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.
Population control is the most effective way to deal with climate change problems along with many other environmental and socioeconomic concerns.
Do they even bring population control up at these ineffective silly gas-guzzling resource-wasting international climate meetings?
A relatively small number of people are contributing a disproportionate amount to climate change, so you'd have to specifically control the population of rich westerners to have the most impact, and those demographics are already declining in number.
Wanting to reduce the burning of fossil fuels, which are largely burned by ICE, says nothing about other uses of petroleum writ large. I think a more challenging problem is the fact that computer modeling suggest that the amount of solar panels (current gen) needed to cover the transition away from Oil would likely wipe out about 50% of the benefit because the panels absorb heat and will cause warming at such scale, they figured this out when they were modeling the giant solar farm in the sahara.
Parking lots and roofs already absorb a lot of heat. If we put the panels over parking lots and roofs, it’s all good.
Only a small percentage of the Sahara would need to be covered to supply Europe and the Middle East. It’s still a huge area and would cost a ton of money, but it would probably not be enough to affect the global climate.
No, that isn’t what happened with Noah’s Ark. Secondly, God promised to never flood the earth again. He first flooded the earth because of mankind’s sin being so horrific. Had nothing to do with how we were treating the planet.
What's God's position on the Holocaust? Asking for a friend.
What's God's position on the Holocaust? Asking for a friend.
A book I read in early 2013, When Bad Things Happen to Good People by Harold S. Kushner, seeks the answer to the ubiquitous question of why "bad things happen to good people". Among those questions addressed was the Holocaust. His "answer" was that G-d is a friend and a support, but since Biblical times has not made a practice in intervening in human affairs. The was an effort to explain how G-d could allow such things to happen as the Shoah, floods, pandemics etc. I have come to agree with most of the book's precepts, that G-d's role is limited to setting up the world, giving humans more powers than animals or plants, and then letting go. G-d does not cause or prevent cancer or other horrible deaths.Otherwise how could G-d be a decent force and worthy of praise? Is there an answer to that question?
Bias alert: The author married my natural parents in February 1955 as a substitute, when their original Rabbi wasn't available. But on an intellectual level I buy his arguments.
Everyone knows democrats want a national emergency over climate change. Then they can lock down the nation. Everyone must stay home and rot. Little zombie polluters must be punished.
A book I read in early 2013, When Bad Things Happen to Good People by Harold S. Kushner, seeks the answer to the ubiquitous question of why "bad things happen to good people". Among those questions addressed was the Holocaust. His "answer" was that G-d is a friend and a support, but since Biblical times has not made a practice in intervening in human affairs. The was an effort to explain how G-d could allow such things to happen as the Shoah, floods, pandemics etc. I have come to agree with most of the book's precepts, that G-d's role is limited to setting up the world, giving humans more powers than animals or plants, and then letting go. G-d does not cause or prevent cancer or other horrible deaths.Otherwise how could G-d be a decent force and worthy of praise? Is there an answer to that question?
Bias alert: The author married my natural parents in February 1955 as a substitute, when their original Rabbi wasn't available. But on an intellectual level I buy his arguments.
Read about Gnostic teachings and there is your answer. In short, this world is screwed up by the demiurge. Gnosticism makes sense of it all.
Everyone knows democrats want a national emergency over climate change. Then they can lock down the nation. Everyone must stay home and rot. Little zombie polluters must be punished.
The progressive socialists rather buy Communist countries oil to enrich those socialist countries while hurting our economy and our capitalists American citizens. That is the stark truth no one wants to talk about.
Climate change is a religion. Good luck shaking them of that. A lot of them would rather die than contribute more pollution to this planet, yet they keep polluting like the rest of us. Just look at all those coal powered Tesla's lefties have been driving around... I thought we moved on from using coal for transportation like a century ago? That's why progressives should really be called regressives. They are trying to take our country and the human species backward.
"Climate change is a religion"
HMMM, I wonder WHY they changed "global warming" to "climate change"!
The Democrats need to drop the climate change issue for the following reasons:
1) We simply do not have economical alternatives to fossil fuels. Nuclear power is expensive, unpopular, and almost impossible to build because of NIMBYism. Wind and solar power are severely limited for obvious reasons: the sun doesn’t always shine and the wind doesn’t always blow. Anyone who thinks we can run everything on wind and solar should look at Germany. They have some of the highest electricity rates in Europe, and they are building new coal power plants because of the unreliability of wind and sunshine. No matter how cheap wind turbines and solar panels get, they will always be expensive to use because of the need for backup power plants and/or massive battery farms.
2) Global warming skeptics aren’t going to change their beliefs. That’s because humans don’t change their beliefs. That’s especially true when humans have a psychological, economical, or political investment in maintaining those beliefs. You simply can’t expect cattle ranchers and people who work in the fossil fuel industry to believe that AGW is real. Since it’s not possible to solve the global warming problem anyway, why lose votes by promising to solve it?
3) Due to our utterly corrupt political system, any policies meant to address global warming will hurt the poor and working classes the most. The rich write the rules. You can bet that taxes on fuel for private jets will be minimal or non-existent. The cost of meat, gasoline, electricity, and heating fuel will skyrocket, hurting low and middle income people the most.
Democrats need to drop the climate change issue, or they will continue to hemorrhage working class voters to the Republicans. It’s a losing issue.
Climate change and calling white people racist is all they have. Everything else has been a disaster for them.
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.
