Global warming conspiracy exposed
Comments
-
I have an idea.
-
I'm hearing costs of what but are way too high cause CO2 restrictions. Like milk would only be 50 cents a gallon. Trump will fix it and bring costs down.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
It might be a good idea to reduce the voluntary human emissions of CO2.RaceBannon said:
So what works to change it?WilburHooksHands said:The effect is here:
It is inarguable that we are contributing to an anomalous level of CO2 based on the norms of the current geological epoch. It's absolutely true that this isn't the first time levels have been that high, but at that time human habitation wasn't a thing. A warmer earth may be better for mammals in a vacuum, but it's not better for our current geographic patterns and the way humanity is set up for the foreseeable future. Our cities, systems, and livelihoods are build around reasonably predictable climate patterns. The higher that level gets, the less predictable those become, and that's a huge issue for people that aren't 70 year olds in Temecula.
Less predictable weather? Seriously?
Next
Will it help? I have no idea.
Will it hurt? No. -
The only thing that can be done, as Boobs said, is to reduce emissions drastically and get back to reasonable, say 1950 levels. That would take a massive global initiative that people will balk at because they are making money now and don't give a fuck what kind of world their grandkids have to live in later.RaceBannon said:
So what works to change it?WilburHooksHands said:The effect is here:
It is inarguable that we are contributing to an anomalous level of CO2 based on the norms of the current geological epoch. It's absolutely true that this isn't the first time levels have been that high, but at that time human habitation wasn't a thing. A warmer earth may be better for mammals in a vacuum, but it's not better for our current geographic patterns and the way humanity is set up for the foreseeable future. Our cities, systems, and livelihoods are build around reasonably predictable climate patterns. The higher that level gets, the less predictable those become, and that's a huge issue for people that aren't 70 year olds in Temecula.
Less predictable weather? Seriously?
Next
Climate is not really weather, climate is weather over time. Significant shifts in climate will start to affect things like where you can grow food and where you get water from. These are not problems that you will have to deal with in your lifetime. These are long term problems with longer term solutions, but will be real and crippling one day if the solutions are not set into motion.
The rising sea levels aren't a danger in the sense of short term flooding. There are bigger dangers like the amounts of fresh water being introduced from massive melt-offs and disrupting ocean currents, which are huge factors in climate as well. The earth is a system and the system will try to correct itself. Problem is, the system doesn't give a fuck about us.
-
I like to side with politicians, pundits, and oil companies and say that climate scientists are the ones that are lying for profit.
-
Which one of you fucks is 400 thousand years old that was measuring this shit?WilburHooksHands said:The effect is here:
It is inarguable that we are contributing to an anomalous level of CO2 based on the norms of the current geological epoch. It's absolutely true that this isn't the first time levels have been that high, but at that time human habitation wasn't a thing. A warmer earth may be better for mammals in a vacuum, but it's not better for our current geographic patterns and the way humanity is set up for the foreseeable future. Our cities, systems, and livelihoods are build around reasonably predictable climate patterns. The higher that level gets, the less predictable those become, and that's a huge issue for people that aren't 70 year olds in Temecula. -
I know it's fun to bash boomers but we cleaned up the air and water.
We are reducing CO2 but it is also a vital part of the lifestyle we ALL enjoy.
So let's cut the hysteria and do actual cost benefit analysis
Make sense? -
Same person that you quote when you say the temperature variation now is normal compared with the last millions of years.Sledog said:
Which one of you fucks is 400 thousand years old that was measuring this shit?WilburHooksHands said:The effect is here:
It is inarguable that we are contributing to an anomalous level of CO2 based on the norms of the current geological epoch. It's absolutely true that this isn't the first time levels have been that high, but at that time human habitation wasn't a thing. A warmer earth may be better for mammals in a vacuum, but it's not better for our current geographic patterns and the way humanity is set up for the foreseeable future. Our cities, systems, and livelihoods are build around reasonably predictable climate patterns. The higher that level gets, the less predictable those become, and that's a huge issue for people that aren't 70 year olds in Temecula. -
In a case like this, the benefit is not measurable to those weighing the costs. The benefit is 200 years away. Its a matter of trusting the data and trusting science, which people do every day when they ride in a tube of metal 30,000 ft in the air or take their medication. For some weird reason they stop when it fucks with their bottom line.RaceBannon said:I know it's fun to bash boomers but we cleaned up the air and water.
We are reducing CO2 but it is also a vital part of the lifestyle we ALL enjoy.
So let's cut the hysteria and do actual cost benefit analysis
Make sense? -
You? are also trying to get rid of the EPA, so let's not jerk ourselves off quite yet.RaceBannon said:I know it's fun to bash boomers but we cleaned up the air and water.
We are reducing CO2 but it is also a vital part of the lifestyle we ALL enjoy.
So let's cut the hysteria and do actual cost benefit analysis
Make sense?
A cost-benefit analysis really depends on how old you are and whether you are altruistic for future generations. Though either way fossil fuels are a limited resource. Establishing infrastructure for renewables is a good thing since it will be required at some point (unless we figure out fusion). Fuck the coal bullshit, I'd rather see photovoltaic plants in WV and PA. -
Race was there.Sledog said:
Which one of you fucks is 400 thousand years old that was measuring this shit?WilburHooksHands said:The effect is here:
It is inarguable that we are contributing to an anomalous level of CO2 based on the norms of the current geological epoch. It's absolutely true that this isn't the first time levels have been that high, but at that time human habitation wasn't a thing. A warmer earth may be better for mammals in a vacuum, but it's not better for our current geographic patterns and the way humanity is set up for the foreseeable future. Our cities, systems, and livelihoods are build around reasonably predictable climate patterns. The higher that level gets, the less predictable those become, and that's a huge issue for people that aren't 70 year olds in Temecula.
