patrick.net

And yet fools continue to deny climate change.

VideoShopped...

BlueSardine says

VideoShopped...

Once more climate change deniers prove that absolutely no evidence will get them to renounce their religious dogma.

That looks terrible.

But where is all of the terrible impacts on humanity from all that melting sea ice?

I've had sploogs that were prettier than that.

socal2 says

That looks terrible.

But where is all of the terrible impacts on humanity from all that melting sea ice?

www.youtube.com/embed/c1dnlHPzhQA

www.youtube.com/embed/wRZ0gM7VH24

www.youtube.com/embed/-JbzypWJk64

YesYNot says

One thing it means is that Al Gore's warning was not all that far off, even though he cherry picked the data a little to say that we could have an ice free summer as early as 2014.

This is a debunked lie. Back when Gore gave his presentation, he outlines the best case scenario, the worst case scenario, and the most likely scenario based on the data at that time. Surprise, surprise, what has happened was better than the worst case scenario but much worse than the best case scenario.

Ignoring the problem of melting ice and rising sea-levels, including the thermo-expansion of the oceans, would be extremely foolish.

In fairness, this has happened in Miami for decades, it's been a problem since the 50s, but the sleezebags who run Miami-Dade keep postponing the water control systems (which is gonna be hella expensive) and spend the money on the upcoming Urban Weekend, where the gays flee for the Keys and the "Urban" crowd will murder several people.

Lashkar_i_Trumpi says

In fairness, this has happened in Miami for decades,

Not nearly to the extent and not nearly as often. Rising sea levels has measurably already impacted Miami and it will cost trillions of dollars to implement the solutions like raising all streets and buildings. That massive level of construction is damn expensive. It would be orders of magnitude cheaper to simply ban all coal power plants and let the cost of electricity rise by free market principles than to save Miami alone, and that's just one city.

Dan8267 says

Back when Gore gave his presentation

If you read the whole link, you will see that he gave a good range in the presentation at his Nobel speech, but he focused on the more dramatic prediction in other talks. He also may have mis-characterized what the author had told him (75% chance comment). I still give Gore a great amount of credit for recognizing a big problem before others did. As I mentioned in my other post, even when he was cherry picking, he wasn't that far off. He was closer than most people would have been.

Dan8267 says

Not nearly to the extent and not nearly as often. Rising sea levels has measurably already impacted Miami and it will cost trillions of dollars to implement the solutions like raising all streets and buildings. That massive level of construction is damn expensive. It would be orders of magnitude cheaper to simply ban all coal power plants and let the cost of electricity rise by free market principles than to save Miami alone, and that's just one city.

Ha ha! Right!

Do you have a clue how expensive and painful it will be for people in the 3rd World alone to save your precious Miami Beach if you take away their coal powered plants?

Seems more humane for rich and pampered Miami Beach folks to move a little farther inland than stunting the development of billions of human beings around the world.

socal2 says

Poll after poll shows people are just not buying the doom-mongering

A lot of people are in denial, because they are big polluters. Look at the graph showing concern versus per capita emissions here:
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/04/18/what-the-world-thinks-about-climate-change-in-7-charts/

The US has the highest per capita emissions, and the lowest concern level other than asia pacific.

Even in the US, look at the policy support here: http://climatecommunication.yale.edu/visualizations-data/ycom-us-2016/

People want us to act.

socal2 says

Do you have a clue how expensive and painful it will be for people in the 3rd World alone to save your precious Miami Beach if you take away their coal powered plants?

If the world economy collapses without coal, then capitalism is an utter failure and needs to be replaced immediately. Any decent economic system would be able to transition off of a terribly misallocated and inefficient power production system without disrupting society, or would have never allowed expensive, cost-shifting coal to be so heavily used in the first place.

Dan8267 says

If the world economy collapses without coal, then capitalism is an utter failure and needs to be replaced immediately.

America and Miami Beach will be OK.

The 3rd world.........not so much.

Global Warmist doom mongers don't care much about brown 3rd world people. They are just worried about their beach front properties.

socal2 says

America and Miami Beach will be OK.

Again, anyone who believes that should put their money where their mouth is. You don't get to force the risk of you being wrong onto me and eleven million other Americans. Pay more than lip service to your belief in free markets by taking out a $100 trillion insurance policy that pays Floridan residents and businesses if you are wrong. If you are right and the free market works, then the premiums on such a policy should be insignificant. I could easily take a $100 trillion insurance policy that the sun won't blow up by 2018 because anyone would take those odds.

Go to Lloyd's of London. You can literally insure anything there if you pay the premiums the free market demands for the risk that you are wrong.

socal2 says

You are just causing the majority of the population to tune you out.

Baseless assertions merit no response.

Dan8267 says

You don't get to force the risk of you being wrong onto me and eleven million other Americans.

You don't get to force millions of Americans to pay for your paranoia and CHOICE to live at or below sea level near the ocean.

Dan8267 says

socal2 says

You are just causing the majority of the population to tune you out.

Baseless assertions merit no response.

Global Warming barely even registers as a priority.
http://www.pollingreport.com/prioriti.htm
http://www.gallup.com/poll/1675/most-important-problem.aspx

As an environmentalist working on important issues like access to clean water, I resent that you fuckers have hijacked the environmental movement with your doom mongering causing people to tune it out.

socal2 says

You don't get to force millions of Americans to pay for your paranoia and CHOICE to live at or below sea level near the ocean.

Pollution controls is not forcing others to pay. Pollution is theft, plain and simple. Pollution steals environmental wealth, which is the vast majority of the world's wealth.

As for paying for paranoia, if you actually believe that's a bad thing then we should slash the military budget by 90%. Paranoia is exactly what causes excessive military spending.

Furthermore, it is utterly hypocritical for anyone who stated that there are economic reasons to continue to allow pollution to then state that we should not be forced to pay to prevent climate change. Just think about how much economic loss there would be if Florida alone were to be flooded. Aside from tens of trillions of dollars of lost real estate, there would be huge costs in refugees, and hundreds of trillions of dollars of lost economic productivity. This is why conservatives suck at business. They can't balance sheets.

And if New York City also gets wiped out, even greater economic productivity would be lost. It's even worse if the two coasts are heavily damaged. Most Americans live in coastal states and most of our economic productivity comes from such states. Your proposition is the worst business management idea ever.

socal2 says

Dan8267 says

socal2 says

You are just causing the majority of the population to tune you out.

Baseless assertions merit no response.

Global Warming barely even registers as a priority.

Non-sequitur, obviously.

socal2 says

, I resent that you fuckers have hijacked the environmental movement with your doom mongering

Acknowledging reality confirmed by tens of thousands of scientists around the world and calling for sensible policies that can be easily implemented is not "doom mongering". You are thinking of the U.S. military whenever it shits its pants over a terrorist attack. Doom mongering is exactly what republicans did after 9/11 in order to undermine the Constitution. Calling for polluters to pay for the clean up of the mess they made is hardly doom mongering. It's like requiring a litter bug to pick up his trash or get a ticket.

Dan8267 says

Acknowledging reality confirmed by tens of thousands of scientists around the world and calling for sensible policies that can be easily implemented is not "doom mongering"

Banning all coal plants as you suggested a few posts up is not sensible.

Nearly 80% of all of China's electricity is produced by coal.

Again, thanks to American frackers and our ability to export LNG to China, we will be able to help them transition to cleaner fossil fuels over the coming decades. This is no thanks to you fuckers on the Left who have been trying to stop fracking for years. American natural gas is more responsible for reducing our carbon emissions than all solar and wind farms combined.

Not if your a mountain rentier.then its a bonanza, thank you very much.
Dan8267 says

Ignoring the problem of melting ice and rising sea-levels, including the thermo-expansion of the oceans, would be extremely foolish

socal2 says

Banning all coal plants as you suggested a few posts up is not sensible.

The free market solution would be to cap current energy production of coal plants and to decrease that cap by 5/12th of a percent each month. Every year the cap is 5% lower and goes to zero after 20 years. Meanwhile, alternative energy becomes more competitive and the market shifts to coal-less energy production.

Tell me exactly why the free market is a failure. If you cannot, then your assertion is wrong and my proposal would work.
socal2 says

Nearly 80% of all of China's electricity is produced by coal.

Tie trade to environmental, labor, and human rights standards. China likes money more than it likes coal.

If capitalism cannot avoid a race to the bottom, then it is a failed economic system. Tell me why capitalism cannot avoid a race to the bottom.

Dan8267 says

Tell me exactly why the free market is a failure. If you cannot, then your assertion is wrong and my proposal would work.

How is it a free market if the government is capping a competing technology (coal power plants) and using our tax dollars to subsidize alternatives?

Obama already spent a fuck ton on using our tax dollars to subsidize solar energy like Solyndra while imposing regulations to make coal more expensive. How come that didn't work out? Why are your big government socialist policies of picking winners and losers such a failure?

socal2 says

How is it a free market if the government is capping a competing technology (coal power plants) and using our tax dollars to subsidize alternatives?

Who said anything about using tax dollars? I said to gradually phase out coal power, which shifts the costs of production onto non-consumers via pollution, and to let the free market adjust energy prices accordingly. That's the very definition of free market.

Subsidizing coal power by letting it pollute is the opposite of the free market. It's a form of theft that lowers the price of coal-produced energy by making everything else more expensive. I'm calling for elimination of this artificial, thinly veiled subsidy paid for with taxpayer dollars in the form of higher costs of health care and pollution cleanup.

socal2 says

Why are your big government socialist policies of picking winners and losers such a failure?

Allowing coal companies to pollute is precisely big government picking winners (coal) and losers (everyone else) by socializing the cost of coal power plants. Shifting the costs via pollution is socialism. It's just bad socialism. Are you really not intelligent enough to understand this? Are you so easily fooled by accounting tricks?

Gee, what a mystery. You build a huge city in a swamp an inch above sea level and wonder why you get flooding.

Personally not a great fan of arctic sea ice anyway.

Maybe we should start calling Global Warming Alarmists "Ice Loving Assholes".

rando says

Personally not a great fan of arctic sea ice anyway.

Neither am I, but I'm less of a fan of my state being submerged under the seas.

Ceffer says

Ice Loving Assholes

Worst Eskimo porno ever!

Ceffer says

Gee, what a mystery. You build a huge city in a swamp an inch above sea level and wonder why you get flooding.

I thought Trump said that draining swamps was a good thing.

On a serious note, every city was built by removing some wilderness. It shouldn't be a surprise that almost all our major cities are built along waterways leading to the ocean or on the ocean itself. This is necessary for trade. Most goods are transported over ships. This was true in the 18th century, and it is still true today.

In fact, the very reason the first states are shaped so irregularly is precisely to make sure that every state had access to waterways for the purpose of trade.