[2018-10-29] Bitcoin trading uses so much power that it could push global temper

[xFiber]

I think we all know they don't investigate important issues very well.

I partially agree with you here but you're still generalizing here. Especially when it comes to global warming because the raw data is at our disposal (https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/en.atm.co2e.pc). There are countless scientific reports indicating that global warming is a direct consequence of the increasing CO² emissions. You don't even need to read newspapers to realize that.

If they did, they would present both sides of the story, not just that which they prefer.

And what do you think is the other side of the story? What kind of agenda do you think they're trying to push, if any?

[1713943143]

1713943143

[1713943143]

1713943143

[1713943143]

1713943143

[1713943143]

1713943143

[Carlton Banks]

I think we all know they don't investigate important issues very well.

I partially agree with you here but you're still generalizing here. Especially when it comes to global warming because the raw data is at our disposal (https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/en.atm.co2e.pc). There are countless scientific reports indicating that global warming is a direct consequence of the increasing CO² emissions. You don't even need to read newspapers to realize that.

If they did, they would present both sides of the story, not just that which they prefer.

And what do you think is the other side of the story? What kind of agenda do you think they're trying to push, if any?

There are climate scientists and naturalists who claim that their studies demonstrate there's no change in trend for temperature (and that defining what "average temperature" affects the outcome significantly)

And I'm not sure what makes the World Bank any more credulous a source of science than journalists.

[Thekool1s]

Lol, Another "paid" study. I mean they have got the guts to use a title like that. I would love to read an article from "bullshitinsider" that how much electricity is wasted per year by the USA alone. I debunked their claim in an earlier thread. if you guys want to read it I will attach it below. Basically, the gist of it is 6 times more energy is wasted by the USA than the whole bitcoin network uses each year.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4943478.msg44566177#msg44566177

[xFiber]

There are climate scientists and naturalists who claim that their studies demonstrate there's no change in trend for temperature (and that defining what "average temperature" affects the outcome significantly)

Source?

And I'm not sure what makes the World Bank any more credulous a source of science than journalists.

How about NASA? And please don't come up with some silly conspiracy theory.
https://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/
https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

97% of scientists worldwide agree that global warming is happening and will have consequences in the (near) future.
At this point scientists aren't arguing whether it's real but rather how fast it's going to happen.

[coolcoinz]

97% of scientists worldwide agree that global warming is happening and will have consequences in the (near) future.
At this point scientists aren't arguing whether it's real but rather how fast it's going to happen.

While I'm not going to argue that temperatures are rising, we can call it global warming or climate change. It's all a matter of perspective. While it may be getting warmer on the poles, the Gulf Stream is weakening and results in Europe becoming colder. While you're talking about global warming it's snowing in South Africa.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/sep/11/giraffes-in-the-snow-south-africa-karoo-desert

Does Bitcoin mining have something to do with that? I very much doubt it and people who are saying that mining will raise global temperatures by 2* are delusional. Google and Facebook servers combined produce a comparable amount of heat and they've been doing it for much longer than Bitcoin miners.

[Carlton Banks]

There are climate scientists and naturalists who claim that their studies demonstrate there's no change in trend for temperature (and that defining what "average temperature" affects the outcome significantly)

Source?

I don't regularly check this topic out, but there certainly are dissenting views from credible scientists. If you're interested, you should search for them. It's actually a benefit to understand the sceptical point of view if you want to argue against it.

If you're not interested in valid antithetical-arguments, but express strong belief in the corresponding thesis, don't expect anyone to take you seriously if you make strong statements on a subject you're not interseted in learning about.

And I'm not sure what makes the World Bank any more credulous a source of science than journalists.

How about NASA? And please don't come up with some silly conspiracy theory.
https://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/
https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

What difference does it make if NASA has a position? Aren't you interested in what's factual? Science is supposed to be about using rational methodology and measurements to prove facts, not who says what.

97% of scientists worldwide agree that global warming is happening and will have consequences in the (near) future.
At this point scientists aren't arguing whether it's real but rather how fast it's going to happen.

Yeah that's pretty much correct. You can include me: climate change is real, and CO² is a greenhouse gas, there is no doubt

What percentage of climate scientists think climate change is happening so slowly that there is no real discernible problem? And does it even matter how low or high the percentages are, when scientific facts are what actually matter?

[xFiber]

97% of scientists worldwide agree that global warming is happening and will have consequences in the (near) future.
At this point scientists aren't arguing whether it's real but rather how fast it's going to happen.

While I'm not going to argue that temperatures are rising, we can call it global warming or climate change. It's all a matter of perspective. While it may be getting warmer on the poles, the Gulf Stream is weakening and results in Europe becoming colder. While you're talking about global warming it's snowing in South Africa.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/sep/11/giraffes-in-the-snow-south-africa-karoo-desert

Fair point, climate change would be the more complete way to define what's happening right now. I am by no means an expert when it comes to this but I am learning everyday. The main point I am trying to stress here is that those increased levels of carbon dioxide, and whatever their effects may be, are doing more harm than good.

Does Bitcoin mining have something to do with that? I very much doubt it and people who are saying that mining will raise global temperatures by 2* are delusional. Google and Facebook servers combined produce a comparable amount of heat and they've been doing it for much longer than Bitcoin miners.

I second this. Completely delusional.

[hotforblockchain]

How much CO² is too much? That's where climate scientists disagree.

And again, where is source?

It is too much when average (yearly) temperature of earth is rising. Which causes climate anomalies, rising waters and possibly worst of all thawing permafrost which protects huge amounts of C02 . These all are negative effects which can and are measured and recorded.

[Carlton Banks]

How much CO² is too much? That's where climate scientists disagree.

It is too much when average (yearly) temperature of earth is rising.

Getting that answer ("average temperature is rising") depends on how you measure it. Not all methodologies of measuring the average temperature indicate a significant rise.

You're talking about an exceptionally complicated topic, but you want to make it seem simple. Weather patterns change for literally thousands of reasons, not just your personal favourite reason.

[Bizard]

Bitcoin trades while the volumes are very small with a comparison of the market for Fiat money, and are unlikely to come close in the near future, but I think bankers know what to do if Bitcoin is not their toy.