How Does America's Response to Climate Change Look From Abroad? | NYT Opinion

[oil pan 4]

The 97% thing is so fake it's been debunked so many times. Some of the so called scientists are regular people, maybe a gym teacher, soccer moms, fork lift drivers, college kids, al gore fan boi club.
If those are your scientists then no wonder all the predictions are hot barge garbage being pecked at by seagulls.

If global warming was real, space weather will still take most of us out before global warming can cook us.

[freebeard]

First the Sun turns black and then red-hot stones fall from the sky. It will be Biblical.

All caused by an otherwise inconsequential ripple in the Galactic Current Sheet.

[oil pan 4]

Originally Posted by freebeard

First the Sun turns black and then red-hot stones fall from the sky. It will be Biblical.

All caused by an otherwise inconsequential ripple in the Galactic Current Sheet.

The difference between that and global warming is...
They can't tax it and say forced virtue signaling will fix it.

Those star nova formed isotopes didn't just miracle them selves here.

[Galvatron1]

Is Carl Sagan & Elon Musk wrong?

https://youtu.be/HQ5u-l9Je0s



https://youtu.be/xKCuDxpccYM


https://youtu.be/KuoIN7yuEQ4

[Piotrsko]

The earth truly has been hotter and colder before. However, species not adapted to those changes become extinct. The fossil fecord is full of those extinctions.

The difficulty will be if we become extinct. I dont care about coastal McMansions in Florida or NYC being underwater, I don't live there. I worry about my water supply being overdrawn in my local desert. Can technology provide a solution, yes, but at what other cost and will it be proffered to me?

[rmay635703]

Originally Posted by oil pan 4

That was supposed to be one of the newest ones.

Unless your in Florida that may not mean much, different pollution standards for coal versus garbage for you know reasons.

https://www.wbur.org/hereandnow/2019...sh-incinerator

[freebeard]

Is Carl Sagan & Elon Musk wrong?

Perhaps. Some top DDG responses to 'plants minimum co2':

PATRICK MOORE condensed - Stanford University
www.stanford.edu/sep/jon/climate.html
The amount of CO2 in the atmosphere was reduced by about 90% during the last 150 million years. If this trend continues CO2 will inevitably fall to levels that threaten the survival of plants, which require a minimum of 150 ppm to survive.

Life on Earth was nearly doomed by too little CO2 - Watts ...
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/06/...oo-little-co2/
Our crop plants evolved about 400 million years ago, when CO2 in the atmosphere was about 5000 parts per million! Our evergreen trees and shrubs evolved about 360 million years ago, with CO2 levels at about 4,000 ppm.


Atmospheric CO2 Concentrations At 400 PPM Are Still ...
https://notrickszone.com/2013/05/17/...life-on-earth/
Plants really begin to suffer once CO2 concentrations fall below 500 ppm.

It's possible Carl Sagan didn't know about Chan Thomas' book Adam and Eve but if he did could he have said anything?

[Galvatron1]

Originally Posted by freebeard

Perhaps. Some top DDG responses to 'plants minimum co2':


It's possible Carl Sagan didn't know about

Let’s take a closer look at at one of your sources:

From Wikipedia:
“Dennis Teel Avery (born October 24, 1936 – June 20, 2020) was the director of the Center for Global Food Issues at the Hudson Institute, where he edited Global Food Quarterly. He died on June 20, 2020, at the age of 83.[1]

Dennis T. Avery
Born
October 24, 1936
Lansing, Michigan
Died
June 20, 2020 (84 years old)
Swoope, Virginia
Occupation
Author, Food policy analyst
Known for
Support of biotechnology in farming. Global warming denier.
A food policy analyst for 30 years, Dennis Avery began his career with the U.S. Department of Agriculture, served on the staff of President Lyndon Johnson's National Advisory Commission of Food and Fiber, and, prior to joining Hudson, was the senior agricultural analyst for the U.S. Department of State.[2] He was the author of several books, including the New York Times best-seller Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1,500 Years which he co-authored with Dr. S. Fred Singer of George Mason University in Virginia.

Avery was an outspoken supporter of biotechnology, pesticides, irradiation, industrial farming, and free trade, as well as a long-time critic of organic farming and farm subsidies.[citation needed] He did not believe that DDT causes egg shell thinning in eagles.[3][4] Hudson Institute's financial backers include major agricultural companies (e.g. ConAgra, Cargill) and pesticide manufacturers (e.g. Monsanto Company, DuPont, Dow-Elanco, Sandoz, Ciba-Geigy.[5]”

Always follow the money. That sounds like a conflict of interest. Companies that manufactures products of petrochemicals as financial backers puts any credibility to doubt. It’s the classic case of industries investigating themselves and finding no wrong doing. Industry shillling to make themselves sound innocent.

Many oil companies already knew of their effects on global warming 30 years ago and denied it.

https://www.theguardian.com/environm...-change-danger

Thankfully, oil companies are finally admitting global warming is real and are starting to do something about it, as they pivot to transitioning to renewable energy sources.

It was only a matter of time, until they ran out of fossil fuels as extraction became riskier and increasingly dangerous with off shore drilling.

They were postponing the inevitable, but the future of cleaner energy is finally and thankfully here
https://www.shell.com/energy-and-inn...-energies.html

[oil pan 4]

So we are supposed to listen to people who are going to make billions of selling global warming compliance products and there's no conflict of interest there?
You just opened up the wrong can of worms.

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

The ones trying to sell any random miraculous approach to overcome the so-called global warming always claim a "conflict of interests" when their nearly-religious beliefs are met with some contrary claims, yet they get mad whenever the issue about conflicts of interests is raised toward them. On a sidenote, why did we never see any push for ethanol in China when its corn harvests led to a surplus and the local dictatorship has claimed to have bought large amounts of corn to keep it stored and rotting away in order to artificially raise prices, at the same time Chinese EVs started field tests in other emerging countries such as Brazil?