HL Climate Change Thread: Fare the well old world

the cac mamba

Veteran
Joined
May 21, 2012
Messages
106,470
Reputation
14,080
Daps
307,625
Reppin
NULL
these are the same types of people who deny evolution. they are scared that scientific knowledge is changing the status quo

have you heard that senator who says that its arrogant to believe that humans have the power to affect gods atmosphere? :laff: never mind the arrogance of believing that everyone who doesnt accept salvation form his god is going to roast in hell forever
 

Hawaiian Punch

umop-apisdn
Supporter
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
18,753
Reputation
6,789
Daps
81,941
Reppin
The I in Team
And yet the summers get more brutal, the storms get more lethal and the winters even stranger. Denying it doesn't make it go away. Debating it doesn't make it go away. The best part about it all is the talking heads cannot distract something that you go outside and experience. Every. Single. Day.

Point being keep arguing your point slystallion. Just make sure you carry some extra sunblock. And don't drink too much water, because half the country is in a drought. And put out the cigarette, because Colorado had the largest wildfire in their history. And lock your door, because the derecho may blow your house away.
 

Type Username Here

Not a new member
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
16,368
Reputation
2,395
Daps
32,645
Reppin
humans
UV65J.jpg
 

Hawaiian Punch

umop-apisdn
Supporter
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
18,753
Reputation
6,789
Daps
81,941
Reppin
The I in Team
Your the sociopath willing to put thousands out of work and harm prosperity for all individuals for a 1% chance that sometime in the future it might be 1 degree warmer

We both are looking out for people difference is I'm going with the more rational sane decision of keeping people employed an the economy prosperous for something that isn't proven to be an imminent nor a threat down the line.

Go ahead go and Fire little Jimmy's dad who is a coal miner and tell him they are going have to starve a little bit.

I say keep letting him work in the coal mine. Why deny the inevitable at this point? A few more wheelbarrels of coal ain't stopping this runaway train:myman:
 

The Guru

Superstar
Supporter
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
9,573
Reputation
2,626
Daps
33,437
Reppin
NULL
Easy..they're guided by the same type of people who told us cigarettes don't cause cancer. Same people who convince blue collar workers to speak out against protecting unions. Same people who are calling higher learning "a scam"
The most easily manipulated members of society and the ones hired by the ultra rich to manipulate them.
 

Dusty Bake Activate

Fukk your corny debates
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
39,077
Reputation
6,023
Daps
132,782
Yeah, it is pretty weird. I watched that movie Jesus Camp for the first time (I know I'm mad late) recently and I was a little disturbed at them teaching little kids that global warming isn't real. fukk does that have to do with Christian teaching?

There's a few elements at play, I would imagine. There's the aforementioned religious one, which is an expression of a sentiment that God is in control of everything and humans can't have that much power over the world and just a general disdain and distrust in science born of fear and a probably subconscious knowing that scientific advancement always seems to disprove religious teaching. And many of these white religious fundie folks can't seem to separate their religion from their politics nowadays, and of course Republicans seem to not want to believe in climate change.

The blue collar conservatives who deny it out of ignorance also are generally distrustful of science and government, and specifically of government telling them have to or should do something. It's the whole "don't tread on me" ethos. That's a tradition that dates back over a century, when the government first starting telling farmers that had to have health requirements and regulations for their livestock. They don't want to be told they can't drive their gas-guzzling car by the government. And they tend to associate climate change with liberal hippie environmental peacenik types, who they see as the enemy, or just not their type of people.

But what's really sad is they're all being duped by the oil companies, energy giants, and other corporations who would rather pollute and not have to deal with any regulatory requirements. They publish junk science through fake "think tanks" they set up to do their bidding and buy Republican politicians to serve as mouthpieces. Even though they don't have any facts on their side, they know people are too dumb, ignorant, and lazy to really research the science behind it. Their intent is to simply muddy up the issue and provide enough reasonable doubt for deaf, dumb, and blind...to sway people who are already inclined to distrust big government or eco-friendly liberalism, and those who are inclined to just say "Well one side says one thing and the other says another :ehh: I don't know," setting up a false dichotomy of two relatively equal competing theories, when in reality one is true and the other is complete bullshyt manufactured to fit an economic agenda.

And that's how imbeciles like Slystallion sadly end up being suckers for it. That pretty much what the right wing movement in this country has been for the past 15-20 years at least: corporations exploiting the fear of idiots to trick them into going against their own self-interest out of fear.
 
Joined
Sep 23, 2012
Messages
217
Reputation
10
Daps
123
Reppin
NULL
We can leave the next generation a messed up environment. No biggie, the environment will heal itself.

We can't leave the next generation federal debt though. That is immoral and is the sign of a weak people.


:rolleyes:
 

atlbound

:ryan:
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
4,996
Reputation
1,085
Daps
8,958
Reppin
SEH
yall really going to listen to scientist when it comes to science?

silly democrats
 

acri1

The Chosen 1
Supporter
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
25,350
Reputation
4,225
Daps
114,315
Reppin
Detroit
It's Already Too Late to Stop Climate Change

Even as climate policy is debated in Doha, it's becoming increasingly clear that the first devastating effects of global warming cannot be prevented.

By Coral Davenport

Amid the glittering skyscrapers of Doha, capital of the arid, oil-rich Arab emirate of Qatar, 17,000 diplomats, delegates, nongovernmental organizations, and environmentalists are converging this week and next in the conference halls and backrooms of the 18th annual United Nations climate-change summit. Their goal: pave the way toward a world treaty, to be signed in 2015, aimed at slowing global emissions of heat-trapping fossil-fuel pollution enough to keep the planet’s temperature from rising by 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit).

That’s the point, scientists say, at which the Earth’s polar ice sheets will melt and many of the hottest and driest regions will no longer be able to grow food. The 2-degree mark will set off a chain of extreme reactions, starting with rapid sea-level rise, widespread flooding, more extreme weather events, food shortages, and price spikes.

But no matter what the diplomats in Doha decide over the next week, it now appears inevitable that the world will indeed hit that 2-degree mark and could well shoot past it to average global increases of 4 degrees or 6 degrees—points at which scientists predict even worse catastrophes.

A scientific study published Sunday in the journal Nature Climate Change concluded that the world’s rapid increase in fossil fuel emissions now makes a global average temperature increase of 2 degrees Celsius all but inevitable. A report released last week by the U.N. Environment Program concluded that given the rapid projected increase in pollution from burning coal, oil, and gas around the world, nations’ current pledges to cut carbon emissions won’t be enough to stave off that 2-degree rise sometime before the end of the century.

Moreover, a November report from the International Energy Agency found that if action isn’t taken to significantly cut carbon emissions by 2017, the existing power plants, factories, and buildings will be enough to push temperatures past the 2-degree mark. Yet another sobering report last month from the accounting firm PricewaterhouseCoopers warned that the only way the world can prevent the 2-degree rise is if the global economy cuts its carbon intensity by 5.1 percent every year from now to 2050, essentially slamming the brakes on growth starting right now—and keeping the freeze on for 37 years.

Nobody expects that to happen. And even while the U.N. climate-change process is working toward a 2015 global deal in which the world’s biggest polluters agree to cut their carbon pollution, the terms of the agreement won’t be enforced until 2020. That means countries won’t even be required to start cutting their emissions for another eight years.

“The necessary rate of decarbonization is so high that it’s never been seen before, never been done before,” said Jonathan Grant, author of the PricewaterhouseCoopers report. “And the level of ambition that we’re seeing at Doha is far below what is required to stick to 2 degrees.”

So what needs to happen? Nations must begin to prepare now for the effects of a 2-degree temperature increase. In the U.S., that means starting immediately to plan and build for the inevitable consequences of more-destructive storms and rising sea levels, particularly in coastal cities such as New Orleans; Norfolk, Va.; and, as superstorm Sandy so frighteningly illustrated, New York. Those preparations are going to cost taxpayers a lot of money.

“When it comes to the worst-case scenarios of sea-level rise, I’m not sure $100 billion will even scratch the surface,” said Brian Murray, director of economic analysis at Duke University’s Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions.

It also means that nations—first and foremost, the world’s two biggest polluters, the United States and China—must develop real, enforceable, and aggressive policies to cut their own carbon emissions, with or without a global agreement. Scientists say that once the world hits that 2-degree mark, the urgency of reducing carbon pollution to avoid a catastrophic tipping point becomes even greater.

Michael Oppenheimer, a professor of geosciences and international affairs at Princeton University and a member of the Nobel Prize-winning U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, says that a 2-degree rise is not itself that point, but rather the beginning of irreversible changes. “It starts to speed you toward a tipping point,” he said. “It’s driving toward a cliff at night with the headlights off. We don’t know when we’ll hit that cliff, but after 2 degrees, we’re going faster, we have less control. After 3, 4, 5 degrees, you spiral out of control, you have even more irreversible change. At this point, with prompt action to reduce emissions, we can still keep it from getting totally out of control.”

When it comes to global climate-change treaties, the U.S. has already cried wolf twice on the world stage. In 1997, Vice President Al Gore urged the rest of the world to sign on to the landmark Kyoto Protocol, but the Senate refused to go along. At the 2009 U.N. climate-change summit in Copenhagen, President Obama took on the same role, urging China and other nations to sign pledges to cut carbon emissions, assuring the world that Congress would soon pass a cap-and-trade bill to cut U.S. carbon emissions. Six months later, the bill died in the Senate.

In December 2015, when it comes time to forge a binding global agreement that could keep the world from heading off a climate cliff, Obama won’t be able to face his counterparts on the world stage with just a promise of what’s to come. To get the world’s other major polluters to agree to cut the carbon pollution that threatens U.S. coastal cities, he’ll need to have a new U.S. climate law in hand.

“It would be very easy, in 2015, for the Obama administration to appear to demonstrate international leadership by agreeing to sign on to something that it knows can’t get ratified by the Senate,” said Robert Stavins, director of the environmental economics program at Harvard University. “But the only way this time will be different is if there’s an agreement that says the U.S. is committing to action on what it’s already done.”

It's Already Too Late to Stop Climate Change - NationalJournal.com


:sadcam:
 
Top