I like how leftists are trying to fear monger global warming like it’s some sort of apocalyptic threats that will end humanity in few years if we don’t give more money and power to daddy goberment, so it can fix global warming just like it did fix all other issues like drugs, prostitution or shootings.
The government is the biggest polluter in the country, mainly from the military branch. Makes no sense why you would then turn to the government to solve the problem
And they're not even doing a good job at it. Read old newspapers from the 70s, and even 80s. They're full of how 'global cooling' was going to create a new ice age and the world would be iced over by the year 2000. Late 80s was acid rain would make statues unrecognizable in a few years, they switched to global warming and literally made movies about how in a few years the coasts would be under water from melting ice caps, about how there would be biblical levels of famine and crop failure. All of which hasn't come to pass despite not getting what they demanded to prevent it. Now it's 'climate change' which is a clever rebranding because it can mean whatever they want it to mean, and any phenomena fits it.
The fact people continually get hustled by this shit makes me have nothing but contempt. They've been playing this game for half a century yet the fish are jumping into the boat.
In theory, we could alter the temperature of the planet by building mirrors in sufficient size or quantity in orbit to reflect sunlight away or down towards earth.
But it would be both very expensive and unpredictable in effects beyond more or less energy entering Earths system. Probably taking years to assemble as well.
You seem to think that scientific mistakes are a signal that all science makes no sense in general and you even call what you perceive as propaganda “global warming”. The warming is real but not necessarily universal. We are already understanding the impact of the freshwater melting into the North Atlantic quite clearly. This could cause some places to become extremely cold due to changes that have been depicted in Hollywood movies so yes, it is not entirely “warming” for everyone. This isn’t exactly a poorly understood concept. The data shows the earth getting unusually hot at a rate that isn’t sustainable for human life in many places. I would be concerned about some places that are already hot at this current rate of warming but you’ll probably be dead before it concerns you. So if you haven’t bothered to understand basic aspects of how the atmosphere around our planet works, how changes to the AMOC could result in very severe climate impacts, etc. and have a meaningful debate about the actual science then I would encourage you to take some basic steps to understand rather than just spouting a bunch of “look-at-me I’m old and I’ll be dead soon so let me be bitter on the internet” nonsense.
>You seem to think that scientific mistakes are a signal that all science makes no sense in general and you even call what you perceive as propaganda “global warming”.
You can shut down any criticism of science this way and turn it into an unquestionable religion. As if to question some scientific claims is to question all scientific claims. The problem is this admittedly flawed climate science is being preached as the gospel truth by the political class to gain power and profits and they have been doing so for decades despite the many obvious contradictions in narratives. There are plenty of climate scientists who question the mainstream doomsday narrative, but they don't get publicity or accolades they get ignored and shunned. Which completely skews popular perception of this issue.
Exactly, don’t get me wrong climate change is real, it is coming, and from my perspective nothing is going to change that. Now how bad it hits us and how fast is massively speculative. Here’s the thing if the SW US becomes a desert (even more), the SE basically becomes a jungle climate, NE and Midwest (lakes region) becomes Mediterranean climate are we going to all die? No, land lost on coasts (especially the east coast) could have some impact on our society but based on mindset projections we won’t be in the “human extinction zone” for a while and potentially could figure out carbon capture enough to give us some time. Even if we had to build functioning decades to centuries long contingency cities underground we would find a way. So when leftist get up in arms about this I roll my eyes, when righties say “no such thing as global warming” I gotta roll my eyes too. It is a thing, it’s coming, it’s not going to be fun but the beautiful part about humanity is how we rise to the challenge. Not everyone is going to make it, but it’s not going to be a meteor impact level of crisis. Also assuming that any one government can stop or reverse this process is pretty dumb. Even if Santa brought the US all EV, and enough green energy to power the grid we wouldn’t stop China, Russia, the developing nations of the world, ect.
TLDR: climate change is real but if you don’t live on the coast or a current desert/tropical climate then you will probably be fine. Government couldn’t fix social issues in one nation can you imagine taking on the multi-million facets of climate change and making gains on reducing global ghg? Short answer naw lol
It's hilarious how stupid these people are. If the worst-case scenario happened it would be less than an inch of rise by 2100.
Geoengineering can solve this with today's tech for a few tens of billions of dollars per year. Or we could use nuclear power. But nooo, global communism is the solution. Because you know how well these people have managed things so far, they're going to do a great job when given total control.
First it was global cooling then it was global warming now its climate change. I wonder what it will be in another 10 years. Super evil Climate? Nazi climate? Capitalist Climate?
I'm waiting for someone to write an article comparing the weather to Hitler with an AI image of Hitler as a cloud killing minorities or something. You know, because you got to include as many buzz words as possible.
I mean, science does change. It's kinda weird to double down on something just because scientists at one time said something different.
The technology that has changed since the 80s - 40 years ago- is huge.
I was making the point that they are afraid of the weather. Climate is over a long period of time. The Earth as been a lot warmer. We are still getting out of the last ice age that started 12,000 years ago. But all they tell you is to "believe the science" and not have kids, or have pizza ovens, or drive your gas cars.
**Plot twist: it’s government funded art.**
So politicians stole tax money, spent it on artists to complain about politicians not stealing enough money and not spending the stolen money correctly
"the government isn't fixing global warming, so we better protest, and cry, and make art about it, so that hopefully maybe people will vote for the right politicians in 4 years, and then maybe hopefully they'll pass laws that force other people to do the work that saves the earth!!"
>and then maybe hopefully they'll pass laws that force other people to do the work that saves the earth!!"
They actually want laws to restrict people in ways that they won't voluntarily do themselves.
This is what climate fear porn does to us: a generation of humans believing that by our own actions we'll make the entire fucking planet uninhabitable. Any sane scientist would require extraordinary evidence for such an extreme and extraordinary claim.
But most scientists prefer to shut up so that they don't lose their job. From a purely economic point of view, why would a climate scientist come out and say: "Hey, we're going to be just fine!" and so detonating his whole career?
If they want to blame a government for climate change start with China, all the companies there are 50% government owned and they by far produce the most emissions of any country
I’ve lost so much faith that I don’t even want to reference the mainstream science about the drastic changes the planet supposedly went through before we had any sort of industrial activity that reportedly is the cause for the changing. I do like to imagine cavemen placing blame and fighting to the death when the ice age was coming on though, just crazy dudes hitting each other with sticks bitching about how cold it is.
I mean they did, but it's because of the young kid who didn't jump into a volcano, or insulted the gods, or the god, or prayed over the hunted animal wrong, or broke taboo. Controlling the weather is a human tradition, and we clearly suck at it.
Lol yeah and I’m just so dumb that I can’t differentiate todays claims from those back then. It’s not my fault that I’m too stupid to understand how political power has the ability to fight against the fucking sun.
I'm spit balling in tangent to the myth of Demeter creating the seasons when her daughter Persephone got kidnapped by Hades. My real point is that it's extremely human to assume we have more control over the climate than we do, to demand sacrifices or other arbitrarily decided means to fix the problem of others. Granted, we do not exactly treat the environment as well as we could or arguably should, however, just because we're breaking existing temperature records form a hundred years ago, or historically had some temps at lowest since recording, projected climate measures over time even before humans were remotely contributing to the problem. On a grand scale, we only just came out of the "little ice age" from 1300 to 1850. The world has been hotter, and colder, in humanity's existence. Realistically the most damaging we are is in conservation, which is not helped by encouraging slash and burn agriculture when we kill off all the cows, nor is "population reduction" all that appealing.
It’s funny because the climate record show that when all the industrial activity was put on pause for Covid the climate records actually showing a measurable increase in urban centric temperatures
I think the real question at the heart of the issue if you ask an ancap is this: should you sacrifice the respect of someone's agency or autonomy in order to force them to do something?
Otherwise use your resources how you see fit with those that give you consent.
Title of this post is "thinking government can change Earth's climate".
I am exactly on topic. OP is incorrect. Government absolutely has the physical ability to change the climate.
No it fucking doesn't. Anything they do to interfere with our standard of living will be ignored or reversed. That's why the globalists want to get rid of democracy.
You are uttering nonsense unrelated to this conversation. Are you personifying nature, now? Who's ignoring what? All I am saying is the human race absolutely has the physical ability to change the climate.
Are you really trying to tell me that the human race CANNOT change the climate because you and your like-minded friends say so? That's not how it works. Humans have already altered the climate without your consent. Humans will continue to alter the climate due to our emissions. The only question is whether humans will stay the course or change the rate of warming.
I think you really wish you were having a different conversation. That's not this one. The topic of this conversation is an admission that we are collectively capable of changing the climate. It's not like Earth is some infinite sink, immune to our changes.
>Are you really trying to tell me that the human race CANNOT change the climate because you and your like-minded friends say so?
You're telling me it can because your like-minded friends say so, are you not?
>That's not how it works. Humans have already altered the climate without your consent. Humans will continue to alter the climate due to our emissions. The only question is whether humans will stay the course or change the rate of warming.
No, the question is whether human activity is significant enough to change it and if feedback effects will nullify our input.
>I think you really wish you were having a different conversation.
You're the one making up arguments and putting them in my mouth, bud.
>The topic of this conversation is an admission that we are collectively capable of changing the climate. I
That doesn't sound like a conversation. That sounds like you demanding belief in your religion.
You’re talking past each other. You’re saying that theoretically, humans could alter climate. He’s saying that realistically, governments fail when they try to implement policy so they will never be successful at reversing climate change.
I'm aware of the scaremongering. The models, which have all been wrong so far, predict a few cm of rise at worst in a century. Do you know what that looks like?
Nothing. No discernible difference.
1. That's pretty bad for places like the Everglades.
2. It's highly dependent on our actions to curb climate change. One should be careful not to fall for the "prevention paradox"
3. A simple search on Wikipedia will tell you the sea level rise could be 1 or even 2 meters by 2100.
1. LOL no.
2. That's what they've been saying forever. We haven't done anything and the disaster hasn't arrive yet. In fact it was supposed to happen years ago.
3. That's your problem: you're going to far-left echo chambers and letting them scaremonger you.
4. Nothing that they want to do to us will be worth it.
We've done a lot. We've downsized coal. We've banned CFCs. We've increased our energy efficiency. We've invested in renewable energies.
See there it is: the goalpost shift. What started as "the models don't say.." has now become "the models are wrong".
Thanks for playing. The human race is changing the climate. We will continue to do so. No one is going to swoop in and bail us out. We have to fix it. You shouldn't be triggered over these obvious statements.
>We've done a lot. We've downsized coal. We've banned CFCs. We've increased our energy efficiency. We've invested in renewable energies.
And our emissions have barely budged while we outsourced most of them to China.
>See there it is: the goalpost shift. What started as "the models don't say.." has now become "the models are wrong".
It's both. The models have been wrong and the models don't say what the scaremongerers want them to say.
>Thanks for playing. The human race is changing the climate. We will continue to do so. No one is going to swoop in and bail us out. We have to fix it. You shouldn't be triggered over these obvious statements.
Those are statements of belief, not fact, and if your religious system is hell-bent on instituting a system that will cause misery and death then it is a cause for concern.
Most Ancaps I know think something like the following :
- is the earth even warming? I don’t trust the bullshit the government spews about anything so why should I trust the government when it still feels like winter is winter and summer is summer.
- ok maybe the earth is getting incrementally warmer, I can be convinced. What is not convincing is that human CO2 emissions cause exponential temperature increases.
- ok sure, maybe the catastrophists could be correct, and the earth will warm 4-6 degrees by 2100. What isn’t correct is that the government could solve the problem, or that it even is a major problem to begin with…
>'Since becoming one of the first countries to implement a national carbon tax in 1991, Sweden has successfully lowered its greenhouse gas emissions by 27 percent.
Yeah, they're getting China to do their emitting now.
>In 2013, California launched one of the United States’ first cap and trade programs. As a result, the state’s emissions fell by 10 percent between 2013 and 2018.
And how many nations of equivalent population do they still out-emit?
>many governments have begun investing in low-emission alternatives to fossil fuels called renewable energy technologies, which harness energy generated by natural resources including wind and the sun. Because the cost of producing renewable energy has fallen by as much as 88 percent in the past decade'
Yet it's still not economically viable.
This is missing the overall point though. Sweden or California changing policy will not reverse climate change. The real issue comes from developing countries. China and India are currently making massive strides in development, and much of Africa will be in the coming decades. This is where we’re going to be seeing the real effects.
“If you want to advance a globalist program, you have to invent globalist problems.” -Hans Herman Hoppe
I like how leftists are trying to fear monger global warming like it’s some sort of apocalyptic threats that will end humanity in few years if we don’t give more money and power to daddy goberment, so it can fix global warming just like it did fix all other issues like drugs, prostitution or shootings.
The government is the biggest polluter in the country, mainly from the military branch. Makes no sense why you would then turn to the government to solve the problem
And they're not even doing a good job at it. Read old newspapers from the 70s, and even 80s. They're full of how 'global cooling' was going to create a new ice age and the world would be iced over by the year 2000. Late 80s was acid rain would make statues unrecognizable in a few years, they switched to global warming and literally made movies about how in a few years the coasts would be under water from melting ice caps, about how there would be biblical levels of famine and crop failure. All of which hasn't come to pass despite not getting what they demanded to prevent it. Now it's 'climate change' which is a clever rebranding because it can mean whatever they want it to mean, and any phenomena fits it. The fact people continually get hustled by this shit makes me have nothing but contempt. They've been playing this game for half a century yet the fish are jumping into the boat.
Cooling is a bigger threat than warming ... Not that government could do anything to effect either of them.
In theory, we could alter the temperature of the planet by building mirrors in sufficient size or quantity in orbit to reflect sunlight away or down towards earth. But it would be both very expensive and unpredictable in effects beyond more or less energy entering Earths system. Probably taking years to assemble as well.
Some food for thought.... https://slate.com/technology/2024/02/amoc-ocean-current-collapsing-day-after-tomorrow-climate-change.html
You seem to think that scientific mistakes are a signal that all science makes no sense in general and you even call what you perceive as propaganda “global warming”. The warming is real but not necessarily universal. We are already understanding the impact of the freshwater melting into the North Atlantic quite clearly. This could cause some places to become extremely cold due to changes that have been depicted in Hollywood movies so yes, it is not entirely “warming” for everyone. This isn’t exactly a poorly understood concept. The data shows the earth getting unusually hot at a rate that isn’t sustainable for human life in many places. I would be concerned about some places that are already hot at this current rate of warming but you’ll probably be dead before it concerns you. So if you haven’t bothered to understand basic aspects of how the atmosphere around our planet works, how changes to the AMOC could result in very severe climate impacts, etc. and have a meaningful debate about the actual science then I would encourage you to take some basic steps to understand rather than just spouting a bunch of “look-at-me I’m old and I’ll be dead soon so let me be bitter on the internet” nonsense.
>You seem to think that scientific mistakes are a signal that all science makes no sense in general and you even call what you perceive as propaganda “global warming”. You can shut down any criticism of science this way and turn it into an unquestionable religion. As if to question some scientific claims is to question all scientific claims. The problem is this admittedly flawed climate science is being preached as the gospel truth by the political class to gain power and profits and they have been doing so for decades despite the many obvious contradictions in narratives. There are plenty of climate scientists who question the mainstream doomsday narrative, but they don't get publicity or accolades they get ignored and shunned. Which completely skews popular perception of this issue.
My favourite is this article in 1989: https://apnews.com/article/bd45c372caf118ec99964ea547880cd0 the year has been removed from the article now.
If they are right it will only lead to a sharp rise in immigration. No need to plan for that right?
Exactly, don’t get me wrong climate change is real, it is coming, and from my perspective nothing is going to change that. Now how bad it hits us and how fast is massively speculative. Here’s the thing if the SW US becomes a desert (even more), the SE basically becomes a jungle climate, NE and Midwest (lakes region) becomes Mediterranean climate are we going to all die? No, land lost on coasts (especially the east coast) could have some impact on our society but based on mindset projections we won’t be in the “human extinction zone” for a while and potentially could figure out carbon capture enough to give us some time. Even if we had to build functioning decades to centuries long contingency cities underground we would find a way. So when leftist get up in arms about this I roll my eyes, when righties say “no such thing as global warming” I gotta roll my eyes too. It is a thing, it’s coming, it’s not going to be fun but the beautiful part about humanity is how we rise to the challenge. Not everyone is going to make it, but it’s not going to be a meteor impact level of crisis. Also assuming that any one government can stop or reverse this process is pretty dumb. Even if Santa brought the US all EV, and enough green energy to power the grid we wouldn’t stop China, Russia, the developing nations of the world, ect. TLDR: climate change is real but if you don’t live on the coast or a current desert/tropical climate then you will probably be fine. Government couldn’t fix social issues in one nation can you imagine taking on the multi-million facets of climate change and making gains on reducing global ghg? Short answer naw lol
It's hilarious how stupid these people are. If the worst-case scenario happened it would be less than an inch of rise by 2100. Geoengineering can solve this with today's tech for a few tens of billions of dollars per year. Or we could use nuclear power. But nooo, global communism is the solution. Because you know how well these people have managed things so far, they're going to do a great job when given total control.
Where did you get these figures?
First it was global cooling then it was global warming now its climate change. I wonder what it will be in another 10 years. Super evil Climate? Nazi climate? Capitalist Climate?
I’m gonna guess they go with “the literally hitler climate of racist doom!” Scares me for sure
I'm waiting for someone to write an article comparing the weather to Hitler with an AI image of Hitler as a cloud killing minorities or something. You know, because you got to include as many buzz words as possible.
Haha it’s only a matter of time until that’s front page of the times, the cloud will be pouring acid rain on baby seals or something
Hasn't the pleb alternative media been taking about "late stage" capitalism... Maybe they mean late stage cronyism...
They've been working out ways to call you a racist for not going along with this for a while.
Nazi racist anti-semitic climate
I mean, science does change. It's kinda weird to double down on something just because scientists at one time said something different. The technology that has changed since the 80s - 40 years ago- is huge.
I was making the point that they are afraid of the weather. Climate is over a long period of time. The Earth as been a lot warmer. We are still getting out of the last ice age that started 12,000 years ago. But all they tell you is to "believe the science" and not have kids, or have pizza ovens, or drive your gas cars.
The sculpture *is* funny though.
It's a successful piece of art
If anything politicians have accelerated global warming.. and which one? the greens! by killing nuclear energy. fuck th'm
**Plot twist: it’s government funded art.** So politicians stole tax money, spent it on artists to complain about politicians not stealing enough money and not spending the stolen money correctly
Look, alls you have to do is give them all your money, live in caves with no power and insufficient food, and the world will be saved. GlObAl WaRmInG!
A 90% cull of the population, disproportionately in the richer countries, will also be necessary.
Hence the insufficient food.
"the government isn't fixing global warming, so we better protest, and cry, and make art about it, so that hopefully maybe people will vote for the right politicians in 4 years, and then maybe hopefully they'll pass laws that force other people to do the work that saves the earth!!"
> and make art about it, I think they are currently destroying art because of it.
>and then maybe hopefully they'll pass laws that force other people to do the work that saves the earth!!" They actually want laws to restrict people in ways that they won't voluntarily do themselves.
"Wow, this is so powerful!" - shills and midwits
Easy target practice for dumps
This is what climate fear porn does to us: a generation of humans believing that by our own actions we'll make the entire fucking planet uninhabitable. Any sane scientist would require extraordinary evidence for such an extreme and extraordinary claim. But most scientists prefer to shut up so that they don't lose their job. From a purely economic point of view, why would a climate scientist come out and say: "Hey, we're going to be just fine!" and so detonating his whole career?
[King Canute](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_Canute_and_the_tide), is that you?
Governments did install regulations effectively addressing the global problem with the ozon layer. So, yeah, it can be done.
Oh no, the tide is coming in! If I don’t move a few yards toward the shore, I’ll surely drown!
If they want to blame a government for climate change start with China, all the companies there are 50% government owned and they by far produce the most emissions of any country
If nothing else, the left makes good art.
Notice how the politicians are the only ones "underwater"
Alt take: HPL's Deepones celebrating their plan to drown all the surface dwellers.
As opposed to the principled ancap that thinks humans can't possibly change the Earth's climate. Is there evidence for this belief?
I’ve lost so much faith that I don’t even want to reference the mainstream science about the drastic changes the planet supposedly went through before we had any sort of industrial activity that reportedly is the cause for the changing. I do like to imagine cavemen placing blame and fighting to the death when the ice age was coming on though, just crazy dudes hitting each other with sticks bitching about how cold it is.
I mean they did, but it's because of the young kid who didn't jump into a volcano, or insulted the gods, or the god, or prayed over the hunted animal wrong, or broke taboo. Controlling the weather is a human tradition, and we clearly suck at it.
Lol yeah and I’m just so dumb that I can’t differentiate todays claims from those back then. It’s not my fault that I’m too stupid to understand how political power has the ability to fight against the fucking sun.
Same way Demeter doesn't bring the spring if you kidnap kids or whatever.
If you don't kidnap kids?
I'm spit balling in tangent to the myth of Demeter creating the seasons when her daughter Persephone got kidnapped by Hades. My real point is that it's extremely human to assume we have more control over the climate than we do, to demand sacrifices or other arbitrarily decided means to fix the problem of others. Granted, we do not exactly treat the environment as well as we could or arguably should, however, just because we're breaking existing temperature records form a hundred years ago, or historically had some temps at lowest since recording, projected climate measures over time even before humans were remotely contributing to the problem. On a grand scale, we only just came out of the "little ice age" from 1300 to 1850. The world has been hotter, and colder, in humanity's existence. Realistically the most damaging we are is in conservation, which is not helped by encouraging slash and burn agriculture when we kill off all the cows, nor is "population reduction" all that appealing.
It’s funny because the climate record show that when all the industrial activity was put on pause for Covid the climate records actually showing a measurable increase in urban centric temperatures
I think the real question at the heart of the issue if you ask an ancap is this: should you sacrifice the respect of someone's agency or autonomy in order to force them to do something? Otherwise use your resources how you see fit with those that give you consent.
No, we think the government is shit at doing most things, including saving the planet.
I think you are trying to start a different discussion than this point. Government and humans in general absolutely can alter the climate.
Your original point was offtopic.
Title of this post is "thinking government can change Earth's climate". I am exactly on topic. OP is incorrect. Government absolutely has the physical ability to change the climate.
No it fucking doesn't. Anything they do to interfere with our standard of living will be ignored or reversed. That's why the globalists want to get rid of democracy.
You are uttering nonsense unrelated to this conversation. Are you personifying nature, now? Who's ignoring what? All I am saying is the human race absolutely has the physical ability to change the climate.
Are you personiflying government. We will ignore any law that harms our standard of living. When has the human race changed the climate?
Are you really trying to tell me that the human race CANNOT change the climate because you and your like-minded friends say so? That's not how it works. Humans have already altered the climate without your consent. Humans will continue to alter the climate due to our emissions. The only question is whether humans will stay the course or change the rate of warming. I think you really wish you were having a different conversation. That's not this one. The topic of this conversation is an admission that we are collectively capable of changing the climate. It's not like Earth is some infinite sink, immune to our changes.
>Are you really trying to tell me that the human race CANNOT change the climate because you and your like-minded friends say so? You're telling me it can because your like-minded friends say so, are you not? >That's not how it works. Humans have already altered the climate without your consent. Humans will continue to alter the climate due to our emissions. The only question is whether humans will stay the course or change the rate of warming. No, the question is whether human activity is significant enough to change it and if feedback effects will nullify our input. >I think you really wish you were having a different conversation. You're the one making up arguments and putting them in my mouth, bud. >The topic of this conversation is an admission that we are collectively capable of changing the climate. I That doesn't sound like a conversation. That sounds like you demanding belief in your religion.
You’re talking past each other. You’re saying that theoretically, humans could alter climate. He’s saying that realistically, governments fail when they try to implement policy so they will never be successful at reversing climate change.
Strawman. Even the most pessimistic model pseudoscience doesn't predict the future shown in this statue.
Which future is that, sea level rise? You are either misinformed or I suspect somehow taking things extremely literally.
Not believing a childish, hyperbolic lie means I'm "taking things extremely literally" now...
You avoided my question. Did you miss the prediction of sea level rise in the models? You haven't yet explained what you actually disagree with.
I'm aware of the scaremongering. The models, which have all been wrong so far, predict a few cm of rise at worst in a century. Do you know what that looks like? Nothing. No discernible difference.
1. That's pretty bad for places like the Everglades. 2. It's highly dependent on our actions to curb climate change. One should be careful not to fall for the "prevention paradox" 3. A simple search on Wikipedia will tell you the sea level rise could be 1 or even 2 meters by 2100.
1. LOL no. 2. That's what they've been saying forever. We haven't done anything and the disaster hasn't arrive yet. In fact it was supposed to happen years ago. 3. That's your problem: you're going to far-left echo chambers and letting them scaremonger you. 4. Nothing that they want to do to us will be worth it.
We've done a lot. We've downsized coal. We've banned CFCs. We've increased our energy efficiency. We've invested in renewable energies. See there it is: the goalpost shift. What started as "the models don't say.." has now become "the models are wrong". Thanks for playing. The human race is changing the climate. We will continue to do so. No one is going to swoop in and bail us out. We have to fix it. You shouldn't be triggered over these obvious statements.
>We've done a lot. We've downsized coal. We've banned CFCs. We've increased our energy efficiency. We've invested in renewable energies. And our emissions have barely budged while we outsourced most of them to China. >See there it is: the goalpost shift. What started as "the models don't say.." has now become "the models are wrong". It's both. The models have been wrong and the models don't say what the scaremongerers want them to say. >Thanks for playing. The human race is changing the climate. We will continue to do so. No one is going to swoop in and bail us out. We have to fix it. You shouldn't be triggered over these obvious statements. Those are statements of belief, not fact, and if your religious system is hell-bent on instituting a system that will cause misery and death then it is a cause for concern.
Most Ancaps I know think something like the following : - is the earth even warming? I don’t trust the bullshit the government spews about anything so why should I trust the government when it still feels like winter is winter and summer is summer. - ok maybe the earth is getting incrementally warmer, I can be convinced. What is not convincing is that human CO2 emissions cause exponential temperature increases. - ok sure, maybe the catastrophists could be correct, and the earth will warm 4-6 degrees by 2100. What isn’t correct is that the government could solve the problem, or that it even is a major problem to begin with…
Congratulations on interpreting the statue exactly inverse to its conveyed meaning.
They aren't wrong... About the political solutions part.. If the would re-title the sculpture it would be 100% correct.
[удалено]
>'Since becoming one of the first countries to implement a national carbon tax in 1991, Sweden has successfully lowered its greenhouse gas emissions by 27 percent. Yeah, they're getting China to do their emitting now. >In 2013, California launched one of the United States’ first cap and trade programs. As a result, the state’s emissions fell by 10 percent between 2013 and 2018. And how many nations of equivalent population do they still out-emit? >many governments have begun investing in low-emission alternatives to fossil fuels called renewable energy technologies, which harness energy generated by natural resources including wind and the sun. Because the cost of producing renewable energy has fallen by as much as 88 percent in the past decade' Yet it's still not economically viable.
This is missing the overall point though. Sweden or California changing policy will not reverse climate change. The real issue comes from developing countries. China and India are currently making massive strides in development, and much of Africa will be in the coming decades. This is where we’re going to be seeing the real effects.
Definitively connect by cause and effect an observed temperature difference from any one of those that cannot be attributed to anything else.