Climate Change Anyone?

ZeeM

New member
Hello all. Firstly, I am new to NTT - found you from THR. Have to say this is the two best forums on the planet.

How is looking after the environment and climate change mutually exclusive? If you focus on the environment, remove litter, stop pollution of all forms etc. you will automatically reduce the human element of climate change. Extreme views on either side are not helpful.
 

Selena

Member
So more collecting data, but no action to reduce carbon dioxide outputs from fossil fuels. Til when? How much data is enough?

If we (the population of the planet) take action and make serious changes towards a rebalancing of the natural system, and it turns out climate change - contrary to the vast majority of data - is not man made, what do we ultimately lose?

The other option is that we keep on keeping on, and if the problem actually is man made, we not only make it much worse but possibly cause a positive feedback loop that we don't have the ability to fix.

What legacy do we want to leave behind for future generations? One of sustainability and conservation, or one of greed and destruction? I know how I feel.

And if the CO2 isn't the culprit? You have a destroyed an economy and inflicted real misery upon the population. How very noble of you. Your faith is not enough to destroy lives.
 

WrongHanded

Active member
What do we stand to lose? A way of life, really. Have you read the "green new deal"?
A way of life. Yeah, I hear that all the time. Basically it comes down to people being scared that somehow something will be taken away from them.

But life today isn't what it was in the 1950s. Times change. Jobs change. Views change. Hobbies change. People change. Life changes. The next generation will never have it the same way the previous one did. Technology assures that. So what is this "way of life" you think will stand the test of time?
 

WrongHanded

Active member
And if the CO2 isn't the culprit? You have a destroyed an economy and inflicted real misery upon the population. How very noble of you. Your faith is not enough to destroy lives.
Well, I mean, it IS the culprit. But even if it's not, we have close to 8 Billion people on the planet, and we are collectively tearing it apart so everyone can live "the best life" they possibly can. Rainforest is cut down and burned every day to make room for oil palm cultivation. We're overfishing the oceans to potentially dangerous levels. And there's much more harm we're doing besides that. Scientists now believe that largely due to habitat lose caused by humans, and combined with rising temperatures, we're in the 6th mass extinction in the history of the planet. The previous one was 65 Million years ago.

But what misery do you think will be inflicted? What economy do you really think will be destroyed? The average american has $8600 in their bank account (or they did before Covid, they probably have far less now). But they also have $38,000 in personal debt not including a mortgage. We are a consumer nation living in debt, based on a fiat currency controlled by a giant private bank, and our own government (an extension of us) is over $26 Trillion in debt. We don't have a good economy, it's already in ruins.

As far as inflicting misery on the people, take a look around. We have people living in generational poverty, huge homeless populations, people out of work and out of money who can't pay next months rent. And in the long term, as technology and robotics swallow more and more jobs, there's simply won't be work for everyone. If we as a nation get all the essential work done with 1/6th of the population (and we pretty much do), then we must "create" or "fabricate" jobs for the others. If you must "create" jobs for people, the work probably doesn't need to be done, those people just need an income. And we justify income by doing work; can't just give fiat currency away to people for nothing. Except if they are very wealthy and connected with family ties or Ivy League buddies, then they can get a big fat slice of corporate pie for very little. "Ah! Is there anything sweeter than money made off the backs and from the sweat of minimum wage corporate employees?"

And what about the misery of people in other countries? There's suffering around the world because of the changing climate. You may not see their problems as our problems, but the world is not so big that we won't see those repercussions.

So what economic and social suffering are you talking about?
 
Last edited:

WrongHanded

Active member
Hello all. Firstly, I am new to NTT - found you from THR. Have to say this is the two best forums on the planet.

How is looking after the environment and climate change mutually exclusive? If you focus on the environment, remove litter, stop pollution of all forms etc. you will automatically reduce the human element of climate change. Extreme views on either side are not helpful.
Welcome! Glad to hear you're enjoying the forums.

Stewardship of the planet and dealing with climate change are not mutually exclusive at all. They are the same. I don't think there are any extreme views when it comes to climate change. Only belief based on facts, or denial based on something else. Once enough people can agree, then we will see "extreme" views on how to combat the problem. Currently we're not even doing that in the US, we're just arguing. I'm sure Gen Z will address the issue and start working towards the future THEY want for themselves. Hopefully it won't be too late by then. But currently, we're not doing much to fix the problem, because some refuse to acknowledge there even is a problem. In fact, environment regulations have been rolled back in the past few years. That's the opposite of progress.
 

Selena

Member
Again, you expect too much destruction on the basis of faith and circular logic. As for the misery... have you- personnally- ever tried to produce foodstuffs commercially? Unless you have you would not be able to understand my reply.

Now if you will excuse me, my uncle once advised me of the foolishness of arguing religion with a zealot.
 

TomJ

Member
WrongHanded, you need to understand the skepticism people have of all politicians, but especially of those from the left. Their dishonesty is staggering, openly lying with the aid of the MSM. I understand that the Republicans are not blameless, either. We've been hearing about the destruction of the planet since the 70's, when an ice age was predicted. After listening to these predictions for 50 years, not one of which has come true we're dealing with a "The boy who cried wolf" situation. I've owned an energy consulting company for the past 20 years. Add to the mix that the left has no realistic energy policy and is completely lying about things such as their plans to ban fracking and AOC is proposing insanity such as banning air travel in the Green New Deal, it's no wonder thinking people don't believe them or take them seriously. If you tell me that you want clean air, land and water, I'm in. I'm also for clean energy and we've made great strides towards that and it will continue. Playing on people's fears to push the left's goals outlined in the Green New Deal falls on deaf ears, as least for me.
 

WrongHanded

Active member
Again, you expect too much destruction on the basis of faith and circular logic. As for the misery... have you- personnally- ever tried to produce foodstuffs commercially? Unless you have you would not be able to understand my reply.

Now if you will excuse me, my uncle once advised me of the foolishness of arguing religion with a zealot.
Selena, if you want to talk about sustainable food production, we can do that. But I know you don't. What you want, is to be right. Yet you don't provide any evidence on your stance other than anecdotal hearsay, and have ignored most of my questions, preferring to pivot instead to some generalized concept or other for which you still provide no evidence.

If you want to call me names, go ahead. Science is not a religion. The conclusions reached by an overwhelming majority of climate scientists are based on data and facts. And it seems that rather than try to understand the data or how the scientists arrived at their conclusions, you'd prefer to stick your head in the sand.
 

WrongHanded

Active member
WrongHanded, you need to understand the skepticism people have of all politicians, but especially of those from the left. Their dishonesty is staggering, openly lying with the aid of the MSM. I understand that the Republicans are not blameless, either. We've been hearing about the destruction of the planet since the 70's, when an ice age was predicted. After listening to these predictions for 50 years, not one of which has come true we're dealing with a "The boy who cried wolf" situation. I've owned an energy consulting company for the past 20 years. Add to the mix that the left has no realistic energy policy and is completely lying about things such as their plans to ban fracking and AOC is proposing insanity such as banning air travel in the Green New Deal, it's no wonder thinking people don't believe them or take them seriously. If you tell me that you want clean air, land and water, I'm in. I'm also for clean energy and we've made great strides towards that and it will continue. Playing on people's fears to push the left's goals outlined in the Green New Deal falls on deaf ears, as least for me.
Tom, I understand the skepticism. There are also many people (perhaps the majority in the country) who are skeptical of the right. But your point is taken. The left certainly is lying about fracking, and I don't know why. We can't track the entire surface of the country without understanding the consequences. Though we already do understand some of them, such as water well contamination.

The hysteria over the Green New Deal is just ridiculous. If it were ever signed into law, it would end up in court immediately. Things will not get that extreme, though it's popular for people to claim they will. All that will happen is we will begin to move away from unsustainable practices, and towards sustainable ones. Some of the far left may claim we won't look to nuclear power, but we will, because we will need to. Some jobs will disappear - though the oil and natural gas industry is already famous for it's "boom and bust" cycle, that leaves many out of work and scrambling for new opportunities regularly - but other jobs in alternative energies will replace them.

But if you don't think things are going to get worse for life on this planet as a result of human activities around the world, you might want to (just for educational purposes) take a look at everything we've already done as a species. It's really pretty shocking, and overall we are not slowing down.
 

TomJ

Member
The left certainly is lying about fracking, and I don't know why.

The hysteria over the Green New Deal is just ridiculous.

But if you don't think things are going to get worse for life on this planet as a result of human activities around the world, you might want to (just for educational purposes) take a look at everything we've already done as a species. It's really pretty shocking, and overall we are not slowing down.
They lie about fracking for the same reason they lie about most things, because if they were honest about their plans for the country they'd lose the upcoming election in a landslide.

There has been no hysteria about the Green New Deal, other then to point out the absurdity of what the left wants to do.

Your last point is more of the fear mongering I mentioned that has been going on for 50 years. We had better implement the lefts policies or something really bad is going to happen.... in 2030, or 2040, or 2050........
 

WrongHanded

Active member
been no hysteria about the Green New Deal, other then to point out the absurdity of what the left wants to do.

Your last point is more of the fear mongering I mentioned that has been going on for 50 years. We had better implement the lefts policies or something really bad is going to happen.... in 2030, or 2040, or 2050........
You may not be hysterical about the idea of the Green New Deal, but a lot of conservatives are. And just because there's legislation written doesn't mean it will definitely pass, or pass in it's current form.

It doesn't interest me that there's been "fear mongering" about the planet for 50 odd years, as you claim. What matters is what is observable and what has been documented. Are you saying deforestation is not real? Or that we haven't overfished the oceans? Or that droughts don't fall on certain regions year after year? The DOD has confirmed that years of drought in Syria was a factor that led to their civil war. Even the DOD seems to accept climate change.
 

TomJ

Member
You may not be hysterical about the idea of the Green New Deal, but a lot of conservatives are. And just because there's legislation written doesn't mean it will definitely pass, or pass in it's current form.

It doesn't interest me that there's been "fear mongering" about the planet for 50 odd years, as you claim. What matters is what is observable and what has been documented. Are you saying deforestation is not real? Or that we haven't overfished the oceans? Or that droughts don't fall on certain regions year after year? The DOD has confirmed that years of drought in Syria was a factor that led to their civil war. Even the DOD seems to accept climate change.
Sadly bad things have been happening to people for as long as we've been here. Sometimes it's brought on by people who are evil and sometimes it's the nature of the planet. The question is whether those things are a result of man made climate change. The left loses credibility when they attribute things that had nothing to do with climate change to it. We'll agree to disagree on this.
 

WrongHanded

Active member
Sadly bad things have been happening to people for as long as we've been here. Sometimes it's brought on by people who are evil and sometimes it's the nature of the planet. The question is whether those things are a result of man made climate change. The left loses credibility when they attribute things that had nothing to do with climate change to it. We'll agree to disagree on this.
Tom, the droughts you can argue about to some degree, along with the floods, wildfires and tropical storms (though there's a lot of evidence our carbon dioxide output is a huge factor). But when people cut down and burn out forest, there's no question man did it. When the oceans are barren of fish because of our systematic harvesting, there's no question man did it. We're having a massive impact on the life of this planet.

When it comes to man made climate change, If you would prefer to adopt a wait-and-see approach, I'd love to know how long you'd like to wait and how bad you'd be willing to let things get. I'd love to know how much more evidence you'd need. Seriously, what more exactly do you need? What more would it take? Quantify it.
 

TomJ

Member
Tom, the droughts you can argue about to some degree, along with the floods, wildfires and tropical storms (though there's a lot of evidence our carbon dioxide output is a huge factor). But when people cut down and burn out forest, there's no question man did it. When the oceans are barren of fish because of our systematic harvesting, there's no question man did it. We're having a massive impact on the life of this planet.

When it comes to man made climate change, If you would prefer to adopt a wait-and-see approach, I'd love to know how long you'd like to wait and how bad you'd be willing to let things get. I'd love to know how much more evidence you'd need. Seriously, what more exactly do you need? What more would it take? Quantify it.
I agree that we should not over fish the oceans and I do not agree with deforestation. In regards to man made climate change I need people who are not liars with political agendas to agree with the leftists. Until then I'm for clear air, land, water and being responsible stewards for the planet God gave us, which is more than enough. Asking me how bad things need to get is another example of fear mongering.
 

WrongHanded

Active member
I agree that we should not over fish the oceans and I do not agree with deforestation. In regards to man made climate change I need people who are not liars with political agendas to agree with the leftists. Until then I'm for clear air, land, water and being responsible stewards for the planet God gave us, which is more than enough. Asking me how bad things need to get is another example of fear mongering.
We already have people to agree with the lefties. They're called Climate Scientists. If you're waiting for a shift in Republican views, you'll be waiting a long time. The fossil fuel industry has them bought and paid for.

And I guess you don't have an answer on how bad things would have to get before you considered changing your mine. I have some minimum requirements for changing mine. And they are quantified.
 
As one step, I would like to see climate models agreeing with one another, and also accurately predicting the near future - as well as the past. That record is not good enough to be confidence-inspiring.
 

WrongHanded

Active member
As one step, I would like to see climate models agreeing with one another, and also accurately predicting the near future - as well as the past. That record is not good enough to be confidence-inspiring.
I understand why you feel that way. It seems like a lot to ask though, doesn't it?

Models only agree with one another when all the data, variables, and parameters are the same. The people creating the models are each capable of doing things slightly differently. How far out can meteorologists predict the weather correctly? If they all do it in the same way using the same data and modelling systems, they all get the same model. But independent systems will give different predictions, and the farther forward in time they try to predict, the more different the predictions will be from one another.

Climate scientists may overwhelmingly agree that climate change is happening and is man made. But that doesn't mean they all agree about how to build a model for future warming. Some get it very wrong, some get very close.

The ones that are really wrong might be cherry picked as "proof" that the science is wrong, when really it's just the model that is wrong. Or, two very different models will be compared to show how climate scientists can't even agree on what's going to happen (even if one of those models is quite accurate).

Asking people to predict the future can be easy, or very difficult. It all depends on the predictions being requested. I could post some links on which models did well or poorly, but I suspect you'd rather look for that yourself. After all, how could you know I'm not cherry picking.
 
It is a lot to ask. But then, those who propose radical restructuring of our way of life also are asking quite a bit. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof, or something like that.

At any rate, I do keep a weather eye (see what I did there?) on the topic, including a review of new developments with the models. I note that one of the newest concerns is that clouds, of all things, are interfering with modeling accuracy, and the folks in charge haven't quite figured out what to do about it. That really illustrates my concerns: the climate is enormously complicated, and in many ways we probably don't even know what we don't know. So yeah, let's keep trying to figure it all out, but let's also not make the whole country go vegan and move into city-center high-rises quite yet.
 

WrongHanded

Active member
It is a lot to ask. But then, those who propose radical restructuring of our way of life also are asking quite a bit. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof, or something like that.

At any rate, I do keep a weather eye (see what I did there?) on the topic, including a review of new developments with the models. I note that one of the newest concerns is that clouds, of all things, are interfering with modeling accuracy, and the folks in charge haven't quite figured out what to do about it. That really illustrates my concerns: the climate is enormously complicated, and in many ways we probably don't even know what we don't know. So yeah, let's keep trying to figure it all out, but let's also not make the whole country go vegan and move into city-center high-rises quite yet.
That's certainly a fair point. And to be honest with you, I don't think an immediate and drastic change in all aspects of life (such as the GND) is necessary. Nor is it achievable. But it's certainly possible that we could make increased efforts to more towards sustainability and reduce our carbon emissions.

The one thing that really bugs me is that we (meaning the US) seem to be standing alone bickering with ourselves, whilst other first world nations are making changes. It's just another one of the many issues that seem to divide this country. But unlike many of the others, this one effects the rest of the world as much as it effects us. And we are supposed to be a world leader after all.
 
Top