The climate change consensus extends beyond climate scientists

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by oil pan 4

Take it to court.
Just remember burden of proof is on the accuser and the court by definition can't be bias.
But when you loose you will be on the hook for the defendants legal costs.

It would be an easy win at the Supreme Court if:
*writ of certorari
*trial by Certificate
*invoking the Penumbra Doctrine
*Section 9(2) of the U.S.Constitution
*Section 8 (3) of the U.S.Constitution
*Necessitas inducit privegium quoad jura privata
*Causa sine qua non
*Proximate cause
*Schenck v.United States,1919
the fossil-fuel industry wouldn't have a leg to stand on.
Legal costs would be easy,we'd have all the corporate assets

[aerohead]

Move over West Nile Virus,you've got a new neighbor.
Don't you just love having South American viruses in the USA?
Global warming is a good thing! Makin' America Great!

[redpoint5]

The consensus of US citizens that GW is not a big priority to them isn't an indication that they are right about having properly evaluated the situation. As George Carlin said, “Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.”

The hockey stick is fairly indisputable, though it is a condensed graph which narrows down to just a few degrees, making the spike look larger than if it were relative to absolute temperature. It should be easy to concede that relatively rapid changes in environment are more difficult to adapt to.

That said, there must be an appropriate course of action somewhere between the extremes of do nothing, and kill yourself.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

The consensus of US citizens that GW is not a big priority to them isn't an indication that they are right about having properly evaluated the situation. As George Carlin said, “Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.”

The hockey stick is fairly indisputable, though it is a condensed graph which narrows down to just a few degrees, making the spike look larger than if it were relative to absolute temperature. It should be easy to concede that relatively rapid changes in environment are more difficult to adapt to.

That said, there must be an appropriate course of action somewhere between the extremes of do nothing, and kill yourself.

The actual 'course' seems to be the pinch point.There's so much money at stake that anyone effected by the policy implications of decarbonization had already circled their wagons by the 1970s.
There are historical precedents in the US for command and control during crises,however few but the scientists are willing to mention that we have one.
We don't have any public education.That's the plan.All state pension plan portfolios include gas-guzzler production,gas-guzzling home construction,gas-guzzling commercial real estate development,investment in all energy and oil companies worldwide,oilfield services,mining,transportation,shipping,parts,serv ice,vendors,the list is endless.It's all the way from municipal,through county,and up to state level,and includes the teacher retirement pension plans as well.
You probably noticed the federal and state gasoline and diesel taxes.
There's no control over real estate development even when areas already suffer grid-lock and are non-attainment areas for clean air.
Building codes are a joke.Regulations come and go with the political winds.
Socialism underwrites 73% of basic scientific research underlying patents,yet consumers get screwed by private industry who're happy to suck that socialist teat.
Our democracy is a failure.It's basically bought and paid for.
Congress is full of people impersonating mannequins.
Meaning full policy recommendations are received as well as the square needle in the left nut.
Without endocranial prosthetics,policymakers will continue to honor the continued maintenance of ancient assumptions about the primacy of an oxidation-centric universe.They're functionally chimpanzee.
Seems like it will take an exponential morgue-count,in-my-backyard event,before things make it off dead-center.Lobbyist influence has lead to preconception infanticide.
The atmospheric rape kit is unequivocal in it's attribution to perpetrators.But every time someone goes to the gas station,it's just another reward and positive market signal to the perps.
We're a funny species.
Structurally,there's no need for a President,Congress,or Supreme Court to have any involvement in a climate solution.However,it would require an informed consumer (formerly citizens)and that is as likely as a suspension of gravity.

[redpoint5]

Originally Posted by aerohead

There's no control over real estate development even when areas already suffer grid-lock and are non-attainment areas for clean air.

Yaron Brook made a comment that struck me... that you can't move to an area and then demand that it be different than it already is. He said that if LA has bad pollution, you can't move there and then demand that it not have bad pollution.

If people want to spend their lives in gridlock, then that's their prerogative. Most of the US land area is empty and has clean air.

Socialism underwrites 73% of basic scientific research underlying patents,yet consumers get screwed by private industry who're happy to suck that socialist teat.

Can you expand on this more? Are you saying that tax money pays for most of the research that ends up generating patents? I find this difficult to believe as there are many private businesses that patent many things.

Our democracy is a failure.It's basically bought and paid for.
Congress is full of people impersonating mannequins.

Agreed. Has democracy ever been different though? Seems any democratic process ends up being a popularity contest, no different than electing a prom king and queen. What's the alternative though?

Without endocranial prosthetics,policymakers will continue to honor the continued maintenance of ancient assumptions about the primacy of an oxidation-centric universe.

Fire is what propelled our species forward. It's no surprise that we've improved our ability to leverage that tool... and it does take exploiting fire to propel us to the next technology. Non-fire alternatives have only been around for ~70 years... we're still in the very early stages of these technologies compared with how long we've had fire.

Structurally,there's no need for a President,Congress,or Supreme Court to have any involvement in a climate solution.However,it would require an informed consumer (formerly citizens)and that is as likely as a suspension of gravity.

Sure, and laws exist only for the wicked. We've got to have them because our nature is not benevolent. I completely agree we should be better... it isn't in our nature. BTW- I'm a proponent of some level of genetic engineering, which I think will greatly reduce many problems... and create the next generation of problems which we'll need to address. That's what our species does; solve problems and introduce new ones.

[oil pan 4]

Originally Posted by aerohead

It would be an easy win at the Supreme Court if:
*writ of certorari
*trial by Certificate
*invoking the Penumbra Doctrine
*Section 9(2) of the U.S.Constitution
*Section 8 (3) of the U.S.Constitution
*Necessitas inducit privegium quoad jura privata
*Causa sine qua non
*Proximate cause
*Schenck v.United States,1919
the fossil-fuel industry wouldn't have a leg to stand on.
Legal costs would be easy,we'd have all the corporate assets

Sounds like a slam dunk win, you should go for it.
Only problem is when man made global warming is put on trial so far they have been losing, being thrown out or held up indefinitely.

[oil pan 4]

Originally Posted by aerohead

Move over West Nile Virus,you've got a new neighbor.
Don't you just love having South American viruses in the USA?
Global warming is a good thing! Makin' America Great!

And this has nothing to do with the flood of illegal immigrants coming across the border?

[redpoint5]

Originally Posted by oil pan 4

And this has nothing to do with the flood of illegal immigrants coming across the border?

I would say your statement is probably correct. Organisms live where the environment permits them to. You couldn't smuggle a penguin in a backpack and plunk it in NM expecting it to thrive.

This does remind me of the many news stories in the 90's warning that killer bees were creeping into the US. I'm sure they have continued migrating north, but I don't hear that in the news anymore.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

Yaron Brook made a comment that struck me... that you can't move to an area and then demand that it be different than it already is. He said that if LA has bad pollution, you can't move there and then demand that it not have bad pollution.

If people want to spend their lives in gridlock, then that's their prerogative. Most of the US land area is empty and has clean air.



Can you expand on this more? Are you saying that tax money pays for most of the research that ends up generating patents? I find this difficult to believe as there are many private businesses that patent many things.



Agreed. Has democracy ever been different though? Seems any democratic process ends up being a popularity contest, no different than electing a prom king and queen. What's the alternative though?



Fire is what propelled our species forward. It's no surprise that we've improved our ability to leverage that tool... and it does take exploiting fire to propel us to the next technology. Non-fire alternatives have only been around for ~70 years... we're still in the very early stages of these technologies compared with how long we've had fire.



Sure, and laws exist only for the wicked. We've got to have them because our nature is not benevolent. I completely agree we should be better... it isn't in our nature. BTW- I'm a proponent of some level of genetic engineering, which I think will greatly reduce many problems... and create the next generation of problems which we'll need to address. That's what our species does; solve problems and introduce new ones.

Gridlock is created by the permitting authority.They could have a moratorium on development when throughput reached some threshold.They would have hit their carrying capacity.Gridlock would be structurally impossible.To protect the public good.
Public money underwrites 73% of the fundamental research which undergirds patents.Private entities patent all the time,without repaying the taxpayers for the billions they spent paying for the basic research they capitalize on.(socialize the cost/privatize the profit)
Our democracy was extremely different before the Supreme Court recognized corporations as 'persons.'We lost our democracy then and there.Reverse Citizen's United.Re-invoke the Tillman Act of 1907.Reinstate McCain-Feingold.
No one will dispute the changes availed to us via fossil-fuels,however,it's showing its dark underbelly now.We've transitioned an entire geologic epoch in 200-years.We no longer live on the Earth of our founding fathers.
As far as 'wicked',I've attempted to remove adjectives like that from my vocabulary.A very close friend reminds me regularly that,people do what they do,because that's what people do.I do believe that rule of law is created for the biggest criminals to drive 18-wheelers through the loopholes.Law is only a reflection of exactly the kinds of behaviors demonstrated by man.
Our constitution is designed to protect 'ourselves and our Posterity.' It's the reason for Juliana v. United States.Technically,President Trump is in violation of his oath of office.By law,he's obligated 'To promote the Progress of Science.'...'a more perfect Union....'to promote the general Welfare'...'To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper' .
We've already had the eugenics movement.In 1918,they were advocating the sterilization of half the US population,as we were deemed genetically unfit.There was no science behind it,but that didn't stop influential people from supporting it.Hitler loved it!

[oil pan 4]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

I would say your statement is probably correct. Organisms live where the environment permits them to. You couldn't smuggle a penguin in a backpack and plunk it in NM expecting it to thrive.

This does remind me of the many news stories in the 90's warning that killer bees were creeping into the US. I'm sure they have continued migrating north, but I don't hear that in the news anymore.

Yeah they have mixed with regular honey bees and calmed way the hell down.
Now they are the slightly more irritable southern honey bee.
With a serious shortage of honey badgers in North America there was no reason to retain the extreme level of aggression. The ultra aggressive hives have been killed, or requeened by bee keepers.