The Green New Deal and the Elephant in the Room

[Lesh]

Wouldn't trying to stop it and trying to mitigate the damage not be the same thing?

There's a huge difference between being proactive and reactive.

Proactive is always cheaper and more effective

 

[Hale]

Back on topic, it's apparent that even if the USA did eliminate all fossil fuels, 85% remains. Is that enough to stop the "global catastrophe"? Obviously not.

So, warmists, a question: How do you propose to enforce your fossil fuel ban on China, Russia, UK, India, Brazil, and others?

Answer: You know you can't. The GND is nothing more than a Globalist takeover, sadly fueled by some of the very citizens it will destroy. Those pushing it know that, and you're being played.

 

[Lesh]

I admit a third alternative is possible, and perhaps even more likely. Civil war.

"Admitting the possibility" of violence is just a sly way to PROMOTE that

 

[Lesh]

Quit buying into this bullshit artists rubbish. I flew into LA in 1963, returning from Illinois, You could not even see LA from a thousand feet for the brown blanket of SMOG. A few years later, it was gone. America can't change the worlds pollution alone when 3 billion chins and hindoos upwind are still cooking their rice over cowshit smudgepots.

You just admitted that we dealt with a massive problem...and then say we can't do that?

 

[NoVote]

This is bunk, it's admitted by all but the walking dead, that climate change is a hoax and the fact is, every living thing on the planet, except for sequoias and some other trees will be long dead before it can happen.

 

[danielpalos]

upgrading our infrastructure can green our economy and environment.

 

[Hale]

"Admitting the possibility" of violence is just a sly way to PROMOTE that

I think your tinfoil hat is a bit loose.