Global Warming

[WinnieW]

...it seems like Ni doms just space out and think about possible futures, then go "oh no" to one of them and think of how to prevent it from happening.

Why does that statement immediately make me think of the motivation of climate change activists?

[Manatroid92]

Why does that statement immediately make me think of the motivation of climate change activists?

Well, climate activists being Ni-valuing isn't really that surprising, on the surface. But I'm doubtful that it's only Ni-doms that are climate activists. I'm pretty sure both IEIs and ILIs would not be the ones leading the charge on that.

But moreover, climate change has evidence backing it, so you don't need to be a Ni-valuer to understand the alleged danger, you just need to be able to read and understand the data behind it.

[Clarke]

Why does that statement immediately make me think of the motivation of climate change activists?

I remember someone in high school saying that the earth would boil and we would lose our hydrogen. It actually theoretically made sense. Nowadays I think it was just an extreme extrapolation though. There might be factors that could stop it that aren't even conscious movements away from fossil fuels.

Anyway, I think that the climate change activists were actually a little correct. Look at how the world climates are vastly different from what they used to be. Texas froze over for some reason a while ago. Earth seems to be changing, and fossil fuels theoretically make sense as a likely cause.

[WinnieW]

I remember someone in high school saying that the earth would boil and we would lose our hydrogen.

Yeah, but that will happen in a very distant future. About 2 billion years in the future.
There are other threats in a nearer future. Like erruptions of super vulcanos... hello Yellowstone and Phlegrean Fields.
or impact of larger asteroids. Impacts of asteriods the size that killed the dinosaur happens statistically every 100 million years.

The development of the next 100 years if climate change continuous at the same rate. Ocean levels will raise up to 2 feet, a lot of island area and coast area will be lost.
And there will be areas around the equator will become unliveable, because air temperature and humidity will excide conditions human physiology can handle.

see: https://www.washington.edu/news/2022/08/25/dangerous-and-extremely-dangerous-heat-stress-to-become-more-common-by-2100/

OK, I have to admit, I derailed that thread a little bit.

[Clarke]

Yeah, but that will happen in a very distant future. About 2 billion years in the future.
There are other threats in a nearer future. Like erruptions of super vulcanos... hello Yellowstone and Phlegrean Fields.
or impact of larger asteroids. Impacts of asteriods the size that killed the dinosaur happens statistically every 100 million years.

The development of the next 100 years if climate change continuous at the same rate. Ocean levels will raise up to 2 feet, a lot of island area and coast area will be lost.
And there will be areas around the equator will become unliveable, because air temperature and humidity will excide conditions human physiology can handle.

see: https://www.washington.edu/news/2022/08/25/dangerous-and-extremely-dangerous-heat-stress-to-become-more-common-by-2100/

OK, I have to admit, I derailed that thread a little bit.

So I think a technology that might be useful in the equator is anything related to insulation. People there would need houses with insulation for dangerous days. They might also be wearing insulated suits, especially workers (like emergency workers).

I don't think we can really do anything about Earth, and I don't think that many people would want to go to a more inhospitable area (mars) in the somewhat near future. I think that when the dangerous days start to form, corporations will probably develop the insulation and house models needed to allow people to still live in those areas. I'm guessing that property values will go down in the equator, so if I'm right that people will still want to live there, then it'll probably be some kind of mass-produced, cheap housing.

If I'm not right, then I kind of wonder about the drug trade. If people abandoned the area, then that's free land to be able to set up various drug trade-beneficial structures. I think that cartels could capitalize on that, although they'd probably have to figure out how to avoid being carpet bombed by the US (due to there being no civilians there).

I guess I'm kinda switching to Gamma NT mode here, which I'm guessing isn't what I looked like before.

[WinnieW]

@Clarke
I think this discussion is worth continuing in an other thread, this thread doesn't seem the proper place for the topic.

[Clarke]

This is a thread dedicated to discussing global warming and its implications. Talk about the evidence for and against global warming, the possible environmental impact of global warming on both a local and global scale, and any technologies that might be developed to deal with global warming.

I didn't have much sleep last night, and therefore seem to be somewhat brain dead at the moment, but I'll contribute if I get any insights.

Here's a link to the previous thread where global warming was discussed: https://www.the16types.info/vbulleti...NFj)?p=1540175

[Clarke]

@Clarke
I think this discussion is worth continuing in an other thread, this thread doesn't seem the proper place for the topic.

I created a thread here: https://www.the16types.info/vbulleti...ming?p=1540324

[WinnieW]

So I think a technology that might be useful in the equator is anything related to insulation.

The question here is: Who can afford insulation for the homes? There are a lot of poor people there, and what about the indigenous people who live there?
There is even cooling technology which use the heat of the sun, but who can afford it?

And the rising temperatures also affect the rest of the ecosystem. What about plants and animals? A lot of them can't adapt in such short time span to higher temperatures.

[Clarke]

The question here is: Who can afford insulation for the homes? There are a lot of poor people there, and what about the indigenous people who live there?
There is even cooling technology which use the heat of the sun, but who can afford it?

And the rising temperatures also affect the rest of the ecosystem. What about plants and animals? A lot of them can't adapt in such short time span to higher temperatures.

Well the cheapest form of insulation would probably be thick walls, maybe made of dirt or clay. There might be a more effective or easier to use form of insulation though, maybe one that's lighter weight if apartment complexes need to be built. An insulator that sort of works is air (you can see this if you have a house with double glass windows), but I actually don't know how effective of an insulator this would be. A more effective form of insulation is a vacuum (think thermos), but that could be problematic, maybe even dangerous if something created a hole in the wall. I think that there was a material that was a good insulator called aerogel.

In desert conditions, a pretty good insulator is water. If you make the walls out of water, sunlight and environmental heat I think warm up the water during the day. Later, during the night, the warmth in the tanks can be used to warm up the house, which might otherwise be cold in a desert climate. However, equator conditions generally aren't desert conditions. I also don't know if the desert can really cool off at night for this to be beneficial, given that they'll be extremely hot.

There's really nothing we can do about the rest of the ecosystem. Obviously we should try to stop global warming if we can, but it sort of looks like things are inevitable. I think that it might be worthwhile to get genetic material from multiple organisms in the area (potentially seeds in the case of plants) and store it in a genetic bank. I would say that it might be worthwhile to genetically engineer some plants for farming, but I realized that unless the farming was done with robots, it would generally be a bad idea to have farms. Ultimately when it comes to wildlife, we can only really find ways to reproduce them in safer conditions so that at least their species can exist. My viewpoint on this is at least partly pragmatic, given that wildlife tends to have unexpected technological use later in the future.

Edit: Thinking about it further, I think that when it comes to the lower or middle class, they're probably more likely to move to northern areas (which will probably have mass produced cheap housing without the strong insulation needed for dangerous areas). However, the dangerous areas might still be useful for the drug trade. I would expect them to either use some kind of space-grade material for their buildings or make complexes underground (this also helps them avoid bombing by first world countries).

[Clarke]

So these are my updated thoughts about insulation:
-The principle of insulation is to slow the heat transfer from a hot area to a cool area. The reverse is not scientifically true. Therefore, in principle, the correct approach to insulation is to create a material that stops airflow and has a medium that doesn't transfer heat. To my knowledge, the most effective materials for insulation are anything with air pockets (see insulation foam, aerogel) and anything that has a lack of a medium (vacuum).
-In terms of practicality, material with air pockets is pretty feasible if you could find a way to mass produce the material used for it cheaply. If houses are constructed in factories or in a 3D printing-like setup, they can be quickly mass produced. Insulation foam could be added to the walls of the homes in the factory.
-Also in terms of practicality, vacuums probably suck. While they're the most insulating material, any puncture in the wall will cause the wall to spontaneously implode inward. If you want to see what this is like, basically buy a cheap thermos and throw it onto the ground. It's at least audibly destructive.
-Heat reflectors may be a useful material to put on the outside layer of house walls. From what I know, it helps to have a layer of insulation between the heat reflector and yourself.
-Water is a complicated material to work with, and is probably useless for wetter parts of the Equator.

These are my current thoughts about wildlife and plant/animal life:
-Wildlife is unsalvageable without preventing global warming. I fully support the creation of a genetic bank for scientific purposes.
-Genetically engineered trees may be useful for a variety of non-farming purposes, such as oxygen generation. I think they also help cool the environment. This is only necessary if trees need heat or drought resistance.
-Genetically engineered crops are only useful if you can somehow harvest them without going outside, or if they have a quality that's not related to outside (such as being more adaptable to underground farms). See the technologies section.
-If underground farms are involved, there will probably be some kind of non-standard livestock. Depending on the level of technology at the time, this can range from small animals (rodents, small flightless birds, small densely-packable aquatic animals, bugs) to stem cell sources.

I think that the following technologies might become valuable if people decide to live in the danger zones:
-Anything related to insulation, mainly anything with air pockets (such as spray foam or aerogel). If something better develops, that might be useful as well.
-Anything related to the creation of underground structures (boring machines and building materials such as cement).
-Anything related to the further development of underground structures (such as anything related to the development of underground buildings or farms). This includes technological planning, and maybe materials/technologies such as LED lights.

I think that my general viewpoint is that we should see what the culture is like at the time unless we want to start building early, before danger zones set in. Generally, I think that waiting for the danger zones to exist is a better approach than making things prematurely because there might be better technologies in existence at that time. The likelihood of people living in danger zones is also fairly low. I think it's more likely that they'd live in densely-packed northern houses.

Generally, danger zones have a similar level of danger to mars. Obviously, mars is more dangerous, but some of the equipment that'll be needed in danger zones will probably be space grade and highly self contained. A key difference between mars and danger zones is that mars has a novelty factor that would make high paying people likely to go there (this would make the cost of building there worthwhile). Unless some major step is taken, I don't think danger zones would be very novel. Though, maybe if there isn't enough space for a large, interesting house in the north, the rich might go to the danger zones just to get away from the bulk of humanity.

[xerx]

Please, please, please let this happen.


Fusion energy breakthrough by US scientists boosts clean power hopes

https://www.ft.com/content/4b6f0fab-...c-cfc345589dc7

[on a peaceful hiatus]

it seems pretty clear we are going back into the stone ages.

[xerx]

Some have argued that a rise in population growth could combat global warming by creating denser cities, allowing the creation of larger and more efficient economies of scale (e.g. a mass transit network serves more people more efficiently, and more cost-effectively, than mass car ownership).

[on a peaceful hiatus]

Some have argued that a rise in population growth could combat global warming by creating denser cities, allowing the creation of larger and more efficient economies of scale (e.g. a mass transit network serves more people more efficiently, and more cost-effectively, than mass car ownership).

You don't seem to be fully aware how grim the situation looks. Have you actually read the newest IPCC report? We pretty much need to reach net zero in a few decades. There isn't really time to create other economies. It's not going to happen. Not to spoil your mood or anything, but naive idealism doesn't help the situation. It's better to think about how we manage a transition to a much poorer society without nuking ourselves over resources

[xerx]

You don't seem to be fully aware how grim the situation looks. Have you actually read the newest IPCC report? We pretty much need to reach net zero in a few decades. There isn't really time to create other economies. It's not going to happen. Not to spoil your mood or anything, but naive idealism doesn't help the situation. It's better to think about how we manage a transition to a much poorer society without nuking ourselves over resources

I don't actually know whether or not it'll work, I only thought that it was a creative suggestion that avoids the usual clichés. But what's so idealistic about it?

[xerx]

I don't actually know whether or not it'll work, I only thought that it was a creative suggestion that avoids the usual clichés.

Not that there is anything necessarily wrong or uncreative with the usual clichéd solutions to climate change.

[Metamorph]

Some have argued that a rise in population growth could combat global warming by creating denser cities, allowing the creation of larger and more efficient economies of scale (e.g. a mass transit network serves more people more efficiently, and more cost-effectively, than mass car ownership).

Well, the spread-out design you see in, say, most American development starting in the 60s and 70s was intended to get people to drive as much as possible so they would need cars and thus a petrodollar economy. There is nothing impractical about anything you're suggesting, but it's still extremely unlikely to happen because the spice must flow to the wagers of petrowars.

[Metamorph]

it seems pretty clear we are going back into the stone ages.

You wish we were going to the Stone Ages. We're going straight to 40k and you're never going to be a psyker.

[sudo]

Please, please, please let this happen.

Now figure energy recapture and inefficiency inherent to turbines, it's nowhere near the milestone it appears to be. A show of "progress" to beg for more funding (although if I must be honest, the DOE is probably one of the best places to put that money anyhow.)

[xerx]

Well, the spread-out design you see in, say, most American development starting in the 60s and 70s was intended to get people to drive as much as possible

It's amazing how so many of the fundamentals of American culture were top-down implemented by big business.

[on a peaceful hiatus]

I mentioned it in another thread, but 40% of global greenhouse gas emissions are caused by the construction and maintenance of buildings, and having more people on this planet means that more houses are going to be build. I don't think there's anything that can really be done about climate change, as it is far too late and outside of anyones control. the global economy will collapse, deglobalization which would be absolutely necessary now will happen automatically, and many nations will go back to an authoritarian mindset. it seems to be natural development. everyone is addicted to their screens. no one will willingly give up anything.

[godslave]

I think that you don't need Ni to be an activist because there are computers calculations and simulations. In fact It seems to me that a lot of activists (not necessarily about climate change) demonstrate a lack of insight when they use violence and damaging artworks for instance. I would say that the day imbeciles will be put into orbit those guys will certainly not stop falling. Those folks do more harm than good to the cause they try to advocate and everybody dislike them (expect a very small minority).

With that said, we live in a world of diggers ! We dig and we exploit until there is no more material. We still are a society of exploitation and as long as fossil energy will be available we will exploit it. The world will really and seriously consider alternatives when all the wells have dried up. Their are superpowers and Countries like China, Russia and North Korea that will always do business the old way without taking into account any conventions that goes against their interests because they can do whatever they want regardless of economic sanctions imho. Finally I would say the the world is like it is because Powerful people want it that way. There are only a few things that man can't control, among those are : Death, Natural Phenomenon and cyclical events of Mass destructions.

Note that I seriously don't know what I'm talking about but this is the way I see it...

[on a peaceful hiatus]

these protests, although probably not entirely idealistic, are a desperate attempt to make more people aware. I mentioned it in another thread, but I work at a relatively high position in one of the biggest german companies and the majority of people there (who are sensing types) still don't think climate change even exists. it's just the media which mainly consists of intuitives that tries to make more people aware. you can probably always trace it back to capitalism but both China and America are massive polluters so Beta or Gamma it all doesn't really matter. we have trapped ourselves in this situation. I think the time we live in now will in the future be seen more as an enlightment phase (despite all the negative elements) due to how society as a whole progressed at a rapid speed but all things eventually come to an end and we are just nearing the finish line of this "infinite" growth cycle.

[Metamorph]

these protests, although probably not entirely idealistic, are a desperate attempt to make more people aware. I mentioned it in another thread, but I work at a relatively high position in one of the biggest german companies and the majority of people there (who are sensing types) still don't think climate change even exists. it's just the media which mainly consists of intuitives that tries to make more people aware. you can probably always trace it back to capitalism but both China and America are massive polluters so Beta or Gamma it all doesn't really matter. we have trapped ourselves in this situation. I think the time we live in now will in the future be seen more as an enlightment phase (despite all the negative elements) due to how society as a whole progressed at a rapid speed but all things eventually come to an end and we are just nearing the finish line of this "infinite" growth cycle.

I've known geology professors who don't think climate change exists. Nothing to do with intuitive vs. sensing.

[on a peaceful hiatus]

not every person who is intuitive grasps global warming. but most people that do understand it are intuitive, as it is related to imagining future scenarios

[Metamorph]

not every person who is intuitive grasps global warming. but most people that do understand it are intuitive, as it is related to imagining future scenarios

Data isn't much related to imagining, data is related to data. Sense perception is much more closely related to imagining: try to get someone to hallucinate via suggestions of various sorts and see how easy it is. That's how most people can be religious and also not care much about logical things like global warming.

[Metamorph]

Speaking of that, bicameralism would take over if people really tried to "go back to the Stone Age," which will never happen anyway because of capitalism and shouldn't happen anyway because humans are rational beings and it's degrading for humans to try to live like animals even if humans did try to live like animals for the past few hundred million years. It doesn't matter if civilization in its current form is unstable, primitivism in its historical form was also unstable or it wouldn't have ended. In a specific way, it's similar to wishing for the Roman Empire back when the Roman Empire fell due to internal problems, not due to external pressures. People are already generally bicameral even in civilization, they have just basically sublimated their bicameralism into attitudes toward their boss, their family, and the things "everyone knows." So if civilization fell, it would quite easily be directed back toward the Earth Mother, the Sky Father, the "third man," god-emperors and sorcerer-kings (and -empresses/-queens,) and various nature spirits, ghosts, and magicians. You can observe this process in most modern people if you know what to look for. History, however, does not repeat, it rhymes, and it follows Hegel's dialect closely enough to be recognizable as it. This is probably a disappointment to almost everyone, since in general, I've found people idealize primitivism and a Rousseauian "state of nature" all over the political compass, as feminists imagine a matriarchal paradise, anti-feminists imagine a patriarchal one, white people think they would be pure and black people think they would be on top. The future will be as primitive as the present, but with every element of a sci-fi dystopia, because that's simply the result of the seed of the present fully sprouting. The future looks more like 40k than anything because the present looks more like 40k than anything to people who see enough to perceive the gestalt.