What does it take for America to accept the climate science and get serious about CO2 emissions?

What does it take for America to accept the climate science and get serious about CO2 emissions?

Attached: mugyldpvfk321.jpg (1024x717, 236K)

Other urls found in this thread:

foxnews.com/science/mass-extinction-great-dying-could-happen-again-scientists-warn
motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2018/12/we-need-a-climate-miracle-would-you-spend-500-billion-per-year-to-get-one/
davidbrin.com/nonfiction/climatechange2.html
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Realistically? Have China and India implement those measures first. It's a standoff. America also knows that artificially limiting their industry output would mean nothing if China and India kept continuing churning out the majority of smoke.

War

hey guys
*gets on jet for the third time today*
obama here
*pulls up in convoy of Yukons*
Global warming is a FACT
*signs trade deal with china*

The fact that they caused the worst mass extinction in earth's history.

foxnews.com/science/mass-extinction-great-dying-could-happen-again-scientists-warn

Attached: Extinction_intensity.svg.png (797x486, 48K)

Who says the left can't meme.

If it gets too bad we can just turn the loose CO2 into hydrocarbons

same thing as niggers becoming smart

I'm not sure an argument like that comic can earnestly be made after last years Christmas.

Quit using lysenkoist tier arguments and appeals to emotions. The climate has never existed in a state of perpetually good conditions, some places have always became unlivable, fertile lands became deserts, colder areas opened up to habitation and agriculture, civilizations were swalloed up by the seas. They did not have heavy industry like we do, but they still vanished regardless of whatever effort they put forth, most likely doing the only thing possible against an unstoppable force such as nature, LEAVING A PLACE THAT IS NO LONGER HABITABLE INSTEAD OF PRETENDING THEY CAN SAVE IT, ESPECIALLY BY THROWING SHEKELS AT IT.

Attached: dwarka.jpg (750x498, 61K)

Yeah, I actually liked that one. Rather clever, lol. Still stupid. I've had so many years before where it didn't snow on Christmas. They act like it's something out of this world

Middle East used to be one of the greenest places on earth until earth happened to it. The ridiculous amount of oil is proof. Now it's just sand and sand people

>US does better on meeting the Paris climate goals than any other nation
>US only major nation not in it

haha you guys are literally paying billions for NOTHING lmao what a bunch of dumb faggots lol get on our level.

not even trying here and still beating you shits

>continues that have polluted for less time and contributed less pollution must make an equal contribution
why?
>if you change your energy generation and build public transportation you will limit your industry output
wut
why aren't you burning things?
>lysenkoist tier arguments
wut
>The climate has never existed in a state of perpetually good conditions, some places have always became unlivable, fertile lands became deserts, colder areas opened up to habitation and agriculture,
RATE
OF
CHANGE
How about you not argue in Bad Faith you fucking retard?
>the solution is to just pack up and move elsewhere YOLO
Rather than trying to avert the problem you're fine with MILLIONS of Bangladeshi, Indians, and Sri Lankans moving to Europe and America when their land becomes inundated then?

The Mongols destroyed the canals and aqueducts that had existed since the Babylonians

You fucking R E T A R D

Attached: 1536094412549.png (515x821, 59K)

We kill them if they try otherwise we die, there is nothing that can be done to stop the climate from changing. No amount of money or even mega projects or deindustrialization can stop it. It's either our death or theirs.

Nothing. America already accepts the science but we'll figuratively and literally be damned if we're going to sacrifice a single penny to cut emissions. It's why I think nuclear power that's as cheap or cheaper per kWh than fossil fuels is the only way forward. Not only does it make the transition palatable but crucially makes the several trillion dollars in still-buried oil/coal reserves mostly worthless to extract.
motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2018/12/we-need-a-climate-miracle-would-you-spend-500-billion-per-year-to-get-one/

Attached: lftr.png (858x474, 129K)

>LEAVING A PLACE THAT IS NO LONGER HABITABLE INSTEAD OF PRETENDING THEY CAN SAVE IT, ESPECIALLY BY THROWING SHEKELS AT IT.
>but if they come out place we will kill them
Well this is a serious argument that has been thought out be a rational adult

>there is nothing that can be done to stop the climate from changing.
CO2 emissions could be reduced

>deindustrialization
Who suggested that? Not me.
That is the second time I have seen this claim banded about, another user said something about limiting industrial output.
Is this a new thing on the reactionary right, to misperceive calls for taking action on climate change as to mean deindustrialising?

>America already accepts the science
The president, congress, and senate reject it and reject taking any action
Several state legislatures have forbidden government employees from mentioning it or making plans for how to contend with it

>but we'll figuratively and literally be damned if we're going to sacrifice a single penny to cut emissions
oh noes the fat cat businessman wont have as much money!

Building different alternative technology and infrastructure would generate growth and employ people
Nuclear as you mention, public transportation, weatherising homes, etc

Water vapor is, by far, the greenhouse gas with the greatest effect on Earth's climate. CO2 is only a small portion of greenhouse gasses which affect the climate. Man-made CO2 is a tiny fraction of total CO2 production.
>muh man-made climate change

>The president, congress, and senate reject it and reject taking any action
>Several state legislatures have forbidden government employees from mentioning it or making plans for how to contend with it
It's kayfabe They are all just pretending not to believe in it since solving it will cost a lot of money

>Building different alternative technology and infrastructure would generate growth and employ people
>Nuclear as you mention, public transportation, weatherising homes, etc
It will goes growth in some areas but but marked declines in others whose vested interested are challenged by it. Big Windmill isn't as rich or influential as Big Oil.

>CO2 emissions could be reduced

no reason to do that

you have no proof

you are just a shill

As the oceans heat up as a result of the climate change caused by CO2 there will be more water vapor in the atmosphere - itself a greenhouse gas and causing GREATER INCREASES in temperatures
Do you have any other circular logic based on turning the byproducts of our actions upside down? Maybe cite the methane leaking out of the thawing permafrost?

the people affected by the climate fraud taxes are the little people not the rich.They can still afford the cars, the planes and the big houses.

So thats what you are.A shill for rich people

You're probably right that they are lying charlatans doing it for money or fear of being primaried against by the radicals the fossil fuel industry support
Which is really disgusting and shows what awful people they are, and worthy of prosecution or worse when the shit hits the fan

>it will cost a lot of money
oh noes the fossil fuel giant has a little less money the sky is falling! help!

>you have no proof
The science is settled on the emission of CO2 and global warming and climate change
If you want to argue that you should also go argue with flat earthers

build public transportation
build alternate energy production
tax the rich

>oceans heat up, evaporate faster
>water vapor in atmosphere condenses into clouds
>clouds block sunlight, cooling earth's surface
>oceans cool off, evaporate less
>fewer and thinner clouds form
>more sunlight gets through atmosphere
>oceans heat up, evaporate faster

>something condenses as soon as it has evaporated

Attached: MAX.jpg (298x379, 9K)

Attached: strawman.jpg (600x450, 85K)

>if you point out I am wrong you're strawmaning

aside from the fact that it doesn't immediately condense, in a warmer atmosphere it will take longer before it does and remain a vapor

you people oppose nuclear at every turn despite being the best alternate energy ever

and they knocked down my shitty walls!

Yes this is your fantasy world.In the real world people can´t pay for energy, cant afford a car and gas and you dont care.
Tax the rich ? You mean like George Soros ?

>agree with nuclear power
>responds to this post by saying you people oppose nuclear power

Attached: lisa what.png (284x337, 142K)

you stil have no proof provided that anthropogenic co2 is responsible for warming oceans.
Thats just your assumption.

the only solution is to drop some nukes on china and india, but nobody wants to implant that idea for some reason

You have no proof the earth is round.
Thats just your assumption.

They're not the ones doing all the consuming driving this
The West is
What the do produce is the result of our outsourcing production there
The pollute to produce our consumer goods

if your theory was valid your side would be able to have climate models that can actually model the climate in the future.Which you cant because you are wrong.No proof of anything.
1.Nobody knows if the rise of CO2 in the air is due to human activity
2.Nobody knows if the warming is due to the increase in CO2 or even because of anthropogenic CO2.
3.Draughts,Hurricances,Flood are the outcomes of a chaotic system which can´t be individually contributed to anthropogenic CO2.
4.Nothing of the climate we have today is unusual or dangerous.Climate change always happen.Sometimes it warms , sometimes it cools.Sometimes fast, sometime longer.
So there is no suggestion that would support your argument.
5.What is suspicion though is that the efforts to battle an anthropogenic climate change will give a globalist elite unlimted power to control and tax and therefore people are correct to question your ilk motives.
6.If your arguments were sincere there would be no need to supress antagonistic opinions, to defund,harass,defame,shame and gaslight.
The reason why your side feels a need to do this points to sinister motives.

the power rest with big banking not with real industry but marx never understood that or never wanted to understand that.
Unless you want to tax Banks and Speculation nothing of what you say makes sense.
So go on.Demand taxing Goldman Sachs and Co.

Make rape legal and I'll drop my CO2 emissions.

if your side were valid you'd be able to prove the earth was round
you cant avoid property tax

Everyone in the Third World should be massacred for what they've done.

Attached: 1542378413529.jpg (719x750, 236K)

>shift manufacturing to another country
>tell that country to stop polluting
hmm

Makes me happy to know that once white people are extinct the remaining shitskins will choke in their garbage anyway.

We manage to have clean air and rivers, you irresponsible chink shill.

Attached: 10 Rivers Contribute Most of the Plastic in the Oceans.png (2147x6217, 3.23M)

Because you created the EPA and instituted environmental regulations
Which businesses hate and have lobbied against for years, those same business get to pollute all they want in China
But not to worry, Trump says the level of clean is too high and its okay to start polluting again
Up to 90% of river ways providing your drinking water could soon be dumping grounds for industrial waste

Bullshit. We have tons of our own manufacturing and construction. Same goes for the rest of the western world. We're just not retards who fuck up everything around us.

It wont change unless something is invented that suddenly makes it not an economic burden to not pollute.

Gas your self. Fucking climate radicals are subhuman scum

Attached: pino1.jpg (600x425, 25K)

Attached: edgy.jpg (240x210, 16K)

Nailed it.

Attached: nyd82khwx71z.png (907x587, 415K)

>hurr durr redistributing

Why is it so hard to accept that someone can accept the data on the changing climate but not be all for the alarmist reaction of smothering modern conveniences and industry? I'd be all for tax deductibles and even credits for people to incorporate more energy efficient things in their homes and lives. Solar panels on the roof. Hybrid cars. Mass adoption of little things add up. But this idea that a passed law is suddenly going to save the Earth and instantly push us into an era of renewable energy is retarded. Especially when it leads to more economic strife for the middle and lower classes.

All of your deaths might convince me so get to work

>1. Nobody knows if the rise of CO2 in the air is due to human activity
We can by comparing the occurence of different carbon isotopes in the air.
>2. Nobody knows if the warming is due to the increase in CO2 or even because of anthropogenic CO2.
We know that it's at the very least a factor since we know that it acts as a greenhouse gas.
>3. Draughts,Hurricances,Flood are the outcomes of a chaotic system which can´t be individually contributed to anthropogenic CO2.
Hurricanes are correlated with higher ocean temperature. Anthropogenic CO2 is at least a factor in rising ocean temperature.
>4. Nothing of the climate we have today is unusual or dangerous. Climate change always happen.Sometimes it warms , sometimes it cools. Sometimes fast, sometime longer. So there is no suggestion that would support your argument.
Probably not as dramatic for humans as it's made out to be since we can adapt easily, but for the rest of the ecosystem. Check out what even slightly rising sea temperatures do to coral reefs

>alarmist
lol
>smothering modern conveniences and industry
nobody has suggested that you fossil fuel cock sucking dweeb
YOU ARE THE ONE BEING AN ALARMIST lying like this and misrepresenting the fax
>I'd be all for tax deductibles and even credits for people to incorporate more energy efficient things in their homes and lives. Solar panels on the roof. Hybrid cars. Mass adoption of little things add up.
This is suggested and the right go and oppose it
A problem here though is it is focused only on individual choice
When the majority of emissions come from industrial scale sources
Your personal choices cant shut down a coal power station
Your personal choices cant build a public transit system
>passing a law
said who?
But maybe it would
If we decide to shut down coal by date X that would prompt changes
>Especially when it leads to more economic strife for the middle and lower classes.
says the people opposed to public transportation and other initiatives that would help middle and lower classes and are concerned only about protecting their own riches

Your whole position is a calculated position of deception and gaslighting with paranoid accusations and topic changing, the intention is to delay and obfuscate

davidbrin.com/nonfiction/climatechange2.html
>Skeptics vs Deniers
please read

it is very dramatic because he plays the game of saying "the climate is always changing" but ignores THE RATE OF CHANGE because he is not serious and an idiot
There are many low lying coastal regions housing millions of people
There are equatorial regions where millions live
Sea level rises will effect this, heat waves will effect this
Changes in climatic paterns will effect growing seasons and rain fall and impact on farming regions and availabilty of fresh water for irrigation and drinking

first off ur memeflag is gay
second the only thing any government wants to do about it is tax co2
third look at the ice core data before making a stupid thread

Attached: 1537747630317.jpg (500x498, 255K)

if you're so furious about legislation how do you propose to address matters like Palm Oil plantations destroying Orangutan habitat?
Just click your heels together and whisper "the free market will fix it the free market will fix it"?

Attached: 1544528434196.jpg (1068x601, 115K)

>I am triggered by a flag
go your safe space then
>tax
but they're not and they have rejected this thanks to fossil fuel lobbying so stop projecting NWO gaslighting lies drip fed to you by fossil fuel funded think tanks and corporate friendly media
ice core data shows us that the current RATE OF CHANGE is entirely unprecedented

Thinking I care if humans continue to live in this universe.... I pray for the giant meteor hitting Yellowstone every night before bed. We are cancer

Who cares? We will all be dead by the time anything serious would happen

see

I think the left and right agree climite change exists.
Whether climate change is man-made or not lies the issue.

This user gets it.

>I am triggered by a flag
no i just think its phony and makes you look gay. im trying to advise.
>tax
wtf do u think is happening in france? the un is pushing this and youre just shilling for em

Attached: article13test3.jpg (192x179, 30K)

"Climate science" orginated from USA and their gov knows perfectly well that fighting CO2 emissions is complete bullshit.
People screaching about CO2 are complete fucking idiots repeating shit they dont understand.
As disclaimer, I'll add that climate is indeed changing and human activity is a factor in it but CO2 is just a boogyman for the masses.

I think the biggest problem with the whole "is climate change real?" debate is that most people that says it's true are often the same people that takes private jets to attend to meetings, using the most polluting materials and such in their every day life. They are the nr 1 biggest hypocrites that does not learn as they live, and meanwhile they want the working people to be taxed like hell and not afford stuff like driving cars while they themselves have the luxury to take private jets every week.

Take the minister of Swedish "environment" political party. They take private jets to attend to meeting, used an outlawed boat paint that was extremely toxic to the environment.

Most people don't eat up this shit, the same people that tells everyone how dangerous it is to pollute and how we must take care of the planet are the same type of people that pollute the most themselves.