One one hand we have hard-core peer reviewed science showing tens of thousands of independent lines of evidence that man-made climate change is real and that severe storms and flooding are some of the results of climate change.
We'll be having none that on Patnet.
How dare you upset deniers!
Having said that, I do not think that cutting CO2 emissions to 0 would have prevented Harvey or more precisely changed its screwed up track, which cause the flood problems. In last 10 yrs we did not get much hurricanes in Gulf, so if the warming would cause them, then we should get MORE of them.
Hopefully, the evidence I presented above will convince you otherwise. If not, there's plenty more evidence.
The professionals studying the impacts of climate change have presented indisputable proof that both hurricanes and flooding become much more common and much more severe as a result of man-made climate change. Denying this won't reduce the very real economic costs of climate change. In fact denial only increases those costs by preventing action.
Let me put this in the clearest terms. Ignoring climate change is foolish for the exact same reason that ignoring cancer is foolish. Even if the cancer doesn't kill you, delaying treatment will exponentially increase the expenses of fighting the cancer and take you out of work for a long period of time. Delaying climate change mitigation treatment will exponentially increase the expenses of climate change and the loss of economic productivity. The is absolutely no rational or sane economic argument for ignoring climate change. It's just bad economics.
This is no time for common sense. We need to panic while we have the opportunity.
Your thinking of terrorism. Spending billions of anti-terrorism programs is panic when all that was needed to prevent 9/11 was locking the cockpit door and letting passengers fight terrorists without fear of being thrown in prison for doing so.
More Americans will die from natural disasters as the result of climate change than all Americans who have ever died from terrorist attacks.
But hey, if it makes you feel better, think of climate change as terrorism. If your Stone Age brain can only comprehend threats from neighboring tribes because that's how your evolved, think of polluters as a neighboring tribe.
The rest of us will use frontal lobe thinking and realize that the threats in the modern world are not the same as those in the Stone Age.
I appreciate that Dan shared sources. I'll check them out.
There are still holes in the logic though (albeit this may be due to colloquial conversation than an actual hole in your argument).
So...I think we can all agree that this hurricane wasn't caused by global warming.
Assuming Dan is correct, what he is suggesting is this hurricane was made worse by global warming.
Lets say this is accurate. What policy/change/difference could possibly have made a difference in the strength of this hurricane? You think lowering carbon emissions by 20% 10 years ago would have made a substantial difference?
To be clear this is not a binary situation. Your words suggest a "do what we say equals no destruction" vs "deny what we believe equals utter destruction". That dichotomy is silly, even if you are 100% right about the science (which you arent).
I was wondering about that too, but read someplace where it said that was by design.
If anything, I was expecting lots of rubberneckers on the upper span.
We should have promoted REC (Rapid Evolutionary Change) 10 years ago to immunize ourselves against radiation.
Then we could have employed tactical nukes in the eye of the storm while it was well out to sea to bring about targeted climate change...
If it doesn't have a dollar value,it doesn't matter.
The thing is that it does have a very high dollar value. So even if making Al Gore cry is more important than keeping your children from being poisoned, people still should be concerned about climate change because it will hit their wallets. No exceptions.
If it doesn't have a dollar value,it doesn't matter.
The thing is that it does have a very high dollar value. So even if making Al Gore cry is more important than keeping your children from being poisoned, people still should be concerned about climate change because it will hit their wallets. No exceptions.
Rational people can still be concerned w our effect on the environment and acknowledge al gore as the lying hypocrite that he is.
Assuming Dan is correct, what he is suggesting is this hurricane was made worse by global warming.
Lets say this is accurate. What policy/change/difference could possibly have made a difference in the strength of this hurricane? You think lowering carbon emissions by 20% 10 years ago would have made a substantial difference?
Why would believing climate change is real or not depend on policies that may or may not be enacted? Logically it shouldn't. Though it's obviously the main motivation of deniers: they believe it is false because they don't like the idea to have global policies against it. Rationalization.
When one paves paradise,where does the water go? We need nice surfaces for our cars to roll around on. I would never park my 4 wheel treasure on dirt. Sidewalks are nice,I don't like walking in the dirt.
Why would believing climate change is real or not depend on policies that may or may not be enacted? Logically it shouldn't.
Of course it doesn't. The POINT of the conversation is that Dan is blaming those who disagree on policy for this disaster. So the relevant question is: what policy change would have mitigated this hurricane? If you have an answer please offer it.
Though it's obviously the main motivation of deniers: they believe it is false because they don't like the idea to have global policies against it.
You pronouns combined w assumptions make this sentence incomprehensible. You typically have great points, so I'd like you to clarify. I'm not following what you are saying or how it relates to the conversation.
Rational people can still be concerned w our effect on the environment and acknowledge al gore as the lying hypocrite that he is.
There is nothing rational about people who deny man-made climate change or its consequences. The scientific evidence is overwhelming. And those people are motivated entirely by identity politics. I presented no false dichotomy.
Furthermore, Al Gore has done more for the American economy than all Republican politicians and voters who have ever lived have done. Because of legislation he sponsored, the Internet and trillions of dollars of yearly commerce was developed in America instead of China or India. We are still reaping the benefits of Al Gore's policies.
Yeah, you can cherry pick images all you want, it doesn't change the other 95% of the American South's behavior. Try changing that.
I can easily find people in New York City behaving politely and being nice to each other. Happens every day. So why again aren't New Yorkers "real Americans" according to the conservative right?
have you been in Houston for more than a few days? Houston is not "conservative" by any stretch of imagination. It is very different from most of TX, most of American South, New Orleans, and, dare I say, from the rest of US of A. First, it is one of few cities where there is no major ethnic group/race. Second, it stands out from big and ethnically diverse cities in that while it slightly favors Democrats, Republicans also have a chance - it voted for R-Abbott in TX gov election. Third, there is much less inter-ethnic animosity than in most other places - people are very mixed up and not that closeted in their ethnic group. This is the biggest difference which transplants from NYC note. There is very little SJW action - demonstrators on campuses in Houston number in TENS typically, and most students ignore the demonstrations. There is some police abuse crap, but less than in other parts of US. Houston is one of extremely rare places in US where a blue-collar worker with high-school or lower education can lead a decent life and buy a house. And yes, it has miserable climate, with heat, humidity, and hurricanes, and an extremely corrupt city hall.
And why I wouldn't want to live there regardless of any other variable. We have our toronados to worry about in the spring and I'll live with that. I just wish Kurt Nauck would move his operations further inland--I hate to think of all those records getting damaged!
I wonder what the representatives from Texas are going to do to mitigate the audacity of their begging for the largest aid package in history after arguing so strenuously against providing relief to the millions of victims of hurricane Sandy?
Perhaps aid packages should include just aid for hurricane relief, and not assorted unrelated crap. Or should we name next Iraq war financing as "hurricane Harvey relief package" and castigate those voting against it?
Yeah, you can cherry pick images all you want, it doesn't change the other 95% of the American South's behavior. Try changing that.
I can easily find people in New York City behaving politely and being nice to each other. Happens every day. So why again aren't New Yorkers "real Americans" according to the conservative right?
I've been to NYC several times and have yet to visit a city in the USA where people are less "nice" to each other.
I agree we can cherry pick all day however and it'll get us nowhere.
Furthermore, Al Gore has done more for the American economy than all Republican politicians and voters who have ever lived have done.
LOL Why did he buy a beach front mansion if he believes the ocean is rising? Al Gore reminds me of one of those Christian revival ministers who can save your soul if you give him ALL your money.
The only bigot here is you. History matters. When Katrina hit New Orleans, the police were shooting blacks who were trying to evacuate or help others.
Yeah they were helping those without flood insurance by burglarizing their houses. That way they could file an insurance claim for burglary. I don't know why the police couldn't understand that.
The plan is quite simple. Tax pollution at whatever rate it takes to clean up the pollution. The free market takes care of the rest. Either pollution continues but is cleaned up, or pollution stops. Same effect either way. It's a more efficient allocation of resources.
invite response
« First « Previous Comments 21 - 57 of 57 Search these comments
Trump is monitoring the situation!
MAGA!
!Dan8267 says
We'll be having none that on Patnet.
How dare you upset deniers!
drBu says
It's not an opinion. It's a scientific fact. Facts matter.
drBu says
Hopefully, the evidence I presented above will convince you otherwise. If not, there's plenty more evidence.
The professionals studying the impacts of climate change have presented indisputable proof that both hurricanes and flooding become much more common and much more severe as a result of man-made climate change. Denying this won't reduce the very real economic costs of climate change. In fact denial only increases those costs by preventing action.
Let me put this in the clearest terms. Ignoring climate change is foolish for the exact same reason that ignoring cancer is foolish. Even if the cancer doesn't kill you, delaying treatment will exponentially increase the expenses of fighting the cancer and take you out of work for a long period of time. Delaying climate change mitigation treatment will exponentially increase the expenses of climate change and the loss of economic productivity. The is absolutely no rational or sane economic argument for ignoring climate change. It's just bad economics.
Ceffer says
Your thinking of terrorism. Spending billions of anti-terrorism programs is panic when all that was needed to prevent 9/11 was locking the cockpit door and letting passengers fight terrorists without fear of being thrown in prison for doing so.
More Americans will die from natural disasters as the result of climate change than all Americans who have ever died from terrorist attacks.
But hey, if it makes you feel better, think of climate change as terrorism. If your Stone Age brain can only comprehend threats from neighboring tribes because that's how your evolved, think of polluters as a neighboring tribe.
The rest of us will use frontal lobe thinking and realize that the threats in the modern world are not the same as those in the Stone Age.
Dan8257: "It's just bad economics."
If it doesn't have a dollar value,it doesn't matter.
I appreciate that Dan shared sources. I'll check them out.
There are still holes in the logic though (albeit this may be due to colloquial conversation than an actual hole in your argument).
So...I think we can all agree that this hurricane wasn't caused by global warming.
Assuming Dan is correct, what he is suggesting is this hurricane was made worse by global warming.
Lets say this is accurate. What policy/change/difference could possibly have made a difference in the strength of this hurricane? You think lowering carbon emissions by 20% 10 years ago would have made a substantial difference?
To be clear this is not a binary situation. Your words suggest a "do what we say equals no destruction" vs "deny what we believe equals utter destruction". That dichotomy is silly, even if you are 100% right about the science (which you arent).
Patrick says
I was wondering about that too, but read someplace where it said that was by design.
If anything, I was expecting lots of rubberneckers on the upper span.
We should have promoted REC (Rapid Evolutionary Change) 10 years ago to immunize ourselves against radiation.
Then we could have employed tactical nukes in the eye of the storm while it was well out to sea to bring about targeted climate change...
CBOEtrader says
The thing is that it does have a very high dollar value. So even if making Al Gore cry is more important than keeping your children from being poisoned, people still should be concerned about climate change because it will hit their wallets. No exceptions.
It's your damn computer. I told you to get an Apple.
Rational people can still be concerned w our effect on the environment and acknowledge al gore as the lying hypocrite that he is.
Your false dichotomies are a fantasy.
Why would believing climate change is real or not depend on policies that may or may not be enacted?
Logically it shouldn't.
Though it's obviously the main motivation of deniers: they believe it is false because they don't like the idea to have global policies against it.
Rationalization.
Never stopped you before.
Is that they don't want to pay forced tithes to the church of
global warmingclimate change.We need nice surfaces for our cars to roll around on.
I would never park my 4 wheel treasure on dirt.
Sidewalks are nice,I don't like walking in the dirt.
Of course it doesn't. The POINT of the conversation is that Dan is blaming those who disagree on policy for this disaster. So the relevant question is: what policy change would have mitigated this hurricane? If you have an answer please offer it.
Heraclitusstudent says
You pronouns combined w assumptions make this sentence incomprehensible. You typically have great points, so I'd like you to clarify. I'm not following what you are saying or how it relates to the conversation.
There is nothing rational about people who deny man-made climate change or its consequences. The scientific evidence is overwhelming. And those people are motivated entirely by identity politics. I presented no false dichotomy.
Furthermore, Al Gore has done more for the American economy than all Republican politicians and voters who have ever lived have done. Because of legislation he sponsored, the Internet and trillions of dollars of yearly commerce was developed in America instead of China or India. We are still reaping the benefits of Al Gore's policies.
The opinion of a climate change denier means nothing.
I can easily find people in New York City behaving politely and being nice to each other. Happens every day. So why again aren't New Yorkers "real Americans" according to the conservative right?
Texas is showing the world that white vs black is a false dichotomy. They are all false dichotomies.
People are people and we help each other. At least, that's how we do it It Texas and across the entire south that I've seen.
Oh that's right, you don't...
Dan8267 says
The only bigot here is you. History matters. When Katrina hit New Orleans, the police were shooting blacks who were trying to evacuate or help others.
You want Texas to be respected, then have its citizens and government behave respectably.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6063982 http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2016/04/danziger_bridge_officers_sente.html
BlueSardine says
If anything, that's damn conservative. Where do you get less? You don't.
have you been in Houston for more than a few days? Houston is not "conservative" by any stretch of imagination. It is very different from most of TX, most of American South, New Orleans, and, dare I say, from the rest of US of A. First, it is one of few cities where there is no major ethnic group/race. Second, it stands out from big and ethnically diverse cities in that while it slightly favors Democrats, Republicans also have a chance - it voted for R-Abbott in TX gov election. Third, there is much less inter-ethnic animosity than in most other places - people are very mixed up and not that closeted in their ethnic group. This is the biggest difference which transplants from NYC note. There is very little SJW action - demonstrators on campuses in Houston number in TENS typically, and most students ignore the demonstrations. There is some police abuse crap, but less than in other parts of US. Houston is one of extremely rare places in US where a blue-collar worker with high-school or lower education can lead a decent life and buy a house. And yes, it has miserable climate, with heat, humidity, and hurricanes, and an extremely corrupt city hall.
That's all they care about
drBu says
And why I wouldn't want to live there regardless of any other variable. We have our toronados to worry about in the spring and I'll live with that. I just wish Kurt Nauck would move his operations further inland--I hate to think of all those records getting damaged!
http://www.78rpm.com/
Perhaps aid packages should include just aid for hurricane relief, and not assorted unrelated crap. Or should we name next Iraq war financing as "hurricane Harvey relief package" and castigate those voting against it?
I've been to NYC several times and have yet to visit a city in the USA where people are less "nice" to each other.
I agree we can cherry pick all day however and it'll get us nowhere.
LOL
Why did he buy a beach front mansion if he believes the ocean is rising?
Al Gore reminds me of one of those Christian revival ministers who can save your soul if you give him ALL your money.
That's not what I said. I said
Yeah they were helping those without flood insurance by burglarizing their houses. That way they could file an insurance claim for burglary. I don't know why the police couldn't understand that.
« First « Previous Comments 21 - 57 of 57 Search these comments