Study Confirms Climate Models are Getting Future Warming Projections Right

Did you just invent the bolded? Or is that study based on past pollution by humans?

Also, the debate over "here are some specific climate change proposals that never happened or I dont like" is just useless. The solution to climate change is complex and requires the efforts of millions, or billions, of people. So policies from some city in California are noble and might make sense, but they might not.

 

China was a signatory to the Paris Accord.

 

Two of those articles are blatantly opinion pieces.

 

No we ****ing DONT “need to live like the Amish”

That is hyoerbole clear and simple

What we do need to do is transition over to cleaner energy. Areas that have done it have SAVED money.

Oh! And we need to slow down logging

 

I do not want to subject the human population to "Darwinian models" because of a threat self-created by humans.

 

Cleaner energy won't supply us with what we need, unless we go completely in with nuclear energy. And there are enough "no nukes" people around from the 1980's to stop that from happening.

 

It would prove that you can actually do the bullshit you believe the scientists are doing.

And if you can do it, then I might be more inclined to believe scientists are doing it.

So go do it.

 

Pretty simple math.

I provide X degree of carbon footprint by living. Let us pretend the number is 100.

If I can convince 20 people (all of whom have a carbon footprint of 100) to reduce their carbon footprint by 5% by posting on these forums, then I have done as much or better by not killing myself. If I cam convince enough people to believe in climate change that they help elect a politician who accepts and agrees to work with the science, then I have vastly outperformed the whole killing myself scenario.

 

Oooh! More conspiracy theory ***** plus added opinion pieces from right wing sources

Look one fifth of global warming is due to deforestation, we need to replant not billions but trillions of trees and stop clear felling and logging in third world countries, problem is THIS is how the impoverished make a living. Wouldn’t it be nice if the richer nations found a way of rewarding poorer. Nations for caring for the lungs of the planet? And the other benefit - people who have jobs don’t want to risk illegal immigration

 

Trumps trade war is not designed to save the planet.

 

Once more, an individuals contribution to climate change is insignificant. Even if I killed myself, my contribution would not change anything. I am much better suited trying to convince a larger percentage of the population to alter their behavior or to support politicians and corporations which are capable of making a significant impact.

 

Which they were doing until the last couple of years

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change_in_China

So they have a greater belief that it is happening

Also. From Wiki

Basically though China sees no reason why they should suffer economic hardship when the main amount of the current pollution was put there by the industrialised nations.

 

You are lying to yourself if you think the Paris Climate Accord solely demanded America pay for the world to do anything.

 

My claim is entirely dependent on AGW being proven a hoax first.

 

Did I say it’s the only option? Is it an option?

No “shock jock” involved. Unlike you I do my own thinking. Interesting that your link supports my position in every way. It verifies nuclear is an existing “mature” source and that environment concerns and public opinion are the limiters. Exactly my point. It is strong evidence nobody is serious about mitigation.

Is France a stupid, dangerous or irresponsible country? Yes, or no?

It’s common knowledge nuclear plants can be built in 5 years. Some have been done in three. The Watts Bar plant was our last one completed. It took 43 years.

I believe it’s time to think through the implications.

As I’ve said before. I’m all for the science. How that science is used is where the fear marketing narrative breaks down for me.

 

Who do you think consumes all the Chinese products that drive up their CO2 output?
a) The Chinese
b) The rest of the world

 

Nice theory. Any empirical evidence?

 

None of those are being banned.

 

I guess the warmers aren't serious about global warming. They just want to punish America.

 

So have a “save the planet” one.

The buffers and mitigations we observe in nature are not designed to save the planet. Should we work to destroy them?

 

Nuclear energy is also extremely expensive.

 

So why do you use the potential policy response as the reason to deny the validity of the science?

 

The current rate of warming is approximately 100x the rate of change experienced during the warming from the end of the last ice age.

 

Now try answering the question instead of repeating you nonsensical claim.
If you buy Chinese products you have to accept responsibility for your share of Chinese CO2 output.

 

Hahaha. China "promised" to peak it's CO2 emissions in 2030. In other word, they promised to keep increasing emissions for the next decade....then they'll think about maybe scaling back to meet the voluntary U.N. goals.