Do you know who else thinks climate change is a hoax?
My cat.
sharemeow
MovieChat Forums > Donald Trump Discussion > Do you know who else thinks climate chan...
Years ago, the Republican party did believe in climate change and wanted to fight against it with renewable energy. What happened? Hundreds of millions of dollars in campaign funds from the Koch Brothers (oilmen and major polluters) changed their mind.
shareI don't think anyone denies climate change is happening. I think there are still lots of disagreements on what degree man-made influences are having an impact on that. Due to Earth's now enormous population will going as green as we can have an enormous impact, maybe even reverse global temperature increase? Or is this a cyclical event like the ice ages that came and went throughout prehistory? As an outsider, it's so hard to know what data to believe. It is all funded by someone with an agenda, one way or another. Some of the scientists have been discredited because our their bias and methods. The laymen (like me) are left in the middle not knowing who to try believe.
shareIt's actually not hard to know which group is telling the truth. It's actually really easy, it's the guys in the white jackets with all the data, not the guys with the agenda in a sports coat and rambling about god.
They use the fact that temperatures rising and falling is natural to under cut the truth that we are in fact contributing to it greatly.
But even if you don't believe that, what trump is doing is handing jobs and a head start in the renewables industry to china. They've already closed coal planets are investing heavily in renewables, while trump farts on about coal. Fossil fuels aren't going to last forever, that is an undisputed fact. And I don't know about you, but I'd rather get my energy in future from wind, water or the sun, than be shooting high pressure jets into the earth to get more gas at the risk of earthquakes. Yes renewables are expensive, but the quick we all are to adopt them the quicker the price will fall.
I agree with almost all of what you've said. I fear the US (and me, in the struggling middle class) getting harmed over a deal that unfairly places all the burden of expense on the US economy while not getting Europe and China to pay their fair share.
shareeh, the USA has contributed the most to climate change, and still is one of the leading contributors per person today. You can say that you've given the most in dollar numbers, but as one of the main contributors you should be. But on a scale of GDP, the USA is 32nd in this list of paying for it. So as the richest country and largest contributor the USA is not even close to paying its fair share. It's like a millionaire going out for a meal with a bunch of middle class folks, and having 5 courses while everyone else has a salads and then expect everyone to split the bill evenly.
But you're right, you(the middle class) shouldn't be footing the bill. The ones most directly gaining from it should. The kock brothers for example. They are after all the types standing in the way of the middle classes getting access to renewables at affordable rates. Make no mistake, these people are steal your children's future. We have, at best 20 years to turn things around before future generations are fucked. And I mean fucked. There will be nothing they can do. Your grandkids will be bouncing on your kneee and asking you why you hate them so much?
Whenever you see climate change deniers. Ask where the information is coming from. Because I promise you, it's opinions. It's not science. Listening to oil companies tell you there's no such thing, is like listening to tobacco companies telling thou there's no direct connection between smoking and cancer. Speaking of which, Philips Morris international(big tobacco company) have pledged to reduce their carbon footprint, and wallmart and Bank of America have set deadlines to be 100% run on renewables. That's right Walmart and Bank of America believe in and are trying to tackle climate change.
Those are all good thoughts, and I haven't seen those numbers. I would think China and India contribute more the global pollution, but maybe the them supplying the US market is the indirect source of that.
In the end, whether you believe in a made-made source of climate change or not, switching over to renewable energy is the right thing to do for the future of us all.
Carbon footprints in kilotons has the usa at just under 8million. China is just over 5million and india is almost 2 million. The problem with the usa is that its so vast and has such different types of land and populous. So you can look out your window in wisconsion and see clear skys, but look at your window in LA and choke to death in seconds.
shareI guess that's one reason I spend a lot more time in Wisconsin than LA. Only one, though.
I would have thought India was more, but maybe it's the perception of the density like you said.
It's that and a lot of propaganda. The American people are led to be
I've they are the best in the world at everything. It's unfortunately not true, but if you dare say that you are labelled anti American, a communist, socialist, traitor etc etc.
Like I said though, whether you believe in it or not. The fact remains that trump is costing the American people money and jobs. Instead of championing new technologies and putting America at the forefront of renewables, he's forcing the country to stay with finite resources that will only continue to cost more, and contribute more to the climate. Worse he might actually be forcing the country backwards. If nothing else he's giving China the head start. They've already said they're putting 360 billion in to renewables and will create millions of jobs over the next 3 years. America doesn't need jobs? The coal miners trump is so worried about can't be retrained in renewables?
share
But the guys "in the white jackets with all the data" do not all agree with you Dallas. From my research, it seems to be about 50/50.
Is there climate change? Of course there is. There always has been, and always will be. The question as Cheepshooter expressed above is how much input human beings have. The scientific jury is still out on that one.
π
Very well said, Cheepshooter.
π
It may be, it may not be, and it would be cyclical if it is--the last Ice Age tells us that. Observable recorded science has not been around long enough to be able to tell. All I know is that the US and Canada are some of the most cleanest air countries in the world and with the Paris Accord the US was forking over billions of dollars to polluting countries that continue to pollute and receive big cash to continue polluting. Sickening.
World Health Organization World Pollution Report.
http://gamapserver.who.int/gho/interactive_charts/phe/oap_exposure/atlas.html
Agreed. I think Paris would have been a raw deal for the US. I'm all for cleaning up, but we are already pretty clean. It is time for others to start helping.
shareNo it wasn't. It wasn't even a deal. AMERICA SET ITS OWN TARGETS!!! There was no punishment other than shame for failing to meet those targets, and you were giving money to other countries to piss up against a wall. Stop listening to that utter buffoon. He's lying to you, or at best just has no clue what's going on. He's talking about how America isn't allowed to use coal anymore, which is a lie. Reducing the reliance on coal was an American idea. The Paris climate agreement was just that, an agreement. An agreement that each country would tackle climate change in its own way. As one of the richest or not the richest countries in the agreement, and biggest contributors of carbon, of course the USA pays more. But as I said already in GDP terms, the USA is behind 31 other countries in how much is contributed to the fund.
share"Reducing the reliance on coal was an American idea." And a good idea, for more reason than one. People in those areas complain about lost jobs, but honestly those jobs aren't for humans. The health costs and human costs of that industry have to be very high. I have no data to back that up, but it seems like it would be so. Also, digging stuff out of the earth without putting something in its place seems like another area of concern. The same is true of metal (recycle, people!).
shareYes, it was a good idea. But no one is forcing america to do it. There are no penalties if america doesntdo it. The paris agreement has no gun pointed at americas head. Trump paints the picture that paris is forcing america to do things, which is not true. America looked at itself and made the call where it could lower carbon output. So when you say paris is a raw deal, its not true. Its something that moron has said who clearly has no clue what the paris agreement is about.
The paris agreement was signed by Israel and Palestine. Let that sink in for a moment. Israel and Palestine AGREE that the the paris agreement is a good idea. Even north korea thinks its a good idea ffs. Trump has walked away from the first thing ever that humanity has come together for. The whole world, except trumps america. Think about that. Think about if you really want to be that isolationist.
"There are no penalties if america doesntdo it. .... Trump paints the picture that paris is forcing america to do things"
I see what you mean. My concern, working at a small company, is that the US would "volunteer" it's companies to become more green, then "mandate" companies comply. The last Presidential mandate ("Affordable" Health Care) really put the squeeze on a lot of small companies. Then, employees at those companies took the brunt. I now have a super high deductible and pay out lots every week, but I'm healthy so that money lines someone else's pockets.
The good news is American companies can (and will) still chose to be green on their own when they can. They don't need the government agreeing to help.
It was never like that. It was all government level stuff. In fact most of the companies in America are urging trump not to pull out. They are mostly in support of going green. Intel, Microsoft etc etc are all disappointed in trumps actions. These are big companies that are for the green agreement.
As for the little guy, no, no one would be forcing anything on them. It would all just trickle down. If trump really wanted to look after the little guy, he'd be offering massive government subsidies to get the ball rolling or renewables. The more money available the faster the uptake, the faster the uptake the lower the prices become. That all filters down to the people. More jobs, less cost and a lot less pissy Wars in the Middle East. No more relying on foreign oil, no more problems in energy at all. The sun isn't going anywhere, the wind won't ever stop, and the water will keep flowing.
As it stands China is doing all of this. So in 20 years they'll be selling energy to the us. They'll have the big companies in place to corner the market, and set the prices. The time is now. But trump only thinks in the now, not years from now. And it's the American people that are gonna pay for it. Him and his rich buddies will be racking it in.
If there are no penalties for non-compliance with goals you make up yourself, and big companies are already complying voluntarily, I'm not sure I understand the fuss after all. Symbolic gesture to the world, maybe?
shareTrump doesn't understand it, it's as simple as that. He claims that China can make as many coal plants as they want but America isn't allowed to which is false. Worse than that China have actually cancelled building over 100 coal plants in their goal of spearheading renewables.
It's all in trumps head, or he's been told to do it by the kock brothers and their ilk. Unfortunately far too many people refuse to see the truth because they don't want to admit they got it wrong. Funny thing is Clinton wouldn't have been any better. She would just have been more of the same but at least she wouldn't be pissing off the rest of the world and sucking up to Russia at every turn. I don't blame anyone for wanting change, but I think it's pretty clear at this point trump isn't that change they wanted.
Actually I tell a lie there is one penalty for missing targets. The country that misses is targets is shamed. That's it. The rest of world gives the country that misses its target a disapproving look and shakes its head.
Shame is a powerful motivator, though.
shareIt is, but its not an economic one as trump suggests. He actually claimed that when the people were celebrating the original signing of the agreement, that they were actually laughing at america and how much the rest of the world was screwing the US over. Its just weird. Its like he thinks none of us have a tv or the internet to fact check things he says.
shareTaking into account economics, the U.S. ranks 10th highest in carbon pollution per gross domestic product behind China, India, Russia, Estonia, Poland, South Korea, the Czech Republic, Mexico and Turkey, according to the International Energy Agency . The U.S. spews almost five times more carbon dioxide per dollar in the economy than Sweden.
Because carbon dioxide stays in the atmosphere for more than a century, scientists and regulators say it's more important to look at historical emissions. Since 1870, the U.S. has produced about one-quarter of the world's carbon dioxide(twice as much as China) and that makes it the biggest polluter in the world by far. Carbon emissions are the only measurements that matter. Clean air free or soot and other shit, yeah, the USA is great. But air born particles are not what's causing global warming.
Plants need Carbon Dioxide to survive and they emit Oxygen so we can survive.
When a Volcano goes off, it emits more CO2 than all of humanity for the last four to six thousand years COMBINED.
What exactly is the problem?
Jesus fucking christ, you cant be that dumb, can you? Its not carbon thats the problem, its the amount of carbon thats the problem. The earth filters carbon over a hundred years or so. It a has a fine eco system that means it can take x amount. We are adding to that number and throwing off the balance.
Do you know why you shouldnt take more than 2 paracetamol/acetaminophen tablets in 4 hours? Its because the body only produces enough enzymes to turn the toxic parts into non toxic in that time frame. If you add more you risk damaging the liver and other organs. Theres a balance to everything. Why fuck with it?
First of all, stop using the Lord's name in vain.
Second of all, how could you be so stupid, so idiotic, to think that a volcano doesn't upset the amount of carbon in the atmosphere or around the world, while us tiny little humans do?
Wake up. The Earth is a lot bigger than your 9x4 office cubicle is. Take a raft and go down the Mississippi River and you will soon realize how tiny you are.
Oh god, you are that fucking stupid. A volcano, is part of the eco system. Your hundreds of fucking coal power plants are not.
Thats also not taking into account that fact that youre full of shit. Volcanos put at the most 319million tons of co2 per year, compared to the 29 billion estimated tons by humans per year. All these facts are easily found outside of your rightwing oil based echo chamber. And god isnt going to help you.
Watch your language. This is a discussion forum, not a high school locker room.
You're tiny Dallas, you're tiny. You have ZERO affect on the world's climate. Mount St. Helens did more to the environment than all humans put together combined from 1900 through till 2000. Wake up and stop slobbering over the false narrative. Who stands the most to gain from climate change? It's a trillion dollar industry, wake up.
Hundreds of Coal Power Plants have nothing against the environment vs. a single Volcano. Do you not realize how large a volcano is?
Hehe, is this a joke post? It's like you are comparing 1 "tiny human" to a volcano when you must realize there are BILLIONS of us, burning up carbon every second of every day. Maybe you are a narcissist like Trump and think that only you exist in the world? Hahaha. Wow. The arguments from the climate change deniers are getting more outrageous by the day.
shareNo it's not a joke post, Climate-Change-Global-Warming is a trillion dollar hoax, and is the largest hoax of the 20th and 21st centuries so far. Follow the money and do your research. Who stands to gain from this lie?
share[deleted]
It gets absorbed into the air, just like everything else.
Remember the BP Oil Disaster? Instead of causing an ecological calamity, it ended up being beneficial to the region. There are more underwater plants and fish in the Gulf than there were beforehand.
Why you ask? Because oil is from the earth. THE EARTH. Oil is not a manmade product. It is from the Earth. It is as natural as natural gets.
Nobody who is sane thinks it's a "hoax". Yes, carbon is natural. So is water. Are you saying water is never dangerous? Try drinking a few gallons of it in one sitting. Wowzers, this has to be a joke post.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_intoxication
I would stop posting for a while if I were you.
[deleted]
Well said, volley. Well said.
π
[deleted]
Yes it it, volley. We should cut way down on foreign aid, and take care of our own people here.
π