I wouldn't be surprised if large parts of Australia will become inhabitable in the near future.
I'm pretty confident that the word you were supposed to have written there is "uninhabitable".
I wouldn't be surprised if large parts of Australia will become inhabitable in the near future.
Crni Vuk posts never fail to lighten up my day.Record for the highest ever measured temperatures in Germany since the start of measuring temperatures in 1800 or so, has been breached like 3 times in the past 1 or 2 days.
Climate change is not real guys. We and we have nothing to worry about.
Just a reminder.
Yeah, and it's weird because no party/politician around here ever wants to appease or be associated with the Greens. In fact the Greens have such a bad fabricated reputation that some people call them terrorists.https://www.smh.com.au/environment/green-ideas-must-take-blame-for-deaths-20090211-84mk.html
Haha, they've been playing the same blame-game even back in 2009.
This is already the case, smart human friend. You should study Australia for a minute or two and see where 99% of the people there live. They live there because the rest of the place is actually pretty darn uninhabitable.I wouldn't be surprised if large parts of Australia will become uninhabitable in the near future.
Do you mean there will be places where there will be days when it's -10°C in winter and days of +40°C during Summer? 'Cause that's nothing new, mate, and people have managed just fine. Harsh winters and exquisite summers have always existed, way before people thought airconditioning (which is so fucking bad for the environment, by the way) was a good idea.Crni Vuk said:Certain areas in the world will see periods where the temperature could rise as far like 50 degrees. That's simply to hot for the human body to regulate them self and without any kind of air-conditioning available all you can do is move into areas where the temperatures are lower.
No, no, no, what's becoming more and more obvious at this point is that 8 billion people is waaaaaaaaaaaaaay too much. And if there is anything we do need it is a serious humanitarian crisis. We need less people so there are less cars and less aircos and less smartphones and less cheap shoes and less cheap clothes and less pointless plastic garbage and less of everything, and since no one on this planet seems to have the intelligence and guts to do something radical about that problem, like a worldwide 1-child policy for a full century (oh, the inhumanity of the idea!) the planet will do it for us.It becomes more and more obvious at this point that we have to think about resettlement programs for millions of people which will be forced to move out of their areas in the next decades. Something we would actually have to start planning and executing now if we want to avoid some serious humanitarian crisis in the near future.
This is already the case, smart human friend. You should study Australia for a minute or two and see where 99% of the people there live. They live there because the rest of the place is actually pretty darn uninhabitable.
And I am talking about the places that ARE still habitable.This is already the case, smart human friend. You should study Australia for a minute or two and see where 99% of the people there live. They live there because the rest of the place is actually pretty darn uninhabitable.
Yeah ... about that. But how exactly do you think that this will play out? The thing is that people are not the kind of creature that sits iddle as they well ... die. Or are close to death. And if the last refugee and migrant crisis has shown one thing. We are much vulnerable than we think. Politically and socially. And I do not mean right now in the sense that we have to help them all. I am talking about the stability of our societies. This will have severe effects on you as well one way or another. Even a mild winter as you put it can be an issue if the energy demands our society has are not meet. We do have very sophisticated societies but to function properly certain conditions have to be meet. A steady supply of energy is one. A working infrastructure another. A lot of things are working here in the background that we simply take for granted. But when you look at it in detail they can be pretty easily disrupted. But I doubt that I am telling you anything new here.No, no, no, what's becoming more and more obvious at this point is that 8 billion people is waaaaaaaaaaaaaay too much. And if there is anything we do need it is a serious humanitarian crisis. We need less people so there are less cars and less aircos and less smartphones and less cheap shoes and less cheap clothes and less pointless plastic garbage and less of everything, and since no one on this planet seems to have the intelligence and guts to do something radical about that problem, like a worldwide 1-child policy for a full century (oh, the inhumanity of the idea!) the planet will do it for us.
Actually no we don't because insects are pretty much the foundation of any eco system serving not only as the sustenance for a lot of animals but also because insects help in decomposing with a large number of biomass.Oh yeah, I totally forgot about rats and cockroaches. We don't want those to go extinct any time soon.
Yeah it's simply staggering when you think about some numbers. The minimum are 500 Million animals. Some sources though claim that it could be up to 1 Billion animals. This is insane.Don't forget other life forms aside from humans. The ecological damage is out of proportions after all.
Stop it white people, please. we got to save the earth, it is dying and on fire and really angry. Eat the bugs, don't drive cars. WHITE PEOPLE PLEASE STOP! STOP DRIVING CARS! STOP IT! WHY WON'T YOU STOP? DO YOU HATE THE EARTH? WHITE PEOPLE NO, PUT DOWN THE CELLPHONE NOOOOOO!Touche.
But more ppl need more cheap power. Which nations got most ppl again? Same ppl who also use cell phoes? But yea, it is the wests fault.
Touche.
But more ppl need more cheap power. Which nations got most ppl again? Same ppl who also use cell phoes? But yea, it is the wests fault.
No-perfect-solution fallacy? Another advantage we have here is that those areas do not have the same kind of energy demand as we do. We are talking about rather rural and undeveloped areas anyway. I have read somewhere that the main energy source in most African communities for example is still a stove. Most of them run on wood. What we have to look for are low tech ideas to solve those issues. We do not always need extremely sophisticated technologies to solve issues here. In fact they can often be counterproductive because people lack the education to actually operate said technologies.There is no such thing as completely consequence free energy. Wind and water still effects nature and doesn't provide enough. Hence, we need to stop IMPREGNATING our females.
Something that's actually a lot more effective in "birth control" is to educate women and stabile income.Those governments need to do what the chinese did. 1 child policy. If your poor, limit yourself to 1 maybe 2 kids at most.
There is no such thing as completely consequence free energy. Wind and water still effects nature and doesn't provide enough. Hence, we need to stop IMPREGNATING our females.