COP27 climate summit

Not for nothing

Super Anarchist
3,694
901
jupiter
It's fundamentally true. Basically, that's why I watch what people do far more intently than what they say.

Maher brings up an interesting dichotomy for example. Can you be in favor of tough climate change measures AND be in favor of things like child tax credits? If you believe humans ARE the problem, then doing anything that makes it easier to raise them seems, at best, counter productive. It'll be interesting to see how this plays out between the Climate Solutions Caucus and the new DADS caucus.

As a more base point, it's really hard for capitalism to solve a problem fundamentally centered on not doing something.

KEY FACTS​

The milestone comes just 11 years after the human population reached 7 billion people and the continued growth can be attributed to extended life expectancies brought about through advances and developments in public health, sanitation and nutrition.

The human population could reach 8.5 billion by 2030, 9.7 billion by 2050 and peak at around 10.4 billion during the 2080s and remain at that level until 2100, the UN estimated.
Soylent Green to feed them?
1675123691785.png

OR
1675123874107.png

1675123954816.png

people laugh at that movie truth stranger than fiction
 
Last edited:

BeSafe

Super Anarchist
8,222
1,458
True - so you support DADS or Climate Solutions Caucus?

Like I said, it's an interesting question.
 

Bagheera

Member
234
344
Alaska
The climate is always changing, and atmospheric CO2 will have some effect. However, none of the alarmist's catastrophic predictions has come true. And the Polar Bears are doing fine.
You show over and over again that you haven't the faintest clue about what science is and what science does.

Climate is always changing and will always be changing, that is factually correct. The change that we have seen over the last 30-40 years has taken planet earth (without the help of humans) several thousands of years in the fastest warm up period in the last million years. Most warm upo periods take closer to 10.000 years. That difference is due to the fact that we are collectively burning every fucking drop of oil before it will run out. The warming is not the problem, the rate at which is it warming is the problem

The other thing is that scientists seldom make predictions of what is going to happen (less than 1% of studies make predictions) and if they do it is always in the form of a bell-curve. There is a likely outcome and two other extremes that could happen but are very unlikely. Those dumb-ass denier websites/youtube channels/newspapers take a study and completely fuck it over to their liking by only selectively quoting as well as only looking at an extreme if a prediciton is made and present that extreme as what 'science' is saying will happen in x-years. Of course it is fucking wrong, it was an extreme that COULD happen but is very unlikely.

There have been nearly a hundred thousand studies to this subject and 99.994% of the scientists come to the exact same conclusion. But you insinuate that they are all crooks and all dumb and all wrong. Your best explanation: because my favorite politician/priest/comedian/teacher/mentor says so.

The only thing I could advise you is to learn to read and learn to think. Though it sounds like you are a lost cause.
 

jzk

Super Anarchist
12,973
476
You show over and over again that you haven't the faintest clue about what science is and what science does.

Climate is always changing and will always be changing, that is factually correct. The change that we have seen over the last 30-40 years has taken planet earth (without the help of humans) several thousands of years in the fastest warm up period in the last million years. Most warm upo periods take closer to 10.000 years. That difference is due to the fact that we are collectively burning every fucking drop of oil before it will run out. The warming is not the problem, the rate at which is it warming is the problem

The other thing is that scientists seldom make predictions of what is going to happen (less than 1% of studies make predictions) and if they do it is always in the form of a bell-curve. There is a likely outcome and two other extremes that could happen but are very unlikely. Those dumb-ass denier websites/youtube channels/newspapers take a study and completely fuck it over to their liking by only selectively quoting as well as only looking at an extreme if a prediciton is made and present that extreme as what 'science' is saying will happen in x-years. Of course it is fucking wrong, it was an extreme that COULD happen but is very unlikely.

There have been nearly a hundred thousand studies to this subject and 99.994% of the scientists come to the exact same conclusion. But you insinuate that they are all crooks and all dumb and all wrong. Your best explanation: because my favorite politician/priest/comedian/teacher/mentor says so.

The only thing I could advise you is to learn to read and learn to think. Though it sounds like you are a lost cause.
Were you going to post your plan on how to lift poor people out of grinding poverty with renewable energy? Hell, Germany could really use your plan right now because they don't seem to have one.
 

Bagheera

Member
234
344
Alaska
Were you going to post your plan on how to lift poor people out of grinding poverty with renewable energy? Hell, Germany could really use your plan right now because they don't seem to have one.
Solar and wind are by far the cheapest sources of energy so those will reduce the energy bills. They also provide more jobs than oil and gas do. If it needs any more explanation than that it is on you.
What is happening in Germany (and most other places in Europe) is political bullshit and it has absolutely nothing to do with what the source of the energy is.
 

Not for nothing

Super Anarchist
3,694
901
jupiter
Were you going to post your plan on how to lift poor people out of grinding poverty with renewable energy? Hell, Germany could really use your plan right now because they don't seem to have one.
Think we need a program here.
We seem to be way off course; It would be nice If the parties come up with a plan,
Let's get the poor homes and food and even educate them. The homeless pisses me off because most are veterans, this is now we treat out vets.

But what's on the agenda of most R's let's see; taking away women rights, gays, trans, book burning and that the government coming to get your gun,
Then they listen to FAUX and the assholes there, that spread fear and hatred. Heard one even wants to attack Canada. and people listen to Tucker as a god running the country.

If your Christian, then feed the hungry and heal the sick, Oh that's socialism, so I guess Jesus Christ is a socialist.
 

billsreef

Anarchist
1,048
596
Miami
Solar and wind are by far the cheapest sources of energy so those will reduce the energy bills. They also provide more jobs than oil and gas do. If it needs any more explanation than that it is on you.
What is happening in Germany (and most other places in Europe) is political bullshit and it has absolutely nothing to do with what the source of the energy is.
Problem with solar and wind is that the petroleum billionaires can't make billions of dollars from it. So they willingly spend millions to convince the likes of dog, jzk, etc., that fossil fuels are good for all.
 

Bagheera

Member
234
344
Alaska
Were you going to post your plan on how to lift poor people out of grinding poverty with renewable energy? Hell, Germany could really use your plan right now because they don't seem to have one.
BTW, the poverty rate in Germany is a fair bit lower than that in the USA. Pretty much all European countries that are embracing renewables and are pushing out the oil and gas are doing better than the USA when it comes to poverty rates.

What is your idea to do about this?
 

jzk

Super Anarchist
12,973
476
Think we need a program here.
We seem to be way off course; It would be nice If the parties come up with a plan,
Let's get the poor homes and food and even educate them. The homeless pisses me off because most are veterans, this is now we treat out vets.

But what's on the agenda of most R's let's see; taking away women rights, gays, trans, book burning and that the government coming to get your gun,
Then they listen to FAUX and the assholes there, that spread fear and hatred. Heard one even wants to attack Canada. and people listen to Tucker as a god running the country.

If your Christian, then feed the hungry and heal the sick, Oh that's socialism, so I guess Jesus Christ is a socialist.

325800629_728943275417970_5266874511329420178_n.jpg
 

jzk

Super Anarchist
12,973
476
Problem with solar and wind is that the petroleum billionaires can't make billions of dollars from it. So they willingly spend millions to convince the likes of dog, jzk, etc., that fossil fuels are good for all.
The petrol billionaires are building coal powerplants in China? Who knew.
 

Bagheera

Member
234
344
Alaska
The petrol billionaires are building coal powerplants in China? Who knew.
There is not a single country on earth that invests more in renewables than China does. So what is your point? Coal is the second most expensive form of energy, why even bother with it?
 

jzk

Super Anarchist
12,973
476
Solar and wind are by far the cheapest sources of energy so those will reduce the energy bills. They also provide more jobs than oil and gas do. If it needs any more explanation than that it is on you.
What is happening in Germany (and most other places in Europe) is political bullshit and it has absolutely nothing to do with what the source of the energy is.
It would be great if that were true. Who doesn't want cheaper energy?
 

jzk

Super Anarchist
12,973
476
There is not a single country on earth that invests more in renewables than China does. So what is your point? Coal is the second most expensive form of energy, why even bother with it?
Right. Why is China bothering with it?
 

Bagheera

Member
234
344
Alaska
Here in our little town in Alaska where we have a micro grid we switched from fossil fuel power to renewable, the cost was cut in half and the power outages were reduced in duration and number.
 

jzk

Super Anarchist
12,973
476
They just scrapped half of the new coal plants that they intended to build and trippled their intend on solar and wind farms. Why would they have done that?
 

Bagheera

Member
234
344
Alaska
And still they scrapped half of the plants that they originally intended.
Are you going to answer any of my questions or are you just sealioning?
 

jzk

Super Anarchist
12,973
476
And still they scrapped half of the plants that they originally intended.
Are you going to answer any of my questions or are you just sealioning?
Why are they building any coal powerplants? Why do all these countries want to waste money on energy? The fossil fuel lobby is strong in China? India?
 

Bagheera

Member
234
344
Alaska
The fossil fuel lobby is strong anywhere in the world. It is the most expensive energy and a small percentage makes a fortune. So of course the lobby is strong.

Why does the US federal government give 32 Billion dollars of subsidy every year to the 5 big oil companies that make a collective 200 billion dollar profit?
 
Top