Fishing is immoral
Really, the only people fighting against the bots are those who have something to lose.
Democrats: SAVE THE FISHES!! !
Republicans: SAVE THE FISHING INDUSTRY! FISH, baby, FISH!
If the fish are gone, then there will be no more fishing industry.
same with coal and the coal industry!
_________________
My god. jelly donuts are so scary.
AngelRho
Veteran
Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,366
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile
It’ll never come to that, though. Worst case scenario: Human industrialists destroy the environment and trigger Armageddon. Whoever is left is forced to adapt to a world without the offending means of production. The planet will eventually repair itself and support a growing human population.
The coming environmental cataclysm and the end of fossil fuels has been predicted for many decades if not over a century by now. The plain fact is it’s not nearly as bad as activists made it out to be. The ice caps haven’t melted. It still snows. And there’s plenty of oil and coal to be had.
And plenty of fish.
I think it will take time to move past fossil fuels for energy. I don’t think we will be pushed to the brink of running out of oil, though. Sooner or later there will be a SpaceX moment where someone independently cracks the code on a better energy source and a better engine and independently makes fossil fuels and internal combustion engines obsolete. It could happen tomorrow. But there are too many people out there who stake their entire lives on these industries. As long as they maintain their hold on power, we’re stuck with what we have.
Not necessarily. Humans may go extinct, like the dinosaurs. Cockroaches will outlive us.
Not yet, but they're going.
Not as much as it used to.
That's the problem.
https://www.edf.org/oceans/overfishing- ... 0discarded.
_________________
May you be blessed by YHWH and his Asherah
AngelRho
Veteran
Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,366
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile
Not necessarily. Humans may go extinct, like the dinosaurs.
Highly unlikely.
Well…maybe a certain TYPE of human will go extinct. That’s just plain evolution. I think a merging of human intelligence with AI is more likely. If anything, our existence may eventually become more transcendent.
The coming environmental cataclysm and the end of fossil fuels has been predicted for many decades if not over a century by now. The plain fact is it’s not nearly as bad as activists made it out to be. The ice caps haven’t melted. It still snows. And there’s plenty of oil and coal to be had.
Serious global warming scientists do not say the world will end in 2000. The prediction is that around 2040 the temperature trends will become unsalvagable - not that the world will end. The world will end later than 2040 if the temperatures follow the trends.
Not necessarily. Humans may go extinct, like the dinosaurs.
Highly unlikely.
Well…maybe a certain TYPE of human will go extinct. That’s just plain evolution. I think a merging of human intelligence with AI is more likely. If anything, our existence may eventually become more transcendent.
Suppose another big asteroid hits the planet?
_________________
May you be blessed by YHWH and his Asherah
kokopelli
Veteran
Joined: 27 Nov 2017
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,657
Location: amid the sunlight and the dust and the wind
The coming environmental cataclysm and the end of fossil fuels has been predicted for many decades if not over a century by now. The plain fact is it’s not nearly as bad as activists made it out to be. The ice caps haven’t melted. It still snows. And there’s plenty of oil and coal to be had.
Serious global warming scientists do not say the world will end in 2000. The prediction is that around 2040 the temperature trends will become unsalvagable - not that the world will end. The world will end later than 2040 if the temperatures follow the trends.
I understand that real climate scientists agree that global warming will bring benefits for decades to come. There is a difference of opinion of how long, but the figures I've seen were all well past 2040. It is quite possible (perhaps probable) that the overall results will be beneficial for hundreds or thousands of years.
Of course, Climate Alarmists want to make it seem like the sky is falling.
What you must understand is that there is not enough free carbon in the world that is available to enter the atmosphere to cause any kind of runaway warming. Over the past several million years, the planet has been sequestering carbon and making it less available to the atmosphere. This is quite dangerous if it keeps up.
We are in an interglacial warm period in our current ice age right now. Ten thousand years ago, it was two or three degrees warmer than today. Was that a catastrophe? Not hardly. That warmer period enabled mankind to switch from a nomadic subsistence hunting species into an agricultural species. That warmer period enabled the very civilization that we have today. Without that warmer period, it would have been much more difficult to form our civilizations that have led us to today.
There is nothing to panic about.
There is nothing to panic about.
Depends on where you live. Where I am, winters are a LOT milder than they used to be. We get a few more hot days in summer. It used to be that very few homes had air conditioning. Now, most of us do. No more ice fishing on the bay.
Within a few decades, my area will be among the best places to live in the United States (climate-wise), while the rest of you lot will be desperate climate refugees.
_________________
May you be blessed by YHWH and his Asherah
kokopelli
Veteran
Joined: 27 Nov 2017
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,657
Location: amid the sunlight and the dust and the wind
There is nothing to panic about.
Depends on where you live. Where I am, winters are a LOT milder than they used to be. We get a few more hot days in summer. It used to be that very few homes had air conditioning. Now, most of us do. No more ice fishing on the bay.
Within a few decades, my area will be among the best places to live in the United States (climate-wise), while the rest of you lot will be desperate climate refugees.
Please tell me how the people of 10,000 years ago survived when it was hotter than now.
They not only survived, but they thrived and started building the foundations of the civilization that we enjoy today.
The climate now is changing faster than ever--at least since humans have been on the planet.
https://www.ipcc.ch/2021/08/09/ar6-wg1-20210809-pr/
According to this chart
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleoclim ... otemps.svg
for the past 10,000 years, temperatures have been stable, but are projected to increase dramatically during this century.
_________________
May you be blessed by YHWH and his Asherah
kokopelli
Veteran
Joined: 27 Nov 2017
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,657
Location: amid the sunlight and the dust and the wind
https://www.ipcc.ch/2021/08/09/ar6-wg1-20210809-pr/
According to this chart
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleoclim ... otemps.svg
for the past 10,000 years, temperatures have been stable, but are projected to increase dramatically during this century.
Humans were on the planet during the Younger Dryas. The change then was unbelievably fast -- up to something like 10 C average temperature drop in just a few decades, possibly one or two decades.
If that happened today, starvation would become the new normal. It is hard to predict whether more people would be dying from starvation or in the wars that would be fought to try to secure the quickly dwindling resources.
They not only survived, but they thrived and started building the foundations of the civilization that we enjoy today.
It's not simply a question of 'can people withstand the temperature increase'.
The current food source infrastructure is huge, practically planet-covering, and is heavily dependent on a stable climate - wheat fields, palm oil plantations, livestock grazing etc.
If those can't be sustained or an alternative rapidly found we are in deep doo-doo.
_________________
Giraffe: a ruminant with a view.
Mormon Church gives water to boost imperiled Great Salt Lake
https://apnews.com/article/mormon-churc ... ubscribers
...He said that the church was grateful for the wet winter — but unsurprised given the power of prayer — and urged members of the faith to conserve water and to not let the season’s plentiful snowpack go to waste...
...Church officials announced earlier this week that they planned to donate roughly 20,000 acre-feet of water rights to the Great Salt Lake, which has shrunk to its lowest levels ever due to a supply-demand imbalance caused by decadeslong regional drought. The church has at least 75,000 acre-feet of active water rights, the Salt Lake Tribune reported in February.
The church’s donation is roughly the size of a small reservoir and about 2% of what’s needed to keep the lake at its current level, according to research from a group of scientists led by Brigham Young University Ecologist Ben Abbott.
“It’s a drop in the bucket on one level, but it’s also a big drop,” Abbott said of the church’s donation...
_________________
May you be blessed by YHWH and his Asherah
kokopelli
Veteran
Joined: 27 Nov 2017
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,657
Location: amid the sunlight and the dust and the wind
They not only survived, but they thrived and started building the foundations of the civilization that we enjoy today.
It's not simply a question of 'can people withstand the temperature increase'.
The current food source infrastructure is huge, practically planet-covering, and is heavily dependent on a stable climate - wheat fields, palm oil plantations, livestock grazing etc.
If those can't be sustained or an alternative rapidly found we are in deep doo-doo.
Agricultural production was much smaller then, but because they didn't have thousands of years of selective pressure to increase crop yields, not because of warming.
The fact is that a warmer planet is a more productive planet.
Greenhouse owners know the value of both CO2 and warmth in increasing their yields. CO2 is so beneficial to crop yields that it is worthwhile for many of them to pump extra CO2 into the greenhouses.
Warming is not the danger. The danger is when this interglacial warm period comes to an end and the climate starts cooling off. This cool-off might be very abrupt. When that happens, expect crop yields and available food supplies to plummet.
It doesn't matter if humans "deserve" obliteration or not. Resist sisphyus. Not going back to the stone ages. I read a story about a bear brutally knawing on someone's leg and then the guy slashed up the bear and the bear ran away and pee'd and pooped himself. Those are the barbaric norms of the stone ages. If humans go extinct you will have to wait millions of years through the savage ages to re-evolve again.
ChatGPT can be very intelligent at times. But they are nowhere near ready to replace the human brain.
Enter merged human/AI consciousness. Rapid decision-making made based on objective data and pure logic. Emotions driven by achieving the best outcomes for the individual. Avoiding problems before they happen because we know our individual self-interest is best served when the needs of other individuals are met. Increased individual freedom because of enhanced problem solving rather playing second fiddle to corrupt politics.
Really, the only people fighting against the bots are those who have something to lose.
Yeah not happening anytime soon. Clownmusk isn't going to link you to the machine matrix and the programmers barely even knows how ChatGPT even works.
More importantly, they have no idea how a soul works or human emotions, so there's no quality of life guarantee for Ai sentience. And that could even be a good thing to keep hidden if there are malware programmers or greedy oligarchs.