The Anthropocene

[elektra]

Shakes head.

That is it, I quote crick's links, I comment on crick's links, I show how the links are pure propaganda, and crick can do nothing, obviously crick knows nothing other than a google search of crick's opinion.

Wind and Solar are destroying the Earth, increasing the use of Oil and Coal, increasing the CO2 in the atmosphere, and crick has no response when crick's links, prove what I state.

Thank you crick, for proving what I state is fact.

 

[Crick]

That is it, I quote crick's links, I comment on crick's links, I show how the links are pure propaganda, and crick can do nothing, obviously crick knows nothing other than a google search of crick's opinion.

Wind and Solar are destroying the Earth, increasing the use of Oil and Coal, increasing the CO2 in the atmosphere, and crick has no response when crick's links, prove what I state.

Thank you crick, for proving what I state is fact.

Face palm... Shakes head... Leaves room.

 

[elektra]

Face palm... Shakes head... Leaves room.

Crick posted 5 links, did not quote one, did not comment on one,

I separated the links and addressed each, five separate comments, with quotes from Crick's links.

Crick is walking away from his/her own links. Unable to provide an answer as to why the links present lies.

 

[Crick]

Crick posted 5 links, did not quote one, did not comment on one,

I separated the links and addressed each, five separate comments, with quotes from Crick's links.

Crick is walking away from his/her own links. Unable to provide an answer as to why the links present lies.

I say this with good intentions. Are you old enough that dementia or Alzheimers is a possibility? Because compared to the arguments we have had in years past, your performance in this one doesn't show a lot of mental acuity. You saying my links are presenting lies is not evidence that they are presenting lies. And you seem to be unaware of that fact.

 

[toobfreak]

I'll say it again:

All of the eons, eras, periods, epochs and ages in the stratigraphic record of Earth history were CREATED by mankind to label boundary EVENTS, not fixed upon the presence of actions of any given SPECIES.

Until the anthropocene came along. That differs in that it is a label unlike all other epochs and ages to label the appearance of mankind BY mankind as an EXTERNAL modulus which is acting detrimentally on the Earth rather than just one more event in the ever-changing face of the Earth.

• No one minded when gases in the atmosphere combined with rock to give us the first ice age which caused the first great mass extinction of anaerobic life planet-wide giving way to aerobic life because without it, we wouldn't even be here! These were just natural events, not some evil attack by aerobic life!
• No one minded when deciduous trees and flowering plants replaced ferns and lichen as the primary groundcover because they gave rise to new foodstuffs supporting greater biodiversity! These were just more natural events!
• But then the anthropocene was created as a way of labeling humanity an an EXTERNAL force acting AGAINST the planet, not as a natural event, but as a detrimental one, even though it is just a repeat of what has been going on for four billion years because those creating the anthropocene don't see the rise of textiles, agriculture and energy mining as /natural/ things necessary to the natural survival of Homo created by his natural talents, but as a DESTRUCTIVE one because they place far higher value on PRESERVING the Earth as it was 200 or 2000 years ago rather than seeing mankind into the future, so, have identified it as something to be CONTROLLED and MANAGED.

Lucky for them, this gives great job security and work for them as well as wealth and power in being the newly self-established benefactors /managing/ humanity. Funny how ten billion billion lesser species than us all managed to get by for 4 billion years with no one to manage them, until mankind came along, the most intelligent, creative and resourceful species yet, somehow just can't get by without being "managed, limited and controlled."

You know--- for the "good" of the planet as if it and us were two separate things.

 

[elektra]

I say this with good intentions. Are you old enough that dementia or Alzheimers is a possibility? Because compared to the arguments we have had in years past, your performance in this one doesn't show a lot of mental acuity. You saying my links are presenting lies is not evidence that they are presenting lies. And you seem to be unaware of that fact.

You are still not able to address what I pointed out.

Crick, you presented 6 links, no comment of what the link was stating, no quote from the link.

I separated my comments and quotes into 5 different replies so you could address each one individually.

You have not responded to one.

Crick's reply is to attack me personally and not address the lies in the links.

Crick, links from Google, without quoting and commenting, and then failing to reply to questions and comments with quotes from the links, According to crick, shows I ain't all there?

Crick, you never ever were able to successfully prove anything is fact that you have posted, technically I need to say, what crick linked to.

 

[elektra]

We are part of nature, and we are changing the planet. For the better or worse depends on the species. Why deny that humanity is having a tremendous impact on the Earth? It just is.

You are right, cutting down the rain forest for the balsa wood to build wind turbines, that are the worst producers of electricity destroys the earth.

I would say it is the inhumanity of those that are getting rich building wind turbines with our tax dollars, that is destroying the earth.

You are so right, coyote

 

[toobfreak]

to build wind turbines, that are the worst producers of electricity destroys the earth.

Ever notice that most every photo of a wind farm shows the blades standing still just sitting there not even spinning?!

 

[elektra]

How Green Is Wind Power, Really? A New Report Tallies Up The Carbon Cost Of Renewables

Building and erecting wind turbines requires hundreds of tons of materials — steel, concrete, fiberglass, copper, and more exotic stuff like neodymium and dysprosium used in permanent magnets.

www.forbes.com

In this link from Forbes, it clearly states it takes hundreds of tons of materials to build wind turbines?

Last I checked, the concrete in the base weighs over a 1,000 tons. The rebar in the base weighs another thousand tons.

There is no way it takes so little material to build one wind turbine let alone the 200,000 wind turbines that have been built and installed in the USA.

It is more accurate to state billions of tons of material has been used by heavy industry to manufacture hundreds of thousands of wind turbines.

200,000 installed in the USA. People like to pretend these last forever, they don't. Today there is only 75,000. The first generation of wind turbines were scrapped 20 years ago. 2nd generation were broke and replaced as well. We are on the 3rd and 4th generation, maybe 5th?

Hundreds of tons? Billions of tons is more accurate. By morning there will be more built. So my number will have to grow.

By the time crick replies, if we don't hear crickets, over a million tons of CO2 will pollute our atmosphere from the renewable, clean, green, sustainable, alternative, wind turbine's heavy industry manufacturing all night long.

 

[westwall]

Geologic Eras are vast stretches of time, almost inconceivable to our brief life spans. There is something strange about being at the beginning of what is likely a new era,and being of the species that defines it

Canada’s Crawford Lake could mark the beginning of the Anthropocene

The mud of a Canadian lake holds an extremely precise record of humans’ influence on Earth. But the Anthropocene isn’t an official geologic epoch yet.

www.sciencenews.org

…Still, attempting to define the Anthropocene in geologic terms underscores humanity’s rapid and intense impact on the planet, Turner says. “We’ve become a geological force.”

It's a load of politically driven BS. There is no difference between now and any of the rest of the Holocene.

 

[elektra]

Ever notice that most every photo of a wind farm shows the blades standing still just sitting there not even spinning?!

It is because good photographers take the pics when the light is best, morning and evening, when there is almost always, no wind.

 

[westwall]

We are part of nature, and we are changing the planet. For the better or worse depends on the species. Why deny that humanity is having a tremendous impact on the Earth? It just is.

Yeah, very small parts of it. A single large volcano has more impact than anything man has done over the last 100 years.

 

[elektra]

Yeah, very small parts of it. A single large volcano has more impact than anything man has done over the last 100 years.

If we use coyotes argument, wind turbines and solar panels are destroying the world. There is no heavy industry as large as the wind and solar heavy industry.

Being inefficient, intermitten, and expensive the impact coyote speaks of is wind and solar "energy", the largest heavy polluting industry in the world.

 

[toobfreak]

It is because good photographers take the pics when the light is best, morning and evening, when there is almost always, no wind.

No. There are tons of midday photos. I actually sought out mostly early and late day pictures only because the light was dimmer forcing the photographer to use longer exposures so no one could claim it was just freeze action.

And in windy places like that chosen for wind farms, wind does not discriminate by time of day. If it did, even there, that would just be an even bigger argument against the efficacy of wind energy.

 

[Crick]

Yeah, very small parts of it. A single large volcano has more impact than anything man has done over the last 100 years.

HAHAHAHAaaaa.... Did you get that from Twitter or Facebook?

Human activities emit 60 or more times the amount of carbon dioxide released by volcanoes each year. Large, violent eruptions may match the rate of human emissions for the few hours that they last, but they are too rare and fleeting to rival humanity’s annual emissions. In fact, several individual U.S. states emit more carbon dioxide in a year than all the volcanoes on the planet combined do.

Which emits more carbon dioxide: volcanoes or human activities?

Human activities emit 60 or more times the amount of carbon dioxide released by volcanoes each year.

www.climate.gov

Which emits more carbon dioxide (CO2): Earth’s volcanoes or human activities? Research findings indicate unequivocally that the answer to this frequently asked question is human activities. However, most people, including some Earth scientists working in fields outside volcanology, are surprised by this answer. The climate change debate has revived and reinforced the belief, widespread among climate skeptics, that volcanoes emit more CO2 than human activities [Gerlach, 2010; Plimer, 2009]. In fact, present- day volcanoes emit relatively modest amounts of CO2, about as much annually as states like Florida, Michigan, and Ohio.

https://volcanoes.usgs.gov/vsc/file_mngr/file-154/Gerlach-2011-EOS_AGU.pdf

“Just a reminder that a volcano in Greece has put more CO2 in the atmosphere in 24 hours than humans have In our entire existence,” one Twitter user wrote on Jan. 11. The tweet was shared more than 23,000 times and received more than 81,000 likes.
But the claim is baseless, according to experts. While volcanoes do release some CO2 into the atmosphere, those emissions are dwarfed by emissions from human activity.
“There is no truth to that,” said Tobias Fischer, a volcanologist at the University of New Mexico. “If you take all the emissions that all volcanoes together produce in a given year, it’s much smaller than what humans emit in a given year. And that’s been shown many times.”
Fischer added that Greece is not a very active volcanic region and that experts would certainly be aware of a single volcano that emits more CO2 than human activity.
“It makes no sense,” he said of the online claims.
Similar claims about volcanoes have circulated in the past, and have been addressed by several scientific government agencies.

Humans emit more CO2 than volcanoes

False. Human activity produces far more CO2 than volcanoes, experts told The Associated Press, and overwhelming scientific evidence shows that climate change is caused by human behavior.

apnews.com

 

[toobfreak]

Human activities emit 60 or more times the amount of carbon dioxide released by volcanoes each year. Large, violent eruptions may match the rate of human emissions for the few hours that they last, but they are too rare and fleeting

Hey Crock, did I just hear you claim that human activity equals a volcano erupting around the clock 24 hours a day? Do you realize there is an average of about 20 volcanoes erupting on the planet at any given time? And one major eruption can cool the planet in days. And you think human output equals 60X that?

If that were true fool, no one on Earth would ever see the Sun we would be so fogged out in a blanket of black human smog!

But the answer is simple: if you democrats believe that crap, your path is clear: all you need to do to save the world is JUMP INTO A VOLCANO. About 4 billion fewer of you idiots should be just about right to solve the pollution/overcrowding/climate/carbon problem for the rest of humanity, then the rest of us can lead normal lives again.

 

[Crick]

Hey Crock, did I just hear you claim that human activity equals a volcano erupting around the clock 24 hours a day?

No. I've never said any such thing.

Do you realize there is an average of about 20 volcanoes erupting on the planet at any given time? And one major eruption can cool the planet in days. And you think human output equals 60X that?

That is what the actual experts tell us. Who tells you anything different?

If that were true fool, no one on Earth would ever see the Sun we would be so fogged out in a blanket of black human smog!

The comparison is solely regards CO2, fool.

But the answer is simple: if you democrats believe that crap, your path is clear: all you need to do to save the world is JUMP INTO A VOLCANO. About 4 billion fewer of you idiots should be just about right to solve the pollution/overcrowding/climate/carbon problem for the rest of humanity, then the rest of us can lead normal lives again.

ANOTHER denier death wish. My collection grows large.

 

[toobfreak]

No. I've never said any such thing.

Sure you did. You said an eruption of a few hours equals human activity and with 20 active volcanoes in the world, that gives pretty much an eruption equal to human activity then around the clock.

That is what the actual experts tell us. Who tells you anything different?

Actual experts. And I'm not exactly totally ignorant of volcanism myself.

The comparison is solely regards CO2, fool.

Could have fooled me. I guess you need to shape the argument so your data fits the desired outcome.

 

[Crick]

Sure you did. You said an eruption of a few hours equals human activity and with 20 active volcanoes in the world, that gives pretty much an eruption equal to human activity then around the clock.

You don't get to paraphrase me and then say that's what I said, asshole.

Actual experts. And I'm not exactly totally ignorant of volcanism myself.

If you think they produce more CO2 than humans, then you are ignorant of the topic.

Could have fooled me. I guess you need to shape the argument so your data fits the desired outcome.

Or you could have just read and comprehended ALL the prior discussion.

 

[toobfreak]

You don't get to paraphrase me and then say that's what I said

Apparently I understand you better than you do yourself. Sorry if you didn't know that what you said implied what I told you.

asshole.

Need help finding one? Look in a mirror.

If you think they produce more CO2 than humans, then you are ignorant of the topic.

If only half of all CO2 is produced by natural volcanism, that kills your whole MMCC/ACC theory!