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.
Wealthy communities will be able to buy their way out of the unfolding climate crisis while the poorest will suffer most, a UN report has found.
Even under the unrealistic "best-case" scenario of 1.5C of warming by 2100, many millions of people will have to choose between starvation and migration, Philip Alston, the UN Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights warned.
He predicted a split between those able to mitigate the worst effects of the warming planet and those with no means to avoid it, calling it a "climate apartheid".
The wealthy have always been in a better position to shield themselves from harm since the dawn of human civilization. If we have a world wide pandemic or widespread famine, the upper one percent will vanish off in their private jets, and the rest of the world will suffer just like always.
Both Europe and N. America are already feeling the pressure as millions of desperate migrants begin moving North, trying to escape crop failures and drought back home. We do have a major crisis on our southern border, but the problem is far more about hungry children and their families seeking asylum than it is about an army of gang members and armed murderers.
We need to understand what is actually happening and ignore the rabble rousers who want to get traction by means of political theater and plenty of fear mongering. Will we treat the underlying disease or will we continue on in our pursuit of quack cures and quick fixes which actually fix nothing? So far we have chosen the latter path while the billionaires snap up tracts of land revealed by the melting glaciers and ice sheets in the far north. Planet Earth; 0, the CEO's of Exxon and BP; 1,000.
Wealthy communities will be able to buy their way out of the unfolding climate crisis while the poorest will suffer most, a UN report has found.
Even under the unrealistic "best-case" scenario of 1.5C of warming by 2100, many millions of people will have to choose between starvation and migration, Philip Alston, the UN Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights warned. He predicted a split between those able to mitigate the worst effects of the warming planet and those with no means to avoid it, calling it a "climate apartheid".
Not at all surprising. The game plan is total control, so naturally they will lie and make false claims.
Alston is a bona fide liar. There won't be any starvation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freak80
How can we prevent the heat and rising seas?
You cannot. Even if you reduce CO2 levels to 260 ppm CO2, the sea levels will still rise 3 meters to 14 meters. It's a scientific fact. You just have to read the peer-reviewed papers published about it, and obviously, a lot of people don't want to know the truth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TreeBeard
No amount of money will be of use if temperatures keep rises in a runaway greenhouse effect.
That's another lie.
CO2 levels were 24,000 ppm to 28,000 ppm for 2.5 Billion years and there was no runaway greenhouse effect.
500 Million years ago, CO2 levels were 8,000 ppm CO2 for several Million years and there was no runaway greenhouse effect.
200 Million years ago, CO2 levels were 1,600 ppm to 2,000 ppm CO2 for several Million years and there was no runaway greenhouse effect.
Why would 800 ppm CO2 for 1,000 years cause a runaway greenhouse effect?
It wouldn't, and anyone who implies or says it would is liar.
Even if CO2 levels were 800 ppm for a Million years it wouldn't happen and if it was 1,600 ppm for Millions of years it still wouldn't happen.
Not at all surprising. The game plan is total control, so naturally they will lie and make false claims.
Alston is a bona fide liar. There won't be any starvation.
You cannot. Even if you reduce CO2 levels to 260 ppm CO2, the sea levels will still rise 3 meters to 14 meters. It's a scientific fact. You just have to read the peer-reviewed papers published about it, and obviously, a lot of people don't want to know the truth.
I long to read peer reviewed papers about 260 ppm CO2 causing a sea level rise of 14 meters. Could you please give us a link to the published study that backs your claim? Pretty please?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea
CO2 levels were 24,000 ppm to 28,000 ppm for 2.5 Billion years and there was no runaway greenhouse effect.
500 Million years ago, CO2 levels were 8,000 ppm CO2 for several Million years and there was no runaway greenhouse effect.
200 Million years ago, CO2 levels were 1,600 ppm to 2,000 ppm CO2 for several Million years and there was no runaway greenhouse effect.
Why would 800 ppm CO2 for 1,000 years cause a runaway greenhouse effect?
It wouldn't, and anyone who implies or says it would is liar.
Even if CO2 levels were 800 ppm for a Million years it wouldn't happen and if it was 1,600 ppm for Millions of years it still wouldn't happen.
Same request. I long to read about the era of CO2 levels of 28,000 ppm from a reputable source.
Not at all surprising. The game plan is total control, so naturally they will lie and make false claims.
Alston is a bona fide liar. There won't be any starvation.
You cannot. Even if you reduce CO2 levels to 260 ppm CO2, the sea levels will still rise 3 meters to 14 meters. It's a scientific fact. You just have to read the peer-reviewed papers published about it, and obviously, a lot of people don't want to know the truth.
That's another lie.
CO2 levels were 24,000 ppm to 28,000 ppm for 2.5 Billion years and there was no runaway greenhouse effect.
500 Million years ago, CO2 levels were 8,000 ppm CO2 for several Million years and there was no runaway greenhouse effect.
200 Million years ago, CO2 levels were 1,600 ppm to 2,000 ppm CO2 for several Million years and there was no runaway greenhouse effect.
Why would 800 ppm CO2 for 1,000 years cause a runaway greenhouse effect?
It wouldn't, and anyone who implies or says it would is liar.
Even if CO2 levels were 800 ppm for a Million years it wouldn't happen and if it was 1,600 ppm for Millions of years it still wouldn't happen.
LOL. the only life on the planet 2.5 billion years ago were bacteria. I guess you never heard of something called a feedback loop.
Your arguments make no sense. CO2 Levels of 1600 plus would wreak havoc on all life inhabiting this planet.
We already know that current levels are having an affect on this planet's climate.
I would rather not have my descendants playing guinea pigs to your idle speculations that C02 levels in the 1600 range is not a problem. Save that for your kids.
Last edited by TreeBeard; 06-26-2019 at 04:22 PM..
This is about what to do in the eleven years before that. With only 12 years left, we have to optimize the time we have left. I think its actually at 11.5 by now anyway.
Climate scientists refute 12-year deadline to curb global warming.
Prominent climate scientists are pushing back against the view, promoted by media coverage of recent science reports as well as climate advocates, that we have only 12 years to act on global warming or face an existential threat to humanity.
Wealthy communities will be able to buy their way out of the unfolding climate crisis while the poorest will suffer most, a UN report has found.
Even under the unrealistic "best-case" scenario of 1.5C of warming by 2100, many millions of people will have to choose between starvation and migration, Philip Alston, the UN Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights warned. He predicted a split between those able to mitigate the worst effects of the warming planet and those with no means to avoid it, calling it a "climate apartheid".
How about preventing the heat and rising seas to begin with? Unless you’re just going to allow anyone around the world to come live in upstate NY... which ain’t the brightest idea.
AGW is not real, but if it was, you couldn't stop it.
Both Europe and N. America are already feeling the pressure as millions of desperate migrants begin moving North, trying to escape crop failures and drought back home. We do have a major crisis on our southern border, but the problem is far more about hungry children and their families seeking asylum than it is about an army of gang members and armed murderers.
...and the fact the population of Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador
has increased from ~9 million in 1960....to over 34 million now
that has nothing to do with "crop failures" and "drought"
Climate scientists refute 12-year deadline to curb global warming.
Prominent climate scientists are pushing back against the view, promoted by media coverage of recent science reports as well as climate advocates, that we have only 12 years to act on global warming or face an existential threat to humanity.
why not...that's been their pattern for the past 50 years
world ends at 10.....film at 11
42
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.
