Another useless and stupid "Climate Deal."

[miles]

The lowlights:

• Deal to limit global warming to "well below" 2C, aiming for 1.5C
  
• Greenhouse gas emissions need to peak "as soon as possible", followed by rapid reduction
  
• Deal will eliminate use of coal, oil and gas for energy
  
• Fossil fuels to be replaced by solar, wind power
  
• Developed countries to provide $US100b a year from 2020 to help developing nations

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-21/australia-set-to-sign-paris-climate-deal/7347574

Why don't these countries actually do something that might actually help people instead of this nonsense?

 

[phrodeau]

Because they are doing something that will actually help people, idiot.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Yes, they are. They are burning huge carbon footprints in order to get together and issue some feel-good statements and produce documents that will further enlarge their footprint and that have zero substantive meaning to them being not just symbolic, but hypocritical, but hey, that's just how the elite class rolls as they run around internationally informing us how they want us to live our lives under attitudes, sacrifices, rules and regulations that simply do not apply to their majesties...

 

[Blue]

They've made targets like this before. Like that one for all the major countries to cut their carbon emissions and that was, what was it, twenty or thirty years ago now? And not a single nation has even taken small steps toward doing that.

Meaningless words. Nothing's going to come out of it, no action is going to be taken and by 2050 Italy and most coastlines will be underwater, entire species of shallow water marine life will wash up on shores entirely extinct, the UK, France and Spain could be under ten meters of permafrost, most habitable lands will be displaying clear signs of desertification and countless millions will have died to meteorological disasters and the spread of, currently rare or uncommon, tropical illnesses into the modernized world.
Heck and that's just by 2050-2070.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Doom and Gloom...



All it does is sell power to the politicians. The earth is largely self-correcting and any model predicting otherwise should be instantly discarded. Chaotic systems are hard to understand, to predictor and to fathom, but they are bound by certain rules and strange attractors like solar output and oceanic salinity.

 

[Blue]

Doom and Gloom...



All it does is sell power to the politicians. The earth is largely self-correcting and any model predicting otherwise should be instantly discarded. Chaotic systems are hard to understand, to predictor and to fathom, but they are bound by certain rules and strange attractors like solar output and oceanic salinity.

Yes the Earth corrects itself but it takes umpteen millions of years for the physical and biological systems to develop and process everything to be able to do that.
Unless we turn this planet into a barren fireball it's going to correct all the damage we've done to it eventually, but we'll have pushed it past the brink of habitability long before then and won the greatest Darwin Award ever handed out.

 

[miles]

7 doom and gloom Earth Day predictions that never quite panned out:

1: “Civilization Will End Within 15 Or 30 Years”

Harvard biologist Dr. George Wald warned shortly before the first Earth Day in 1970 that civilization would soon end “unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind.” Three years before his projection, Wald was awarded the Nobel Prize for Physiology or Medicine.


2: “100-200 Million People Per Year Will Be Starving To Death During The Next Ten Years”

Stanford professor Dr. Paul Ehrlich declared in April 1970 that mass starvation was imminent. His dire predictions failed to materialize as the number of people living in poverty has significantly declined and the amount of food per person has steadily increased, despite population growth. The world’s Gross Domestic Product per person has immeasurably grown despite increases in population.


3: “Population Will Inevitably And Completely Outstrip Whatever Small Increases In Food Supplies We Make”
Paul Ehrlich also made the above claim in 1970, shortly before an agricultural revolution that caused the world’s food supply to rapidly increase.

Ehrlich has consistently failed to revise his predictions when confronted with the fact that they did not occur, stating in 2009 that “perhaps the most serious flaw in The Bomb was that it was much too optimistic about the future.”


For the rest of the Chicken Little predictions follow this link:

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog..._predictions_that_never_quite_panned_out.html

 

[miles]

George Carlin nails it.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

I believe that you are caught up in the hype and fear of a religious political science movement that is at odds with Science.

So we will just have to agree to disagree...

But I'll leave you with one example:

As technology has advanced, an efficient method of mining, known as fracking, is producing copious quantities of natural gas which is making it a preferable and cleaner source of energy putting pressure on the coal industry to downsize according to the iron laws of economics. Unfortunately the political scientists of the green industry are willing to promote lies about fracking in order to put a halt to it in favor of subsidized wind and solar because they, as did the leaders in the novel Anthem, prefer inefficiencies if it means they get to set the rules for all of society. The only way you get to fireball is to abandon Science, hold technology to the technologies of the past and set taxes high enough to discourage Capital accumulation and investment.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Ted Danson, eminent political scientist predicting the death of the oceans in ten years...



Ted never told us when the ten years would start, we just assumed that he meant then, 20+ years ago...

 

[Blue]

As technology has advanced, an efficient method of mining, known as fracking, is producing copious quantities of natural gas which is making it a preferable and cleaner source of energy putting pressure on the coal industry to downsize according to the iron laws of economics. Unfortunately the political scientists of the green industry are willing to promote lies about fracking in order to put a halt to it in favor of subsidized wind and solar because they, as did the leaders in the novel Anthem, prefer inefficiencies if it means they get to set the rules for all of society. The only way you get to fireball is to abandon Science, hold technology to the technologies of the past and set taxes high enough to discourage Capital accumulation and investment.

Or perhaps it's the fact that states in the USA with fracking sites experience earthquakes more and more as fracking sites pop up. Even in states that are not seismologically active. The quakes are caused by the hundreds of thousands to millions of tonnes of toxic water used to smash up the rock containing gas pockets which is left underground and turns literally square miles of crust around the sites to rock sludge. So you end up with a massive sandwich in the form of crust > sludge layer > surface rock. Which the surface landmasses begin to literally slide and contort over because they're no longer sitting on a stable foundation.
THAT'S science.

Your examples of "scientific predictions" were individuals with whack ideas throwing them into the public sphere. The effects of climate change, and things like fracking on the other hand, are universally agreed upon by scientific bodies around the world.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Those "earthquakes" are mild, deep and cause little or no damage.


That is FACT.


I live on the New Madrid fault; the last time it blew, it caused real damage.

 

[Blue]

Those "earthquakes" are mild, deep and cause little or no damage.


That is FACT.

No.
Those "earthquakes" are EARTHQUAKES and eventually such huge amounts of crust are going to be turned into sludge that literally hundreds of square kilometres of land could begin contorting. You really think that's not going cause any damage? Especially in states that are genuinely seismologically active?
And it's not just the quakes either, just the fracking sites in Texas alone have produced more waste methane last year than all the cars on this planet combined, in the hundreds of thousands of metric tonnes, OF GAS. And methane is one of the most destructive gases for ozone.
As well as the fact that the wastewater seeps into underground reservoirs and literally makes the water flammable and purely toxic.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Okay, I see you're fully invested in the politics of the movement, so I think our conversation is pretty much over.

I'll just say this one last thing, fracking occurs at depths deep beneath any aquifers and there is no solid Science behind the methane myth; this is just fear-mongering in order to gain political power and control over people's lives.

 

[Blue]

Okay, I see you're fully invested in the politics of the movement, so I think our conversation is pretty much over.

I'll just say this one last thing, fracking occurs at depths deep beneath any aquifers and there is no solid Science behind the methane myth; this is just fear-mongering in order to gain political power and control over people's lives.

No solid science? It's in their own bloody waste reports. They openly tell the government, and by proxy scientific bodies, how much methane their operations produce. And are you really saying that it's just a coincidence that people's tap water becomes flammable and full of benzene and other toxic compounds produced in fracking, around fracking sites?
That's an awfully coincidental coincidence.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

We get it.

You are terrified of climate change and fracking.

I am ending my conversation on this topic with you because it is a waste of my time.

It is also getting terribly uninteresting.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/energy/g161/top-10-myths-about-natural-gas-drilling-6386593/

 

[phrodeau]

Ehrlich's prediction didn't come true, because of efforts by scientists and politicians to save the people with social programs and improved agriculture tech.

Clear and simple facts. They are what people learn.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

His and Toffler's predictions did not comes true because they held technology constant and then tried to treat a chaotic system as no more than simple algebra...


They are to Science as Rachel Carson is to malaria.

 

[miles]

No solid science? It's in their own bloody waste reports. They openly tell the government, and by proxy scientific bodies, how much methane their operations produce. And are you really saying that it's just a coincidence that people's tap water becomes flammable and full of benzene and other toxic compounds produced in fracking, around fracking sites?
That's an awfully coincidental coincidence.

Who is "they?"

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Who is "they?"

They is clearly not Popular Mechanics, but I do note a lack of basic evidentiary proof of the opinions offered by this poster.

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

Who is "they?"

"They" are the companies engaging in fracking operations. If you could manage to follow a thread you would know that, but you're too busy snuggling up to Cap'n Disingenuous for that.

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

They is clearly not Popular Mechanics, but I do note a lack of basic evidentiary proof of the opinions offered by this poster.

Popular Mechanics, THE go to scientific journal of hayseeds all across the country.

 

[miles]

There he is...the final authority on absolutely nothing.

 

[WalksOnWater]

The only thing GB wannabe experts better give as well as personal relationship advice is climate change intelligence.

 

[richard_daily]

If only climate change could be solved with mass amounts of American Thinker C&Ps, AJ would have this situation under control.