Questions for Conserative/libertarians after Harvey.

Not that Bobbys chart (that I can't see and wouldn't mind if someone would repost so I can see how laughable it is) isn't garbage but scientists can measure temperature going back thousands of years by measuring permafrost and the carbon levels that pertain.

They can measure carbon levels because it's a scientific fact that temperature and carbon coincide. If the temperature goes up, C02 goes up. If the C02 goes up, temps go up. That's why the spike after 1950 is the most staggering fact out there as it pertains to climate change. This is simple stuff that both trolls and zealots just refuse to grasp.

 

Are you really this dense about basic climate science or do the mods need to check to make sure you aren't a bot?

 

you are a blessing to every conversation you take part in dobro. You always add meaningful insights.

Some advice. If you don't have a worth while response then just don't say anything. It doesn't mean your position is wrong.

 

In terms of time scale, there is a sweet spot in the middle that we need to pay special attention to. Day-to-day, weather is highly volatile, but we can deal with that because it averages out over time. There are also natural cycles of extreme climate conditions that occur over millennia and we are now in a relatively "comfortable" period on that time scale -- comfortable enough for us to flourish especially in the last 400 years. While we are in that period of relative comfort, we should be mindful of how our activities are impacting the climate in a way that could severely impact us and the next few generations. Ignoring that just puts us on an expedited path to massive destruction that we are ill-prepared for.

I think it is fair to say that there is probably some motivated reasoning on both sides. But personally I trust scientists to be more objective and accurate in their assessment of this situation than political/business leaders and commentators.

And I think the science needs to just be evaluated on its own terms. What is the dooms-day report you are referring to? The IPCC report, which is a conservative consolidation of our scientific knowledge on his issue, doesn't say we are doomed. But if we don't act soon there is a point at which irreversible damage will be done for the next few hundred years. Pinning our hopes on the belief that nature is self-correcting (according to graphs depicting cycles over millennia) offers little comfort to the generations that follow us.

 

Also the push for climate change awareness has never been about giving money to the government or making scientists rich like right wing hate talk radio would lead you to believe.

Its about the opposite. Free market to choose clean energy as a consumer is what folks like myself ultimately want, and if given a choice, I believe the majority of people will go clean and it will help curb CO2 levels getting emitted.

We are supposed to live in a free market capitalist society. Yet up until this year when there finally looks to be some breakthrough, it was virtually impossible in DFW for me to get solar panels put on my roof unless I was willing to shell out 40K. I should be able to have a choice in where I get my energy from.

Through citizens united, corporations like the Koch brothers are allowed to infiltrate the government and work in opposition to the free market by campaigning against it by confusing people about and denying basic climate science because they want to milk the cash cow of fossil fuels that they have a market on for years to come at the expense of our environment.

What I want the government to do is quite the opposite of what folks like Tell and Bobby are led to believe from talk radio. I want them to get out of the way, stop the influence of fossil fuel companies, and allow competition in the energy market. Right now China is kicking our tails in clean energy technology and infrastructure that will ultimately kick our tails in the global economy. That's why the Paris agreement was so infuriating to so many. Its a green light that our idiotic government gave for China and India to be at the table first. The Paris agreement is a move to help 3rd world countries industrialize their energy sector with clean energy that will ultimately benefit the environment. Do we want these countries to have Chinese companies setting up global industry in all of these countries that need sustainable energy infrastructure or do we want American countries to be competitive in those markets?

Taking care of our earth is a big part of it, but the density and ignorance from the right on the lack of understanding of the economic factors at play is astounding. Since when did capitalism become dead in the Republican party? Ronald Reagan would be ashamed of you folks.

 

I think if you take the word "constant" out of your claim of what Bobby said you would be fairly accurate. He can make this claim because history...

He doesn't have to understand anything about the climate models because to be honest none of them have proven to be very accurate, so why understand junk?

you need to understand rockets... go talk to Kim Jong Un.

 

Don't forget that for every thoughtful regulatory change enacted, we must remove two other regulations. Hopefully they're not for anything important. I guess if we can't find any that can safely be removed at this time, we'll revisit after the next weather disaster.