Do you believe in man-made climate change?

[HeffDoesWant]

I've always been amazed the people that think it's a money motive by the encumbent powers that be, when it's the richest groups with literally 100s of trillions in fossil fuel reserves at risk. It's laughably stupid.

All I know is the Great Pacific Garbage Patch is no joke, The size of TEXAS.we should start there

I do think it could actually help cool the earth as you can clearly see its lighter thus more reflective than the dark ocean.
It's not a net win, just a separate problem.

 

[kahiljabroni]

1300-1850: Little Ice Age
1970s: Global Cooling

I'm convinced man's actions hasn't been the best for "the climate", and that we are for sure impacting it negatively. However, none of the earlier predictions have turned out to be accurate (looking at you, Al!), which has given me quiet confidence that we'll be fine in the long run. And I think curbing population growth, and aiming for a reduction in the longer term (max 2 billion) will yield more favourable results in all aspects of life. Yet, and this really puzzles me, the most vocal people (excluding the Gretas and her generation) about climate change all have 3 kids or more, which seems, to me, incompatible with their world views.
As Frankie Boyle once joked: If you really want to help the environment, you should reuse your plastic shopping bags to suffocate your children.

Limiting the population always seemed like the logical answer to me. However whenever its mentioned both sides cry.

I don't think the corporations that run the world would allow it. Growth is the ultimate goal. Less consumers would cause contraction

 

[TimeisNOW]

of course not, I actually follow the science.


Also, who wants to see an outright lie posted right on NASA's website as the very first piece of "evidence" in support of climate change?

 

[TimeisNOW]

https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/


"Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals1 show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree*: Climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities."




that is what we call a MSM fact. In the real world it is known as pure bullshit.

 

[Mark Hunts FIST]

Actually no he didn’t. Just tap out dude. You’re digging deeper.

Stay in school kids.. compared to staying out of school kids??

Unless he's referring to me being "in a school kid" the comma is needed.


Apparently, we all need to go back to school.

 

[ReligiousDiscipline]

We can certainly do a far better job caring for the planet. My issue with the "climate change" agenda has to do with the politics surrounding it. A lot of unnecessary taxes and money-making schemes have been pushed in the name of climate change.

 

[boingyman]

I have zero knowledge on this topic and would hate to randomly scour the internet to find biased answers from every side of this topic.

 

[icffedor]

The wobble of the Sun and Earth matter as well in this cycle. Distance is an issue, but way more important is the angle of the Sun, which these wobbles absolutely make that change.

Also isnt the sun just a baby star that is still growing and getting hotter?
Not anytime soon, but in billion years or so it will leave earth scorched and uninhabitable

 

[nstig8]

Just like COVID, the people that are dictating policy are the biggest hypocrites.

Why do the politicians, celebrities, influencers, etc that are the loudest about how we are destroying the climate have the biggest carbon footprints? What's with the huge mansions, private jets/yachts, fleet of cars, etc?

I will take it seriously when they do.

 

[ReligiousDiscipline]

Just like COVID, the people that are dictating policy are the biggest hypocrites.

Why do the politicians, celebrities, influencers, etc that are the loudest about how we are destroying the climate have the biggest carbon footprints? What's with the huge mansions, private jets/yachts, fleet of cars, etc?

I will take it seriously when they do.

One of the climate-change virtue signalling events that really grinds my gears is the summits where a bunch of politicians and elites fly from all over the world to sign a bunch of bullshit and pat each other on the back over how much they care about the environment. Eliminating these useless summits alone would greatly reduce the carbon footprint. They can use zoom like everyone else does these days for the climate change circle-jerk.

One of the biggest hypocrites is Canada's Justin Trudeau. He will never waste an opportunity to lecture and virtue-signal over climate change and create new taxes to screw the working class over, but then constantly (and often needlessly) takes a private jet all over the place. During the 2019 election, the Trudeau liberals even used two private jets to campaign.

Here are some numbers from just one of Trudeau's jet trips. Imagine how many other wealthy hypocrites who preach about climate change and condemn the average person are causing just as much problems for the environment if not more. Ultimately, the taxes, scams and schemes are forced on the general public so the elites can maintain their wasteful lifestyles. Leo Dicaprio is so preachy and condemning towards the peasants because he wants to keep using his yachts and private jets.


PM's use of jet for family vacation emitted as much CO2 as average Canadian per year

The use of a military jet for Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s two-week family vacation on the Aga Khan’s private island pumped about as much carbon dioxide into the atmosphere as the average emitted per capita in Canada each year.

Trudeau’s use of the Challenger to fly his family and a nanny from Ottawa to Nassau, Bahamas over the New Year holiday and back consumed about 9,100 litres of jet fuel, according to the Department of National Defence.

Christopher Surgenor, who runs the environmental aviation website GreenAir, calculated that the trip would have therefore created about 23.3 tonnes of CO2 .

Those amounts are approximately equivalent to the average emitted per Canadian in 2014, which was pegged at the equivalent to 20.6 tonnes of CO2 , according to Environment and Climate Change Canada. That per capita figure includes industrial emissions, of which the oil and gas sector was the number one contributor.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/pm-...ch-co2-as-average-canadian-per-year-1.3250397

 

[NFLDer]

You're right

It's twice the size of Texas

The Great Pacific Garbage Patch is part of the five offshore plastic accumulation zones in the world's oceans and is located halfway between Hawaii and California. It covers an approximate surface area of 1.6 million square kilometers – an area twice the size of Texas and three times the size of France

Where the pictures? They have pictures of a small patch. You figure a garbage pile that big would be seen from one of NASAs satellites, so where are the pictures of the entire massive patch?

 

[milliniar]

Where the pictures? They have pictures of a small patch. You figure a garbage pile that big would be seen from one of NASAs satellites, so where are the pictures of the entire massive patch?

https://oceana.org/blog/3-misconceptions-about-great-pacific-garbage-patch
Most of the "patch" is micro plastics floating hard to see with the eye, and to photograph.

 

[Officer Rick]

https://oceana.org/blog/3-misconceptions-about-great-pacific-garbage-patch
Most of the "patch" is micro plastics floating hard to see with the eye, and to photograph.

Exactly..

 

[Bob Gray]

It's not really a question of if, it's definitely happening. It's just a question of scale and proportional response.

AOC crying about the world ending is laughable. So is stuff like Mark Ruffalo tweeting that Trumps policies will result in the deaths of "whole nations". This kind of stupidity helps no one and needs to be called out out by both sides as uniformed.

It just comes to the same thing. What's the proposed solution, what does it cost, what's the intended result and at one point do we deem it a failure if it doesn't produce results?

Too often I see people seeing anything climate change related as a good solution, even if it's a terrible policy. Or vague allusions to solving the problem with phrases like "investing in infrastructure". White noise. I'm always willing to accept practical solutions. But if you can't tell me what it's gonna cost, what it does or what the intended result is then your solution is useless.

 

[Jose Beehive]

Single best thing you can do is stop eating animal based products..

 

[honzo]

I need to the nationality of everyone who doesn't believe in climate change.
I'm thinking 70÷ are Americans

 

[deviake]

Pretty simple cause and effect and basic math. Not hard to follow lines on a graph that begin *curiously* trending upward with the start of the industrial revolution and track with emissions.

I love the "it's a conspiracy pushed to benefit certain industries". Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh..... Do you know nothing about companies (fossil fuel industry, meat and dairy, etc) constantly trying to get around regulations intended to curb destroying the environment and the influence their money has on governments? Real, well documented corruption. The fucking oil industry fought to keep info getting out about the deleterious effects of leaded gas. But no, multibillion dollar industries that have a vested interest in holding back "green" tech aren't the corrputors, it's... the solar panel lobby I guess. Which, even if that was true - oh no, companies are trying to do less damage to the environment to make more money. Man, that's the worst case we could ever ask for.

Even if you believe that's true, if you don't believe, well, forget believing, if you don't acknowledge the influence the old industries have and the damage they've caused and that we need to alter course...




You may not believe in anthropogenic climate change, but, spoiler: Exxon Mobile does. They studied it and used the info for their benefit.

 

[Blayt7hh]

i don't have to BELIEVE in science.
science it's true wether i believe in it or not. all the evidence i've seen points to anthropogenic effects on the climate patterns through pollution and disturbance of natural cycles. it's proof vetted by thousands upon thousands of scientists whose work has been endlessly peer reviewed. you don't get to CHOOSE to believe in it. it's just true irrelevant of your opinion.
it's just that it's a fashion among dumb people now the idea that you can choose facts.
you don't.

Yeah it’s not even up for discussion at this point. It’s just a fact now.

 

[rpn453]

I'm sure we have some effect.

But the climate change strategy is bullshit. The answer to excessive energy/resource consumption (aka spending) is not increased energy/resource consumption. We simply need to stop consuming so much of our resources. They're not going to last forever. The politicians should set an example by living frugal, simple lives.

I don't give a fuck about climate change because we have the technology to survive in pretty much any environment that will come from this, and warmer is a lot better than colder. I don't want a glacier to cover Canada again anytime soon. But I don't know how we would exist with depleted resources.

I actually wonder if they pushed this climate change shit so hard to try to compel us to develop technology to conserve resources. Since the result has simply been an increase in consumption via crony capitalism, they're going to shut this down and depopulate, one way or another. It wouldn't make sense to let us just waste everything that's left over the next few decades.

 

[icffedor]

Single best thing you can do is stop eating animal based products..

And stop fishing the fuck outta the oceans