View Single Post
Old 12-26-2019, 04:38 PM   #8030 (permalink)
redpoint5
Human Environmentalist
 
redpoint5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Oregon
Posts: 9,296

Acura TSX - '06 Acura TSX
90 day: 28.24 mpg (US)

Lafawnda - '01 Honda CBR600 F4i
90 day: 47.32 mpg (US)

Big Yeller - '98 Dodge Ram 2500 base
90 day: 21.82 mpg (US)

Prius Plug-in - '12 Toyota Prius Plug-in
90 day: 57.64 mpg (US)

Mazda CX-5 - '17 Mazda CX-5 Touring
90 day: 26.85 mpg (US)
Thanks: 3,227
Thanked 3,548 Times in 2,647 Posts
I've got no horse in the game, so a determination that global warming is a net negative is a conclusion I'm willing to accept. I'll only get there if the debate is had though, and that involves acknowledging benefits from warming too.

Key to convincing me that there is a problem developing is determining when warming is projected to become a net negative assuming current projected trends. That requires reasonable effort to consider the most serious negative impacts weighed against the most beneficial ones. Talk of polar bear habitat is distracting because it has nothing to do with human well-being.

Certainly it makes sense to me that rapid change tends to be harmful/stressful for most creatures.
__________________
Gas and Electric Vehicle Cost of Ownership Calculator







Give me absolute safety, or give me death!
 
The Following User Says Thank You to redpoint5 For This Useful Post:
aerohead (12-26-2019)