Posted by tangplay on 6/16/2020 4:33:00 PM (view original):
Posted by toddcommish on 6/16/2020 4:28:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tangplay on 6/16/2020 4:09:00 PM (view original):
None of us are climate scientists. I mainly just take what they say at face value and follow their recommendations. Right now, it seems to be that we need to fight climate change now. Unless you believe in some sort of conspiracy around the research, there would be no reason to do otherwise. From what I understand, the issue with "research now, act later" is twofold. First, I don't think there's much more to uncover. Climate change is happening, we largely know why, and we have some ideas about what to do about it. Secondly, from what I can understand, we are going to reach enough CO2 that we are just ****** unless we magically are able to pull it out of the atmosphere using technology that doesn't exist yet. This is an issue that requires urgent action. We can't wait until cities are underwater to address it.
Addressing climate change sucks because in the short term, it's going to **** everyone over. It's going to require our economy to take a hit. But the longer we wait, the more drastic the solution will need to be. If we had taken action against this problem 30 years ago, we would probably be fine today. In terms of the economy, it's going to be better in the long run to take the hit now. Plus, America seems to be pretty good at developing tech. If we act now, and become more environmentally friendly, we will be way ahead of the curve. Everyone is going to have to adapt eventually, so we might as well do it now and help ourselves down the line.
I tend to NOT believe the scientists who are dependent on funding. They'll tell you (and the general public) almost anything to keep the gravy train going. That's why the narrative shifted from Global Warming to the more general, less committed "Climate Change". That way, any change in the temperature contributes to the narrative, despite the lack of statistical significance over, say, 4.5 billion years.
Humans will tough it out, evolving whatever characteristics are necessary to tolerate warmer/colder temps, higher/lower CO2, and Rob Manfred. Worry more about global extinction events like large asteroid chunks smashing into Mexico or large nuclear bombs being dropped on population centers. Those have really happened.
Deaths directly attributable to man-made climate change haven't.
Just because they haven't happened yet doesn't mean they will in the future. Who is profiting off these fake scientific studies? No one wants to believe in climate change.
The opposite is actually true. The climate denial "research" is funded completely by big oil and energy companies who do not want to be regulated. Here in Kansas, the Koch Brother(s) (ha) pay to insert climate skepticism in our education. If you think there is more money in climate change research than climate change denial, you're kidding yourself.
Evolution takes a long time. Thousands of years. Climate change, as we know it now, is happening far faster. This "science is a liar sometimes" argument is ridiculous.
EVERY SINGLE CLIMATOLOGIST (and bogus "environmentalist" profiteers) is profiting from these studies. Seriously, before 1970, was there even a job called "climatologist"? Weren't they just weathermen or meteorologists?
Just because you might not be willing to indulge in scare tactics to keep your family fed doesn't mean that some less scrupulous might not figure out that keeping the people scared every time the thermometer swings makes the cash register ring.
You're willing to believe that big oil and energy is willing to lie to keep getting money, yet you DON'T believe that the other side is doing the EXACT SAME THING?!?! That's one of the problems with current political discourse, everyone thinks THEY'RE on the moral high road, when they're just in self-preservation mode. If you're a scientist and you have a family to feed, you're gonna balance your moral compass based on how it serves your family. Yes, it's cynical. But it's true.