Do you believe in man-made climate change?

[PhitePhan]

Yes. It's a shame the issue has become such a political one. You would think if there was something we could all agree on it would be that we need to stop polluting the planet but here we are.

CO2 isn’t pollution, is it?

I don’t think many will argue against deducting pollution, it’s the “give a lot of money to government to stop the by product of life,” thing that people are leery about.

 

[Hellowhosthat]

Because of deforestation, the Amazon rainforest is now producing more CO2 than it is absorbing. This seems as clear an example as any that the actions of man are impacting the climate, and i find it hard to believe that the industrialisation of most of the world over the last 100 years or so, and the acceleration of the global population alongside it hasnt been doing the same. Imo, the opposing viewpoint is founded in protecting economic interests and i am therefore quite sceptical of it.

You're allowed to be anti big-pharma on here but being anti big-energy is frowned upon.

 

[Papi Chulo]

The earth is so vast and so big and humans are tiny compared to it. Us driving our pickup trucks and making bonfires cannot change the climate.

If you live in a city, I guess you might think the rest of the world looks like what you see around you. But get in an airplane and look down and see how small we actually are to the rest of the earth.

 

[heloder]

Do greenhouse gasses increase global temperature?
"Yes"

Is CO2 a greenhouse gas?
"Yes"

Do humans produce and release CO2 through industry?
"Yes"

Are humans partially responsible for increasing global temperature?
"No"

These people aren't just denying climate change. They're not just denying science. They're denying causality itself.

 

[Kingz]

Well, I definitely don’t believe in man made reversals, diversions, or slow downs of climate change. That’s ultimately what the fight is about and the “inconvenient truth” happens to be all so convenient for most the same old economic, structural, and cultural agendas of the people most pushing it as the “existential threat” of our times.

 

[jefferz]

We are too overpopulated. We need to cull this heard.

If you’re serious about “culling the herd”, which means people need to be killed off, why don’t you start us off?

 

[Mark Hunts FIST]

If you’re serious about “culling the herd”, which means people need to be killed off, why don’t you start us off?

You're telling me I should commit suicide? A tad bit of an overreaction, no?

 

[Iceberg Slim]

It seems we've warmed the earth enough to delay the next ice age. How that will turn out is a total unknown

 

[bobgeese]

I think we should definitely work to keep the earth a clean habitable place.


Ridiculous things like banning lawn mowers are not going to do that.

 

[jefferz]

You're telling me I should commit suicide? A tad bit of an overreaction, no?

Nope, not even close.
You’re the one advocating for “culling the heard” aka killing people off. I’m merely asking why you think other people should be killed off but you shouldn’t.

 

[Bald1]

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

Whatever anyone believes we have to be better stewards of the environment. Once we make meaningful steps in that direction the environment can not help but improve. We obviously have a negative impact, the big question is just how much of one? I'm not gonna pretend I'd be ok with doing away with modern conveniences, but we can do better.

Buy local - shipping is a prime polluter
Buy reusable - curb the proliferation of everything from econo boxes to single use anything to shit EVs that can't be recycled
Fuck global military industrial complexes - probably the most egregious of polluters

 

[The Audience]

You're allowed to be anti big-pharma on here but being anti big-energy is frowned upon.

For whatever reason, big-energy, climate science denying lobbyists seem to also be invested in pushing against the vaccines. Not sure how this relates to the protection of their corporate interests, but at the lower level i can see how the two could be packaged as the position of the right wing, mirroring the perspective of someone like Charles Koch.

 

[Loiosh]

In terms of pollution focus, our entire effort should be put into cleaning the oceans. Always. Full time.

Of course a shark would say this. You're just a shill for Big Ocean.

 

[west42]

That pic is from the 2011 Japan quake. There's no island of garbage out in the Pacific.

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

 

[west42]

If that were the case it would be easily verified from space.

I have yet to see the receipts

The garbage patch from this thread is an area in the Pacific that due to ocean currents contains about four parts per cubic meter average of fingernail sized pieces of garbage. It's not visible from space or or even a low altitude

 

[TribalDrumz]

That pic is from the 2011 Japan quake. There's no island of garbage out in the Pacific.

There’s still masses amount of trash out there and they recently cleaned up 20,000 pounds…
https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/trash-removed-from-great-pacific-garbage-patch/

 

[calavera2]

Believing has nothing to do with it. The evidence is in.

 

[DespicablePeep]

It's irrelevant because China is by far the worst polluter, and they do not give a shit.

US built China, average American footprint is absurd. Per capita US is double than most countries.

Its laughable how American corporations talk about green while being the worst. Plastic everywhere, cities built for cars and rampant consumerism

 

[mb23100]

CO2 isn’t pollution, is it?

I don’t think many will argue against deducting pollution, it’s the “give a lot of money to government to stop the by product of life,” thing that people are leery about.

I would consider anything in high enough concentrations to do damage to be pollution.

I understand the second part from both sides. It's become so politicized and there is so much money involved it's hard to tell if governments really give two shits or not about the subject.

 

[fedoriswar37]

Yes. But we live better then 99% of civilizations that lived before us so that's the trade off. Secondly , there's certain parts of the climate changing we have no control over , like it or not. Miami will be under water at some point in the next few decades , regardless of our intervention. Certain places may also become inhabitable , that's just reality. The earth is going to go through cycles regardless of if its habitable for humans or not.