Recommended Posts

lol, Man kind IS going to kill our selves.

This would make a great movie. In the movie humans accomplish their goal and the earth finally cools down. We are all having a drink and talking about it when all of a sudden a mega volcano erupts and spills dust into the atmosphere. One guy looks at the other and says, "Oh ****". The movie ends.

The whole point is NO ONE knows for sure and its all speculation. When it comes to climate change, for every person saying one thing another person is saying the other. When you factor in the fear part, people will tend to believe the worst.

The whole point is NO ONE knows for sure and its all speculation

This is stupid of course no one knows for sure! no one knows for sure that this entire universe isnt an elaborate computer simulation FFS. Absolute certainty is absolutely useless!

With that aside we can be as confident in the current modal of climate science as with any other area of science.

When it comes to climate change, for every person saying one thing another person is saying the other

Facepalm, You could say this about evolution,heliocentric solar system,germ theory ? Should we discard those too because i can provide you real life examples of people denying all three.

1 http://www.icr.org/

2 http://geocentrism.com/

3 http://naturalnews.com/

How is this any different from the idiots at the websites above ? And how the hell are we ment to prove anything when all someone has to do according to you is create a blog and years of scientific research are voided ?

. When you factor in the fear part, people will tend to believe the worst.

What people believe is irrelevant, Its what people can prove thats important

  • Like 1

They're proposing to relocate an asteroid three times the size of the one that wiped out the dinosaurs in a near-orbit of Earth?

Here's another brilliant idea: We can detonate every nuclear weapon on Earth to create "nuclear winter" and cancel out the effects of global warming.

The whole point is NO ONE knows for sure and its all speculation. When it comes to climate change, for every person saying one thing another person is saying the other. When you factor in the fear part, people will tend to believe the worst.

There is a great difference between "speculation" and educated reasoning. For instance, we can use scientific theory to determine that dilution of the Gulf Stream through the melting polar ice caps will alter sea salinity and density, which will cause it to shift and change the climate throughout the Northern Hemisphere - it has happened before, so it's not wild conjecture. How do we know the polar ice caps will melt? Well, we've observed a trend of diminishing ice levels and again we can look to the past and see that they have melted before in a similar pattern. Of course there will be debate over the specifics and while the sheer number of variables will make it difficult to predict specific events it is much easier to predict general trends (rising sea levels, ocean acidification, extreme weather patterns, etc).

It is disingenuous to suggest it's all merely "speculation", especially when numerous reports predict similar outcomes using different methodologies and data. Have some portions of the media greatly exaggerated some of the claims? Absolutely, but that is true of every field. The reality is that we know an awful lot about what is happening and we can't simply sit around and wait for undeniable proof - evolution has taught us even when you have proof people will deny it. It's time to see climate change as an opportunity. What's the worst case scenario of climate change being a hoax but taking action to stop it anyway? We'll eliminate our dependence on fossil fuels, modernise industries, create jobs and nothing happens - some money is wasted and economic growth may be slowed but that's not the end of the world. What's the worst case scenario of climate change being real but taking no action to stop it? Millions dead, infrastructure destroyed, food shortages, more extreme weather and an end to society as we know it - even if it's only half as severe that's still a serious issue.

The point is why wait? We know that we're using the planet's resources at an unsustainable rate - from fossil fuels (coal, oil, gas) to precious metals (lithium, gallium, indium), essential gases (helium) to aquifers, forests (for furniture, land for cattle) to food (cattle, fish, crops). It is simply impossible to maintain the level of resources we're using. So why are we doing nothing about it? The answer is because businesses make money and that's needed to keep capitalism afloat - unfortunately it's destroying the planet as we know it. Infinite growth with finite resources is impossible. Sustainability is the ONLY way forward. Is oil sustainable? No. Is our consumption of water sustainable? No. Is the amount of CO2 we're putting into the atmosphere sustainable? No. When CFCs threatened the atmosphere they were banned. When smog threatened lives and quality of life massive restrictions were introduced through the Clean Air Act. Businesses adapted and society moved on, having mitigated the impact had nothing been done.

There may be many questions still to answer but doing nothing isn't an option.

The whole point is NO ONE knows for sure and its all speculation. When it comes to climate change, for every person saying one thing another person is saying the other. When you factor in the fear part, people will tend to believe the worst.

We might not know with absolute certainty what the cause of global warming is (although that isn't necessary, we are certain enough). But we do however know with absolute certainty that your claim about volcanoes was absolute bull. Which is enough to discredit all your other "facts"

Whether you accept Global warming or not, Global warming if true is not going to happen overnight. There is plenty of time to fix things than taking a gamble on terraforming the planet which lets face it, is more likely to cause problems. Whats worse is that even if it was miraculously 'successful' there would be so much space debris that it would be virtually impossible to ever leave this planet again for even simple missions and no way to undo it even once it does hypothetically cools the earth. There might even be too much debris and send us into an Ice age (if we make it past dodging all the meteor showers)

fear sells and sell well, hence why "global warming" has a huge following... i have to take off right now but when i get back i can link 100X more pages back to you saying the opposite of what you linked... just like religion, people seem to believe what they choose to believe based on fear of the unknown, as in they are not in control so they must have something they can influence... nature currently is beyond mass control at the moment. i am not scared :) Could i be wrong? Yes.

It's not exactly fear of the unknown. It's more like fear of the known. All you have to do is study the Bible.

As for this case, I think it's too risky. Let science work it's magic without an asteroid.

We might not know with absolute certainty what the cause of global warming is (although that isn't necessary, we are certain enough). But we do however know with absolute certainty that your claim about volcanoes was absolute bull. Which is enough to discredit all your other "facts"

not my facts... "the-people-who-know-this-stuff" facts... and i would say i agree...

not my facts... "the-people-who-know-this-stuff" facts... and i would say i agree...

You still didn't succeed in backing up your claim. And I guess you never will.

Let's recapitulate, your claim was: One single volcano eruption releases more CO2 in the atmosphere than the human race did in its entire existence.

So, prove it. What are the numbers according to you?

not my facts... "the-people-who-know-this-stuff" facts... and i would say i agree...

You mean the climatologists... Yeah they disagree

You still didn't succeed in backing up your claim. And I guess you never will.

Let's recapitulate, your claim was: One single volcano eruption releases more CO2 in the atmosphere than the human race did in its entire existence.

So, prove it. What are the numbers according to you?

after digging deeper and lots of searching, it does infact seem like most claim volcanoes DO NOT emit more CO2. I was wrong.

You mean the climatologists... Yeah they disagree

there are climatologists that also say it is not our fault, like i said, i could be wrong and it could be our fault, the only thing that i know as a fact is fear sells and sells very well.

there are climatologists that also say it is not our fault, like i said, i could be wrong and it could be our fault, the only thing that i know as a fact is fear sells and sells very well.

And there are geologists who claim the earth is 6000 years old big whop you may aswell say there are butchers that say it is not our fault.

When you cherry pick an appeal to authority you are disregarding climate science

after digging deeper and lots of searching, it does infact seem like most claim volcanoes DO NOT emit more CO2. I was wrong.

there are climatologists that also say it is not our fault, like i said, i could be wrong and it could be our fault, the only thing that i know as a fact is fear sells and sells very well.

Fear sells to the ones that have fear. What we see today is that nobody is fearing nothing... Global warming is increasing, be it natural or human-caused and we are doing nothing about this. We're actually just pretending that we are.

Also, if fear is indeed selling, then it is selling for our own good because pollution kills (I think I don't need to prove it, right?) and the few efforts that are done to cease global warming are also greatly reducing pollution.

So you can disagree with global warming being caused by humans, but we should do our part as it will undoubtedly improve our quality of life.

They're proposing to relocate an asteroid three times the size of the one that wiped out the dinosaurs in a near-orbit of Earth?

Here's another brilliant idea: We can detonate every nuclear weapon on Earth to create "nuclear winter" and cancel out the effects of global warming.

:laugh:

after digging deeper and lots of searching, it does infact seem like most claim volcanoes DO NOT emit more CO2. I was wrong.

there are climatologists that also say it is not our fault, like i said, i could be wrong and it could be our fault, the only thing that i know as a fact is fear sells and sells very well.

I like it when people can admit they were wrong. It shows character.

Apart from that, my take on it is simple. Yes I do believe that we have a negative effect on the climate and on nature in general. Does that matter for earth in the long run? No of course not, there have been bigger disasters. Does it matter to me personally that we are destroying ecosystems, yes it does, so I want that measures are taken to lessen our impact.

Regardless of all of the above and all the believes and scientists and naysayers, how could cutting down our dependence on fosil fuels be a bad thing? I want to live in a world where people strive to invent new ways to see to their energy needs. Where people believe that improving the efficiency of a wind turbine or solar panel might not only benefit the climate, but lead to bigger things.

When you cherry pick an appeal to authority you are disregarding climate science

read below

Does that matter for earth in the long run? No of course not, there have been bigger disasters. Does it matter to me personally that we are destroying ecosystems, yes it does,

this is kind of my stance on it as well... i KNOW we aren't HELPING, but even at FULL effort, we humans are just to small to stop/reverse/change things in the big big picture. I am a VERY STRONG advocate for recycling, water reduction/reuse, renewable power/energy etc... so i am FOR environment protection. but after saying that I just simply will not buy into the fear of global warming. It very well could be true (as in our fault), i just honestly believe we don't have much impact on it.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Why it's almost impossible to produce a smartphone in the United States by Hamid Ganji If you look at the back of some Apple products, you can see the famous phrase “Designed by Apple in California, Assembled in China.” This phrase appears on products from one of the largest smartphone brands in the United States. These products are designed in the U.S., but their manufacturing takes place in China, India, Vietnam, or even Brazil. But why can’t Apple, as one of the largest American tech companies, produce its iPhones on U.S. soil? The idea for this topic came to me after the Trump Foundation launched a smartphone called the T1 and claimed that it was designed and built with American values in mind. However, this claim did not last long, as it was revealed that Trump’s phone was actually a rebranded HTC U24 Pro, with only a gold case and minor internal component changes. You see? Even a phone that is supposed to represent American values is manufactured in China. With a gross domestic product (GDP) exceeding $32 trillion, the United States is currently the world’s largest economy, while China ranks second with around $20 trillion. On the other hand, the United States is by a wide margin the global leader in various technological fields, and American companies spend hundreds of billions of dollars annually on research and development. From Apple and Google to Microsoft, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and others, American tech and industrial giants lead their foreign competitors in many sectors. The United States also has no shortage of smartphone brands. Apple, Google, and Motorola are among the major brands in the smartphone market, collectively holding a significant share. However, the vast majority of their products are manufactured outside the United States. So why is it that the world’s largest economy, home to the most advanced technology companies and industrial powers, cannot produce a smartphone on its own soil? Let’s explore this question together. Even threats to impose tariffs won’t work After Trump entered the White House as the 47th President of the United States, his administration adopted strict tariff policies. One of these policies was the imposition of a 25% tariff on smartphones manufactured outside the United States. Trump said he “had a little problem” with Apple CEO Tim Cook over producing smartphones outside the U.S. So he thought that threatening a 25% tax on imported phones might force Apple to bring manufacturing back to the United States. “I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhones that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. Image via The White House Although Apple currently manufactures some of the iPhone’s chips in the United States with TSMC's help, it still shows no willingness to shift full iPhone production to the country. At the time, renowned Apple supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo wrote on X, “In terms of profitability, it’s way better for Apple to take the hit of a 25% tariff on iPhones sold in the US market than to move iPhone assembly lines back to the US.” However, manufacturing a smartphone in the United States is not as easy as it might seem, and many technical and economic barriers are involved. The lack of necessary manufacturing hubs There is a clear reason why many companies prefer to manufacture their products in China. China has established itself as the main global manufacturing hub for international companies, and over the past few decades, large contract manufacturers have emerged there, allowing companies like Apple to outsource production. One such example is Foxconn, which also manufactures some Apple products in India. Building the infrastructure required to produce smartphones in the United States would require tens of billions of dollars in new investment. Factories would need to be built, essential manufacturing equipment would have to be installed, and, most importantly, a skilled workforce capable of operating these systems would need to be recruited and trained. The United States currently lacks the core infrastructure needed to manufacture smartphones, and for this reason, many companies prefer to outsource production to Chinese contractors rather than spend tens of billions of dollars to build that infrastructure, which is significantly more economically efficient. Additionally, building such infrastructure in the United States could take up to a decade, ultimately leading to a significant increase in the product's final price for consumers. Shortage of trained labor in the U.S. compared to China Decades of serving as a global manufacturing hub have allowed China to build a massive talent pool in the production sector that is almost unmatched worldwide. Today, if a company chooses to manufacture its products in China, it can be confident that the workers involved in production have years of experience in their respective roles and are capable of producing high-quality goods with minimal errors. Even if we assume that tens of billions of dollars were invested in building smartphone manufacturing infrastructure in the United States, finding skilled workers would remain highly challenging. Apple CEO Tim Cook visiting the iPhone 6 assembly line in China in 2014. Image: Tim Cook on X In a 2015 interview on CBS’s 60 Minutes, Tim Cook said the main reason Apple isn’t producing in the US is a lack of skills. "China put an enormous focus on manufacturing, in what you and I would call vocational kind of skills. The US over time began to stop having as many vocational kinds of skills. I mean you could take every tool and die maker in the United States and probably put them in the room that we're currently sitting in. In China you would have to have multiple football fields,” Cook said. Also, in 2017, at the Fortune Global Forum in Guangzhou, Cook once again emphasized the importance of highly skilled Chinese workers. “China has moved into very advanced manufacturing, so you find in China the intersection of craftsman kind of skill, and sophisticated robotics and the computer science world. That intersection, which is very rare to find anywhere, that kind of skill, is very important to our business because of the precision and quality level that we like. The thing that most people focus on if they’re a foreigner coming to China is the size of the market, and obviously, it’s the biggest market in the world in so many areas. But for us, the number one attraction is the quality of the people,” Apple CEO said. Higher labor costs in the United States Producing almost any product in the United States is more expensive than in many other countries, and one of the main reasons is the higher cost of labor in the U.S. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, median weekly earnings of full-time workers in the United States were $1,235 in the first quarter of 2026. Meanwhile, the average annual salary in China's private sector in 2025 was RMB 71,590 (US$9,961). In many parts of the world, the weekly wage of an American worker is equivalent to several months of income. Another important factor to consider is that in the United States, the workforce capable of working on a smartphone assembly line is highly specialized and therefore commands higher-than-average wages. According to an estimate by Bank of America, producing an iPhone in the U.S. is technically possible, but “iPhone cost can increase 25% purely on higher labor cost in the U.S.” However, this 25% increase applies only if final assembly is performed in the United States while components are still sourced from China or elsewhere. In this case, the price of a base iPhone would rise from $799 to around $1,000. But in another scenario, if Apple were to produce the required components for the iPhone within the United States, production costs could increase by more than 90%. Trump’s dream for a “Made in the USA” iPhone might never come true In a free-market capitalist economy, one of the primary responsibilities of any CEO is to maximize profit. Using Apple as an example, Tim Cook’s role is to maximize the company’s profits so that it can fund research and development for new products and invest in areas such as artificial intelligence, while also keeping shareholders satisfied. Therefore, it is entirely understandable that Apple would choose not to bring its manufacturing back to the United States and instead keep production in countries where labor is cheaper, and products can be manufactured at a lower cost, thereby maximizing its profit margins. What is your opinion about manufacturing smartphones in the United States? If you are an American citizen, would you be willing to pay hundreds of dollars more for a smartphone made domestically in the USA? Let us know in the comments.
    • Cheers everyone for the replies. It's been very useful. 👍
    • Compared to the 7735HS it is around 25-30% slower in multi-threaded tasks (according to Google search) I did a review of the 7735HS Beelink SER6 Max in 2023, but thinking about it, it's not comparable to the 7730U. For the example you gave about how it will be used, the 7730U is actually an excellent choice for its power and battery efficiency.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • One Month Later
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Woland13 earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      503
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      194
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      151
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      71
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      67
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!