Gunnar on protest CO2 emissions

[_ajax18]

I know important anthropogenic global warming is to you. It's an urgent crisis, correct? Have the experts in your field come up with any studies on the net increase of the carbon footprint for burning cars and buildings. I know you support these protests with all your heart whether it spreads Covid or not. Do you cringe when you see the black stinky smoke of a police car on fire heading toward heaven because of what it's doing to the environment? Do you have any green recommendations for protesting? Maybe you send these by email out to Al Sharpton himself. He might consider if you get down and kiss his feet first.

[Guest]

What an incredibly stupid and dishonest distraction from the issue at hand! Of course I don't like the burning and the looting, and neither does Al Sharpton! Neither do the real protesters of this very real wrong that needs to be addressed. The burning and the looting is being done mainly by opportunistic, selfish criminals and/or hard right idiots trying to discredit honest protesters, and who really couldn't care less about BLM. Many of the protesters themselves cooperate with law enforcement in reporting and preventing the looting and vandalism, and there have even been cases of peaceful protesters coming to the defense of overwhelmed police units being attacked by the looters. And none of this is relevant to the very real issue of climate change. That is an entirely separate issue that still needs to be addressed, covid-19, BLM or not!

Your only reasons for even bringing this issue are to distract from the facts that: 1. you are an incorrigible and misanthropic racist, and 2. you know you can't come even close to credibly denying how badly your Lord and Savior, Trump has messed up the pandemic response. You know that even attempting to do so will only result in your abject humiliation.

And why are you so obtusely antagonistic to the very idea of green energy and cleaning up our polluted environment, and the tremendous entrepreneurial opportunities and jobs that will be created by the transition to a green enemy economy? Are you heavily invested in fossil fuel company stocks or something?

You know that it is not only I on this forum who is committed to a green energy future. I am not even the most knowledgeable and best versed or the most persuasive among some of the other science advocates on this board. I think you also realize that even on this issue, you have only managed to thoroughly humiliate yourself by your ignorant and hateful rantings against it. The fact is that you and your descendants will benefit as much as anyone else from a green energy future. To oppose that is sheer stupidity and ignorance on your part!

[_Some Schmo]

If ajax lives his life according to the ideas he posts on this forum, he must be paralyzed. Every decision involves a trade off, but to ajax, if there are two important things that need attention that might be in conflict, he can't do either. Apparently, weighing pros and cons and assessing risk aren't activities in which he's interested.

[Guest]

I think a huge part of his problem is that, like Trump, he is so narcissistic and full of himself that he is totally incapable of acknowledging even the merest possibility that he could ever be mistaken about any of his deeply held views, no matter how nonsensical and obviously contradicted by even the most abundant and incontrovertible evidence. Also, like Trump, humility is a totally alien concept to him.

[_Some Schmo]

I think a huge part of his problem is that, like Trump, he is so narcissistic and full of himself that he is totally incapable of acknowledging even the merest possibility that he could ever be mistaken about any of his deeply held views, no matter how nonsensical and obviously contradicted by even the most abundant and incontrovertible evidence.

I get the feeling by people like ajax that bucking facts and common sense gives them a defiant rush. They are so impotent to make the world a better place, they decide to just forward the most nonsensical crap, because they know it irritates regular people. It's their only recourse to their powerlessness.

I actually think this is a big reason faith is popular with so many people. Somewhere deep down, they know they're bucking common sense, and they like it, because f*u*c*k all the people making sense.

[_Gunnar]

I get the feeling by people like ajax that bucking facts and common sense gives them a defiant rush. They are so impotent to make the world a better place, they decide to just forward the most nonsensical crap, because they know it irritates regular people. It's their only recourse to their powerlessness.

I actually think this is a big reason faith is popular with so many people. Somewhere deep down, they know they're bucking common sense, and they like it, because f*u*c*k all the people making sense.

Yes, there is that too, but on the other hand, part of his problem may be us. He may feel mercilessly ridiculed by us at times for his extreme and poorly thought out positions. No one likes to be the object of ridicule or seen to be a fool. Often one would rather remain a fool than abandon a foolish position and thereby admit to having been one.

[_Some Schmo]

Yes, there is that too, but on the other hand, part of his problem may be us. He may feel mercilessly ridiculed by us at times for his extreme and poorly thought out positions. No one likes to be the object of ridicule or seen to be a fool. Often one would rather remain a fool than abandon a foolish position and thereby admit to having been one.

Perhaps, but I'm not sure I'd frame it as our problem. If ajax keeps beating his head against the wall, we don't blame the wall for the pain.

In this scenario, reality is the wall.

[_Gunnar]

Perhaps, but I'm not sure I'd frame it as our problem. If ajax keeps beating his head against the wall, we don't blame the wall for the pain.

In this scenario, reality is the wall.

Thanks for that analogy! I like it!

[_Chap]

I know important anthropogenic global warming is to you. It's an urgent crisis, correct? Have the experts in your field come up with any studies on the net increase of the carbon footprint for burning cars and buildings.

A few years ago, if I recall rightly, a Republican member of congress suggested that rising sea levels might be the result of 'rocks falling off cliffs into the sea", or words to that effect. It was not difficult to show that the order of magnitude of any such effect would be far too small to be measurable.

Similar considerations apply here. Ever day about 390 million gallons of gasoline are burned in the US. Each gallon weighs about 6.3 pounds. So that makes a weight of about 2.5 billion pounds of combustible matter burned every day, just in running automobiles and so on.

Now the entire Empire State building weighs 365,000 tons, or 730 million pounds, 0.73 billion pounds. I think you would agree that the total of combustible matter burned by some protesters in recent events is not likely to amount to more than a fraction of that - say at the very outside 1%, which would be 0.0073 billion pounds.

2.5/0.0073 = 340, to two significant figures.

So at the very, very outside, the total contribution of recent protests to global warming might amount to 1/340 of the contribution made by US automobiles every single day. It's likely to be a lot, lot less than that.

[_Gunnar]

Thanks, Chap, for pointing out how once again, ajax has thoroughly humiliated himself by his disability and disinclination to think things through before posting.