Politics & News

Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Is species survival a partisan issue?

The worst thing about the Trump Presidency (IMO) is that he is about to move the US out of its international obligations on climate change. The international community has already been slow to act but it has at least got an agreement in place that was a small step in the right direction. Tearing it up will have consequences for years to come.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/nov/13/trump-looking-at-quickest-way-to-quit-paris-climate-agreement-says-report#comment-87446139

It is already predicted that the temperature of the planet will rise by 2 degrees C because of that. This will mean more floods in Bangladesh, more storms and more land becoming uninhabitable. There will be more wars over land and resources as people are displaced and (with huge irony) this will further increase the demand to emigrate to the cooler Global North. You are not going to stop immigration by making the third world unlivable.

Climate change should not be a partisan political issue and this is not a hoax by the Chinese. An issue of species survival is too important to be tarred as a niche concern for the young Liberal middle-class. The international science community (bar a tiny minority of denialists in the pocked of the fossil-fuel industry) all agree that climate change is significantly increased by human activity. More needs to be done, not less and it needed to be done yesterday. Remember this moment in two decades time.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-scientific-consensus-intermediate.htm

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

hippyjoe1955 · 70-79, M

There is no danger in releasing CO2 into the atmosphere. It does not cause global warming but is plant food. The more plants that grow the more animals thrive. The world is at a near historic low on CO2 and its plants and animals need more.

1-25 of 29

Nomadiano

Are u feeling too cold nowadays? Or are u suffocating?

hippyjoe1955 · 70-79, M

@nomadiano: Nope I am actually better informed on the subject than you. I have been an avid hiker and naturalist for more decades than you have been alive and I study history.

Nomadiano

@hippyjoe1955: But we are talking about Trump and CO2 levels today and we are nt talking abt which period during life evolution CO2 levels had increased

hippyjoe1955 · 70-79, M

The point is that the whole CO2 is bad crap is just that CRAP!!!! CO2 is good for the world and we could desperately use more. I want life to thrive on earth therefore I want more CO2. You can't have life without CO2.

Burnley123 · 41-45, M

@hippyjoe1955: Then WHY would the vast majority of climate scientists disagree with you and why is this not a partisan issue anywhere in the world?

Right-wing conspiracy theories about liberals trying to hate on corporations are somewhat mitigated by the fact that the rest of the world has near consensus on this and that green-energy is a capitalist industry.

Nomadiano

@hippyjoe1955: And you cannot have intelligent lyf on boiling earth

Burnley123 · 41-45, M

@nomadiano:

@hippyjoe1955: And you cannot have intelligent lyf on boiling earth

Then climate science denialists will be fine. ;-)

hippyjoe1955 · 70-79, M

@Burnley123: Go over the data and show me where CO2 actually causes warming. You can't because there has been no CO2 caused warming.

Nomadiano

@Burnley123: intelligent lyf = stenothermal organisms

Nomadiano

@hippyjoe1955: If u start denying statistical data n survey tht has been taken over the last years using the best technology then we can't remove the cataract of ignorance off ur eyes of mind

Nomadiano

@hippyjoe1955: use ur grey cells before they are wasted for ever

hippyjoe1955 · 70-79, M

Provide the statistics and not the media releases. If you look at the statistics you will find out that there has been no warming in 20 years.

Nomadiano

@hippyjoe1955: If you want a first hand experience welcum 2 New Delhi .All your baseless argument will be cooled down forever by the tym winter is over here .

Ah! One more thing if u r till nt satisfied even spend the 45-47 C summer here

Burnley123 · 41-45, M

No answer my questions please.

hippyjoe1955 · 70-79, M

Where did you find that Micheal Mann? Bwahahahahahahahaha every other graph shows a stasis trending down and you come up with Mann's discredited hockey stick. Bwahahahahahahaha!

Nomadiano

@hippyjoe1955: It wud be better if u r the last 1 standing after the whole humanity is wiped out

Burnley123 · 41-45, M

@hippyjoe1955: The first pic didn't load right so I found another (from NASA) that agrees.

every other graph shows a stasis trending down

Is that every other graph bu the 3% of people funded by fossil fuels who agree with you?

Mann's discredited hockey stick.

I posted analysis and data. You will think what you want because of partisan bias. Its easy to fool someone but hard to convince someone who has already been fooled. 20 years time mate! Remember this.

hippyjoe1955 · 70-79, M

The problem you have is that you keep showing me graphs of very short term. The variation you have shown is less than what most stations record from one year to the next. You need a much longer data set. The earth has been around for a lot longer than that and it has been much warmer and much cooler. If you looked at the time when dinosaurs roamed the earth and the last ice age you would surmise that the earth is going to freeze to death. You can't determine anything beyond natural variation based on your data set even rigged as it is. NOAA has been caught 'smoothing' data which makes anything it publishes suspect.

Nomadiano

@Burnley123: We cannot rectify ths opinion of his becoz ths is one of the central ideas of his attitude n central idea can be changed effectively by personal experience

Nomadiano

@hippyjoe1955:CO2 global warming is the problem of last 2 to 3 centuries . If u start comparing it 2 the tym when plants grew as taller as a redwood tree or even taller then u r thinking in the wrong direction . Tht tym CO2 increase was sumthing else now its sumthing else n moreover there has been increase in temp in earth's most coldest places too n tht hadnt happen when industrial revolution had just started nor ppl were suffering frm problems due to untimely seasons as 2day

hippyjoe1955 · 70-79, M

@nomadiano: You do realize that there is huge natural variations in CO2 levels that have been noted long before mankind existed don't you. All that coal in the ground was once CO2.

Nomadiano

@hippyjoe1955: Tell me one thing plant at tht tym ate up those CO2 and due 2 the production of O2 due 2 comsumption of excess CO2 lead 2 existence of lyf wholly dependent on O2 . Now the CO2 levels are beyond levels of normal breathing n normal living temp so where r sufficient plants 2 put lyf into earth again?

hippyjoe1955 · 70-79, M

CO2 is at historic low concentrations not high concentrations. The higher the concentration the more plant life flourishes. Animal life is not bothered by CO2 levels almost 40 times current levels.

Burnley123 · 41-45, M

Animal life is not bothered by CO2 levels almost 40 times current levels.

BUT ut IS bothered by temperature change. That is the issue.

hippyjoe1955 · 70-79, M

@Burnley123: Except it is not bothered by warming nearly as much as cooling and this old earth has been much warmer and much cooler in the past and life is still here.

1-25 of 29