Is climate hysteria going too far?

[shimerra]

All human progress, such as that of the industrial revolution will create negative side effects. There's no way to stop that, new advancements will create even more complex problems in the future. May as well get used to it. The net statistics are very good though, economies are growing, agriculture gets more efficient, the population is going up in spite of all the new complications. So unless you buy into the 'utopia is possible' myth then all of this to be expected.

There actually is a way to manage or even mitigate completely a lot of these effects. You're just being particularly stupid. Like really really stupid. Some metrics are increasing now in the short term but the way they're increasing they will have vastly more damaging effects in the long term. Do you understand the long term? I'm sure me doing cocaine to study for a test might keep me awake in the short term but long term coke use is going to wreck my brain. There's literally entire departments of pretty much every business that determine cost benefit analysis. The problem is that because often these companies aren't directly paying the costs of their polluting they opt for the more profitable choice and force society to shoulder the cost. That's called an externalities and has been a basic economic fact from the get go. What we're trying to do is factor those externalities into the decision making process.

For example a Swedish company just came up with a way to die clothes with zero waste. And their carbon footprint is basically neutral. A huge chronic side effect of the clothing industry and someone figured out a way to eliminate it. Again you're just throwing your hands in their air and saying shit happens because you don't understand the nature of the problem.

"We have only ten years to save the planet"..how often has this been said now?

I dont listen to fear merchants

- - - Updated - - -

As soon as you can come up with concrete proof that these "models" are in any way shape or form accurate, let me know.

"This will happen in 50 years" - theory. Not fact.

[/url]

I mean if you're demanding perfect accuracy you're an idiot on top of being unreasonable. Given the scale of climate science being 5 years off or even a couple decades is pretty damn close considering we're talking chances that outside of human interference, something new that's never been seen on earth, normally happens on the scale of thousands of years or more. And most of the doom saying people like you lie about, I've stopped saying wrong because at this point you all have been corrected enough you're just liars, is in reference to our ability to prevent or mitigate the worst of the effects.

And you might want to check your source. I've never heard of that website you linked but their source is pure bullshit, which leads me to believe your site that would be stupid enough to source them is as well. The Heartland institute are known hacks with a history of pushing conspiracy theories. They're literally bank rolled by the Koch brother's to parrot views that fuel the Koch brother's interests. I mean I only had to check your sea level rise one.

For example those shitheads even argue that the negative effects of smoking are overblown and we're just a bunch of big meanie weanies to the tobacco industry. You know, the industry that lied and actively suppressed science that smoking was bad for decades. The Heartland Institute's job isn't to argue for good science. It's to argue for minimal corporate regulation regardless of the cost to the public or the environment. Let's put it another way. If Trump or the Koch brother's said the sky was red or the earth was flat they'd write up a string of bullshit "proving" it was so. They're pure right wing shills and you should distrust them even if they tell you your date of birth and they happen to be right. It's more likely your mother screwed up or lied to you than the Heartland Insitute would've gotten it right that's how bad they are.

I wont waste my time with any of your other links. You might as well cite sources from the ICR or the Institution for Creation Research. People who literally believe adam and eve were fucking dinosaurs a few thousand years ago.

[PC2]

There actually is a way to manage or even mitigate completely a lot of these effects. You're just being particularly stupid. Like really really stupid. Some metrics are increasing now in the short term but the way they're increasing they will have vastly more damaging effects in the long term. Do you understand the long term? I'm sure me doing cocaine to study for a test might keep me awake in the short term but long term coke use is going to wreck my brain. There's literally entire departments of pretty much every business that determine cost benefit analysis. The problem is that because often these companies aren't directly paying the costs of their polluting they opt for the more profitable choice and force society to shoulder the cost. That's called an externalities and has been a basic economic fact from the get go. What we're trying to do is factor those externalities into the decision making process.

For example a Swedish company just came up with a way to die clothes with zero waste. And their carbon footprint is basically neutral. A huge chronic side effect of the clothing industry and someone figured out a way to eliminate it. Again you're just throwing your hands in their air and saying shit happens because you don't understand the nature of the problem.

Indeed we can solve these externalities over time, but they couldn't have been bypassed. Take the use of fossil fuels, in order to avoid air pollution countries would have had to outlaw coal and gas before the industrial revolution, and say that energy production isn't allowed unless it's 100% emission free. But of course that's ridiculous because logically-speaking society first needed to burn coal and then gas as a stepping stone to get to 100% clean renewable tech, which we still haven't mastered. And even if we have a "green revolution" in the next 50 years there will still be many new side effects since even green tech like solar panels and batteries include a lot of toxic materials that can't be effectively recycled anytime soon. So it's a continuous process of innovation -> new problem -> solve side effects + new innovation -> new side effects, and so on.

You're just being particularly stupid. Like really really stupid.

Try to be more mature and not stoop to ad hominem. You're better than that.

[Anevers]

"We have only ten years to save the planet"..how often has this been said now?

I dont listen to fear merchants

- - - Updated - - -

As soon as you can come up with concrete proof that these "models" are in any way shape or form accurate, let me know.

"This will happen in 50 years" - theory. Not fact.

- - - Updated - - -



What sea level rise?

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/06/...ea-level-rise/



https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/07/...d-politicians/

- - - Updated - - -



What sea level rise?

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/06/...ea-level-rise/



https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/07/...d-politicians/

Find a better source please

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/watts-up-with-that/

Factual Reporting: LOW
Country: USA
World Press Freedom Rank: USA 48/180

History

Watts Up With That? (or WUWT) is a blog promoting climate change denial that was created by Anthony Watts in 2006. The blog predominantly discusses climate issues with a focus on anthropogenic climate change, generally supporting beliefs that are in opposition to the scientific consensus on climate change. According to their about page “WattsUpWithThat.com is the world’s most viewed website on climate.” Anthony Watts states he was a “television meteorologist who spent 25 years on the air and who also operates a weather technology and content business, as well as continues daily forecasting on radio, just for fun.

Funded by / Ownership

The blog is owned by Anthony Watts and is funded through advertising and donations. The website does not disclose donors.

Analysis / Bias

In review, the sole purpose of the website is to debunk human influenced climate change. Climatologist Michael E. Mann has called WUWT the leading climate change denial blog. There are numerous articles written about WUWT and many failed fact checks that can be seen here through a factual search.

Overall, we rate Watts Up with That a strong pseudoscience and conspiracy website based on the promotion of consistent climate denialism propaganda. (2/14/2017) Updated (D. Van Zandt 8/02/2019)

Source: https://wattsupwiththat.com/

[saymo]

The climate is all right! You overstate!!!

[Aehl]

And most of the doom saying people like you lie about

Flannery made those predictions. PUBLICALLY. He said it.


https://climatism.blog/2018/03/12/ti...te-falsehoods/

In 2004 Flannery said:

“I think there is a fair chance Perth will be the 21st century’s first ghost metropolis. It’s whole primary production is in dire straits and the eastern states are only 30 years behind.”

We are “one of the most physically vulnerable people on the Earth,” and “southern Australia is going to be impacted very severely and very detrimentally by global climate change.” We are going to experience “conditions not seen in 40 million years.”

In 2007 he said:

“…That’s because the soil is warmer because of global warming and the plants are under more stress and therefore using more moisture. So even the rain that falls isn’t actually going to fill our dams and our river systems, and that’s a real worry for the people in the bush. If that trend continues then I think we’re going to have serious problems, particularly for irrigation.”

“The one-in-1000-years drought is, in fact, Australia’s manifestation of the global fingerprint of drought caused by climate change.”

Fact.

Heres a YouTube of him saying it

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wM_C_-2MGWU

So no I am not making any of it up. He said it. Word for word..and he was WRONG, repeatedly. Every single doomsday prediction he made was wrong.

Want me to listen?

Get rid of the hysteria and doomsday prophecies.

[Masark]

Word for word..and he was WRONG, repeatedly. Every single doomsday prediction he made was wrong.

So you're posting from the 22nd century? Want to send me some Grey Cup and Superbowl scores so I can clean up?

[Zuben]

Cases like those certainly take it overboard. They should harden their delicate hearts a bit, because their current state isn't useful to anyone, least of all themselves.

[Powerogue]

It's one of those things like the looming inevitability of death that is absolutely soul-crushing and the only real way to deal with it on a personal level is to not think about it too much.

I don't intend on having children. I leave it at that. Not putting them through the trashfire of our mistakes.

[Pony Soldier]

I mean I sort of have the same feelings he has. Whenever I see one of those diesel trucks just chugging along the road especially up a hill like he said I also can't help but think of all the co2 going up in the air. It's worse when it's a hot day out. But to be this affected by it that you cry yourself to sleep and you take off sick sounds more than just climate hysteria. This sounds more like a serious mental problem.

[Aehl]

So you're posting from the 22nd century? Want to send me some Grey Cup and Superbowl scores so I can clean up?

No he posted his garbage predictions in 2007. Its 2019 and none of them came true.

A shepherd-boy, who watched a flock of sheep near a village, brought out the villagers three or four times by crying out, “Wolf! Wolf!” and when his neighbors came to help him, laughed at them for their pains. The Wolf, however, did truly come at last. The Shepherd-boy, now really alarmed, shouted in an agony of terror: “Pray, do come and help me; the Wolf is killing the sheep”; but no one paid any heed to his cries, nor rendered any assistance. The Wolf, having no cause of fear, at his leisure lacerated or destroyed the whole flock.

There is no believing a liar, even when he speaks the truth.

There is no believing a panic monger and fear merchant whose doomsday claims have repeatedly turned out to be so much hot air. These climate "models" are total bullshit and none of them can be trusted..for the simple reason that none of them can be verified for 100 years.

As soon as you can get in a TARDIS and PROVE that these theories are in any way even remotely accurate....nope.

So, when you can pass a message or make sense minus the "we are all dooooooooooooooooooooooooooomed" mantra, give me a call.

Until then, like the villagers of the tale , you can keep screaming wolf all you like.

I aint listening.

[Theodarzna]

There's been a lot of studies on the impact on the economy and other human related activities (not just speculation):
https://blogs.ei.columbia.edu/2019/0...onomy-impacts/
https://science.sciencemag.org/content/363/6430/930

I brought this up in the other thread while talking to you. I mentioned how increasing sea levels will impact coastal areas, such as homes, tourism and businesses and you just said people should move. Losing these huge economic centers and having to deal with the problems of mass migration of climate refugees is something we will soon be facing. It just doesn't seem like any amount of evidence will convince you of the immense problems our actions are causing for ourselves and our world.

The idea that a Humanist isn't an Environmentalist is strange. Like where does one assume humans live?

[Aehl]

Listen to an all out mealy mouthed hypocrite?

NO

According to the report, compiled from public records requests and information from the Nashville Electric Service, Gore’s 20-room, 10,070-square-foot, Colonial-style mansion consumed an average of 19,241 kilowatt-hours per month—more than 21.3 times that of the U.S. household average of 901 kilowatt-hours monthly.

[PC2]

The idea that a Humanist isn't an Environmentalist is strange. Like where does one assume humans live?

It would be helpful to distinguish between the environment and the "natural environment". Human's natural environment is the one we evolved under around 200k years ago. It was not only brutal but it can't possibly sustain 7+ billion people, which is why we've cleared out a lot of it for agricultural use. We mostly live in cities which are incredibly removed from the natural environment. It's fine that some people prefer to preserve the natural environment, but it's also okay that some prefer to use it for economic development.

[Theodarzna]

It would be helpful to distinguish between the environment vs the "natural environment" would be a better way of putting it. Human's natural environment is the one we evolved under around 200k years ago. It was not only brutal but it can't possibly sustain 7+ billion people, which is why we've cleared out a lot of it for agricultural use. We mostly live in cities which are incredibly removed from the natural environment. It's fine that some people prefer to preserve the natural environment, but it's also okay that some prefer to use it for economic development.

History is replete with civilizations buried in their grave for fucking up the environment around them.

[PC2]

History is replete with civilizations buried in their grave for fucking up the environment around them.

Okay? One of the focal points of my arguments are to point out the fallacy of using past observations/patterns to try to justify an argument or prediction of what will happen in the future. It's how people are prone to think about the world, it's also utter nonsense.

[Theodarzna]

Okay? One of the focal points of my arguments is to point out the fallacy of using past observations/patterns to try to justify an argument or prediction of what will happen in the future. It's how people are prone to think about the world, it's also utter nonsense.

Versus using what to make predictions? Versus an aggressively pollyannish view of "All will be well" mentality.

[PC2]

Versus using what to make predictions?

Versus getting out of the mid-to-long-term prophecy game altogether. Figure out new ways to achieve our goals instead of looking to some kind of crystal ball.

Versus an aggressively pollyannish view of "All will be well" mentality.

Of course not. Never assume that anything will stay good or get better without daily effort, new developments and ideas.

[Theodarzna]

Versus getting out of the mid-to-long-term prophecy game altogether. Figure out new ways to achieve our goals instead of looking to some kind of crystal ball.

Of course not. Never assume that anything will stay good or get better without daily effort, new developments and ideas.

Our Goals? What Goals?

[PC2]

Our Goals? What Goals?

We're in a climate thread so obviously our goal is to solve any potential climate problems.

[Theodarzna]

We're in a climate thread so obviously our goal is to solve any potential climate problems.

So your plan is to ignore it because heaven forbid people not to consume everything like wasteful hedonists.