Quote:
Originally Posted by caliboy1994
Both the recent cold spells and record breaking drought that is affecting my state are consistent with climate change models. Also, you never responded to my logic experiment.
|
Because your arguments, and your 'game' are tedious. Especially considering that I've already addressed your concerns if you had actually read my posts with anything other than blinders on. So, since you blow off my posts, why are yours any better? Also, you never responded to my comments about a few things, either. For example: the email scandal, cherry picking of temp results. Instead you make unrealistic assumptions.
Here; I'll show you your assumption problems.
Quote:
Originally Posted by caliboy1994
I have an idea, Yug. Let's play a logic game. So let's assume for a moment that climate change/global warming isn't really happening for whatever reason. And that we take no action. What happens then? Nothing. Everything is the same. Now let's assume that it is not happening and we DO take action. The world economy suffers a bit because of our clamping down on fossil fuels. Developing nations suffer particularly, and countries such as the United States and China who rely heavily on fossil fuels might have recessions due to rapid shifts in the energy economy. But eventually everything turns out fine within a few decades.
|
First off, your assumption is
not logical that the world economy will suffer. China takes care of China. They don't give a shyte about anything/anyone besides their own welfare, and how to further their power/wealth/influence. To them, economics is merely war by other means. If you don't believe that, you are not worth any further discussion of any issue that affects them. (I've worked in areas where I dealt with INTEL of various sorts, so I KNOW what I'm talking about when it comes to them) With that, it will NOT be the world economy that takes a hit, it is ours, the U.S. - because China and India won't play your game. China then becomes the world power as the U.S. slides into third world obscurity. Now our new masters are dictating terms, and guess what? They STILL won't play your game. Now we are totally fcuked, thanks to your little game of fools, and the pollution from China (and others) continues unabated. Meanwhile, algore and his buddies got rich trading these sham 'carbon credits', and we see we have been clearly duped, but now it is too late to put things to right.
Quote:
Originally Posted by caliboy1994
Now, let's assume that it IS happening. And we take action. We successfully mitigate the crisis. A few economic setbacks, pretty much the same as stated above, and the damage done so far by climate change has been minimized. Now, let's assume that it is happening and we take NO action. Worldwide economic collapse, sea level rise, mass extinction, and perhaps the collapse of civilization altogether in some areas of the globe that are more vulnerable to climate disruption. Perhaps a billion or so people die within a few decades, and a billion or so more are displaced and become climate refugees. Resource wars, famine, mass migration, and the collapse of many countries' political, social, and economic systems becomes the new norm. This could all potentially happen in this last scenario, it is entirely possible.
|
Another flaw in your 'logic' based on your assumption (again) that we can 'mitigate' anything. This is because of what I said above: China, and probably India won't play. Their govts only want development. The U.S. may be the only major industrial nation that even listens to the enviro whackos (the brainwashed nuts that want to do anything/everything against global warming) in the first place (probably because we haven't jailed or shot enough of them) which is probably why the scam was begun in the U.S.; where else would you find enough tree-hugger anti-industry 'ohh-noo-we're-killing-the-Earth' idiots to dupe? Try this in China, and you disappear or get shot in the head. Try this in India, and you end up fertilizing a farmers crops.
Also, I won't assume it IS happening, since I don't believe it in the first place. We have had warming periods in the past that have still not been explained if all you go on is the CO2 levels. Also, the email scandal shows they intentionally altered the data with full intent to deceive No-one here has made any attempt yet to determine why they did that - unless they had to because the raw data wouldn't support their argument. They also cherry picked temp readings from built up areas (areas where the heat is reflected instead of absorbed by surroundings, and ignored readings that didn't fit their temp increase agenda. This is not based on assumptions, which you seem rather free with, this was proven to have occurred (and you still have not addressed these items, but instead you ignore them, and then expect me to play YOUR game? again, sounds one-way to me - and still tedious)
Quote:
Originally Posted by caliboy1994
Let's make another assumption. Assume that we have no way of knowing that climate change/global warming is actually happening. As many distinguished "climate skeptics" argue, the evidence is inconclusive. Now, we have to pick a path to take given the four scenarios above. Take no action, or do something about it. Given the benefits and consequences of each potential scenario, what do you think is the best course of action?
|
You last assumption is also bogus - we CAN know if it is happening, but it must be based on
solid science, not a cadre of agenda-driven (maybe politically motivated, or bribed) conspirators with the proven intent to deceive the world for their personal anti-development beliefs, and others who will profit from trading 'carbon-credits'.
Here is my bottom line: if it even was happening (which I don't for one moment believe), the worst polluter can not be compelled to play along. They are becoming a world power already, and doing what the 'the-sky-is-falling' chicken-little types suggest would hasten their rise to power. Here is my logic: because of this (that they won't play), accept it; you couldn't change it since you can't compel them to comply unless you want to go to war. That war may involve nukes. You think that won't pollute? So... in case that was not clear - you can't affect enough change, accept it, move on to your next 'cause-of-the-moment'.
(will this do until you once-again ignore / fail-to-address these points?)