Is it Game Over on the climate front?

[Gaidin]

I find you eating up Republican propaganda on the Green New Deal god damn hilarious.

[Heathen Hammer]

I find you eating up Republican propaganda on the Green New Deal god damn hilarious.

What Republican propaganda? I didn't even mention any Republicans, just facts that:
"Countries that cause the most damage to environment are not Western. "
"If you want to see effective action from the West to prevent damage to environment, that would require complete social and economic overhaul, something that is not practically possible without literal revolutions and/or coups of most Western governments. "

It sounds like you don't care about the issue and are just repeating same tired partisan narrative, since it is obvious that Democrats care about the issue just as much as Republicans do.

[Gaidin]

What Republican propaganda? I didn't even mention any Republicans, just facts that--

It's a 14 page resolution that does...well...nothing but push the US in a direction. If it actually did something New Deal worthy it'd be actual legislation thousands of pages long you eating up propaganda would've already died from a heart attack. Even though I would still be driving cars albeit electric ones, and the livestock would be perfectly fine because, no, you can't change science. Only engineering. You see...about all you do is read propaganda. You don't read how real works. You need to start reading how real works.

[Infidel144]

It's a 14 page resolution that does...well...nothing but push the US in a direction. If it actually did something New Deal worthy it'd be actual legislation thousands of pages long you would've already died from a heart attack. Even though I would still be driving cars albeit electric ones, and the livestock would be perfectly fine because, no, you can't change science. Only engineering. You see...about all you do is read propaganda. You don't read how real works. You need to start reading how real works.

What "Republican propaganda" are you claiming he is "eating up"?

[Pontifex Maximus]

I find you eating up Republican propaganda on the Green New Deal god damn hilarious.

Lol fantastic. Tell me, what do you like about the green new deal? In your opinion who should be most reprimanded, anyone who ever used fossil fuels or everyone in society in general because being warn during winter = sin.

[Heathen Hammer]

It's a 14 page resolution that does...well...nothing but push the US in a direction. If it actually did something New Deal worthy it'd be actual legislation thousands of pages long you would've already died from a heart attack. Even though I would still be driving cars albeit electric ones, and the livestock would be perfectly fine because, no, you can't change science. Only engineering. You see...about all you do is read propaganda. You don't read how real works. You need to start reading how real works.

Again, seems like you haven't read the text you quoted, just ad hominem attacks because I pointed out why your narrative makes no sense.
Like I said, Western nations do not contribute to negative influence on environment not even on a close scale as China or India do, who will continue doing their thing no matter what draconian laws you enact within the West, unless what you demand is above-mentioned complete social, economic and political overhaul which current elites would never commit to. You keep deflecting and throwing up hilariously childish insults at me and rambling about imaginary "republican propaganda", ironically spouting same boring and predictable partisan talking points that clearly show you are just virtue signaling and your don't even care about global warming or environment in general.

[dogukan]

Huh? You seem to either not read the text you quoted or are pretending to do so.
Again, read and repeat:
Countries that cause the most damage to environment are not Western.
Imposing extra taxes or banning planes and animals in Western countries will help deal with damage done by China and India as much as hopes and prayers would. If you want to see effective action from the West to prevent damage to environment, that would require complete social and economic overhaul, something that is not practically possible without literal revolutions and/or coups of most Western governments. Good luck with that.

Thats because their populations are ginormous.
Their PER CAPITA contributions are nothing compared to western countries.

Climate action requires globalism. No one will sacrifice their economic growth when others are winning.
But we are too far from getting into such rational debates seeing the partisan stupidity of "woke" climate change deniers....

[z3n]

Thats because their populations are ginormous.
Their PER CAPITA contributions are nothing compared to western countries.

Climate action requires globalism. No one will sacrifice their economic growth when others are winning.
But we are too far from getting into such rational debates seeing the partisan stupidity of "woke" climate change deniers....

Let's say 2 people live in a town, one person kills another person. They now have the highest PER CAPITA town murder rate in the entire world. Isn't that terrible?

[Gaidin]

Let's say 2 people live in a town, one person kills another person. They now have the highest PER CAPITA town murder rate in the entire world. Isn't that terrible?

That’s not a town, that’s a house that did paperwork with the state.

If a state allows this to go forward they deserve all possible statistics that follow.

All over the country there are unincorporated cities run by the county for this reason. You want to try this try it on someone else.

[z3n]

That’s not a town, that’s a house that did paperwork with the state.

If a state allows this to go forward they deserve all possible statistics that follow.

All over the country there are unincorporated cities run by the county for this reason. You want to try this try it on someone else.

Patently false there are towns with a population of one. Do some research before making claims.

[NorseThing]

The game of climate change is never over. All political people use anything to get what they want, which is mostly attention and approval.

The latest from the mayor of NYC: Liberal NYC mayor rolls out 'Meatless Mondays' in all public schools

Of course this was already tried by the church for economic reasons with their meatless Fridays.

Of course this is also good reason to take government out of owning, operating, and hiring staffing for our public schools. Let's keep this on Baslio though. from the article:

“We're expanding Meatless Mondays to all public schools to keep our lunch and planet green for generations to come.”

[Heathen Hammer]

Thats because their populations are ginormous.
Their PER CAPITA contributions are nothing compared to western countries.

Climate action requires globalism. No one will sacrifice their economic growth when others are winning.
But we are too far from getting into such rational debates seeing the partisan stupidity of "woke" climate change deniers....

Climate action requires... complete overhaul of social, political and economic, order, which itself requires removal of current elites from power via coups/revolutions. Globalism (as in rule of above-mentioned oligarchies who are totally fine with screwing over the environment) is the reason why things are as they are now.

[dogukan]

Climate action requires... complete overhaul of social, political and economic, order, which itself requires removal of current elites from power via coups/revolutions. Globalism (as in rule of above-mentioned oligarchies who are totally fine with screwing over the environment) is the reason why things are as they are now.

For gods sake, this economic illiteracy is killing me.
There is no unified global economic elite. Stop coming up with this conspiracy nonsense. There countless interest groups in global exonomy that struggle over what the future will be like.
Not all firms are equally contributing to climate and no every firm is equally impacted by it. Certainly, coal, oil and steel lobbys puppet trump for instance does not represent a struggle against environment destroying "globalists".


The issue of climate change is a typical "trafedy of the commons" problem. The only way such a probşem can be solved through is globalist institutions and their proper enforcement.

Struggle against climate change requires many industries to get hurt significantly, and NO NATION STATE alone can nake sure this happens.

What do you propose to solve this conflict of interests?ınternational institutions often empower the hands of politicians against powerful lonby groups by transferring monitoring to third parties.
National institutions are open to erosions by donestic politics(see: trump and epa)...

[Heathen Hammer]

Cosmopolitan nature of "global" institutions makes them much more open to corruption then national ones- UN is a good example for that. Your take of submitting to globalist groups (that submit themselves to interests of same lobbies that benefit from damaging the environment) is hilariously far from the truth, and is something neoliberal politicians would love for us to think when they cry crocodile tears about "global warming" while continue maintaining same order that damages the environment. Things is, things are too far gone to make the above-mentioned lobbies lose their influence. If you want to preserve whatever is left of our planet's ecosystem, then you want a literal revolution, otherwise you are just virtue-signaling for partisan attacks against perceived "enemy" like Gaidin here.

[swabian]

Thats because their populations are ginormous.
Their PER CAPITA contributions are nothing compared to western countries.

Climate action requires globalism. No one will sacrifice their economic growth when others are winning.
But we are too far from getting into such rational debates seeing the partisan stupidity of "woke" climate change deniers....

Gotta agree here. It requires a few key countries like China, US and EU-countries and the rest can be more or less diplomatically forced to follow or is irrelevant. However, this is of course not possible with the obnoxious orange, but he's not the only one. The recent climate summits, such as in Kyoto, have shown that it's not taken seriously enough by many others. Therefore what is truly required is a global crisis of brutal proportions and lots of dead or fleeing people, as always.

[B. W.]

For gods sake, this economic illiteracy is killing me.
There is no unified global economic elite. Stop coming up with this conspiracy nonsense. There countless interest groups in global exonomy that struggle over what the future will be like.
Not all firms are equally contributing to climate and no every firm is equally impacted by it. Certainly, coal, oil and steel lobbys puppet trump for instance does not represent a struggle against environment destroying "globalists".


The issue of climate change is a typical "trafedy of the commons" problem. The only way such a probşem can be solved through is globalist institutions and their proper enforcement.

Struggle against climate change requires many industries to get hurt significantly, and NO NATION STATE alone can nake sure this happens.

What do you propose to solve this conflict of interests?ınternational institutions often empower the hands of politicians against powerful lonby groups by transferring monitoring to third parties.
National institutions are open to erosions by donestic politics(see: trump and epa)...

Hilarious! You're calling people illiterate and you make statements like the one above I highlighted in bold. Exactly what is it you are referring to there?

[dogukan]

Hilarious! You're calling people illiterate and you make statements like the one above I highlighted in bold. Exactly what is it you are referring to there?

Man-made climate change due to increasing Co2 emissions hurting the existing eco-system and drastically changing the climate zones that we built our lives in and populated to such an extend that IF there is even a little change, it can cause catasthrophic effects on global stability by severe droughts, heatwaves, extreme weather events...etc uprooting tens of millions people to cause HUGE migration waves that we have never seen before, causing drastic changes in global food prices/food security, causing new diseases that we cannot handle and economic crises that lead to wars and millions of deaths?

[B. W.]

Man-made climate change due to increasing Co2 emissions hurting the existing eco-system and drastically changing the climate zones that we built our lives in and populated to such an extend that IF there is even a little change, it can cause catasthrophic effects on global stability by severe droughts, heatwaves, extreme weather events...etc uprooting tens of millions people to cause HUGE migration waves that we have never seen before, causing drastic changes in global food prices/food security, causing new diseases that we cannot handle and economic crises that lead to wars and millions of deaths?

Ha, Ha! Apparently you can't even say it. It's called Anthropogenic Global Warming and its been proven to be fraudulent and based on manipulated data. Heck, even the last IPCC report was proven to be based on bad data two days after it was released by a blogger in Australia and the IPCC had to issue an retraction for publishing a fraudulent report.

There is no scientific data that supports global warming as a result of increased levels of CO2. It's just the opposite. Rising CO2 levels follow increased global temperatures.

[fkizz]

etc uprooting tens of millions people to cause HUGE migration waves that we have never seen before, causing drastic changes in global food prices/food security, causing new diseases that we cannot handle and economic crises that lead to wars and millions of deaths?

Is it me having spent too much time on history and TWC type games, or does what you describe sound like a typical crisis as described in History books?

Cmon if we're talking of the north pole melting or something come up with something more drastic than average.
If it's not extinction level, then it's in no way more dangerous, than say, an all out nuclear war.

Now on this I'm not necessarily a denier, just there is some dislike to be found in the way this technical issue was turned into a moral issue.

Even if Global Warming at extremely alarming levels exists and is happening, it's not via morality or proselytism that it will be solved, but via technical solutions. Let the Scientists and Engineers and Economists and whoever else do their thing.

Sudden replacement of fossil fuels is not only extremely difficult but if it's too sudden will also give you a social crisis asides from economic crisis.

Don't forget the yellow vests in France starting spark (albeit not whole cause) was Macron's tax on fuel thus making transportations much more expensive.

Moralism/Preaching as a solution will just give you a group of believers and a group of non-believers. Not much more

[B. W.]

And yet another climate scientist comes out against the man made global warming fantasy. Announces imminent global cooling could mean doom for civilization:

https://www.americanthinker.com/arti...te_threat.html