Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don’t understand why you think AGW is some kind of conspiracy.
First of all, accepting the physical reality of AGW in no way obligates any kind of political action. If there’s no economical way to prevent AGW, we will simply have to adapt. We will have to abandon places like south Florida, New Orleans, and other pow-lying areas. Air conditioning will become as critical to survival as central heating in the northern states is now. All outdoor work will have to be done between midnight and 8 am in the summer. Societies without access to AC might have to live underground. Special bioengineered crops will be needed to survive extreme heat and drought. And so forth.
I was in Rapid City, SD in July 1973 when it hit 110° (link to historical data). Now that's rare. Though I was 16 at the time I didn't exactly panic either.
There have always been weather extremes, these were formerly classified as anomalies. Now they are common and reoccur every year, and as records indicate, the occurrences are usually more intense than the previous year. This pattern is the result of climate change, and it aint going away.
What were once normal temperatures, and normal rainfall amounts, are now going to be the anomaly.
I don’t understand why you think AGW is some kind of conspiracy.
First of all, accepting the physical reality of AGW in no way obligates any kind of political action. If there’s no economical way to prevent AGW, we will simply have to adapt. We will have to abandon places like south Florida, New Orleans, and other pow-lying areas. Air conditioning will become as critical to survival as central heating in the northern states is now. All outdoor work will have to be done between midnight and 8 am in the summer. Societies without access to AC might have to live underground. Special bioengineered crops will be needed to survive extreme heat and drought. And so forth.
But many of those in charge think the US should pay for all of it.
I don’t understand why you think AGW is some kind of conspiracy.
First of all, accepting the physical reality of AGW in no way obligates any kind of political action. If there’s no economical way to prevent AGW, we will simply have to adapt.
You should be right but I don't think you are. The AGW advocates hold international conference after international conference. Some with the inestimable help of scientists such as Bon Jovi and Elton John (link).Think these, listed below (source and source):
There are others prior to 1995, including notably Lima in 1992. You can be sure if that kind of money is being expended they are going to insist on "action", on the U.S.'s dime, of course.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freak80
We will have to abandon places like south Florida, New Orleans, and other pow-lying areas. Air conditioning will become as critical to survival as central heating in the northern states is now. All outdoor work will have to be done between midnight and 8 am in the summer. Societies without access to AC might have to live underground. Special bioengineered crops will be needed to survive extreme heat and drought. And so forth.
I don't think that's likely. I think the whole thing is a crock of male cattle excrement.
I don’t understand why you think AGW is some kind of conspiracy.
First of all, accepting the physical reality of AGW in no way obligates any kind of political action. If there’s no economical way to prevent AGW, we will simply have to adapt. We will have to abandon places like south Florida, New Orleans, and other pow-lying areas. Air conditioning will become as critical to survival as central heating in the northern states is now. All outdoor work will have to be done between midnight and 8 am in the summer. Societies without access to AC might have to live underground. Special bioengineered crops will be needed to survive extreme heat and drought. And so forth.
OK, I’m starting to like where this is going. Adaptation is a good response. If the scientists were advocating for the betterment of humanity utilizing technology and innovation in response to climate change, and not coming up with redistributive schemes that move us toward collectivism, I might be less inclined to impute ill will to them.
I have never thought this was a conscious conspiracy. I have always thought it was an ideology. I don’t think climate scientists conspire, I think they independently and innocently come up with their conclusions colored by collectivist redistributive ideology.
The thing is, they should not be coming up with any solutions at all. That’s not their pay grade or their training or their function. Report the data, report the conclusions. Let free societies come up with free solutions based on being rationally persuaded and figuring out how to make money off of it.
Capitalism will solve this, not coercion, and not redistribution.
There's not a whole lot can be done with China's 1.3 billion people marching relentlessly towards a consumer lifestyle with India's 1.2 billion in hot pursuit. Not to mention Africans having three times the kids of most other countries. People want to think there's a solution "if we just act now" but they're just whistling through the graveyard. If it were to be prevented it should have happened a hundred years ago, but that would have been impossible. I'm not saying we should do nothing, by all means try to find less polluting and wasteful ways to live, but its kind of like closing the barn door after the horse got out.
But many of those in charge think the US should pay for all of it.
Name one person that thinks that.
For every dollar that the US spends on renewable energy, China is spending three, making it by far the leading investor in renewable energy around the world, according to an analysis by the United Nations.
But many of those in charge think the US should pay for all of it.
Name one person that thinks that.
When you read the Paris Climate Accords there's a nifty section on financing the Climate Adjustment Fund. Conveniently the U.S. is the only likely contributor.
When you read the Paris Climate Accords there's a nifty section on financing the Climate Adjustment Fund. Conveniently the U.S. is the only likely contributor.
China is already paying three times as much as the US for climate mitigation, while Trump continues to deny that AGW is even happening.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
