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.
Tipping point schmipping point. "Tipping point" is an invention, a fabrication, an armageddonism. It's nonsense. Nothing is going to tip, we aren't going to be suddenly washed down a vortex. The climate will slowly warm, the seas will slowly rise, conditions will gradually change, and we will figure out how to overcome every obstacle that comes up. That's what we do.
Tipping point is just another scare tactic used by Social Justice Eco-Fascists to implement this:
Notice how gender inequality and no poverty and reduced inequalities are key parts of the mitigation mix. So if we steal money from people who have it, to give to people who claim they need it, Earth temperatures will drop. Utter madness, until you realize that climate change is a tool, not a goal. The real goals are the ones in the link.
Climate change science is all about leftist-collectivist control of men, and very little about control of climate.
I couldn't rep you again but you are 100% in line with my thinking. Most people haven't troubled to read teh Paris Accords. You're one of the few who knows there is a "gender equality" part of the so-called "climate treaty."
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrownVic95
Excellent post.
And the argument of the Eco-hallucinators can be summed up just about as simply as the highlighted two words. It's nothing but leftist hot air that, to the extent taken seriously, kills all individual freedom in it's path.
I agree. And that's why in countries where the people have an actual role selecting their leaders such as the U.S. when it gets this far a Reagan (Law of the Sea Treaty) and Trump (Paris Accords) gets elected.
Under this administration, we'll be lucky to avoid a return to the glory days of lead in gasoline, acid rain and CFC pollution.
CFC pollution is another example of a huge whopper sold to the public. As a result A/C works less well, resulting in the consumption of more "greenhouse" gases to cool indoor temperatures to manageable levels. Ever been in NYC during a heat wave when the A/C fails or there's a blackout?
And instead focus efforts on something that can be acknowledged by pretty much everyone -- the need for clean air and water?
It just seems a whole lotta energy is being spent by different groups bickering over whether climate change exists, which takes the spotlight away from other more concrete and immediate issues.
Why not set that aside and focus on keeping air and water safe from excessive pollution?
For those who are skeptical of climate change, would you be on board with having a much narrower - albeit still nationwide - set of regulations that exist only to minimize pollution/contamination levels in the air and water supply?
No one denies climate change. The debate is whether human's are causing it & if so, to what degree?
I'm absolutely on board with regulations & laws to curb pollution/contamination. We currently have mnore than nearly any other country, how many more were you thinking to add?
[quote=Mason3000;47511288]No one denies climate change. The debate is whether human's are causing it & if so, to what degree?
See this from another thread:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steelernation71
15.6" fell yesterday. Had March 14 been a month, it would have had more snow than November, January and February. Yesterday's fall was the 4th highest March daily snowfall and the 15th highest daily snowfall overall.
Since 2016, we've had the 12th highest October daily snow, 3rd highest November, 10th highest December, 2cd highest February and 3rd highest march.
As of 8am, we were up to 22.2". It has continued snowing since. Perhaps 30" from this storm?
I guess that's climate change. It's different from others. Now again, mild months also prove climate change.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mason3000
I'm absolutely on board with regulations & laws to curb pollution/contamination. We currently have more than nearly any other country, how many more were you thinking to add?
Their goal is to change the U.S. to a European model. In Europe "default mode" is that if something isn't expressly permitted it's forbidden. In the U.S. it's the other way around; unless prohibited it's permitted. The distinction is subtle but crucial.
No one denies climate change. The debate is whether human's are causing it & if so, to what degree?
I'm absolutely on board with regulations & laws to curb pollution/contamination. We currently have mnore than nearly any other country, how many more were you thinking to add?
To add? None. I'm more concerned about eliminating some of the more sensible laws on the books, like the executive order that eliminated the law against dumping contaminants into rivers.
Maybe less sea ice can be helpful. Maybe we should, as I've always said, consider the fact that climate change will be good for the planet. ......... But maybe we are learning some things:
What I'd like to know is why didn't they conjecture or publish anything about what will happen to that marine life when there are no longer any meltponds occuring? For meltponds to occur there has to be sea ice to melt. Less sea ice means less meltponds and no sea ice at all means no meltponds at all. When that finally happens, then what?
It has now been shown that agriculture is possible in permafrost areas. Warming could enhance agricultural production in northern zones heretofore unthinkable. Siberia, Canada, Alaska, etc. Another possible good effect of climate change. That's the key to dealing with it. Discovering ways to to exploit it!
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.