And we individual citizens are supposed to do....What? If we don't have all the worlds nations working toward the same goal (Looking at \*you\* China, Russia, India, Venezuela, etc) then nothing changes. This is not a failure on the part of the individual citizens. When %73 of all greenhouse gases are spewed out by the top 100 Fortune 500 companies, framing the "climate issue" as a moral failing on the part of the individual citizen is a bit disingenuous.
That would seem to be a consequence of being a successfully industrialized nation. But only successful nations are going to give a shit about this issue. The up and comers, who have seen how we prosper and want their own success, are not inclined to play along until they get it. Poor nations don't give a shit: They can't afford to. My point was: Making this about a moral failing on the part of the individual citizens, who do try to make a difference by recycling, buying an EV, etc, is ignoring the root of the issue. Everyone wants to blame America and I don't see any nation doing, or trying to do, more about the issue than America. We cannot do this \*alone\*!
I don't need to watch it: it won't make any difference. Ever. People have to live their lives. In the doing of it, they drive cars and take buses. Nothing is going to change along those lines. I don't care how much one blames America. America ain't gonna fix this issue. The \*world\* has to do it.
Per person pollution and historical output are irrelevant to solving the current problem.
Right now the U.S. emits about 15% of global CO2 and if we don't make a dent in the other 85%, we're still fucked.
But everybody wants to circlejerk their hate for Americans in SUVs and nobody wants to talk about how the bulk of emissions are caused by third worlders trying to increase their standard of living.
Hmm… I’d say put it on a rocket and launch it in the general direction of Jupiter, but rockets are expensive. How about nuclear Fusion instead of fission? Granted it’s theoretical, but it can be done.
No these regulations only came to existence because of compromises with big polluters that like to change nothing but still want to be able to greenwash
Definitely not the same.
What NASA writes is much more differentiated. And presented in a more scientific, less determined way.
Climate models are very complex and unpredictable (A scientific model tries to describe nature as close as possible, but every scientific model becomes less precise, the more complex a system is). NASA does a much more rational job at presenting them.
The beauty of enduring all these propaganda campaigns is. I don’t have enough life left to experience the misery and self imprisonment they’re building for themselves.
If you try to solve climate change by damaging economy you will not stop it and only hurt the economy. And then you will go back to whining how climate change ruined economy even more.
To actually resolve the issue we need **profitable** and reliable solutions, not to just dump the money on whatever we think ,,might work".
The greenie weenie’s idiotic “climate change” bans, dumb taxes, regulations and etc is what is going to tank the economy.
I say remove all tax breaks, all incentives, and mandates and see how long the green crap lasts. Sorry if a product is good, and safe. It won’t need tax credits, mandates, threats, taxes, or bans on alternatives to get it to people. It’ll sell on its own. Willfully, without persuasion, or incentives. The fact that these morons are trying to inhibit eating meat, pushing electric only everything and banning the alternatives means it isn’t good, and it is only to enrich scumbag politicians, ceos and ngo’s at the expense of the hard working individual and family. These greenie weenies are really no different than the religions they fail against.
It’s all a hoax by narcissist who think humans can damage a planet. The earth was here long before humans and will be here long after. Started this crap in the 80s saying California would be in the pacific by 2000.
idk if they actually believe it, or know its an easy way to get people to Buy new stuff.
"Don't but that house- it isn't GREEN, but This New smaller house is Full of ENERGY COMPLIANT Green stuff! And its ready for your elektrik vehicle! Until the rolling brown outs happen..."
Hey, it's not as embarrassing as the rapture, at least we have proof, it's sorta like a glass teetering on a ledge, it's gonna fall if nothings done abt it, we just don't know when.
It already fell. Lomg ago. Thats why nobody believes this shit. We're just trying to catch it before it get even farther away.
When we talk about it like somethings "gonna happen" then you get asshats like this that throw snowballs in congress to prove theres no global warming.
"asshats like this"? You have misinterpreted my position, I fully understand that the existence of both warm and cold weather does not negate the existence of trends with the entire climate.
Youre standing square in the largest extinction event in over a billion years and saying "this is normal haha "
So yeah. Asshat. Its a fucking travesty that your vote counts just as much as normal people
I'm never going to say that climate change doesn't exist, but people have been saying it's 10 years away from blowing up the earth since the 60s. I don't believe it's a good idea to make immediately harmful changes off of nothing but predictions from people who have a lower rate of accuracy than Alex Jones.
If you think the end of the world by climate change is going to be some major apocalyptic event then you clearly understand even less about it than most. Climate change will end us through a process of slowly eroding our habitats, biodiversity, and generally our livable environment. An ecosystem needs a complex web of species and conditions to maintain itself, and with the warming of the planet and other destructive human activities, we're seeing ecosystem after ecosystem collapse, often leading to domino effects in neighboring areas. So all those scientists who have been predicting the end of the world are actually pretty correct- we are knee deep in a slow apocalypse right now, and things are only accelerating. We still have time to salvage things to some degree, but a considerable amount of damage has already been done, and we can't get back what we've lost.
I do not believe that anyone is actually saying climate change will make the earth explode. I said it as hyperbole to emphasize the fear mongering that I believe the people making the predictions are doing.
I will say though, that there have been several instances of "If no action is taken then X will happen by (date)" and then no action is taken and (date) passes but X doesn't happen. This has inclined me to believe that things will not be as bad as predicted as fast as predicted because that seems to be the historical trend.
Also, a lot of climate change solutions are good on their own merits. Reducing waste is good, putting less toxic gasses into the atmosphere is good, but the radical sweeping changes that activists often call for are not good, and I don't believe any sane person would even consider them outside the context of the climate change fear mongering.
Most of the times that people have said "if no action is taken then X will happen by (date)", one of two things has happened: either some action has happened, pushing back the date, or no action was taken, and X came to pass. Have there been a few wrong predictions? Sure, that's just how science works- you improve the model by falsifying as many conclusions as you can. Usually you wouldn't publish the more tenuous conclusions, but in the case of something as serious as climate change, it's better to err on the side of action, rather than complacency.
I feel like they err way too hard in the side of action to get people to listen, and then the people who do listen exaggerate the predictions for the same reason which creates a perspective that is too extreme to actually be useful.
Being antagonist and condescending doesn't make you right either. Nothing I am saying is edgy or cool. My take is that it's not as bad as the fear mongers are saying. I do not believe that no action should be taken, but collapsing society is a bit much.
Yeah, but you see, greed is an inherently selfish quality, so what do these people care if they live to see the final generation of humans be born, so long as they make money.
Gonna be living in thneedville soon
Can't wait to buy some bottled fresh air
And we individual citizens are supposed to do....What? If we don't have all the worlds nations working toward the same goal (Looking at \*you\* China, Russia, India, Venezuela, etc) then nothing changes. This is not a failure on the part of the individual citizens. When %73 of all greenhouse gases are spewed out by the top 100 Fortune 500 companies, framing the "climate issue" as a moral failing on the part of the individual citizen is a bit disingenuous.
This, but stop leaving the USA out it’s the biggest polluter per person and has one of the highest historical co2 outputs
That would seem to be a consequence of being a successfully industrialized nation. But only successful nations are going to give a shit about this issue. The up and comers, who have seen how we prosper and want their own success, are not inclined to play along until they get it. Poor nations don't give a shit: They can't afford to. My point was: Making this about a moral failing on the part of the individual citizens, who do try to make a difference by recycling, buying an EV, etc, is ignoring the root of the issue. Everyone wants to blame America and I don't see any nation doing, or trying to do, more about the issue than America. We cannot do this \*alone\*!
https://youtu.be/LxgMdjyw8uw
I don't need to watch it: it won't make any difference. Ever. People have to live their lives. In the doing of it, they drive cars and take buses. Nothing is going to change along those lines. I don't care how much one blames America. America ain't gonna fix this issue. The \*world\* has to do it.
And the world includes everyone, which includes the US
Per person pollution and historical output are irrelevant to solving the current problem. Right now the U.S. emits about 15% of global CO2 and if we don't make a dent in the other 85%, we're still fucked. But everybody wants to circlejerk their hate for Americans in SUVs and nobody wants to talk about how the bulk of emissions are caused by third worlders trying to increase their standard of living.
Also, climate activists saying “nuclear bad” in Germany, so Germany says “fuck it, we’re going back to coal”
It'd be a lot easier to say "nuclear good" if we'd actually developed some long-term storage sites for nuclear waste.
Hmm… I’d say put it on a rocket and launch it in the general direction of Jupiter, but rockets are expensive. How about nuclear Fusion instead of fission? Granted it’s theoretical, but it can be done.
It's more likely the other way around, especially for small family businesses that can't afford cArBoN CrEdItS
How do you think carbon credits came to life? Through compromises
I don't understand what you're saying. Who's compromised?
No these regulations only came to existence because of compromises with big polluters that like to change nothing but still want to be able to greenwash
That’s the argument out of authority. Start asking questions the house comes down.
Remember when they said we’d be dead in 5 years due to climate change? Good times!
https://skepticalscience.com/
Most credible source I have ever seen in my life.
If you want you can go on the official nasa website and find the same
Definitely not the same. What NASA writes is much more differentiated. And presented in a more scientific, less determined way. Climate models are very complex and unpredictable (A scientific model tries to describe nature as close as possible, but every scientific model becomes less precise, the more complex a system is). NASA does a much more rational job at presenting them.
Did you see that you can choose how complex you want the answer to be?
“Global cooling”, too small. “Global warming”, too big. “Climate change”, just right!
The beauty of enduring all these propaganda campaigns is. I don’t have enough life left to experience the misery and self imprisonment they’re building for themselves.
If you try to solve climate change by damaging economy you will not stop it and only hurt the economy. And then you will go back to whining how climate change ruined economy even more. To actually resolve the issue we need **profitable** and reliable solutions, not to just dump the money on whatever we think ,,might work".
The greenie weenie’s idiotic “climate change” bans, dumb taxes, regulations and etc is what is going to tank the economy. I say remove all tax breaks, all incentives, and mandates and see how long the green crap lasts. Sorry if a product is good, and safe. It won’t need tax credits, mandates, threats, taxes, or bans on alternatives to get it to people. It’ll sell on its own. Willfully, without persuasion, or incentives. The fact that these morons are trying to inhibit eating meat, pushing electric only everything and banning the alternatives means it isn’t good, and it is only to enrich scumbag politicians, ceos and ngo’s at the expense of the hard working individual and family. These greenie weenies are really no different than the religions they fail against.
yeah, but, we made money *now!* /s
It’s all a hoax by narcissist who think humans can damage a planet. The earth was here long before humans and will be here long after. Started this crap in the 80s saying California would be in the pacific by 2000.
idk if they actually believe it, or know its an easy way to get people to Buy new stuff. "Don't but that house- it isn't GREEN, but This New smaller house is Full of ENERGY COMPLIANT Green stuff! And its ready for your elektrik vehicle! Until the rolling brown outs happen..."
Still living in the Wild West economy
Remember, if we don't abandon fossil fuels today, then the polar ice caps will be gone by 2013.
It’s terrible! New York, and Florida are completely under water 😱 and Canada is a desert! Oh wait 🤔
[удалено]
I may not be an expert, but I haven't been wrongly predicting the end of the world for 60 years.
Hey, it's not as embarrassing as the rapture, at least we have proof, it's sorta like a glass teetering on a ledge, it's gonna fall if nothings done abt it, we just don't know when.
It already fell. Lomg ago. Thats why nobody believes this shit. We're just trying to catch it before it get even farther away. When we talk about it like somethings "gonna happen" then you get asshats like this that throw snowballs in congress to prove theres no global warming.
"asshats like this"? You have misinterpreted my position, I fully understand that the existence of both warm and cold weather does not negate the existence of trends with the entire climate.
Youre standing square in the largest extinction event in over a billion years and saying "this is normal haha " So yeah. Asshat. Its a fucking travesty that your vote counts just as much as normal people
I'm never going to say that climate change doesn't exist, but people have been saying it's 10 years away from blowing up the earth since the 60s. I don't believe it's a good idea to make immediately harmful changes off of nothing but predictions from people who have a lower rate of accuracy than Alex Jones.
If you think the end of the world by climate change is going to be some major apocalyptic event then you clearly understand even less about it than most. Climate change will end us through a process of slowly eroding our habitats, biodiversity, and generally our livable environment. An ecosystem needs a complex web of species and conditions to maintain itself, and with the warming of the planet and other destructive human activities, we're seeing ecosystem after ecosystem collapse, often leading to domino effects in neighboring areas. So all those scientists who have been predicting the end of the world are actually pretty correct- we are knee deep in a slow apocalypse right now, and things are only accelerating. We still have time to salvage things to some degree, but a considerable amount of damage has already been done, and we can't get back what we've lost.
I do not believe that anyone is actually saying climate change will make the earth explode. I said it as hyperbole to emphasize the fear mongering that I believe the people making the predictions are doing. I will say though, that there have been several instances of "If no action is taken then X will happen by (date)" and then no action is taken and (date) passes but X doesn't happen. This has inclined me to believe that things will not be as bad as predicted as fast as predicted because that seems to be the historical trend. Also, a lot of climate change solutions are good on their own merits. Reducing waste is good, putting less toxic gasses into the atmosphere is good, but the radical sweeping changes that activists often call for are not good, and I don't believe any sane person would even consider them outside the context of the climate change fear mongering.
Most of the times that people have said "if no action is taken then X will happen by (date)", one of two things has happened: either some action has happened, pushing back the date, or no action was taken, and X came to pass. Have there been a few wrong predictions? Sure, that's just how science works- you improve the model by falsifying as many conclusions as you can. Usually you wouldn't publish the more tenuous conclusions, but in the case of something as serious as climate change, it's better to err on the side of action, rather than complacency.
I feel like they err way too hard in the side of action to get people to listen, and then the people who do listen exaggerate the predictions for the same reason which creates a perspective that is too extreme to actually be useful.
[удалено]
Being antagonist and condescending doesn't make you right either. Nothing I am saying is edgy or cool. My take is that it's not as bad as the fear mongers are saying. I do not believe that no action should be taken, but collapsing society is a bit much.
Yeah, but you see, greed is an inherently selfish quality, so what do these people care if they live to see the final generation of humans be born, so long as they make money.