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.
If this season wasn't an indication of what we are in for nothing is, ran the alphabet on hurricanes and then there was several historic fires. What does it take to get peoples attention. Worrying about an increase of a few cents at the gas pump compared to the damage that will be done is short sighted.
Authoritarianism is way more of a crisis than the phantom of climate change.
Like being chased by a grizzly bear and worrying that Caspar the Friendly Ghost might be in your house if you run inside.
The subverted demoralized zombies cannot process real valid information no matter what facts are presented to them. They are programmed, and nothing anyone says or does can sway them.
They want to fight this phantom menace of climate change, and Humanity be damned, you will obey and comply to their FINAL SOLUTIONS.
If this season wasn't an indication of what we are in for nothing is, ran the alphabet on hurricanes and then there was several historic fires. What does it take to get peoples attention. Worrying about an increase of a few cents at the gas pump compared to the damage that will be done is short sighted.
Maybe globalism isn't all that good....
"Ships contribute a significant amount of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere. The International Maritime Organization (IMO) calculated that ocean-going vessels released 1.12 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide in 2007. This is equivalent to the annual greenhouse gas emissions from over 205 million cars, or more cars than were registered in the entire United States in 2006 (135 million).
Shipping is responsible for over three percent of global anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions and is growing. Over the last three decades, the shipping industry has grown by an average of five percent per year. The IMO predicts that without introducing measures to reduce emissions from shipping, carbon dioxide emissions from the industry could rise to 1.48 billion metric tons by 2020, equivalent to putting 65 million new cars on the road."
And this isn't including the negative impact it has on our oceans.
The subverted demoralized zombies cannot process real valid information no matter what facts are presented to them. They are programmed, and nothing anyone says or does can sway them.
They want to fight this phantom menace of climate change, and Humanity be damned, you will obey and comply to their FINAL SOLUTIONS.
Have you read my arguments on this thread? They're pretty good.
Pretty much every predicted climate crisis of the last 50 years hasn't come to fruition. In the 70s we were all going to die in a new ice age within a generation. Then it was ozone depletion. Then it was Gore's "Inconvenient Truth" debacle that predicted we'd be living in a Water World type situation by now. It's always some new manufactured climate crisis dujour. Global temperatures have been going up and down since the beginning of time. I suspect that if we're headed to a climate change induced extinction-level event, the best we can hope for is to delay it slightly, if that. Mother nature wins in the long term, every single time.
#1. Al gore's "An Inconvenient Truth" doesn't count. That's from a politician.
#2. Fears about the global cooling don't count either. That was 40-50 or so years ago. Also, that was after the world had experienced a brief temperature fall, and had been in a relatively flat level of temperature change after that. From what I understand, by the 1980's that thought process was pretty much gone. Also, there are people who believe that we should actually be in the beginning of an ice-age right now, but human activity has prolonged the inter-glacial period.
#3. We were causing harm to the ozone layer. Stop thinking in terms of straw-man arguments about the movie Water-World and such. More than 30 years after the Montreal Protocol, NASA scientists documented the first direct proof that Antarctic ozone is recovering because of the CFC phase-down: Ozone depletion in the region has declined 20 percent since 2005. And at the end of 2018, the United Nations confirmed in a scientific assessment that the ozone layer is recovering, projecting that it would heal completely in the (non-polar) Northern Hemisphere by the 2030s, followed by the Southern Hemisphere in the 2050s and polar regions by 2060.https://www.nationalgeographic.com/e...pletion/#close
#4. From what I understand, projections about glacial melting were wrong, but projections about temperature increase over the years have been right on target.
What other theories can you think of that were supposedly wrong, or would you like to elaborate on anything you've described so far?
#5. What signs do you see that nature is overpowering human influence, rather than the alternative? Earth's temperature has been going up pretty steadily, closely following the level of human-produced C02, while the Sun has been in a relatively steady level of activity - not increasing in activity. What natural processes can you think that might be responsible for that, besides humans? We are producing massive amounts more C02 each year than volcanoes. We are in an interglacial period. Normally, in interglacial periods the ocean outgasses more C02 than it absorbs. It is currently absorbing more C02 than it is outgassing, because humans are dumping so much C02 into the atmosphere.
Authoritarianism is way more of a crisis than the phantom of climate change.
Like being chased by a grizzly bear and worrying that Caspar the Friendly Ghost might be in your house if you run inside.
So advocate not getting away from coal then. Only advocate slowly developing electronic cars that don't use oil. Don't advocate carbon taxes in general...just stuff like the Obama presidency emissions standards stuff that would have pushed companies to make more efficient vehicles.
Some people believe peak oil (when oil prices are as cheap as they're going to get due to availability) could happen in the 2050's.
Why would we not want to shift culture to prepare more for that in advance? Oil is our society's lifeblood right now. Why would we not want slowly shift things to veer away from that, especially given how reliant we are on other nations for it.
"Ships contribute a significant amount of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere. The International Maritime Organization (IMO) calculated that ocean-going vessels released 1.12 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide in 2007. This is equivalent to the annual greenhouse gas emissions from over 205 million cars, or more cars than were registered in the entire United States in 2006 (135 million).
Shipping is responsible for over three percent of global anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions and is growing. Over the last three decades, the shipping industry has grown by an average of five percent per year. The IMO predicts that without introducing measures to reduce emissions from shipping, carbon dioxide emissions from the industry could rise to 1.48 billion metric tons by 2020, equivalent to putting 65 million new cars on the road."
And this isn't including the negative impact it has on our oceans.
Location: Was Midvalley Oregon; Now Eastside Seattle area
13,080 posts, read 7,527,706 times
Reputation: 9814
Making some coin on alternative energy, storage, and use.
Not much profit in fossil any more.
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.
