The Green New Deal

[TheramoreIsTheBomb]

https://www.congress.gov/116/bills/h...6hres109ih.pdf

John Kerry announced earlier this afternoon that the Biden administration wants all cars to go electrical, to invite credits for carbon, severely punish damage to the climate, and much more.

What are your thoughts about the Green New Deal?

[Felya]

What are your thoughts about the Green New Deal?

That someone needs to define what the New Greed Deal is... because this isn’t what AOC meant, when she used the term, and sure as hell not what conservatives mean when they use it.

[Elegiac]

https://www.congress.gov/116/bills/h...6hres109ih.pdf

John Kerry announced earlier this afternoon that the Biden administration wants all cars to go electrical, to invite credits for carbon, severely punish damage to the climate, and much more.

What are your thoughts about the Green New Deal?

That this isn't it and we shouldn't take this as remotely enough.

[PC2]

It's irrelevant because no matter what's in the Green New Deal environmentalists will say it's not enough and doom is still coming. There's literally nothing you could put in the Green New Deal that would make it so environmentalists are satisfied and not fearful of the future.

[unfilteredJW]

Incoming PC2 science denialism.

[PC2]

Incoming PC2 science denialism.

Science can't determine national environmental policy and thinking that it can is called *scientism*. The Green New Deal is determined by ideology, not by science.

[Calfredd]

Science can't determine national environmental policy and thinking that it can is called *scientism*. The Green New Deal is determined by ideology, not by science.

Just like your posts are determined by ideology and not by science.

[Santti]

Just like your posts are determined by ideology and not by science.

I don't think there is an ideology that explains PC2.

[Lenonis]

Science can't determine national environmental policy.

It sure can.

[PC2]

Just like your posts are determined by ideology and not by science.

Yes that's the same for everyone, we post based on which ideas we think are correct. Science is just about creating testable explanations, so the idea that science can determine political choices or tell you what to post in a forum is pure quackery.

[Kaleredar]

Yes that's the same for everyone, we post based on which ideas we think are correct. Science is just about creating testable explanations, so the idea that science determine political choices or tell you what to post in a forum is pure quackery.

Decisions should be backed up by science, and it’s evident that human-based activities are causing harm to the planetary climate and therefore the environment. Which most people agree is bad, and I don’t personally care about or appreciate the opinions of people who don’t think that it’s bad or don’t believe the science.

As for the topic at hand... this is something we should have been doing 20 years ago. But it’s something we didn’t, and we must always do what we can.

[PC2]

It sure can.

No that's called scientism. Where is the scientific methodology that determined the Green New Deal? Why won't they release it? If it's scientific then they must release their methodology so that it can be replicated by a third party who will verify their work and arrive at the exact same conclusions.

[Edge-]

No that's called scientism. Where is the scientific methodology that determined the Green New Deal? Why won't they release it? If it's scientific then they must release their methodology so that it can be replicated by a third party who will verify their work and arrive at the exact same conclusions.

That's literally not how any of this works and I think you know that well.

Science is the foundation for these policies, you can't "science" politics dude.

[Mayhem]

I don't think there is an ideology that explains PC2.

He's a libertarian, so you're right.

[Santti]

He's a libertarian, so you're right.

I was thinking along the lines of mistaking ones own confidence for knowledge. And turning that up to eleven.

But Libertarian works too.

[Mayhem]

Well, let's see if they actually go through with it, I somehow doubt it though. I mean, it sounds ambitious and looks like moving in the right direction but this has to be fought globally, we are very much past the point where one country could make a significant enough of an impact. I am not talking about China or something, I am talking about global transportation and Industries that don't give a shit about borders.

- - - Updated - - -

I was thinking along the lines of mistaking ones own confidence for knowledge. And turning that up to eleven.

But Libertarian works too.

Well, may I direct you to my signature?

[Felya]

It's irrelevant because no matter what's in the Green New Deal environmentalists will say it's not enough and doom is still coming. There's literally nothing you could put in the Green New Deal that would make it so environmentalists are satisfied and not fearful of the future.

Yes, it absolutely matters... because without environmentalist actually reacting to it, your assumption that it will be unreasonable, is just bias. If no one can even bother to define what the new green deal is, having an opinion on how people will react to it, is asinine.

[zEmini]

Cars going electric should of been a thing 30 years ago. However does their useful life outlast the norm? Does manufacturing these create other unintentional consequences? Should we go back to nuclear?

[JohnBrown1917]

It's irrelevant because no matter what's in the Green New Deal environmentalists will say it's not enough and doom is still coming. There's literally nothing you could put in the Green New Deal that would make it so environmentalists are satisfied and not fearful of the future.

Imagine actually wanting to save lives, the insanity.

[PC2]

Science is the foundation for these policies,

No it's not, science can't tell you whether national governments should prioritize the environment over liberty and business. That's determined by your subjective values and interpretations and it has nothing to do with science.

you can't "science" politics dude.

The fact that you can't "science" politics is actually my point.