What should we do about climate change?

[oldtimer28]

Let's see if we can agree some points first.

1. Climate change is real.

2. The cause is unknown.

3. Climate change should be a political issue for each party?

4. Climate change should be a corporate issue for maajor businesses?

Eg

I am true, true (but accept some argue man made via carbon emissions), yes, and yes if direct financial risk.

Last two points are also not saying what attitudes should be, just that climate change issues should be considered.

Thoughts?

I especially welcome solid data for or against the net zero push.

[Axe]

With or without covid, you can choose to wear face masks in public places or whenever you're somewhere outside your home but that's only necessary if you really are concerned about your health and the environment you're in. In fact, many japanese have been wearing them even before covid came despite the general cleanliness of their country.

[Norcaliblunt]

I love how pollution kills the earth but not you.

Pollution has nothing to do with this pandemic or your health, but it is destroying the earth.

Science mofos.

[Patrick Chewing]

10,000 years from now, when humans look back on this generation, they'll be laughing and mocking us for thinking the world was coming to an end.

[FultzNationRISE]

Climate change is the preferred establishment term, but it is not the actual malady.

The two primary obstacles:

1. Energy consumption
2. Habitat destruction.

Banks dont want to scale back the economy, which would be the antidote to these items. Reduced economy is simply not an option. So we therefore use the term climate change, which requires a huge INVESTMENT into protecting the economy. New types of vehicles, colonizing Mars etc. These are inefficient solutions ecologically, but much more exploitable financially.

The terms are carefully chosen because the bulk of simpletons never figure things out on their own. They are beholden to the phrases, topics, thoughts and ideas created for them. Most people are not intuitive thinkers, and essentially live in a prison of conception created for them by people smarter than they are. They are not intrinsically capable of thinking in ways that are not externally provided.


Aint that but a bitch?

[FultzNationRISE]

The great pandemic of 2021. Well, Johnny, back during the great pandemic we had a population of 7.25 billion... and by the time it was over with 4 years later, the population was 7.3 billion. It was horrible, Johnny!

The only thing horrible about the pandemic is all the retard moron citizens that are actively helping the government implement a new world order beast system.

These people.... every single one of em...

Cant argue with any of this tbh.

Vax wacks remind me of the Hitler Youth tbh. Very passionately dogmatic about the State narrative. It's just human nature that most people feel comfortable sticking closely to establishment doctrine. There's a reason the phrase "going out on a limb" implies danger. It's much safer to stick to the nice sturdy, stable tree trunk. The farther out you move, the harder it is to balance.

Most people aint built for it. That's just facts.

It's gonna be a wild ride the next couple decades.

"Buckle" up, Joey ;)

[tpols]

10,000 years from now, when humans look back on this generation, they'll be laughing and mocking us for thinking the world was coming to an end.

Yup. People have no idea how many catastrophic events have already happened on this planet. Asteroids, earthquakes, tsunamis, volcano eruptions, and storms that have wiped out species that survived for millions of years. And we think of humans from 2000 years ago as ancient.

People really don't appreciate the scale of time and the extent of chaotic events that have happened in the past. A big enough asteroid could cause more pollution than all of the nukes in the world today going off at once.

Although 10,000 years from now they're probably wont be real humans anymore with nanotechnology already taking off now. Just a smaller race of some type of cyborg hybrids.

[tpols]

Cant argue with any of this tbh.

Vax wacks remind me of the Hitler Youth tbh. Very passionately dogmatic about the State narrative. It's just human nature that most people feel comfortable sticking closely to establishment doctrine. There's a reason the phrase "going out on a limb" implies danger. It's much safer to stick to the nice sturdy, stable tree trunk. The farther out you move, the harder it is to balance.

Most people aint built for it. That's just facts.

It's gonna be a wild ride the next couple decades.

"Buckle" up, Joey ;)

Woah buddy slow down.... this topic is about climate change not LeBron James.

[FultzNationRISE]

Woah buddy slow down.... this topic is about climate change not LeBron James.

Dey know.

[jstern]

The topic of climate change is an interesting one, but not because of pollution, but the way the Earth spins. It spins like Dreidel, so as the millennium passes, the tilt changes, which changes the weather around the Earth, with animals dying and adapting into new ones.

The Earth is extremely old. There was a time when it virtually rained for two million years. I think there were two different events where it was covered in snow for millions of years. So many mass extinction events.

Those were the everyday normals for Earth during those eras. Everything was perfect for the animals alive.

[ZenMaster]

With or without covid, you can choose to wear face masks in public places or whenever you're somewhere outside your home but that's only necessary if you really are concerned about your health and the environment you're in. In fact, many japanese have been wearing them even before covid came despite the general cleanliness of their country.

Yes, producing and disposing of 15ish billion face masks per day will surely help the environment

[Chick Stern]

Let's see if we can agree some points first.

1. Climate change is real.

2. The cause is unknown.

3. Climate change should be a political issue for each party?

4. Climate change should be a corporate issue for maajor businesses?

Eg

I am true, true (but accept some argue man made via carbon emissions), yes, and yes if direct financial risk.

Last two points are also not saying what attitudes should be, just that climate change issues should be considered.

Thoughts?

I especially welcome solid data for or against the net zero push.

Of course the cause is known

[oldtimer28]

Climate change is the preferred establishment term, but it is not the actual malady.

The two primary obstacles:

1. Energy consumption
2. Habitat destruction.

Banks dont want to scale back the economy, which would be the antidote to these items. Reduced economy is simply not an option. So we therefore use the term climate change, which requires a huge INVESTMENT into protecting the economy. New types of vehicles, colonizing Mars etc. These are inefficient solutions ecologically, but much more exploitable financially.

The terms are carefully chosen because the bulk of simpletons never figure things out on their own. They are beholden to the phrases, topics, thoughts and ideas created for them. Most people are not intuitive thinkers, and essentially live in a prison of conception created for them by people smarter than they are. They are not intrinsically capable of thinking in ways that are not externally provided.


Aint that but a bitch?

Great posts all. But I will reply to this one.

Seems most agree that


1. Climate change is happening

2. Cause not humans.

No one commenting on 3 and 4 in op.
The quoted post makes a lot of sense but are you saying bad solution or farce of a concern?

[bladefd]

Humans are a huge part of the cause. It's all connected. The more greenhouse gases enter the atmosphere, the more energy gets trapped from escaping our atmosphere. The more energy gets trapped, the warmer the land/oceans/etc get as they absorb the excess heat. The warmer it gets, the more evaporation you get (ice caps/glaciers melt more too so water level rises too). The more evaporation you get, the more precipitation you get. More precipitation means more and stronger hurricanes/typhoons. More hurricanes means more destruction of people/infrastructure/forests/wildlife/etc.

^ All of those things are positive amplifications, making matters worse for us as time passes. Some of them also help contribute to forest fires, deforestation and desertification, which further amplifies climate change/global warming.

We humans are mostly responsible for the excess greenhouse gases entering the atmosphere without a doubt. It's mainly two gases causing misery due to the extreme amounts.. CO2 from coal/oil/gas and methane from excess animal breeding (cattle) for our consumption. Other lesser amounts include NO2 from agriculture waste and other fluorides.

Fewer ice caps/glacier coverage also means there is less sunlight being reflected back into space, which means more energy gets absorbed into the land/water rather than reflected back into space (look up 'albedo effect')... This is yet more positive amplification.

As far as the point of return goes, we will never truly know. No climate scientist or computer prediction model can tell you "Year x is the point of no-return" with 100% certainty. It could be 2020 or 2220. It will also never end the Earth. Having said that, it still does not disprove any of the facts posted above, and it certainly does not disprove climate change/global warming/whatever synonym you want to use. It also does not dispute the fact that we need to focus on expanding clean renewable energy (and nuclear energy).. We must resist coal, oil and natural gas. Coal should have been gone this decade.



What should we do?

Technology won't bring back extinct animals (yes, I know about Jurassic Park but you can never bring back pure breeds - only hybrids and you can't know about unintended consequences like in Jurassic Park) and won't bring back ancient forests/rain-forests we are burning down. Technology alone isn't the answer but technology + behavior shift together.

Behavior change examples:
-We need to eat much less meat and breed less farm animals for our consumption. They take up too much open land for grazing (results in fewer trees/forests as the land is cleared out) and release too much methane. Another possible solution: more fake meat.
-We need to bring down population growth. Earth can't sustain more than ~20 billion people max , 10-12 billion is a good balance imo to maintain high quality of life.
-Stop overfishing. Eat less fish. We need more plant-based diet with some meat/fish than vice versa.
-Switch to biodegradable plastic across the board. No non-biodegradable plastic bags and plastic water bottles.
-Retraining for those doing jobs in coal, oil, and eventually natural gas sectors into solar, nuclear, wind, hydro, etc. Transition faster.
-Some carbon capture technology usage to take some carbon out of the atmosphere back into storage/solid state. You don't want to overdo this because you don't want unintended consequences from excessively artificially screwing around with the Earth's processes.
etcetc

[warriorfan]

Humans are a huge part of the cause. It's all connected. The more greenhouse gases enter the atmosphere, the more energy gets trapped from escaping our atmosphere. The more energy gets trapped, the warmer the land/oceans/etc get as they absorb the excess heat. The warmer it gets, the more evaporation you get (ice caps/glaciers melt more too so water level rises too). The more evaporation you get, the more precipitation you get. More precipitation means more and stronger hurricanes/typhoons. More hurricanes means more destruction of people/infrastructure/forests/wildlife/etc.

^ All of those things are positive amplifications, making matters worse for us as time passes. Some of them also help contribute to forest fires, deforestation and desertification, which further amplifies climate change/global warming.

We humans are mostly responsible for the excess greenhouse gases entering the atmosphere without a doubt. It's mainly two gases causing misery due to the extreme amounts.. CO2 from coal/oil/gas and methane from excess animal breeding (cattle) for our consumption. Other lesser amounts include NO2 from agriculture waste and other fluorides.

Fewer ice caps/glacier coverage also means there is less sunlight being reflected back into space, which means more energy gets absorbed into the land/water rather than reflected back into space (look up 'albedo effect')... This is yet more positive amplification.

As far as the point of return goes, we will never truly know. No climate scientist or computer prediction model can tell you "Year x is the point of no-return" with 100% certainty. It could be 2020 or 2220. It will also never end the Earth. Having said that, it still does not disprove any of the facts posted above, and it certainly does not disprove climate change/global warming/whatever synonym you want to use. It also does not dispute the fact that we need to focus on expanding clean renewable energy (and nuclear energy).. We must resist coal, oil and natural gas. Coal should have been gone this decade.



What should we do?

Technology won't bring back extinct animals (yes, I know about Jurassic Park but you can never bring back pure breeds - only hybrids and you can't know about unintended consequences like in Jurassic Park) and won't bring back ancient forests/rain-forests we are burning down. Technology alone isn't the answer but technology + behavior shift together.

Behavior change examples:
-We need to eat much less meat and breed less farm animals for our consumption. They take up too much open land for grazing (results in fewer trees/forests as the land is cleared out) and release too much methane. Another possible solution: more fake meat.
-We need to bring down population growth. Earth can't sustain more than ~20 billion people max , 10-12 billion is a good balance imo to maintain high quality of life.
-Stop overfishing. Eat less fish. We need more plant-based diet with some meat/fish than vice versa.
-Switch to biodegradable plastic across the board. No non-biodegradable plastic bags and plastic water bottles.
-Retraining for those doing jobs in coal, oil, and eventually natural gas sectors into solar, nuclear, wind, hydro, etc. Transition faster.
-Some carbon capture technology usage to take some carbon out of the atmosphere back into storage/solid state. You don't want to overdo this because you don't want unintended consequences from excessively artificially screwing around with the Earth's processes.
etcetc