It Makes NO DIFFERENCE what the U.S. does to reduce its Greenhouse Gas Emissions!

[JoeB131]

We're a first world economy.

So? That means we should be producing LESS per capita, not more.

And we should be sharing that technology with other countries.

Because once Global Warming makes the planet uninhabitable, you aren't going to be able to tell the difference between an American Corpse or a Chinese one.

 

[ReinyDays]

Saving energy saves money ... it's called capitalism, so it DOES make a difference ... see how walking to work instead of driving your Ford F-350 4x4 keeps more money in your pocket? ... or am I just being an American? ...

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

So? That means we should be producing LESS per capita, not more.

And we should be sharing that technology with other countries.

Because once Global Warming makes the planet uninhabitable, you aren't going to be able to tell the difference between an American Corpse or a Chinese one.

That means we should be producing LESS per capita, not more.

We produce less per dollar of GDP.

And we should be sharing that technology with other countries.

Many countries have banned fracking.

Because once Global Warming makes the planet uninhabitable

So we've got a few billion years?

 

[ding]

So? That means we should be producing LESS per capita, not more.

Don't be silly, Joey. It means we CONSUME MORE per capita.

 

[jc456]

I owe so loved this discussion.

 

[jc456]

Read closely: The COSTS of the campaign (in the U.S. and Europe) to "save the planet" are immediate, definite, and severe: higher energy costs, general inflation, shortages, blackouts, brownouts. And they hit the WORKING CLASS more than anyone else. I am a rich retired fukker, and today's inflation is nothing more than an irritation to me, but for a young couple with kids, working two remote jobs, it can be devastating.

But the BENEFITS of the campaign to save the planet are a hundred years out, very slight, and very speculative - based on computer models that have invariably been wrong until now. What is the hope, exactly? Lower global temperatures by one degree Celsius a hundred years from how? Ridiculous.

And the people who are PUSHING the campaign to save the planet are the very same people who claim to "feel for" the Working Class.

Do you get it now? It has nothing to do with saving the planet, and everything to do with increasing Leftist influence and power.

here's just about Colorado

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

China, not America, has the real emissions problem

They pass climate change legislation that does nothing but inflict immense harm on the economy and America’s strategic position

spectatorworld.com

I've been saying this for years, but here is the data to support it. Much worse than even I imagined.

"Among non-Western nations, China’s carbon dioxide emissions tripled, and its share of global emissions rose from 12 percent in 1992 to 31 percent in 2020. The math is inescapable: what America and the West do is of diminishing relevance to global emissions and therefore to future global temperatures."

We in the West are trying to empty out the swimming pool with teacups, while the Chinese are standing there on the other side of the pool with a firehose, filling it back up.

Seriously, take a few minutes and read the article. It is an eye-opener.

Let's say you accidentally set your neighbor's house on fire and now it's threatening the whole neighborhood. You keep adding gasoline to the fire until one day you realize "Oops, this gasoline I'm adding to the fire is making things worse!" so you stop adding gasoline to the fire.

Meanwhile the neighbors on the OTHER side are adding gasoline to the fire. And you can't stop them. Mainly because you are paying them to add gasoline to the fire.

So you are in a pickle. You pay them to add gasoline to the fire but you know that it will make the fire worse. You have stopped adding gasoline but that isn't helping enough.

Here's some key questions:

1. Do you bear ANY responsibility for the other neighbor you are paying to add gasoline to the fire?
2. Do you bear ANY responsibility for STARTING the fire?

 

[jc456]

Let's say you accidentally set your neighbor's house on fire and now it's threatening the whole neighborhood. You keep adding gasoline to the fire until one day you realize "Oops, this gasoline I'm adding to the fire is making things worse!" so you stop adding gasoline to the fire.

Meanwhile the neighbors on the OTHER side are adding gasoline to the fire. And you can't stop them. Mainly because you are paying them to add gasoline to the fire.

So you are in a pickle. You pay them to add gasoline to the fire but you know that it will make the fire worse. You have stopped adding gasoline but that isn't helping enough.

Here's some key questions:

1. Do you bear ANY responsibility for the other neighbor you are paying to add gasoline to the fire?
2. Do you bear ANY responsibility for STARTING the fire?

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

CO2, without CO2 we all die.

H2O, without H2O we all die.

But you CAN kill someone by making them drink a huge amount of water in one quick go (that's called "rate" in the sciences).

Your point is facile, stupid and beneath someone who actually has a science degree (which is how we all know you don't).

 

[jc456]

H2O, without H2O we all die.

But you CAN kill someone by making them drink a huge amount of water in one quick go (that's called "rate" in the sciences).

Your point is facile, stupid and beneath someone who actually has a science degree (which is how we all know you don't).

well sure, show us 120 PPM of CO2 will kill us! show us 400ppm of CO2 will kill us. Why not report on the PPM level of CO2 that will kill us? I can say that if someone held someone's head under water for over one minute, 50% of people would most likely die. Extend that time and more will die. Where's the graph with those kinds of figures skipper?

 

[elektra]

H2O, without H2O we all die.

But you CAN kill someone by making them drink a huge amount of water in one quick go (that's called "rate" in the sciences).

Your point is facile, stupid and beneath someone who actually has a science degree (which is how we all know you don't).

Still cant address a topic?

I guarantee my education makes you look like a toddler, now post your diploma and prove you are not a big fat liar. Talking about cartoons and telling us we can drown drinking water simply proves you are liar claiming you are educated

 

[elektra]

H2O, without H2O we all die.

But you CAN kill someone by making them drink a huge amount of water in one quick go (that's called "rate" in the sciences).

Your point is facile, stupid and beneath someone who actually has a science degree (which is how we all know you don't).

Diploma and patents, prove you are not a liar

 

[Flash]

There are several things that these stupid uneducated Environmental Wacko Moon Bats always deny:

1. That the Principle Climate Scientists admitted they produced fraudulent and cherry picked data.

2. That the earth was cooler when we had higher CO2 and warmer when we had lower CO2.

3. That CO2 levels lags temperature increases.

4. That government agencies like NOAA and NASA have been caught several times fabricating data.

5. That none of the dire predictions by the Environmental Wackos ever come true.

6. That nothing the US or humans will do will effect climate change.

Climate change is real. Man made climate change is a scam.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Let's say you accidentally set your neighbor's house on fire and now it's threatening the whole neighborhood. You keep adding gasoline to the fire until one day you realize "Oops, this gasoline I'm adding to the fire is making things worse!" so you stop adding gasoline to the fire.

Meanwhile the neighbors on the OTHER side are adding gasoline to the fire. And you can't stop them. Mainly because you are paying them to add gasoline to the fire.

So you are in a pickle. You pay them to add gasoline to the fire but you know that it will make the fire worse. You have stopped adding gasoline but that isn't helping enough.

Here's some key questions:

1. Do you bear ANY responsibility for the other neighbor you are paying to add gasoline to the fire?
2. Do you bear ANY responsibility for STARTING the fire?

You're right, we shouldn't waste trillions while China adds more gasoline.

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

You're right, we shouldn't waste trillions while China adds more gasoline.

What about your responsibility paying the Chinese to add more gasoline. Every time you buy something here in the US you pay CHina to add more gasoline.

 

[elektra]

Let's say you accidentally set your neighbor's house on fire and now it's threatening the whole neighborhood. You keep adding gasoline to the fire until one day you realize "Oops, this gasoline I'm adding to the fire is making things worse!" so you stop adding gasoline to the fire.

Meanwhile the neighbors on the OTHER side are adding gasoline to the fire. And you can't stop them. Mainly because you are paying them to add gasoline to the fire.

So you are in a pickle. You pay them to add gasoline to the fire but you know that it will make the fire worse. You have stopped adding gasoline but that isn't helping enough.

Here's some key questions:

1. Do you bear ANY responsibility for the other neighbor you are paying to add gasoline to the fire?
2. Do you bear ANY responsibility for STARTING the fire?

Pathetic, instead of discussing the topic you make a scenario up, that is fake, never happens, and you think the answer to your bizare reasoning will make you right.

Post your diploma and patents, cause you post as if you have no idea about yhe topic.

Would you pour gas on your neighbor's house.

Well, Mr Wizard, if it is yoir house I would...

 

[toobfreak]

It makes no difference to you, because you're old and you'll croak before the worst effects of climate change are felt.

Good. Good. I hope you are only about 30 now so you'll have to suffer through at least the next 40 years of your life in climate hell. You, your family, your friends, and your little dog Toto, too.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

What about your responsibility paying the Chinese to add more gasoline. Every time you buy something here in the US you pay CHina to add more gasoline.

Exactly. No need for me to waste trillions.

 

[jc456]

Pathetic, instead of discussing the topic you make a scenario up, that is fake, never happens, and think the answer to your bizarre reasoning will make you right.

Post your diploma and patents, cause you post as if you have no idea about yhe topic.

Would you pour gas on your neighbor's house.

Well, Mr Wizard, if it is yoir house I would...

it's condescending's art of creating rat hole 101. It is hilarious.

 

[themirrorthief]

Your brand of thinking is a race to the bottom. We need to lead on this, and we should lead on this, as we have been the worlds largest polluter and contributor of greenhouse gases for decades. We have that obligation, and we also have the technical ability to do so. Naysayers like yourself cannot be convinced otherwise, but the world will still be moving towards cleaner energy sources, and someone is going to lead the way.

With President Biden, we are now leading the way.

poor old bidens smelly depends contribute more to climate change than all those hundreds of new coal fired plants being built in china