could transform the world’s most important ecosystems. Take the Amazon basin, for example. Some species would remain exposed to dangerous conditions long after the global average temperature stabilised – with some remaining exposed as late as 2300. This is because some species, especially those in the tropics, live closer to the limit of heat they can tolerate and so are sensitive to relatively small changes in temperature. And while global average temperatures may return to safer levels eventually, local temperature changes might lag behind.

      The consequences of this exposure could be irreversible and include the tropical forest turning into savanna. The world would lose a critical global carbon sink, leaving more planet-warming gases in the atmosphere.

      The Coral Triangle in the western Pacific Ocean is one of the most species-rich marine ecosystems and home to many reef-building corals, sea turtles, reef fish and mangrove forests. Our modelling showed that in some communities, all or most of the species would be exposed to dangerous conditions simultaneously for at least a few decades and as much as two centuries. As well as disrupting a source of food for millions of people, disappearing corals and mangroves would remove a natural barrier protecting coastal towns and villages from rising seas and worsening storms.

      [...]

      Delaying drastic cuts to emissions will mean the world overshooting 2░C is a best-case scenario. This overshoot would come at an astronomical cost to life on Earth that negative emission technologies will not reverse. The effort to stop temperatures rising isn’t an abstract attempt at bending curves on a graph: it’s a fight for a liveable planet.
      Are we doomed within 10 years? AGAIN? Still? Are we on about the 20th anniversary of our last doomation?
      The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post

        Are we doomed within 10 years? AGAIN? Still? Are we on about the 20th anniversary of our last doomation?
        https://energyeducation.ca/encyclope...imate_feedback


        Positive climate feedback


        In other languages: Franšais

        Figure 1. A map showing the decrease in arctic sea ice over the years. The melting of ice and corresponding change in albedo is one major positive feedback.[1]

        Positive climate feedback is a process that is one type of climate feedback wherein some initial change in the climate causes some secondary change that in turn increases the effects of the initial change, essentially magnifying the initial effect.[2] Positive climate feedbacks are often discussed in the context of climate change and is one sub-type of positive feedback.

        Similar to how keeping money in a savings account earns interest and compounds to earn more money, positive climate feedback increases some initial change in the climate. Some initial warming is accompanied by additional warming from some other process, which in turn results in even more warming. For further explanation on what a positive feedback is in general, click here.

        Although there are also negative climate feedbacks, positive feedback cycles are what are so disconcerting. Positive feedback cycles accelerate climate change as they increase warming, leading to large non-linear responses. With positive feedback, some minor change in the state of the climate can result in a large change overall. This is in stark contrast with negative feedback, which reduces the impact of some initial climate change by acting in the opposite direction, bringing it back to its initial state.[3]

        Examples of Positive Feedback
        There are disconcerting positive feedback cycles being observed and predicted.[4] It is important to note that these different types of positive feedback result in a different amount of warming overall. The following are a few of the climate endangering cycles.

        Ice-Albedo Feedback
        One example of a positive feedback is the melting of ice - particularly sea ice - and corresponding decrease in albedo (see Figure 1). Ice is white and highly reflective - corresponding to a high albedo. This reflectivity prevents some incident sunlight from being absorbed.[2] However, when ice melts the vegetation, soil, or water beneath it is exposed. These surfaces are darker and heat faster and thus have a lower albedo. As these surfaces with a lower albedo are exposed to the Sun, they absorb more solar radiation than the ice would have. This absorption further raises temperatures and causes even more ice to melt, continuously heating and pushing the cycle. This feedback can act more quickly over the ocean than over land as sea ice is able to melt more quickly than large, continental ice sheets.[4]

        Water Vapour Release
        The human-caused release of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere as a result of fossil fuel combustion is the initial cause of climate change. These human activities increase global temperature as these gases trap heat in the atmosphere as a result of their basic properties. The feedback comes when the warmer atmosphere results in more evaporation of water on the surface of the Earth. As the water from the Earth evaporates, it turns into water vapour in the atmosphere. This water vapour thus causes even more warming of the atmosphere, creating a self-reinforcing cycle of heating.[4]

        Carbon Release
        As the temperature on the Earth increases, permafrost begins to thaw. This permafrost contains large amounts of carbon that was contained in frozen soil. Thus the melting of the permafrost releases methane into the atmosphere. As these greenhouse gases are released they cause more warming, which in turn causes more thawing and more carbon release.[4]


        "It ain't necessarily so
        The things that you're liable
        To read in the Bible
        It ain't necessarily so
        ."

        Sportin' Life
        Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

          https://energyeducation.ca/encyclope...imate_feedback


          Positive climate feedback


          In other languages: Franšais

          Figure 1. A map showing the decrease in arctic sea ice over the years. The melting of ice and corresponding change in albedo is one major positive feedback.[1]

          Positive climate feedback is a process that is one type of climate feedback wherein some initial change in the climate causes some secondary change that in turn increases the effects of the initial change, essentially magnifying the initial effect.[2] Positive climate feedbacks are often discussed in the context of climate change and is one sub-type of positive feedback.

          Similar to how keeping money in a savings account earns interest and compounds to earn more money, positive climate feedback increases some initial change in the climate. Some initial warming is accompanied by additional warming from some other process, which in turn results in even more warming. For further explanation on what a positive feedback is in general, click here.

          Although there are also negative climate feedbacks, positive feedback cycles are what are so disconcerting. Positive feedback cycles accelerate climate change as they increase warming, leading to large non-linear responses. With positive feedback, some minor change in the state of the climate can result in a large change overall. This is in stark contrast with negative feedback, which reduces the impact of some initial climate change by acting in the opposite direction, bringing it back to its initial state.[3]

          Examples of Positive Feedback
          There are disconcerting positive feedback cycles being observed and predicted.[4] It is important to note that these different types of positive feedback result in a different amount of warming overall. The following are a few of the climate endangering cycles.

          Ice-Albedo Feedback
          One example of a positive feedback is the melting of ice - particularly sea ice - and corresponding decrease in albedo (see Figure 1). Ice is white and highly reflective - corresponding to a high albedo. This reflectivity prevents some incident sunlight from being absorbed.[2] However, when ice melts the vegetation, soil, or water beneath it is exposed. These surfaces are darker and heat faster and thus have a lower albedo. As these surfaces with a lower albedo are exposed to the Sun, they absorb more solar radiation than the ice would have. This absorption further raises temperatures and causes even more ice to melt, continuously heating and pushing the cycle. This feedback can act more quickly over the ocean than over land as sea ice is able to melt more quickly than large, continental ice sheets.[4]

          Water Vapour Release
          The human-caused release of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere as a result of fossil fuel combustion is the initial cause of climate change. These human activities increase global temperature as these gases trap heat in the atmosphere as a result of their basic properties. The feedback comes when the warmer atmosphere results in more evaporation of water on the surface of the Earth. As the water from the Earth evaporates, it turns into water vapour in the atmosphere. This water vapour thus causes even more warming of the atmosphere, creating a self-reinforcing cycle of heating.[4]

          Carbon Release
          As the temperature on the Earth increases, permafrost begins to thaw. This permafrost contains large amounts of carbon that was contained in frozen soil. Thus the melting of the permafrost releases methane into the atmosphere. As these greenhouse gases are released they cause more warming, which in turn causes more thawing and more carbon release.[4]

          You have me, like, shaking in my boots. I mean, like, I'm now terrified.
          The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post

            You have me, like, shaking in my boots. I mean, like, I'm now terrified.
            Think of your great grand-children!
            "It ain't necessarily so
            The things that you're liable
            To read in the Bible
            It ain't necessarily so
            ."

            Sportin' Life
            Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
              Given that carbon monoxide indirectly contributes to the build-up of some greenhouse gases, the following is from a serious article on why even temporarily going beyond a 2oC rise could cause permanent damage to the species on this planet, including of course, our own.
              What is your point and why is this in my thread?
              Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by seer View Post

                What is your point and why is this in my thread?
                That this ruling is going to assist in exacerbating climate change.
                "It ain't necessarily so
                The things that you're liable
                To read in the Bible
                It ain't necessarily so
                ."

                Sportin' Life
                Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by seer View Post

                  What is your point and why is this in my thread?
                  I think she's off on a tangent that we really shouldn't be against abortion because all those babies are going to be subject to the horrors of climate change.

                  Remember, this is H_A we're talking about.
                  The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

                    That this ruling is going to assist in exacerbating climate change.
                    What the EPA was doing was unlawful. They had no such right. Such policies must be passed through the Congress.
                    Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by seer View Post

                      What the EPA was doing was unlawful. They had no such right. Such policies must be passed through the Congress.
                      As I understand it this ruling will begin to remove the powers of agencies such as the EPA to enforce policy. Rather than allowing federal agencies to enforce such things as the Clean Air Act, this new dispensation will require Congress to pass much more explicit regulations. However, this ruling will no doubt render it nigh on impossible to get any clear statements from Congress. When was the last serious climate bill passed by Congress?

                      Furthermore, this recent ruling will make it even harder to achieve any international progress on rising temperatures. If the US [historically the world's largest emitter of carbon] cannot play a serious policy role it will be increasingly hard for the US to play a serious international leadership role.

                      With unprecedented flooding in Asia and heat levels in the Middle East; a prolonged drought and then record fires in the US south west as well as the recent extensive rainfall and flooding in Yellowstone, where is all this going to end with a climate that is out of control?

                      Cow Poke joked about "doomation" but what does all this promise for his, or indeed anyone else's great grandchildren when they reach their sixties or seventies in another one hundred years or so?
                      "It ain't necessarily so
                      The things that you're liable
                      To read in the Bible
                      It ain't necessarily so
                      ."

                      Sportin' Life
                      Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

                        As I understand it this ruling will begin to remove the powers of agencies such as the EPA to enforce policy. Rather than allowing federal agencies to enforce such things as the Clean Air Act, this new dispensation will require Congress to pass much more explicit regulations. However, this ruling will no doubt render it nigh on impossible to get any clear statements from Congress. When was the last serious climate bill passed by Congress?
                        No the EPA was going beyond their mandate. And yes, the Congress has to get more explicit. That is how US law works. Whether Congress acts or not has no bearing on the EPA overreach.

                        Furthermore, this recent ruling will make it even harder to achieve any international progress on rising temperatures. If the US [historically the world's largest emitter of carbon] cannot play a serious policy role it will be increasingly hard for the US to play a serious international leadership role.
                        The US economy has grown over the last 30 years yet our CO2 footprint has actually gone down.

                        https://www.eia.gov/environment/emissions/carbon/

                        With unprecedented flooding in Asia and heat levels in the Middle East; a prolonged drought and then record fires in the US south west as well as the recent extensive rainfall and flooding in Yellowstone, where is all this going to end with a climate that is out of control?
                        Who knows, without China, India and Africa getting on board (and they aren't) what we in the West do won't help much. And isn't your country turning more and more back to fossil fuels like natural gas?


                        Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by seer View Post

                          No the EPA was going beyond their mandate. And yes, the Congress has to get more explicit. That is how US law works. Whether Congress acts or not has no bearing on the EPA overreach.



                          The US economy has grown over the last 30 years yet our CO2 footprint has actually gone down.

                          https://www.eia.gov/environment/emissions/carbon/



                          Who knows, without China, India and Africa getting on board (and they aren't) what we in the West do won't help much. And isn't your country turning more and more back to fossil fuels like natural gas?

                          Given what is happening with the climate I suspect that even serious attempts are not going to undo what is now happening. That does not mean we should not try and reduce our anthropogenic impact but humans are going have increasingly challenging situations to face in the next fifty to one hundred years.

                          It is predicted that there will be mass migration as people leave regions that become increasingly uninhabitable [including parts of the northern hemisphere] and possible wars for resources [water being one of those], Viruses and bacteria may increasingly jump species or arrive in new areas of the world via vectors moving to new regions as a result of climate change. Future generations are also going to experience increasingly extreme weather patterns as climate change is likely to affect the frequency and intensity of El Ni˝o / La Ni˝a leading to increased drought and flooding, and of course with sea level rises some regions [including parts of the US Eastern seaboard] will gradually disappear. Scientists have already detected warning signs of the collapse of the Gulf Stream which is one of the planet's main potential tipping points.



                          "It ain't necessarily so
                          The things that you're liable
                          To read in the Bible
                          It ain't necessarily so
                          ."

                          Sportin' Life
                          Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by seer View Post
                            the sky is falling....

                            Justice Kagan warns parts of East Coast could be 'swallowed by the ocean' in dissent in EPA case

                            EPA case decision comes as a major blow to the Biden admin's climate change agenda

                            https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics...ssent-epa-case
                            She said that as a negative thing???
                            "So when you actually get the virus, you're going to start producing antibodies against multiple pieces of the virus. So, your antibodies are probably better at that point than the vaccination."
                            - Pfizer Scientist Chris Croce

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
                              then record fires in the US south west
                              I'm sorry but there are not 'record fires in the US south west'.

                              Indeed, they are miniscule compared to the fires that occurred in the 1500s-1800s. We used to have 100s of millions of acres burning ANNUALLY, average of around 150 million per year. For comparison, our 'record fires' this year amount to a measley 3 million (1.5 million last year) acres burned thus far.

                              And most of the fire issues we have today are due to 'environmentalists' interfering with forest management and the long-time policy of suppression of all fires no matter if they threaten anyone or not, and even then we are not even close to those record fires before 1800s
                              Last edited by Gondwanaland; 06-30-2022, 10:55 PM.
                              "So when you actually get the virus, you're going to start producing antibodies against multiple pieces of the virus. So, your antibodies are probably better at that point than the vaccination."
                              - Pfizer Scientist Chris Croce

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

                                That this ruling is going to assist in exacerbating climate change.
                                Which is not relevant because it is not the sort of thing the Court is supposed to consider (at least from the perspective of judicial conservatism). Outcomes and their potential impacts should rank far below the question of whether the law or regulation being disputed is in keeping with the Constitution, if those outcomes and potential impacts are considered at all.
                                Geislerminian Antinomian Kenotic Charispneumaticostal Gender Mutualist-Egalitarian.

                                Beige Federalist.

                                Nationalist Christian.

                                "Everybody is somebody's heretic."

                                Social Justice is usually the opposite of actual justice.

                                Proud member of the LGBFJB community.

                                Would-be Grand Vizier of the Padishah Maxi-Super-Ultra-Hyper-Mega-MAGA King Trumpius Rex.

                                Justice for Ashli Babbitt!

                                Justice for Matthew Perna!

                                Arrest Ray Epps and his Fed bosses!

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by seanD, 08-14-2022, 12:30 AM
                                31 responses
                                245 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Sparko
                                by Sparko
                                 
                                Started by Thoughtful Monk, 08-12-2022, 12:39 PM
                                15 responses
                                131 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post Thoughtful Monk  
                                Started by Starlight, 08-11-2022, 01:26 AM
                                129 responses
                                774 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post Stoic
                                by Stoic
                                 
                                Started by Bill the Cat, 08-09-2022, 12:30 PM
                                52 responses
                                337 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Started by Sparko, 08-09-2022, 10:43 AM
                                22 responses
                                163 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Working...
                                X