Please tell me you have a better solution than "So I guess in 50-100 years all hell will have broken loose, with massive, massive refugee crises in every country away from the coast. Guess the best thing to is nothing and not eveb try, that's it for humanity, but if the government tries to fix it, that's tyranny or something"
I'm serious, I suspect that's not what you're saying, right?
I dont thinks its manmade. Keeping the environment clean surely is a good thing but spending tons of money in the pretext of looming doom if we do not cut down carbon dioxide emmissions is hella dumb.
Goverment trying to fix things usually goes bad. Especially in this case. An unproven theory leads to huge wealth incremation and wind turbines for example are a huge burden on the environment by themselves.
How are wind turbines, that kill a bird every now and then, a bigger "burden on the environment" than this:
Certainly in uncorrupted countries like those in Western Europe, our water supply is safe, we don't have toxic chemicals dumped in the rivers, there's no more harmful lead in basically everything, etc. Even the quite corrupt US government has achieved some of those
You've seen the graphs: CO2 levels went up drastically since the industrialization, to unprecedented levels in the last hunderds of thousands of years:
In the last 100 years, we have changed the CO2 levels more than the atmosphere has been changed in hunderds of thousands of years before. And here's the important part: Those processes always took thousands of year, now that's within one person's lifetime.
You also can't deny that burning fossil fuels DEFINITELY emits CO2 into the atmosphere, right? So how is it so unbelievable that we can drastically change the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere?
Now, the real question is: Does the obviously mandmade drastically increased CO2 level lead to higher temperatures? Well, there is very clearly an unprecedented change in global temperatures today, that has never been seen before in the last thousands of years:
Allow me to return back to Germany before to formulate adequate answers on all your replies, i do not want to let this opportunity for good discussion slip :)
Now, the real question is: Does the obviously mandmade drastically increased CO2 level lead to higher temperatures?
When I look at these graphs it´s undeniable that the CO2 levels have risen. It is also undeniable that we emmit much more then we did hundred years ago.
What i miss is the hard proof of it being 1)manmade and 2) how CO2 changes the climate. Is it getting hotter, is it getting colder? The scientist supporting your thesis are pretty much flip flopping on that.
Please tell me you have a better solution than "So I guess in 50-100 years all hell will have broken loose, with massive, massive refugee crises in every country away from the coast. Guess the best thing to is nothing and not eveb try, that's it for humanity, but if the government tries to fix it, that's tyranny or something"
I'm serious, I suspect that's not what you're saying, right?
I dont thinks its manmade. Keeping the environment clean surely is a good thing but spending tons of money in the pretext of looming doom if we do not cut down carbon dioxide emmissions is hella dumb.
Goverment trying to fix things usually goes bad. Especially in this case. An unproven theory leads to huge wealth incremation and wind turbines for example are a huge burden on the environment by themselves.
How are wind turbines, that kill a bird every now and then, a bigger "burden on the environment" than this:
Certainly in uncorrupted countries like those in Western Europe, our water supply is safe, we don't have toxic chemicals dumped in the rivers, there's no more harmful lead in basically everything, etc. Even the quite corrupt US government has achieved some of those
You've seen the graphs: CO2 levels went up drastically since the industrialization, to unprecedented levels in the last hunderds of thousands of years:
In the last 100 years, we have changed the CO2 levels more than the atmosphere has been changed in hunderds of thousands of years before. And here's the important part: Those processes always took thousands of year, now that's within one person's lifetime.
You also can't deny that burning fossil fuels DEFINITELY emits CO2 into the atmosphere, right? So how is it so unbelievable that we can drastically change the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere?
Now, the real question is: Does the obviously mandmade drastically increased CO2 level lead to higher temperatures? Well, there is very clearly an unprecedented change in global temperatures today, that has never been seen before in the last thousands of years:
Allow me to return back to Germany before to formulate adequate answers on all your replies, i do not want to let this opportunity for good discussion slip :)
Cheers
Now, the real question is: Does the obviously mandmade drastically increased CO2 level lead to higher temperatures?
When I look at these graphs it´s undeniable that the CO2 levels have risen. It is also undeniable that we emmit much more then we did hundred years ago.
What i miss is the hard proof of it being 1)manmade and 2) how CO2 changes the climate. Is it getting hotter, is it getting colder? The scientist supporting your thesis are pretty much flip flopping on that.