15 Jan 2020, 2:49 am
15 Jan 2020, 3:07 am
15 Jan 2020, 3:13 am
15 Jan 2020, 2:11 pm
15 Jan 2020, 5:30 pm
EzraS wrote:
China is already a communist dystopia, so there's no reason to use climate catastrophe to trick them into becoming one.
Call me an idiot,
Most do,
But I think there is enough evidence to support the conclusion that the climate change debate is extremely political and polarising.
Man-made climate change is enticing for people who hate big business (like me),
But who would also want a social paradigm shift towards socialism (unlike me).
I have already speculated that Greta didn't sail off to Shanghai *because* it was a communist country.
And I am staggered that Australia has become a focus of outrage, with its 1.5% of global CO2 emissions,
Whereas China, with its 27% gets off scot-free.
Does anyone in progressive land have a rational explanation for this?
Seriously, I am interested in hearing the reason people involved in Extinction Rebellion, as an example, are targeting us with such vitriol, but not China.
Q: What would a reduction of 1.5% of CO2 emissions out of the earth's system accomplish?
A: Bugger all.
Q: What would a reduction of 27% of CO2 emission out of the earth's system accomplish?
A: Presumably, a bloody lot.
But the assumption here is that CO2 emissions are overwhelmingly the main contributing factor in global warming.
BTW,
What are the other influences on global warming?
Surely it can't solely be plant food, right?
Could someone quantify this?
15 Jan 2020, 5:45 pm
EzraS wrote:
China has admitted that their economy is more important than plant food emissions reduction.
BTW,
CO2 is invisible, duh.
P.S.
I can't bring myself to post to cybertroll,
Hence my posting to you.
15 Jan 2020, 5:59 pm
15 Jan 2020, 6:55 pm
SoloSailor wrote:
<snicker>
15 Jan 2020, 7:01 pm
firemonkey wrote:
Climate change brings out the Dunning Kruger effect in many people especially , but not exclusively , those who are sceptical about it . A modicum of actual knowledge is touted as a professorial level of knowledge about it .
Then please educate us.
Please answer the questions I posed,
If you haven't already done so.
15 Jan 2020, 8:20 pm
Pepe wrote:
firemonkey wrote:
Climate change brings out the Dunning Kruger effect in many people especially , but not exclusively , those who are sceptical about it . A modicum of actual knowledge is touted as a professorial level of knowledge about it .
Then please educate us.
Please answer the questions I posed,
If you haven't already done so.
I've already said , in so many words, I'm like the average lay person about it . There may be a few people here that are sufficiently knowledgeable about the subject but they'll be few and far between .
If man made climate change was on trial , as things stand the verdict wouldn't be guilty or innocent but not proven .
I agree the China -Australia situation is strange .
15 Jan 2020, 10:01 pm
15 Jan 2020, 11:07 pm
firemonkey wrote:
If man made climate change was on trial , as things stand the verdict wouldn't be guilty or innocent but not proven .
I agree the science is not proven,
Based on rational, reasonable counter-arguments from intelligent critical thinkers,
Yet we are told by one side it is,
Which reflects poorly on them,
IMO.
Are there any progressives who don't believe the science is proven?
Rhetorical question since they all clam up when asked straight forward requests for clarification like this.
Meh,
What can you do?
15 Jan 2020, 11:31 pm
SoloSailor wrote:
Holy moly.
And that, ladies, gentlemen and the gender diverse,
Is why I prefer to ask the questions,
Rather than attempt to give the answers.
16 Jan 2020, 12:56 am
Pepe wrote:
Holy moly.
The condensed version:
Quote:
This difference between observations and simulations suggests that most of the observed trend is due to natural variability instead of a forced response to anthropogenic forcing.
16 Jan 2020, 2:07 am
16 Jan 2020, 2:10 am
