Jump to content
reo

Senator Denies Climate Change On Senate Floor And Gets A Science Lesson From His Colleague

Recommended Posts

efus50   

99% of all climate scientists and ever major scientific climatology group in the entire world accept anthropogenic climate change. 

 

 

The deniers, whether they know it or not, are insisting that a vast, all encompassing conspiracy is affront in ever country, in every major climate group, involving the overwhelming majority of the worlds climate scientists, over the last several decades. That's more idiotic and implausible than 911 conspiracies. 

 

To deny, you are either ignorant of the science, or you some kind of right wing or fundamentalist fucking asshole who thinks we can't fuck up the Earth because Yahweh won't let it happen or because that's not what Revelation says or whatever. 

too bad it's no hotter. Step one. It gets hotter. Step two you worry about it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The steps utilities are taking to stop rooftop solar will only grow over time. They're also likely to increase energy usage overall as a result, which is desirable for a utility.

I don't suspect the masses have the intelligence or appetite to address the inherent challenges anytime soon... challenges that actually give utilities a decent bit of credibility in their arguments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, and it takes willful ignorance to deny climate change. This guy eviscerated his opponent. It was fun to watch. And sad it was needed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with the entire argument about global warming/climate change is that there exists no international mechanism to disrupt its existence. I think we have all of the tools available to slow its progress, but the technology isn't there, yet. Solar panels help. I've also read about harnessing the ocean through its constant movement. Both are capable, but the continued problem is the movement of energy.

There does not exist, at the moment, a verified way of moving energy that is more cost efficient than coal, fossil fuels, and nuclear power. This is undeniable. To argue against its continued use is to argue against capitalism, itself.

Until one of three things happen the path will not change. 1. A new technology for harnessing and transporting energy exists. 2. An international entity comes into existence to implement changes to lower the standard of existing models. 3. Enough people become concerned about the matter that the situation organically changes. The first is obviously the most conceivable. Seeing as the people pushing for change have some of the highest CO2 footprints in the world, it's pretty unlikely that number 3 takes place without advancements in technology. The second is unlikely because nations value sovereignty. People tend to not care about issues that are very unlikely to affect their lives directly.

As well, climate change is on the back burner of things threatening humanity. WW3 is a much more likely occurrence to wipe out humanity than climate change. Global species existence is another (45% of bee populations have been wiped out in the past 60 years, 40% of spider populations...etc). Our oceans are over-fished and tirelessly polluted. Our rain forests are ravaged for paper products when hemp is regenerative and costs less to produce (war on drugs, conspiracy...etc).

While we attack Afghanistan and Iraq, we allowed the world's craziest nation to attain nuclear weapons. North Korea is much more of a threat to humanity's existence than climate change.

Until I see anything other than a push to lower our standard of living via taxes and regulations, I will continue to believe those in power pushing this are, at the least, misguided. China and India both have larger footprints than us. We will not lead them out of their ways without a technology capable of maintaining their bottom line. We helped push capitalism on the world. Deal with its repercussions.

Edited by IsntLifeFunny

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
efus50   

I do love the word change in the last couple years. It used to be called global warming. Since it's not getting warmer lets call it climate change. Stop driving your cars and live what you yip. Then I will talk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
efus50   

The problem with the entire argument about global warming/climate change is that there exists no international mechanism to disrupt its existence. I think we have all of the tools available to slow its progress, but the technology isn't there, yet. Solar panels help. I've also read about harnessing the ocean through its constant movement. Both are capable, but the continued problem is the movement of energy.

There does not exist, at the moment, a verified way of moving energy that is more cost efficient than coal, fossil fuels, and nuclear power. This is undeniable. To argue against its continued use is to argue against capitalism, itself.

Until one of three things happen the path will not change. 1. A new technology for harnessing and transporting energy exists. 2. An international entity comes into existence to implement changes to lower the standard of existing models. 3. Enough people become concerned about the matter that the situation organically changes. The first is obviously the most conceivable. Seeing as the people pushing for change have some of the highest CO2 footprints in the world, it's pretty unlikely that number 3 takes place without advancements in technology. The second is unlikely because nations value sovereignty. People tend to not care about issues that are very unlikely to affect their lives directly.

As well, climate change is on the back burner of things threatening humanity. WW3 is a much more likely occurrence to wipe out humanity than climate change. Global species existence is another (45% of bee populations have been wiped out in the past 60 years, 40% of spider populations...etc). Our oceans are over-fished and tirelessly polluted. Our rain forests are ravaged for paper products when hemp is regenerative and costs less to produce (war on drugs, conspiracy...etc).

While we attack Afghanistan and Iraq, we allowed the world's craziest nation to attain nuclear weapons. North Korea is much more of a threat to humanity's existence than climate change.

Until I see anything other than a push to lower our standard of living via taxes and regulations, I will continue to believe those in power pushing this are, at the least, misguided. China and India both have larger footprints than us. We will not lead them out of their ways without a technology capable of maintaining their bottom line. We helped push capitalism on the world. Deal with its repercussions.

i agree with most of what you are saying here. The problem is energy is a commodity and the reality is we should be doing everything we can to drive the price down

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OILERMAN   

Since it's not getting warmer lets call it climate change.

 

It's absolutely undeniably getting warmer

 

nasa_historic_temps.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...