Pretend it is a train coming at us. The Train is so far away we can't hear it. Should I worry or simply keep walking down the street? These nuts act as if Climate (lasts from 30 years to many more) is roaring our way trying to destroy us. So tell them no thanks.
Think about being on the tracks, a train is approaching from the distance and you find that you can only move a few millimeters a year.
Thanks a lot for helping me make my case. Let's try that and see if it works.
We are in our current situation because far too many people listened to advice like yours.
Can you cause the Sun to rise 15 minutes sooner?
I had no idea I was so powerful. Do you wish you were as powerful?
I didn't say "your advice". I said "advice like yours".
Crick, this is not a tip to you, but trying to be kind.... Try being humble.
My advice is to listen to the scientists who speak the truth and are not out to cause you a lot of distress.
I do listen to scientists but I should hope NOT to scientists who decide what to tell me and what not based on how distressed they think I might become. The thing we're all after here is the truth and not all truths are painless.
As the OP noted, nobody argues that an extra 7 billion people on Earth do not have some effect on local environments. Cities are MUCH larger than they were at the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, there are infinitely more square miles of buildings, parking lots, pavement, concrete surfaces, etc. replacing bare ground, grass, trees, other vegetation that once kept things cooler on a hot summer day.
www.theguardian.com
But all the wind farms, all the solar panels, all the EVs, all the energy saving appliances, all the efforts to promote and require green energy all over the world has not reduced CO2 in the atmosphere by a single particle nor is there any evidence it has changed the temperature/weather in any place, much less the whole planet. And we are on track to add another 3 billion people to the planet by the year 2100.
Absolutely correct as usual. What about the rest of the world. Doing this as proposed by the alarmists might kill off millions in Africa or in South America since they lack funds to pay for changes.
It HAS reduced the rate at which we are putting it into the atmosphere. You have been shown the data on that.
CO2 is a well-mixed gas. It's effects in either direction will not be localized. There is an ENORMOUS amount of evidence that it has changed the temperature of the planet UPWARDS. AS the rate at which our emissions were increasing has come down, so has the rate at which temperature has been increasing. But, they are both still increasing. We need to do more.
What's the matter? Don't you appreciate a challenge. And don't forget we are planning on giving every human on the planet a lifestyle equivalent to a middle-class American.
Where did you get $50 billion and what is it supposed to pay for?
Resolving global warming by addressing its causes will cost significantly less than ignoring it and dealing piecemeal with the issues it creates. If you don't want to impoverish billions, you should be advocating that we deal with this problem as quickly as possible.
You give the appearance of a person who means well, but factually you scare the hell out of good decent Americans with your doom and gloom predictions of hell on Earth.
I bet the guy who stops you from stepping in front of a bus scares you. Or your wife warning you that someone's pulling out in front of you. Do you think they shouldn't have said what they said to you because it scared you? I'm trying to convince people that something bad is happening and it requires that we take some action; that we make some different choices.
Yes, they do. I get my ideas from the work of thousands of scientists from all over the world. There are a few scientists that reject AGW, but they are less than 1% of the total number of scientists. Science treats the greenhouse effect as an established fact. The greenhouse gases in the Earth's atmopshere are responsible for 59 Fahrenheit degrees of waming. You don't think a 50% increase in the second most effective GHG might have a discernible effect?
Gas? Gasoline? It's called CO2 Robert.
In 1850 there were only 280 Pennies. They've increased by 50%. So, whatever effect they produce will have increased as well. There are lots of compounds that will kill you with a tiny fraction of the current level of CO2. There's more than enough there for all the plants and phytoplankton on the entire planet to thrive. Robert, you don't seem to bring a lot of science knowledge to the table here. Trying to show me that 420 ppm is a small fraction serves no point other than to demonstrate your technical shortcomings. I'm a degreed engineer. I know what ppm stands for. I also know physics, chemistry and thermodynamics. You, apparently, do not.
