Board index › General Discussion › News and Current Events

Lead author of oct 2018 IPCC report says it's time to panic

Page 2 of 4 [ 49 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Magna
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jun 2018
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,932

01 Dec 2019, 3:22 pm

We can do both. My point is that I'm not seeing that. Although there are people that are devoted to the planet itself, Gaia, ie planet worship, most people who embrace the ideology of reversing "climate change" say they're doing it in hopes of securing a habitable place for future generations. This would seem to indicate a devotion to and even a love for all peoples. Working toward helping future peoples is a noble cause; however, presently there are millions of people living right now that need help and could benefit from a global movement to think of and implement ideas for rapid assistance. There is no such unified global movement. We can do both. It's not happening. In my opinion there should be a huge shift of focus toward trying to solve present day humanitarian crises rather than prognosticating about a possible future climate doomsday. Work at the problems at hand with as much fervor as is given about a possible doomsday; otherwise the intent rings hollow.



beneficii
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 May 2005
Age: 42
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,245

01 Dec 2019, 3:38 pm

Magna wrote:
We can do both. My point is that I'm not seeing that. Although there are people that are devoted to the planet itself, Gaia, ie planet worship, most people who embrace the ideology of reversing "climate change" say they're doing it in hopes of securing a habitable place for future generations. This would seem to indicate a devotion to and even a love for all peoples. Working toward helping future peoples is a noble cause; however, presently there are millions of people living right now that need help and could benefit from a global movement to think of and implement ideas for rapid assistance. There is no such unified global movement. We can do both. It's not happening. In my opinion there should be a huge shift of focus toward trying to solve present day humanitarian crises rather than prognosticating about a possible future climate doomsday. Work at the problems at hand with as much fervor as is given about a possible doomsday; otherwise the intent rings hollow.


Why are you bringing up Gaia worship? Are you trying to eff with me here?


_________________
"You have a responsibility to consider all sides of a problem and a responsibility to make a judgment and a responsibility to care for all involved." --Ian Danskin


Magna
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jun 2018
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,932

01 Dec 2019, 3:45 pm

I don't know you from anyone. I brought it up because there are people that could be strictly devoted to preserving the planet itself rather than caring about the well being of humans in any way; and there are people that say they're devoted to preserving the planet for the purpose of securing a habitable environment for future generations of people. Both groups of people want to "save the planet", but for very different reasons.



beneficii
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 May 2005
Age: 42
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,245

01 Dec 2019, 4:02 pm

Magna wrote:
I don't know you from anyone. I brought it up because there are people that could be strictly devoted to preserving the planet itself rather than caring about the well being of humans in any way; and there are people that say they're devoted to preserving the planet for the purpose of securing a habitable environment for future generations of people. Both groups of people want to "save the planet", but for very different reasons.


Here’s the thing. In this thread, I provided scientific evidence of a potential environmental catastrophe, along with recommended solutions. As you have presented no evidence to dispute that, and have instead ranted about off-topic things, I take it then that you have conceded the point?


_________________
"You have a responsibility to consider all sides of a problem and a responsibility to make a judgment and a responsibility to care for all involved." --Ian Danskin


lostonearth35
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Jan 2010
Age: 52
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,886
Location: On a planet where I don't belong.

01 Dec 2019, 4:26 pm

Guess we'd better get the cyanide ready. :skull:



beneficii
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 May 2005
Age: 42
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,245

01 Dec 2019, 4:34 pm

lostonearth35 wrote:
Guess we'd better get the cyanide ready. :skull:


How would that help anybody?


_________________
"You have a responsibility to consider all sides of a problem and a responsibility to make a judgment and a responsibility to care for all involved." --Ian Danskin


Magna
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jun 2018
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,932

01 Dec 2019, 4:38 pm

beneficii wrote:
Magna wrote:
I don't know you from anyone. I brought it up because there are people that could be strictly devoted to preserving the planet itself rather than caring about the well being of humans in any way; and there are people that say they're devoted to preserving the planet for the purpose of securing a habitable environment for future generations of people. Both groups of people want to "save the planet", but for very different reasons.


Here’s the thing. In this thread, I provided scientific evidence of a potential environmental catastrophe, along with recommended solutions. As you have presented no evidence to dispute that, and have instead ranted about off-topic things, I take it then that you have conceded the point?


I think my responses have indeed been on topic since they deal with "Climate Change" and the claim that humans will suffer if something isn't done to reverse things.

I will not live in constant fear and panic because some people think I should in the name of a "Climate Crisis". That's my choice as a free human being.



beneficii
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 May 2005
Age: 42
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,245

01 Dec 2019, 4:48 pm

Magna wrote:
beneficii wrote:
Magna wrote:
I don't know you from anyone. I brought it up because there are people that could be strictly devoted to preserving the planet itself rather than caring about the well being of humans in any way; and there are people that say they're devoted to preserving the planet for the purpose of securing a habitable environment for future generations of people. Both groups of people want to "save the planet", but for very different reasons.


Here’s the thing. In this thread, I provided scientific evidence of a potential environmental catastrophe, along with recommended solutions. As you have presented no evidence to dispute that, and have instead ranted about off-topic things, I take it then that you have conceded the point?


I think my responses have indeed been on topic since they deal with "Climate Change" and the claim that humans will suffer if something isn't done to reverse things.

I will not live in constant fear and panic because some people think I should in the name of a "Climate Crisis". That's my choice as a free human being.


I think you're taking the title literally, and that's OK. What it means, is that we need to immediately enact policy at the national and global levels to address this problem. There are a number of policy solutions that are recommended in the articles I presented. As long as we're doing that, there will be no need to panic.


_________________
"You have a responsibility to consider all sides of a problem and a responsibility to make a judgment and a responsibility to care for all involved." --Ian Danskin


EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,828
Location: Twin Peaks

01 Dec 2019, 8:15 pm

It has already been established in other it's time to panic threads, that those who post them want you to vote for the left.



beneficii
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 May 2005
Age: 42
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,245

01 Dec 2019, 8:49 pm

EzraS wrote:
It has already been established in other it's time to panic threads, that those who post them want you to vote for the left.


Or, failing that, for the current administration to stop its denialism and actually implement the policy recommendations.

Why doesn't the right ever seem to want to implement any of the policy recommendations? Serious question.


_________________
"You have a responsibility to consider all sides of a problem and a responsibility to make a judgment and a responsibility to care for all involved." --Ian Danskin


Magna
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jun 2018
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,932

01 Dec 2019, 9:30 pm

I skimmed the article you posted, but I couldn't find the "policy recommendations". What "policy recommendations" are given? It doesn't interest me enough to read through an entire article or multiple articles.



beneficii
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 May 2005
Age: 42
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,245

01 Dec 2019, 9:36 pm

Magna wrote:
I skimmed the article you posted, but I couldn't find the "policy recommendations". What "policy recommendations" are given? It doesn't interest me enough to read through an entire article or multiple articles.


The policy recommendation is to work to reduce carbon emissions and aim for zero emissions by 2050.


_________________
"You have a responsibility to consider all sides of a problem and a responsibility to make a judgment and a responsibility to care for all involved." --Ian Danskin


Magna
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jun 2018
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,932

01 Dec 2019, 9:39 pm

I've said this multiple times in multiple threads on this topic over the last year and half:

What are some specific examples, concrete examples of how we're supposed to do that?



beneficii
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 May 2005
Age: 42
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,245

01 Dec 2019, 9:46 pm

Magna wrote:
I've said this multiple times in multiple threads on this topic over the last year and half:

What are some specific examples, concrete examples of how we're supposed to do that?


One way is through cap and trade, where you put a hard limit on the amount of carbon emissions in industry each year. You then sell certificates, which are transferable and can be traded, for those emissions. Basically, industry will need to buy those certificates before they can emit carbon and only as much as is allowed on those certificates.

Another way is to fund alternative energy projects. The Obama Administration, which was not able to get anywhere on cap and trade, did fund some of those. Their status is unclear under the Trump Administration:

https://www.nap.edu/read/23490/chapter/8

So those are some examples.


_________________
"You have a responsibility to consider all sides of a problem and a responsibility to make a judgment and a responsibility to care for all involved." --Ian Danskin


Magna
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jun 2018
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,932

01 Dec 2019, 9:53 pm

Would Chinese, Russian and Indian industries participate in purchasing the certificates?



EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,828
Location: Twin Peaks

01 Dec 2019, 10:02 pm

beneficii wrote:
EzraS wrote:
It has already been established in other it's time to panic threads, that those who post them want you to vote for the left.


Or, failing that, for the current administration to stop its denialism and actually implement the policy recommendations.

Why doesn't the right ever seem to want to implement any of the policy recommendations? Serious question.


So you're using WP to campaign for the left.