Anyone on the right believe in climate change here?

[no fat chicks]

Or conversely does anyone on the left on this board believe it's a hoax?

I can't believe how this is a partisan issue when it's simple science.

The right leaves a bad taste in a lot of potential members with its denial of proven science based on politics

 

[Cuauhtemoc]

Yes. Only american conservatives do not believe in it. It is not really up to debate in europe.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

As an independent I feel that only fucking assholes and morons don't want to do something about pollution.

 

[Rex Kwon Do]

No one on the right denies the climate is changing. They only deny that the main reason is anthropogenic. Big difference.

Of course there's climate change; simply look at tables of mean global temperature and it's prima facie. Now, what has driven that change is a much more complicated issue.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

No one on the right denies the climate is changing. They only deny that the main reason is anthropogenic. Big difference.

Of course there's climate change; simply look at tables of mean global temperature and it's prima facie. Now, what has driven that change is a much more complicated issue.

Dumb it down for me. Is pollution something that should be curbed?

 

[8KresniK8]

Denying climate change is pretty dumb. Paying people money because its happening is pretty dumb too.

 

[uncommon]

Dumb it down for me. Is pollution something that should be curbed?

Pollution is a general term for negative output right?

I think the better question is to what degree is co2 pollution?

 

[Devout Pessimist]

I believe in respecting, protecting and conserving the environment.

Roger Scruton - Why Conservatives Should Care About the Environment

 

[7437]

Dumb it down for me. Is pollution something that should be curbed?

No. Pollution is just a term made up by marxists. It has never hurt anyone.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

Pollution is a general term for negative output right?

I think the better question is to what degree is co2 pollution?

Sure, if you want to get lost in the minutiae. Does it makes sense to you that renewable energy like solar and wind are better for the environment than burning up fossil fuels that add <insert whatever phrasing you like> into the air/atmosphere?

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

No. Pollution is just a term made up by marxists. It has never hurt anyone.

Come to think of it, now's about time for another Michael Moore documentary in Flint.

 

[nostradumbass]

There aren't many people who deny the climate changes. The issue is whether more gov't control and extra taxes will fix it.

 

[RhinoRush]

Every political quiz I've ever taken places me as a social liberal/fiscal libertarian. So naturally, on Sherdog I'm a hard right fascist. I believe in climate change.

Earth's climate is constantly changing and always has been. What I disagree with is the idea that humans need to change their behavior to stop climate change. You can't stop climate change. It's typical human arrogance to think we can.

If human beings cause enough damage that Earth's climate changes to make Earth uninhabitable by humans, we will die out. Just like 99% of all species that have ever existed on Earth already have. Earth will go on just fine without us. We've been here for 200,000 years. Earth has been around for 4.5 billion years.

We humans are really not as big a deal as some people seem to think.

 

[uncommon]

Sure, if you want to get lost in the minutiae. Does it makes sense to you that renewable energy like solar and wind are better for the environment than burning up fossil fuels that add <insert whatever phrasing you like> into the air/atmosphere?

I would say its better (wind probably being least pollutant).

i also think the average person underestimates just how much fossil fuels contribute to wealth, and to wind down the wealth produced from fossil without a clear cost benefit analysis doesnt seem appropriate.

We need to know beyond reasonable doubt how much the penalty is for burning carbon. Because the reward for burning carbon is what modern society is.

 

[BossRootin]

Climatology is the farthest thing from simple science. To this day we still are unsure what causes ice ages

There are literally hundreds of variables from solar cycles to volcanoes, yet all that gets focused on is CO2.

Sure, more CO2 = Higher Temperatures seems to make sense, but climate is much more complicated than that.

I have a hard time believing that CO2 being 400/1,000,000 instead of 300/1,000,000 is going to spell doom for us all.

Water vapor is a much stronger greenhouse gas that CO2.

12,000 years ago the earth was 10 degrees colder and the Northern US was under a mile of ice.

What caused the earth to warm 10 degrees within a few decades? Not CO2, that's for sure.

Right now we are living in the longest period between ice ages in the last quarter million years.

To say that climate change is a settled science is parroting others' emotional response to an incredibly complex topic.

Besides periods of warming are some of the most productive in mankind's history.

Watch Joe Rogan's podcast with Randall Carlson if you are interested.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

I would say its better (wind probably being least pollutant).

i also think the average person underestimates just how much fossil fuels contribute to wealth, and to wind down the wealth produced from fossil without a clear cost benefit analysis doesnt seem appropriate.

We need to know beyond reasonable doubt how much the penalty is for burning carbon. Because the reward for burning carbon is what modern society is.

Believe it or not, I need you to dumb it down a little more. You're agreeing that we're severely damaging the sustainability of life on Earth while needing exact math on cost benefit analysis (in terms of your own creature comforts) before making a substantial effort to reduce the inter-species effects of benefits gained?

 

[Rex Kwon Do]

Dumb it down for me. Is pollution something that should be curbed?

I guess that depends on your definition of "pollution." If you mean should d-bags stop throwing their beer cans and used condoms on the sidewalk, sure, because it's a social nuisance. If you mean should factories not dump their toxic waste in our waterways, then yeah, because it's a direct threat to human health. If you define it as adjusting driving behavior, industrialization, and things like that which produce greenhouses gases or something like that, no, probably not.

 

[Metusalemi]

Meh. Fossil fuels will run out anyways, so no more CO2 emissions.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

I guess that depends on your definition of "pollution." If you mean should d-bags stop throwing their beer cans and used condoms on the sidewalk, sure, because it's a social nuisance. If you mean should factories not dump their toxic waste in our waterways, then yeah, because it's a direct threat to human health. If you define it as adjusting driving behavior, industrialization, and things like that which produce greenhouses gases or something like that, no, probably not.

Do you consider fracking to have a positive or negative effect on the environment? Oil drilling? Are solar panels more catastrophic? Generally speaking we think of smoke as a pollutant. Burning cigarettes into our lungs or pumping CO2 into the air doesn't seem like a recipe for success. Call me a common-senser on this subject.

Bottom line, there's people who sound like they're trying to enlighten the situation and there's those who appear to obfuscate. I'll trust the enlighteners.

 

[Rex Kwon Do]

Do you consider fracking to have a positive or negative effect on the environment? Oil drilling? Are solar panels more catastrophic? Generally speaking we think of smoke as a pollutant. Burning cigarettes into our lungs or pumping CO2 into the air doesn't seem like a recipe for success. Call me a common-senser on this subject.

Bottom line, there's people who sound like they're trying to enlighten the situation and there's those who appear to obfuscate. I'll trust the enlighteners.

Everything has an effect on everything. Fracking probably has some negative affects and some positive ones. Smarter people than me study this stuff, so I'll leave the cost-benefit calculations to them. I won't let the Michael Moores of the world scare me into thinking fracking is going to usher in the end times. It'll be fine. There's a reason my water supply is clean, and that's because generally common-sense regulations are put in place, and overreacting scaredy-cat ones aren't. I say let them frack, bro.