Comments 1 - 19 of 19 Search these comments
Gentle Reader,
Apparently some Scientists don't understand Science. Scientific dissent is essential for science until one starts to dissent for dissents sake. It's like some Scientists refuting the Theory of Evolution. That is and should be enough to get a Scientist fired. No if's, and's or but's.
Climate Change Dissent? If it is based on the actual Physics of Climate Change, then sure. If it is based on the garbage that I continually read from groups who do not understand the basic principles behind the theory? Theory not understood properly? Dissent is then so much used butt wipe.
You may disregard them as you wish.
Regards,
Roidy
Gentle Reader,
So, what does this graphic actually mean and where did it come from?
It should be understood that India and China will reduce the overall growth of their greenhouse gas emissions, BUT these countries are developing while the US is developed. So, I kind of accept this little cartoon, but it has no context or comment.
In conclusion, it's fucking stupid.
Regards,
Roidy
The cartoon is a graphical description of actual carbon emission data. The USA leads the entire world in carbon emission REDUCTION, while china and India have been INCREASING their emissions every year by 5-10%. The USA has nearly cut emissions in half over the past couple of decades, and is on target to continue the trend with many green technologies being developed and adopted.
California alone gets nearly 40% of its daytime electricity from solar, to say nothing of wind and hydroelectric.
With the increasing adoption of electric vehicles (thanks to battery advances), the USA will be able to continue reducing emissions indefinitely.
All this without the Paris treaty.
Meanwhile China produces twice the carbon we do and India has just passed us.
Clear now?
So, what does this graphic actually mean and where did it come from?
It means while you talk your nonsense, China can't even see their ten fingers 10 inches in front of their face because industrial pollution and smog is so thick, you disingenuous fool!
It means while you talk your nonsense, China can't even see their ten fingers 10 inches in front of their face because industrial pollution and smog is so thick, you disingenuous fool!
Gentle Reader,
I love ad hominem attacks. They just get to the actual point of the argument so quickly and precisely.
Precisely this little cartoon is at best illiterate and foolish, because it provides no context to the actual situation in these countries. They are developing industrially as we did for some 100 years or more. I remember the summer inversions that would cause industrial output to hang low in the air. There was a reason that Nixon instituted the EPA. China and India are working to industrialize and reduce their growth in greenhouse gas output. China has proceeded with some terrible choices. The Three Gorges dam is an example. This little cartoon is just stupid and ignorant.
See, Gentle Reader? This is how an argument is attacked without insulting someone personally.
Regards,
Roidy
Meanwhile China produces twice the carbon we do and India has just passed us.
Clear now?
Gentle Reader,
This is absolutely true. What is also true is that China has more than 4 times (1.379 billion) the population that the US does. India (1.324 billion) has about the same population as China. The US (323.1 million) population is far less and produced far more greenhouse pollution PER CAPITA.
So yes, now it's clear.
Regards,
Roidy
Unsurprisingly, they support deregulation of the environment, and are part of the libertarian dogma that thinks everyone would be happier if we just handed over the entire government to the worst of the worst corporations-- big tobacco, big oil, sweat shops, etc
How come we aren't happy, then, since this happened decades ago.
Climate Change Dissent? If it is based on the actual Physics of Climate Change
Please link to said climate change physics. Thanks
So you're saying that Chinese and Indian carbon is good and USA carbon is bad?
Interesting.
Climate Change Dissent? If it is based on the actual Physics of Climate Change
Please link to said climate change physics. Thanks
Gentle Reader,
Sure. Good call. Lets start with the American Physical Society's webpage on the physics of global climate change.
https://www.aps.org/units/fps/newsletters/200807/hafemeister.cfm
Regards,
Roidy
P.S. If anyone wants to wade through the mathematics analysis of this, please let me know. I'll try to explain it.
Have you been to China? There are places where you can't come outside during the day because of pollution from all their factories. We don't have this problem in US.
Gentle Reader,
You're right. We don't have this problem... anymore. There are a number of reasons that we don't, and it is not a simple explanation. Suffice it to say that the EPA, industrial automation, evolution of the types of industry that we have here in the "post-industrial" West, etc, etc, have changed this. I remember what it was like when I was a young teenager in the late 60s and early 70s. It was not good.
Regards,
Roid
These must be retarded scientists who don't know where the grant money is.
These must be retarded scientists who don't know where the grant money is.
Gentle Reader,
Scientists always know where the grant money is.
Regards,
Roidy
They must be going for the Koch Brothers grants.
https://phys.org/news/2017-08-pair-global-natural.html