[andyt]

bootlegga bootlegga:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

We don't have to worry about them. They'll be just fine!


Everybody thinks that Syria is a big deal now, but if the sea levels rise as predicted, there will be something like 600 or MILLION people displaced - which is a hundred times the size of the Syrian diaspora right now.

Did you mean billion? There are about 4 million syrian refugees outside syria, with another 6.5 million displaced in the country.

[andyt]

redhatmamma redhatmamma:

Guess the homeless and aboriginals don`t need any help. How is he going to pay for this?

They do, but we certainly have't stepped up until now, so if he doesn't give that money to other countries, it's not as if the homeless or aboriginals will be better off. It mostly means people will have more money to spend on their electronic pacifiers and such.

[bootlegga]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

bootlegga bootlegga:

Sure, most of us won't be alive when that happens (say 2075 or later), but our kids and/or grandkids will be and they will have to deal with that crisis.

A crisis which is inevitable. Nothing we do will stop the natural temperature & climate cycles of the Earth.

Guess you've never heard the phrase, "an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure."

We might not be able to prevent it entirely, but we can reduce the severity/longevity of the event if we reduce emissions now instead of waiting until nations sink under the waves and we're faced with millions of refugees headed our way. By then, it'll be too late.

We don't need to become a zero carbon economy tomorrow, but we can all take steps which reduce our footprint. Buy smaller vehicles, smaller homes, energy efficient appliances, upgrade our homes so they are more energy efficient and so on.

[bootlegga]

Lemmy Lemmy:

bootlegga bootlegga:

Everybody thinks that Syria is a big deal now, but if the sea levels rise as predicted, there will be something like 600 or MILLION people displaced - which is a hundred times the size of the Syrian diaspora right now.

Sure, most of us won't be alive when that happens (say 2075 or later), but our kids and/or grandkids will be and they will have to deal with that crisis.

Climate change is the primary cause of the Syrian crisis in the first place! They haven't had a harvest in Syria in a decade. Every nickel spent on Syria, its refugees, its war, rebuilding its infrastructure, etc., etc., is a direct result of climate change.

But no, there's no climate crisis yet. Morons.

Yeah, that was my point - and that crises brought on by climate change are going to get bigger, not smaller.

That's why it's in our own best interests to act now while the costs are much, much smaller than they will be in a generation.

[N_Fiddledog]

Lemmy Lemmy:

Climate change is the primary cause of the Syrian crisis in the first place!

Nonsense.

Rebutting the claim: Did Human-Caused Climate Change Lead to War in Syria?

Is There an Elephant in the Living Room? Or Did Manmade Climate Change Cause Syria’s Civil War and the Rise of ISIS?

Once you hear the evidence against the claim it can be written off as nothing more than Catastrophist's wishful thinking.

[N_Fiddledog]

It just fascinates me the intellectual contortions you guys will twist your minds into to serve up a nutty notion like carbon dioxide caused a 1/2 degree temperature rise in the fertile crescent since 1930 and that caused the terrible 3 year drought which in turn caused the 2011 syrian conflict, but I can't get you to consider the possibility that Islam might have something to do with the Islamic state.

I mean forget about the poor water policy mentioned in the study, and the fact the population boomed 11 times since 1930, from about 2 million to about 23 million, or even the fact these guys have been having droughts and wars for centuries, there's cow farts, and some of you greedy Canadian capitalist bastards want to heat your house cheap in the winter.

[andyt]

bootlegga bootlegga:

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

bootlegga bootlegga:

Sure, most of us won't be alive when that happens (say 2075 or later), but our kids and/or grandkids will be and they will have to deal with that crisis.

A crisis which is inevitable. Nothing we do will stop the natural temperature & climate cycles of the Earth.

Guess you've never heard the phrase, "an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure."

We might not be able to prevent it entirely, but we can reduce the severity/longevity of the event if we reduce emissions now instead of waiting until nations sink under the waves and we're faced with millions of refugees headed our way. By then, it'll be too late.

We don't need to become a zero carbon economy tomorrow, but we can all take steps which reduce our footprint. Buy smaller vehicles, smaller homes, energy efficient appliances, upgrade our homes so they are more energy efficient and so on.

What you don't get is that OTI is denying AGW in his post, that it's all just natural cycles, which we can't prevent. Guess the deniers will keep saying that right til the end.

[N_Fiddledog]

andyt andyt:

What you don't get is that OTI is denying AGW in his post, that it's all just natural cycles, which we can't prevent. Guess the deniers will keep saying that right til the end.

Well you of the Warmist faith will never know. Wasn't one of your congregation just telling us the rising oceans of Warmegeddon won't be here for at least another 60 years. Were you planning to be around?

That's the best kind of prophecy. The one you don't have to be there to be proven wrong.

[PluggyRug]

This battery will be awkward to re-cycle.

[bootlegga]

andyt andyt:

bootlegga bootlegga:

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

A crisis which is inevitable. Nothing we do will stop the natural temperature & climate cycles of the Earth.

Guess you've never heard the phrase, "an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure."

We might not be able to prevent it entirely, but we can reduce the severity/longevity of the event if we reduce emissions now instead of waiting until nations sink under the waves and we're faced with millions of refugees headed our way. By then, it'll be too late.

We don't need to become a zero carbon economy tomorrow, but we can all take steps which reduce our footprint. Buy smaller vehicles, smaller homes, energy efficient appliances, upgrade our homes so they are more energy efficient and so on.

What you don't get is that OTI is denying AGW in his post, that it's all just natural cycles, which we can't prevent. Guess the deniers will keep saying that right til the end.

Oh I get where he is coming from, but if we still need to try to convince people of the perils that lie ahead.

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke

While climate change isn't evil, ignoring it for the sake of profits is.

[PluggyRug]

bootlegga bootlegga:

While climate change isn't evil, ignoring it for the sake of profits is.

Maybe that should read embracing it for the sake of profit.

[DrCaleb]

PluggyRug PluggyRug:

Cmon Doc we all know that money will not be spent on it's proper destination.

I know. I recall numerous times when promises like this were made, then the money was simply never budgeted. If the government was Conservative, then there would have been several 'feel good' announcements about this spending before it was ignored.

This won't cost us a cent.

bootlegga bootlegga:

Everybody thinks that Syria is a big deal now, but if the sea levels rise as predicted, there will be something like 600 or MILLION people displaced - which is a hundred times the size of the Syrian diaspora right now.

Sure, most of us won't be alive when that happens (say 2075 or later), but our kids and/or grandkids will be and they will have to deal with that crisis.

Its funny how people can ignore the obvious things. Lake Chad has lost nearly 90% of it's water due to global warming and diversion of tributaries. It accounts for most of the starvation in 3 countries, along with the bulk of Terrorist recruitment.

https://www.ctc.usma.edu/posts/boko-har ... had-region

But hey, it's not really happening because some guy on the internet said so, so we return you to our regularly scheduled program.

[andyt]

My only objection to trying to lower carbon output is that it seems we have to drastically cut back in order to really make a difference. Nobody's willing to do that. No country, not you with your F150 and ice racing, etc, not me with central heating and still using a car, etc etc. Unless the green tech is a lot further along that it seems, we'd have to drastically alter our way of living, our whole economic system and consumption, to really make a diff. So maybe the people who say what's the point have a point, because we're just making futile little gestures. Like I say, on the level of bringing your own coffee cup to Starbucks and thinking you're saving the planet.

[DrCaleb]

andyt andyt:

My only objection to trying to lower carbon output is that it seems we have to drastically cut back in order to really make a difference. Nobody's willing to do that. No country, not you with your F150 and ice racing, etc, not me with central heating and still using a car, etc etc. Unless the green tech is a lot further along that it seems, we'd have to drastically alter our way of living, our whole economic system and consumption, to really make a diff. So maybe the people who say what's the point have a point, because we're just making futile little gestures. Like I say, on the level of bringing your own coffee cup to Starbucks and thinking you're saving the planet.

Then we should aim for the big generators of greenhouse gasses, not the small one. Seems to me they'd be the bigger bang for the buck.

But we have to start somewhere.

[andyt]

Well, that puts the oilsands directly in the target, as we've seen. And all sorts of other industries that would be harmed by forcing large reductions. And, individuals, collectively, are huge emitters and can't just be ignored.

The thing is, we want strong action taken against GHGs, while not being willing to make and sacrifices to our lifestyles. Ultimately focusing only on big generators will still cost us all, they can't just absorb the costs and stay in business. I don't think the world is ready for that sort of sacrifice. The developed countries are too smug and comfortable to give that up, the underdeveloped countries could just die trying.

As I say unless we have the tech of energy for nothing (emissions) and soon, I doubt we're going to make it. Lots of sturm und drang signifying nothing on the way tho.