The climate change consensus extends beyond climate scientists

[redneck]

.

redpoint5

It will certainly be way cheaper to simply move affected people to more habitable areas, to treat their disease and hunger, and to rebuild than to spend our way towards carbon neutrality.

Sam Kinison, agrees with you...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ylyts7L6Hwg

>

[NeilBlanchard]

The Dilbert cartoon is not accurate for how computer models are used for climate science. All conclusions are based on data, and the models are made more accurate as newer data is gathered.

Ironically, economic models that ignore climate change are guaranteed to be wrong.

Anthropogenic climate change is fact; based on all the evidence.

Ignoring climate change will cost far more than addressing it. Switching to renewable energy will PAY FOR ITSELF in a short period of time. We are already getting far more new jobs from renewable energy, than for fossil fuels.

[Fat Charlie]

Is preemptively rebuilding NYC somewhere else cheaper than trying to mitigate problems and adapt to change?

Renewables are a good move regardless of where you stand on climate change.

[sendler]

Originally Posted by Fat Charlie

Renewables are a good move regardless of where you stand on climate change.

True. Whether or not you want to believe in man made global climate change and if it is a problem, there is a second problem looming. Which is simple fossil fuel depletion. It will take a century of focused effort to replace all of the energy we get from crude oil before it gets too expensive. And we need all of the crude we have left to build the new infrastructure to replace it.

[redpoint5]

Originally Posted by NeilBlanchard

Anthropogenic climate change is fact; based on all the evidence.

I think most on this forum accept that fact.

Ignoring climate change will cost far more than addressing it.

How do we know? It's difficult for me to wrap my mind around spending enormous amounts of money to reduce the outdoor thermostat a miniscule amount when that money can help people with acute needs.

Switching to renewable energy will PAY FOR ITSELF in a short period of time. We are already getting far more new jobs from renewable energy, than for fossil fuels.

Makes sense to me. Harnessing free energy should be more cost effective in the long run than producing it. In time we will develop technology and infrastructure to overcome the intermittency of renewable energy.

Originally Posted by Fat Charlie

Is preemptively rebuilding NYC somewhere else cheaper than trying to mitigate problems and adapt to change?

Renewables are a good move regardless of where you stand on climate change.

Eh, we need a New, New York anyhow. Ever go for a walk on a hot summers night in Manhattan? Oh the odors you will discover from a city that planned nothing.

I'll second your comment that renewables make sense regardless of what we believe can/should be done about climate change.

[oil pan 4]

The tiny problem with building and installing renewables they are completely dependent on non renewables for every aspect of creation, transportation, implementation and maintenance.

No one seems to be too worried about the computer models. AL gore obviously not worried about the computer models saying the polar ice caps would be melted by 2018 when he bought a 9 million dollar beach front mansion some time around 2009 or 2010.
Probably has something to do with being made look like a fool after saying for years that the polar ice caps would be melted by 2010. He doesn't seem to be losing too much sleep over it.
It's almost like he knows something that he is not telling to his chicken little disciples.

If promoting dooms day man made global warming would make me not even rich, but just well off in a way that I would not really even have to work hard for I would become a believer in name only.

But when you follow the money and look at the actions of those promoting dooms day man made global warming is the only thing that truly worries them is the flow of money stopping and loss of influence. They leave all the worrying to the gullible.

[Fat Charlie]

Originally Posted by oil pan 4

The tiny problem with building and installing renewables they are completely dependent on non renewables for every aspect of creation, transportation, implementation and maintenance.

Unlike non-renewables, apparently.

Now we've got cruise ships in the Northwest Passage, Antarctic ice shelves dropping like flies, and actual houseflies beginning to infest Antarctica. Being a smidgen off on the year predicted isn't much, and if the man wants to live at the beach, let him.

[oil pan 4]

Practicing what you preach makes your narrative that much more believable.
"Do as I say not as I do" leadership displays elitism and inspires resentment and damages cause credibility.

If I got rich quick off promoting dooms day global warming I would at least have the decency to act the part.

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by Xist

THow much is the Paris Accord supposed to cost? Is anyone disputing $100 trillion?

Seems like it saves money in the long run.

Anyway, I need to get to work, I need to drive my black Civic forty-five minutes each way in 120° F weather.

Why is your Civic black? That seems like really poor planning to me :-)

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

It will certainly be way cheaper to simply move affected people to more habitable areas...

Oh? You have spare habitable planets handy? And cheap interstellar space travel?

Even if you're one of those Dr. Pangloss types who manage to delude themselves into thinking that AGW won't render the whole Earth uninhabitable (see Permian-Triassic extinction), why do you think the people already living in those more habitable areas are going to passively accept a massive influx of newcomers?