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.
Do you think all Democrats are in favor of climate change laws ?
Especially when the entire world is NOT onboard ?
FWIW that alarm has been sounding for 60 years now.
Yeah the alarm has been sounding for 60 years because no one is ****ing doing anything to substantially mitigate the problem. The rest of your post is irrelevant.
Quote:
Originally Posted by scarabchuck
There is no hatred. Just skepticism, especially on if mankind can actually reverse it.
The panic is lost on me when we hear talk of banning two stroke weed whippers, culling cattle, wiping out forests to make room for solar panels, all while we are still seeing ocean front developments, the shipping industry building more and more huge ships, air travel rising, etc.
In my mind, all these things are contributors, but the largest one, is 8 billion people and rising, consuming the resources of this planet. Until we can find a way to reduce that number, I don't see things changing dramatically. Look at how much we've progressed since the 70's, and yet it still isn't enough.
Population is not the problem. The things you described in your first paragraph are consequences of capitalism and the infinite growth paradox.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeerGeek40
But Marxism is?
It's not hatred toward the environment, at least not from some of us. Reduce/reuse/recycle, have an eye on doing with less where you can, I'm all for that.
What I'm not for is having the elites tell us that we can't have a car, or if we have one, we can only drive it X number of miles. Or we can't fly on planes any longer or have freedom of movement. That's what we are fighting tooth and nail against, because the left has long proven, on any issue - if you give them an inch they will take a mile. FACTS.
Why are you bringing up Marxism? Weird. Your conspiracy theories are noted; do you have any examples of current policy, either proposed or currently in effect, that regulate consumers in the manner you described?
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheseGoTo11
What evidence do you have that the world will be uninhabitable? Does it concern you at all that "scientists" have been making alarmist predictions like this for over 50 years and none have come true?
Why are you putting scientists in quotes? They are not "scientists," they are scientists. And there is mountains of evidence of the climate changing in the past 50 (or 60, depending on who you ask) years. Extreme rapid hurricane intensification is one of the newest pieces of evidence of the changing climate, as previous models struggle to contend with what's being observed.
Yeah the alarm has been sounding for 60 years because no one is ****ing doing anything to substantially mitigate the problem. The rest of your post is irrelevant.
Who is no-one? China? India? The West is not just doing something, it is being totally ridiculous and making things worse in the process.
Quote:
Why are you bringing up Marxism? Weird. Your conspiracy theories are noted; do you have any examples of current policy, either proposed or currently in effect, that regulate consumers in the manner you described?
Marxism is not a conspiracy theory. Remember the Russian revolution and the Soviet Union? North Korea, China, Cuba, Venezuela.
Quote:
Why are you putting scientists in quotes? They are not "scientists," they are scientists. And there is mountains of evidence of the climate changing in the past 50 (or 60, depending on who you ask) years. Extreme rapid hurricane intensification is one of the newest pieces of evidence of the changing climate, as previous models struggle to contend with what's being observed.
What extreme rapid hurricane intensification? That should tell you why we put "scientists" in quotes. Insurance damage is not the result of hurricane intensification. It is the result of human intensification. That and the fact that we are in a El Nino/La Nina cycle.
I don't have the time to explain the evolution of capitalism from the time of the Industrial Revolution until now. Plenty of books and studies track the development of capitalism and are able to explain it far better than I ever could. In a nutshell though, the quest for ever-increasing growth and profits will naturally lead to a denuded biosphere without vigorous governmental intervention to effectively regulate said growth. This has occurred in some fashion or another as capitalism has progressed, but never to the level required to ensure sustainable, closed-circuit growth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 303Guy
Who is no-one? China? India? The West is not just doing something, it is being totally ridiculous and making things worse in the process.
Marxism is not a conspiracy theory. Remember the Russian revolution and the Soviet Union? North Korea, China, Cuba, Venezuela.
What extreme rapid hurricane intensification? That should tell you why we put "scientists" in quotes. Insurance damage is not the result of hurricane intensification. It is the result of human intensification. That and the fact that we are in a El Nino/La Nina cycle.
Has it ever occurred to you that US leadership on this issue would bring developing countries like India and China on board? Are you aware that China are producing renewables at a much higher and faster rate than the US? Or that China's non-fossil fuel energy sources exceed 50% of its total installed generation capacity? Leaning on "but India!" and/or "but China!" is lazy and is used as an excuse to continue doing nothing to mitigate the problem.
The conspiracy theories I alluded to related to this: "What I'm not for is having the elites tell us that we can't have a car, or if we have one, we can only drive it X number of miles. Or we can't fly on planes any longer or have freedom of movement. That's what we are fighting tooth and nail against, because the left has long proven, on any issue - if you give them an inch they will take a mile. FACTS."
Unless you have solid evidence supporting these claims then they can be dismissed as conspiracies.
What do you mean "what extreme rapid hurricane intensification"? This is a well-known phenomenon that has been causing modeling issues for nearly a decade at this point. Here's one article about rapid intensification: https://www.osti.gov/pages/servlets/purl/1559277
And which cycle are we on? El Nino or La Nina? Do you understand positive and negative phases of the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation and how it affects hurricanes? Do you understand how hurricanes form in the first place? Or what it means for a hurricane to go through an eyewall replacement? Or what the ACE value is?
Because I have a tenuous grasp on these concepts and I have a 4 year degree in Environmental Studies, let alone people whose degrees are specifically in meteorology, atmospheric sciences, and the like. The people on this forum who unironically put scientists in quotes are some of the most scientifically-illiterate and confidently incorrect people I've ever encountered online, which is saying something considering I've been online for over 25 years at this point.
I don't have the time to explain the evolution of capitalism from the time of the Industrial Revolution until now. Plenty of books and studies track the development of capitalism and are able to explain it far better than I ever could. In a nutshell though, the quest for ever-increasing growth and profits will naturally lead to a denuded biosphere without vigorous governmental intervention to effectively regulate said growth. This has occurred in some fashion or another as capitalism has progressed, but never to the level required to ensure sustainable, closed-circuit growth.
Interesting. And I won't argue this, although, I still think the population size, and it's demands are a large part of what is happening to our environment.
What do you mean "what extreme rapid hurricane intensification"? This is a well-known phenomenon that has been causing modeling issues for nearly a decade at this point. Here's one article about rapid intensification: https://www.osti.gov/pages/servlets/purl/1559277
And which cycle are we on? El Nino or La Nina? Do you understand positive and negative phases of the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation and how it affects hurricanes? Do you understand how hurricanes form in the first place? Or what it means for a hurricane to go through an eyewall replacement? Or what the ACE value is?
You mean which part of the cycle? We are now in the El Nino phase. But you knew that.
Quote:
El Niño and La Niña are opposite phases of a naturally occurring global climate cycle known as the El Niño Southern Oscillation (or ENSO)
Regarding hurricane intensity
Quote:
Claim: The frequency (and strength) of hurricanes making landfall in the continental U.S. has declined slightly since 1900.
Rated by PolitiFact: Half True
Half true? Ok.
Quote:
"There aren’t more powerful hurricanes either. The frequency of Category 3 and above hurricanes making landfall since 1900 is also trending slightly down,"
So who am I to believe? Sure, there has been an increase in certain regions making the overall a slight increase I think they said.
Interesting. And I won't argue this, although, I still think the population size, and it's demands are a large part of what is happening to our environment.
You'd be wrong, because the population of the developed world, which accounts for some 1.5 billion people of around 8 billion total, consumes far greater resources and at far larger amounts than the developing world. Taking this line of thought through to its natural conclusion, the population of the developed world should be reduced before the population of the developing world to achieve this mythical "balance" that is always bandied about but never defined.
Capitalism as we know it is the problem, not human beings.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 303Guy
You mean which part of the cycle? We are now in the El Nino phase. But you knew that.
Regarding hurricane intensity
Half true? Ok.
So who am I to believe? Sure, there has been an increase in certain regions making the overall a slight increase I think they said.
Yes, I did know we are in an El Nino cycle. Did you know that offhand as well, or did you need to look it up? I looked up the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation because I couldn't remember if we were in a positive or negative cycle (it is currently positive).
As for the rest of your post, I'm not sure what it has to do with rapid hurricane intensification in either the Atlantic or Pacific basins, to say nothing of other basins such as the Indian Ocean. As I said before, it is a relatively recent phenomenon that is causing continued headaches as scientists try to figure out the mechanisms supporting said intensifications so models can be updated.
We have 'smashed through the 2 degree mark' now. Watch out! The planet may never recover, unless we give a one world government unlimited power (and money) to fight this crisis!
------------------------------------------------------------
The Earth’s temperature briefly rose above a crucial threshold that scientists have been warning for decades could have catastrophic and irreversible impacts on the planet and its ecosystems, data shared by a prominent climate scientist shows.
For the first time, the global average temperature on Friday last week was more than 2 degrees Celsius hotter than levels before industrialization, according to preliminary data shared on X by Samantha Burgess, deputy director of the Copernicus Climate Change Service, based in Europe.
It's pretty damn cold right now. I could use some globaloney warming. Even two degrees.
Every single COP meeting has hundreds of PRIVATE JETS flying in, limos for all of them and then they hob nob about climate change and then all fly home.
That is the real world my friend and it just happened again with COP28.
They are hypocrites to say the least.
Even darling Greta refuses to condem OPEC or Asian countries or private planes.
She only condemns the west. Why ?
Here she is laughing it off and not answering a direct question....
We are apparently the users, and the ones who pioneered its use, and which are “furthest from the land”, meaning it is also the west which will have the hardest time altering lifestyles and practices.
Not a judgment call, but I instantly saw a logical through way to that line of thought.
You'd be wrong, because the population of the developed world, which accounts for some 1.5 billion people of around 8 billion total, consumes far greater resources and at far larger amounts than the developing world. Taking this line of thought through to its natural conclusion, the population of the developed world should be reduced before the population of the developing world to achieve this mythical "balance" that is always bandied about but never defined.
Capitalism as we know it is the problem, not human beings.
.
I guess it's the price to be paid to live the lifestyles we do in a developed nation. I'd much rather live in a developed country, than someplace like Somalia or the equivalent.
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.
