Comments by "Paul Frederick" (@1pcfred) on "Forget Yellowstone - These EIGHT Supervolcanoes Could Destroy The World | Answers With Joe" video.

  1. You're paraphrasing no country is more than three meals away from a revolution.
    2
  2. Pick a happy medium. I'd call it 1 MT personally. Often when using the atomic bomb quantity people are referring to the two that have been deployed in warfare though. Which is only about 20 KT. Now you have to ask yourself does it really matter? The reason we banned testing is due to environmental destruction. Any nuclear weapon blowing up has planetary negative consequences. Back when everyone was testing nukes we really effed the planet up! We managed to contaminate the entire surface. Every square inch. Yup even you and me are both contaminated because of testing that happened in the 50s and 60s. And that's why there's a test ban treaty in place now.
    1
  3. That's how I feel about the whole SI scale. I'm not prejudiced about any particular unit really.
    1
  4. Not if liberalism destroys the world first.
    1
  5. Geologic time scales are long periods of time. In the grand scheme of things we're a relatively recent phenomenon. In our short time here we have made quite a mark for ourselves already though.
    1
  6. Is it also crazy to you that fleas do not steer dogs? Because they don't. I think you're failing to understand the scale of things here. Compared to us the planet we live on is pretty big. These volcanoes all over the place are not isolated things either. They're all connected to each other because the whole inside of this planet is molten rock! You ain't taming anything even remotely like that. When Krakatoa blew they heard it in London. That's halfway around the world.
    1
  7. What part of the Sun? It is highly unlikely this planet's core is hotter than the Sun's core.
    1
  8.  @SHARAraTH  it is a question science has not adequately answered. One interesting theory I've heard is it is due to atomic decay. So not only do we live on a molten ball but a radioactive one as well!
    1
  9. There's nothing we can do about climate change either. If climate change is actually anthropogenic there's nothing we can practically do about it. Or we'd already be doing it! We do the best we can whenever we can. What you see is what it is. There ain't jack anyone can do differently about anything either.
    1
  10.  @peterwolf4230  stop emitting so much you say? How much am I emitting now? How much less do you expect me to get by with? I should lower my quality of life for the greater good? I am not living particularly large now. But you expect me to get by with even less. I'm sorry but I don't see your soft conservation plan working. No one wants to go backwards in life. Quite frankly a lot of us don't have much further we can go back now. The real problem is there's just too many humans on Earth. That's a bit of a touchy topic to broach though. But liquidating the vast majority of people alive now would get you the numbers you're looking for. I mean you might as well. You're already proposing taking what little we have away from us. Might as well just take it all. The coof was just the dry run. The next one they release will be the real killer.
    1
  11. That's the honey pot pile of supplies. The one I poisoned. So help yourself.
    1
  12. When you're talking about 100 nuclear weapons all detonating at once how much yield any one of them has doesn't matter so much either. It is too much no matter how you slice it.
    1
  13. Atomic bombs really do not come in many sizes. Nuclear devices on the other hand have been produced in a variety of sizes.
    1
  14. It would fill the pockets of researchers that rely on grant money and relieve their inherent conflict of interests? That's amazing!
    1
  15. Wind power is not good period. Let's say we fill the sky with turbines, how much air movement do you think will happen then? The German landscape is littered with generations of failed wind generators. If the Germans can't get it to work who can? They just let them rot where they lie because it's too costly to demolish them. Even tearing a wind generator down is expensive.
    1
  16.  @namenloss730  I can assure you that surface obstructions reduce wind. I experience it all the time where I live. I live in a forest but when I go out to the road where it is clear it is windier. Or did you mean the abandoned German windmills? It's not something they advertise. I learned about it watching a video of someone driving around Germany. They also don't talk about how they strip mine lignite either. Which is the worst garbage fuel on the planet. They'll condemn whole villages to demolish them so they can keep mining that trash. You can see the mines from space! Lignite is called brown coal. It's organic material that almost turned into coal, but not quite. Nuclear fission is pretty much off the table for Germany due to previous ah, transgressions. So they have to resort to desperate measures to try to generate power. Junk like solar and wind being two of them. And burning the worst fossil fuel known to Man. Really they run on Russian gas. But they do what they can do besides that.
    1
  17. The future is vivoleum!
    1
  18. The last time Yellowstone blew up was over 70,000 years ago which is before humans got here. It's practically before modern humans existed period. Although I'm sure the event screwed our ancestors up wherever they were. It would have dropped global temperatures for years.
    1
  19.  @forloveofthepage2361  they probably did not GTFO but rather just died where they were. Ecosystems recover though.
    1
  20.  @forloveofthepage2361  animals can't just hop in their cars and drive far away like we can.
    1
  21. More like a suicide volunteer. I heartily encourage everyone that wants to, to go. Bon voyage!
    1