Two boys die in "ebike" accident: Cardiff riot broke out after 'police prevented parents seeing fatal crash victims', close relative says

[Deleted member 16246]

But giving Mars an atmosphere and populating it with enough human diversity to ensure continuance is another matter entirely.
.

I'm amused at the idea of 'terraforming Mars'... In two hundred and fifty years we managed on this very hospitable planet to increase co2 in the atmosphere from about 1 in 4000 molecules of the atmosphere to 1 in 2000 (aprox figures). But there are people who suggest that we can make a habitable atmosphere on a planet which has 2% of the atmosphere that we have and somehow acquire the water we would need to live which was all lost to space over billions of years since 4 billion years ago.

They also seem to forget that all the time they are trying to do this half way across the solar system and all the earth's population support and technology, the cause of Mars' dry desert, and super cold modern environment is busily undoing their work. Mars did not become what it is for no reason and the reason is still active. It lost its one time habitable environment because the solar wind stripped it away when the planet's magnetic field stopped working. That happened because being much smaller than earth, Mars' interior cooled down and solidified. These fantasists think they can overcome planetary dynamics and the power of the colossal star in the middle of the solar system. Such idiocy is hard to fathom in my view.

 

[saneagle]

Are you guys saying that real men actually landed on the moon?

 

[Woosh]

These fantasists think they can overcome planetary dynamics and the power of the colossal star in the middle of the solar system. Such idiocy is hard to fathom in my view.

We don't need to colonise Mars for living space, at least for the short term.
The idea is to advance our understanding and science.
AI is going to put a lot of humans out of work, the pressure is then on to reduce the over population and the need to grow food will be vastly reduced. We'll stop burning fossil fuels well before we run out of oil and gas.

 

[Deleted member 16246]

We already have nuclear fusion and essentially unlimited energy. It exists today, 93 million miles away and right now (14.58 on 5th June, the UK is getting 27.5% of its electrical power from it. Solar energy.

In fact we are getting 100% of our energy from it in the form of fossilised solar energy from ancient plants and animals that was laid down in the past under the ground and under shallow seas.

We also get all of our own animal energy from it in our food.

There are readily available technologies to extract and store solar energy on a huge scale if we had the gumption to do it. A tiny fraction of the Sahara desert set up with either photovoltaic or concentrated solar thermal power plant would supply the entire planet with more energy than it could feasibly use. We already have mature technologies for doing this, but we lack the will to do it at scale.

New Concentrating Solar Tower Is Worth Its Salt with 24/7 Power

A California firm is converting sunlight to heat and storing it in molten salt so it can supply electricity when the wind is calm or the sun isn’t shining

www.scientificamerican.com

 

[AndyBike]

Are you guys saying that real men actually landed on the moon?

When they finally do trips to the moon. The best thing you could do is die there. Forget neil whatsname. First guy(or gal) to pop their clogs on it will be remembered for just that.

 

[flecc]

We don't need to colonise Mars for living space, at least for the short term.
The idea is to advance our understanding and science.
AI is going to put a lot of humans out of work, the pressure is then on to reduce the over population and the need to grow food will be vastly reduced. We'll stop burning fossil fuels well before we run out of oil and gas.

Now you are talking my sense, these are the real answers. Drastically reducing the population to a sustainable long term level, eventually no more than half a billion. The other eight billion we don't need and haven't done since our scientific and engineering advances in robotics and mechanical handling.
.

 

[Deleted member 16246]

Now you are talking my sense, these are the real answers. Drastically reducing the population to a sustainable long term level, eventually no more than half a billion. The other eight billion we don't need and haven't done since our scientific and engineering advances in robotics and mechanical handling.
.

Life forms don't really work like that. They do not reproduce according to the economic needs of society - outside totalitarian systems like Mao's China. They reproduce according to their own best interests - like viruses really. They have no interest in what are sensible societal or Gaia type goals.

Plague, starvation and disaster might do it. Like what Malthus said.

Mind you - as China will soon find, there will be some nasty times as the population contracts and the old accepted behaviours of caring for the non productive members of society at the expense of the young, become impossible. Death through starvation and neglect of the elderly will become the norm unless there is compulsory euthanasia on illness and retirement.

 

[Nealh]

Mars does still have water but it is trapped in it's frozen polar caps, often visible from Earth using a decent telescope.

 

[Deleted member 16246]

Mars does still have water but it is trapped in it's frozen polar caps, often visible from Earth using a decent telescope.

Yes - but it is a tiny residual remnant. Four billion years ago it had oceans. All blown away by the solar wind when the magnetism stopped.

https://pubs.aip.org/physicstoday/article/75/4/62/2842795/How-did-Mars-lose-its-atmosphere-and-water-They

 

[Woosh]

Yes - but it is a tiny residual remnant. Four billion years ago it had oceans. All blown away by the solar wind when the magnetism stopped.

https://pubs.aip.org/physicstoday/article/75/4/62/2842795/How-did-Mars-lose-its-atmosphere-and-water-They

there is usually more water in the rocks than on the surface, even on earth. Anyway, we can make water with basic chemistry. The main thing is we need to develop small fusion reactors with a diameter of 2M or less that we can carry on boats, planes and spaceships.

 

[saneagle]

One thing that you guys might be able to help me with. The climate change people don't want us to drive cars, eat meat, fly on holiday anywhere, have wood burning fires and things like that because of carbon footprints, yet the same guys are all cheering on the war in Ukraine and sending weapons there that not only keep it going, but all cause massive burning. The amount of stuff burning there every day is almost beyond imagination, but somehow that doesn't leave footprints? Is that squabble between two neighbouring countries really more important than saving the whole planet? Greta and others said that we only have 8 years left, and we're now in year four, but they all want to keep Ukraine burning with no end in sight. I personally haven't seen any change since Greta said that and they all agreed. It's only got worse. Does that mean we're all doomed?

Thunberg says only 'eight years left' to avert 1.5°C warming

Climate change is a top priority at the Davos meeting for policymakers and business leaders though Donald Trump is pulling the United States out of the Paris Agreement

www.climatechangenews.com

 

[flecc]

Life forms don't really work like that. They do not reproduce according to the economic needs of society - outside totalitarian systems like Mao's China. They reproduce according to their own best interests - like viruses really. They have no interest in what are sensible societal or Gaia type goals.

I didn't for one moment think it would be voluntary.

However, having said that, voluntarism is creeping in. When the Chinese gave up on their one child policy there was no return to the old trend towards 2 billion. Instead the population have stayed inclined to remain with 1.4 billions.

And in Japan where they have been notoriously giving up on reproductive sex, the change is even more dramatic. For the last 12 years the population and birthrate have fallen substantially every year. If present trends continue their population will have fallen 20% from their near 125 millions by 2056. Little wonder that they have been creating robots to assist with such as the needs of the elderly.

And of course even here marriage has become far less popular and couples in partnerships are increasingly deciding not to have children.
.

 

[soundwave]

wars make big money so that's fine we need the sales

 

[flecc]

One thing that you guys might be able to help me with. The climate change people don't want us to drive cars, eat meat, fly on holiday anywhere, have wood burning fires and things like that because of carbon footprints, yet the same guys are all cheering on the war in Ukraine and sending weapons there that not only keep it going, but all cause massive burning. The amount of stuff burning there every day is almost beyond imagination, but somehow that doesn't leave footprints? Is that squabble between two neighbouring countries really more important than saving the whole planet? Greta and others said that we only have 8 years left, and we're now in year four, but they all want to keep Ukraine burning with no end in sight.

I can help you with that, it's all about keeping the population under control, as the old saying predicts, idle hands make work for the devil.

While there's a war the population are kept busy worrying about and dealing with the fallout from that.

But in peace with time for us to be nuisances, our politicians need to create things for us to fear in order to keep us in check, such as climate change threat, pandemics, economic recessions, high unemployment.

Long ago there was no need for these, since we were threatened by religious punishment such as purgatory and hell if we disobeyed our leaders. But the decline in religious belief from the 17th century on has led us to where we no longer have any belief in such things, so modern political substitutes have become necessary.

That is what the cold war was about, there never actually was a cold war. It was simply the way that the winners of WW2 jointly decided at Yalta to keep their populations in check. And it worked for 40 years.
.

 

[Deleted member 16246]

I can help you with that, it's all about keeping the population under control, as the old saying predicts, idle hands make work for the devil.

While there's a war the population are kept busy worrying about and dealing with the fallout from that.

But in peace with time for us to be nuisances, our poiticians need to create things for us to fear in order to keep us in check, such as climate change threat, pandemics, economic recessions, high unemployment.

Long ago there was no need for these, since we were threatened by religious punishment such as purgatory and hell if we disobeyed our leaders. But the decline in religious belief from the 17th century on has led us to where we no longer have any belief in such things, so modern political substitutes have become necessary.
.

But as you pointed out above (I think you did) people in western societies are already limiting their reproductive fertility. They are doing it because it suits them to do so. The birth rates per woman in most of Europe are very low. In Italy and Spain it is almost at one child China levels - 1.24 children per female in Italy and 1.23 in Spain. Uk is 1.56, Scotland 1.31. I differentiate because Scotland has fewer migrant people who boost the English data. France has 1.9, but 19% were born to migrant mothers. EU sources have a number of articles about it.

Population growth in the west is down to migration. The huge growth in human population is in Africa and parts of South Asia.


EDIT: Reading your post again, I note that it is more about social control than population growth. I think I jumped on that topic because of the earlier remarks.

 

[saneagle]

I can help you with that, it's all about keeping the population under control, as the old saying predicts, idle hands make work for the devil.

While there's a war the population are kept busy worrying about and dealing with the fallout from that.

But in peace with time for us to be nuisances, our poiticians need to create things for us to fear in order to keep us in check, such as climate change threat, pandemics, economic recessions, high unemployment.

Long ago there was no need for these, since we were threatened by religious punishment such as purgatory and hell if we disobeyed our leaders. But the decline in religious belief from the 17th century on has led us to where we no longer have any belief in such things, so modern political substitutes have become necessary.

That is what the cold war was about, there never actually was a cold war. It was simply the way that the winners of WW2 jointly decided at Yalta to keep their populations in check. And it worked for 40 years.
.

Are you suggesting that Greta is just trying to scare us and the planet won't explode in 4 years time and we should support the war in Ukraine because it's reducing the world population?

I would have thought that a war in India or China would reduce the population more than Ukraine.

 

[saneagle]

But as you pointed out above (I think you did) people in western societies are already limiting their reproductive fertility. They are doing it because it suits them to do so. The birth rates per woman in most of Europe are very low. In Italy and Spain it is almost at one child China levels - 1.24 children per female in Italy and 1.23 in Spain. Uk is 1.56, Scotland 1.31. I differentiate because Scotland has fewer migrant people who boost the English data. France has 1.9, but 19% were born to migrant mothers. EU sources have a number of articles about it.

Population growth in the west is down to migration. The huge growth in human population is in Africa and parts of South Asia.


EDIT: Reading your post again, I note that it is more about social control than population growth. I think I jumped on that topic because of the earlier remarks.

Are you sure it's not something they put in the water? I can remember years ago when they were putting female hormones in chickens to make the grow, and a whole load of guys started growing tits and doing knitting. There seems to be a whole load of transsexuals these days and the gay movement is bigger than ever. Or was it something they put in the covid jab? Luckily, I still have a healthy appetite for women because I didn't have the jab. The problem is that it's becoming more difficult to tell which is which. I have to do that, "what's that up on the ceiling" trick.

 

[flecc]

Are you suggesting that Greta is just trying to scare us and the planet won't explode in 4 years time and we should support the war in Ukraine because it's reducing the world population?

I would have thought that a war in India or China would reduce the population more than Ukraine.

Greta believes what she is saying, but is in danger of getting trapped on an Ixion's wheel of her own devising.

I don't support any war anywhere since all wars are pointless and achieve nothing.
.

 

[WheezyRider]

Are you sure it's not something they put in the water? I can remember years ago when they were putting female hormones in chickens to make the grow, and a whole load of guys started growing tits and doing knitting. There seems to be a whole load of transsexuals these days and the gay movement is bigger than ever. Or was it something they put in the covid jab? Luckily, I still have a healthy appetite for women because I didn't have the jab. The problem is that it's becoming more difficult to tell which is which. I have to do that, "what's that up on the ceiling" trick.

Your credibility sinks lower and lower with your homophobic/transphobic remarks on top of other nonsense. Sounds like you are going for a full house on the conspiracy theorist's bingo card. Time to ease back on the Russia Today viewing perhaps?

 

[saneagle]

Your credibility sinks lower and lower with your homophobic/transphobic remarks on top of other nonsense. Sounds like you are going for a full house on the conspiracy theorist's bingo card. Time to ease back on the Russia Today viewing perhaps?

There we go again with the labels. That's what people do when they've lost the arguement. You managed three in one short post. It looks like a terminal case - better get some treatment quick.