RedEye9 wrote on Nov 18, 2023, 09:30:
Starship made it into space before it was terminated.

I liked this quote more:

“An incredibly successful day even though we did have a rapid, unscheduled disassembly of both the Super Heavy booster and the ship”

Starship made it into space before it was terminated.

the rocket's Super Heavy first stage booster, though it appeared to achieve a crucial maneuver to separate with its core stage, exploded over the Gulf of Mexico shortly after detaching.
Meanwhile, the core Starship booster carried further toward space, but roughly 10 minutes into the flight a company broadcaster said that SpaceX mission control suddenly lost contact with the vehicle.
"We have lost the data from the second stage... we think we may have lost the second stage," SpaceX's livestream host John Insprucker said.

MrCharm42 wrote on Nov 18, 2023, 06:39:
No. The US is part of the world, and the various statistics were readily at hand, so I used it as an example. Feel free to provide the statistics for say, Bangladesh or somewhere you think more relevant. In fact, you are reinforcing my point that the article appears to intentionally leave out useful context/scope. That's why I said it is poor journalism. I'm not saying the problems don't exist, or even that the stats provided aren't real, just not grounded properly.

This is similar to so many articles about guns in the US, where "annual gun deaths" are rolled out as a statistic to have a big number to scare people, and when you drill down into a particular topic (say murders by long rifles/guns), it's a small percentage of the overall number. Doesn't mean it isn't getting worse, and nothing should be done, but understanding the proportionality correctly leads to more sustainable (politically) solutions.

In the climate conversation, any realistic progress will rely on making mutually acceptable tradeoffs, not "final conquest over those ignorant fools on the other side".

click

No. The US is part of the world, and the various statistics were readily at hand, so I used it as an example. Feel free to provide the statistics for say, Bangladesh or somewhere you think more relevant. In fact, you are reinforcing my point that the article appears to intentionally leave out useful context/scope. That's why I said it is poor journalism. I'm not saying the problems don't exist, or even that the stats provided aren't real, just not grounded properly.

This is similar to so many articles about guns in the US, where "annual gun deaths" are rolled out as a statistic to have a big number to scare people, and when you drill down into a particular topic (say murders by long rifles/guns), it's a small percentage of the overall number. Doesn't mean it isn't getting worse, and nothing should be done, but understanding the proportionality correctly leads to more sustainable (politically) solutions.

In the climate conversation, any realistic progress will rely on making mutually acceptable tradeoffs, not "final conquest over those ignorant fools on the other side".

MrCharm42 wrote on Nov 17, 2023, 17:35:
I don't dismiss any of the points you've made. I think a decent article could be constructed from what you wrote, with some interesting facts to highlight it. My main complaint with the article is that obfuscation of the headline fact seems done to just drive unreasoning terror and not persuade anyone.

IMO, this is exactly how to grow the ranks of people that dismiss it all as hysteria.

Agreed.
Too little or distorted information.
The reality is that you can't get the truth to people that can't countenance it, and it's not even prudent, as you ruin their peace of mind.

You'll get avoidance, refusal (up to pushback or violence), anxiety, or stampeded cattle.
It's what it is, let us make the best of it for ourselves managing it with indifference or humor, even action for the brave.

MrCharm42 wrote on Nov 17, 2023, 17:35:
I don't dismiss any of the points you've made. I think a decent article could be constructed from what you wrote, with some interesting facts to highlight it. My main complaint with the article is that obfuscation of the headline fact seems done to just drive unreasoning terror and not persuade anyone.

IMO, this is exactly how to grow the ranks of people that dismiss it all as hysteria.

Man you said what I have been thinking for years now, but much better and more concisely.

I don't dismiss any of the points you've made. I think a decent article could be constructed from what you wrote, with some interesting facts to highlight it. My main complaint with the article is that obfuscation of the headline fact seems done to just drive unreasoning terror and not persuade anyone.

IMO, this is exactly how to grow the ranks of people that dismiss it all as hysteria.

Prez:
You're doing right for you, my friend, enjoy !

Thanks! You are totally doomed though.

All good Mr. Tact.
As you say, I could have made my intent clearer.
----
Prez:
You're doing right for you, my friend, enjoy !

WannaLogAlready wrote on Nov 16, 2023, 23:07:
Really Mr. Tact ?

Apologies if I overlooked some sarcasm. It happens.

Oh I know things aren't pretty. Forgive me if I sound callous, I just don't really care. All I can do I have done if for nothing else so as to not feeling guilty that I am making things worse. You guys can focus on how everything sucks all the time - not me. I was granted an extremely unlikely second chance and I am not going to waste it being a meme of the old mysterious guy in every horror movie who tells the people in the movie "You're all doomed!". 😁

MrCharm42 wrote on Nov 16, 2023, 21:45:
2 comments about the very poor journalism in the "Extreme Heat" article:

Did you notice they didn't state how many people actually died? They talked a great deal about 85% this, and 5x that, 370% increase and 520 million more under threat, but didn't actually state a number? Is it 100k, 1 million more? 500 million?

From this website, it was 1650 heat deaths in the US last year. So 5x=8250. Last year 3.27 million Americans died from all causes.

Also, according to this website, the world population between now and 2050 will increase by 2 billion. So, not quite an existential threat to the human race.

So you read an article from France24 and assumed it was just about the US?

Prez wrote on Nov 17, 2023, 05:38:
That's why I love this site. Everyone is a bundle of fuckin' joy! So much optimism and hope for the future! It's really heartwarming.

There are three kinds of people in any emergency situation. Those who freak the fuck out, and I generally find those people to be useless. Those who immediately perform a craniorectal inversion and start gibbering about things like "hope" and "someone else will fix this" while denying the reality staring them in the face. Those that set their jaw and start working the problem because they're disinclined to do anything but deal with the situation as presented.

The human race is in for a reckoning of our own making. We industrialized at a rapid pace with the only concerns being profit, convenience, and comfort. We've polluted our waters, both fresh and salt alike, polluted our land, stripped that land of every conceivable resource, and then ignored the fact that we were destroying the balance that was necessary to sustain both nature and life. We've known global warming has been a problem since the 70s. We ignored it because it was inconvenient to do anything about it.

A few months ago in an OotB comment section, I mentioned how even my own mother was noticing the sudden lack of biodiversity this year. The green anoles, for example, have practically disappeared and they used to be everywhere. If it weren't for the fact that my sage bushes have flowered multiple times this year (which is not a good thing by the way since they only bloom when in severe distress) which drew pollinators in large numbers, my garden would have been a total shitshow. Lots of gardeners in central Texas this year were complaining about the meager yields due to the dearth of pollinators and excessive, sustained heat. Some became super proactive and were able to maintain yields but it took a ton more effort than it did previously. We went months and months without rain and then got inundated with so much that those of us that harvest rain water couldn't collect and use it efficiently. There are people who like to say "Hurrr...you live in Texas, it never rains there!" Yeah, that's west, northwest, and to a lesser degree north Texas. Central, east, and southeast Texas are typically much wetter. When I was a kid, we would get a little bit of rain almost every week throughout the summer. It would rain like Hell for about fifteen minutes and then be done. That doesn't happen anymore. It gets hot, gets hotter still, stays that way and the ground dries out. Hell, I even mentioned the fissure that had appeared in my backyard that was a mini chasm from the earth being so dry that it was physically shrinking and pulling apart. I have never seen that happen before where I live.

I would say that it is reasonable and logical to acknowledge "Yep, we're fucked" when you're seeing an unmitigated disaster unfolding with your own eyes.

That's why I love this site. Everyone is a bundle of fuckin' joy! So much optimism and hope for the future! It's really heartwarming.

MrCharm42 wrote on Nov 16, 2023, 21:45:
2 comments about the very poor journalism in the "Extreme Heat" article:

Did you notice they didn't state how many people actually died? They talked a great deal about 85% this, and 5x that, 370% increase and 520 million more under threat, but didn't actually state a number? Is it 100k, 1 million more? 500 million?
From this website, it was 1650 heat deaths in the US last year. So 5x=8250. Last year 3.27 million Americans died from all causes.
Also, according to this website, the world population between now and 2050 will increase by 2 billion. So, not quite an existential threat to the human race.

Please, read this as apocalyptic science fiction:

Oh, never fear, heat *will* kill hundreds of millions, sideways:

- Rapidly disappearing fresh water sources (glaciers, drying rivers, lakes, underground).
- Droughts, wildfire, failing crops, will bring increased food costs and scarcity up to famine and inflation -already is a worldwide phenomenon-.
- Dying insectile, avian, and any animals, so many invaluable pollinators.
- Invasive species from hotter climates (from piles of decomposing algae to destructive fishes and insects).
-Wars for remaning water and productive land, that will be both more economically critical than oil. Eventually, but surely.
- Raising oceans levels, some coast will be gone (Florida for example), archipelagos, and even whole countries (Asia).
No embankments, levees or seawalls high enough.
- Even now, ocean water floods brought by hurricans are polluting fresh underground water in the USA.
- Heat implies more climatic chaos: fiercer and farther reaching winter weather as we began to see this last years, will worsen to new records.
- Brazil, not even summer there, registered thermic sensations of 137 F (58 C) at Rio de Janeiro these past days.
It's the beginning.
Sea water can't refresh you if it is as warm as your blood, you'll have a heat stroke at the beach nevertheless.
Read about hundreds of dolphins dead and high mortality of fishes ?
Mammals for the heat, and fishes because oxygen content decreases in too hot water to insufficient levels for their gills.
Extrapolate this in time to less coastal fishing produce.

And then the meteorite will hit.

This comment was edited on Nov 17, 2023, 06:10.

Really Mr. Tact ?

jdreyer, allow me to use your very apt recent answer:
"C'mon man, your reading comprehension is better than that. "
----

2 comments about the very poor journalism in the "Extreme Heat" article:

Did you notice they didn't state how many people actually died? They talked a great deal about 85% this, and 5x that, 370% increase and 520 million more under threat, but didn't actually state a number? Is it 100k, 1 million more? 500 million?

From this website, it was 1650 heat deaths in the US last year. So 5x=8250. Last year 3.27 million Americans died from all causes.

Also, according to this website, the world population between now and 2050 will increase by 2 billion. So, not quite an existential threat to the human race.

Mr. Tact wrote on Nov 16, 2023, 19:52:

WannaLogAlready wrote on Nov 16, 2023, 18:42:
"Extreme heat will likely kill nearly five times more people by 2050."
Not that many, some will be drowned by hurricans, floods and submerged coastal low lands by then.

Err... all of which will have at a minimum, been made worse by the heat, if not caused by it.

You guys just don't know anything. All of the megacorps say they will be carbon neutral by 2050. Of course they wouldn't lie or redefine the term just for their own benefit.

WannaLogAlready wrote on Nov 16, 2023, 18:42:
"Extreme heat will likely kill nearly five times more people by 2050."
Not that many, some will be drowned by hurricans, floods and submerged coastal low lands by then.

Err... all of which will have at a minimum, been made worse by the heat, if not caused by it.

Cameron is an unrecognized (sufficiently) genius.
The Abyss is a lovely film with superb acting and action, will enjoy seeing Cameron's full realization.
-----
"Universe is expanding faster than theory predicts"
And ?, known fact that stars enjoy travelling.
-----
"Extreme heat will likely kill nearly five times more people by 2050."
Not that many, some will be drowned by hurricans, floods and submerged coastal low lands by then.