Climate Change
Out of context: Reply #129
- Started
- Last post
- 538 Responses
- deathboy-7
Theres 2 types that puzzle me
1) Climate change deniers. Now I think this group is more likely misunderstood do to absurd nature of believing such a thing. I could be wrong, but I think this camp is more common sense driven. Lived in an area 30-40 years and has seen the weather and sees little correlation to the narrative man and extent he has altered the environment.
2) Climate controllers who believe they can stop climate change through man made laws and actions.... now this group I find the crazier of the two. We know climate changed before man. History. And now we have people telling us we can control it by adopting varying rules.... Seems a little suspect right? BS detector pinging? Thinking a little highly of our capabilities like a dotcom company who thinks they're changing the world?
I prefer choosing 3
3) we will die as a species more than likely, wether it be weather or by our own hand. chasing hubris is simply a power game for politicians and corps. Not trying to tax countries burning our computers. Its best to practice the 3 Rs where possible, but to penalize ppl or tax them to alleviate fears of the rich with more assets and property to fear about... thats bullshit. And the whole pitch being sold is as educated as a flat earth sale. And yes i expect the ocean will swallow NY one day and i find no need to panic about it. Thats life. And i do feel that way because i have no assets there. And not going to irrationally try to protect them. If i did thought i still wouldn't be a stupid child and think stupid laws would make a difference... idiots...
- you are the personification of everything wrong with mankind. your handle suits you well!hotroddy
- cool bro. of course interpretation of my handle is more a reflection of your meaning. which you'd need to define. im all wise and comfy not runnin from death?deathboy
- Like I said before, laws made a difference with ozone layer depletion. Which you tried to refute with a forbes article that had a clickbait title.T-Dawg
- Are you 1) an ozone layer denier? 2) An ozone layer controller? or do you still prefer choosing 3) we will die as a species anyways.T-Dawg
- Which you're still perfectly entitled to do, but seems silly when we look at this past example of a large scale air pollution measure.T-Dawg
- there's tons of evidence to backup claims of climate control and our man-made impact on its change ... but only anecdotes and confusion from deniersmonospaced
- Denying a global environmental crisis where millions could die because politicians and corporations told you to is pretty much the definition of sheeplikeyuekit
- thinking...maybe it's time to reevaluate your other beliefs too if you genuinely were fooled by this.yuekit
- tdawg did you read past the headline on the forbes article have an issue on it pertaining to content other than headline in anyway to ozone layer?deathboy
- mono how hard is it and costly to accurately control climate in a house, building? Do you really think we could control climate despite larger shit like EMdeathboy
- and orbits? Are you one of those believers we can stop climate change?deathboy
- ukit. im not denying any crisis of any sort. im like meh on it. and more denying any ability to change or altar it. and realizing by holding it as some greatdeathboy
- value or thing to pursue politically we are going to sacrifice many. Not the rich but the poor. Here's a thought you should really think about with escalationdeathboy
- IF man-made climate change is the beast to destroy, than the most efficient method would be to destroy man and limit their numbersdeathboy
- theres no centralized plan yet, but just wait for it and its going to be dark ages shit if common sense doesn't kick indeathboy
- lol death did YOU read the article? Because the scientist who's study the article was based on is quoted IN THE ARTICLE saying the measures were workingT-Dawg
- I already brought this up, but I'm learning now that you're more interested in being heard than listening.T-Dawg
- It's all starting to make sense now. I suspected there might be an ego issue when you went into an unrequested explanation of your username handle.T-Dawg
- You know what, forget that. I shouldn't have posted that last comment. I apologize. You're allowed to be who you are.T-Dawg
- Just find it silly that we already went through this discussion already, and I'm not going to dig out the previous conversation.T-Dawg
- It's like conversing with a brick wall.T-Dawg
- hehe got frustrated. it happens.T-Dawg
- But seriously, go back and re-read the article you posted.T-Dawg
- Read the scientist's take on the study at the bottom.T-Dawg
- *On his own studyT-Dawg
- To be honest I'd don't recall the conversation. Have to see what I wrote. Was it this article? https://www.forbes.c…deathboy
- Where he says the motreal protocol seems to be working but there is a lot of unknowns and don't know if its related to faster ozone depletion in lower?deathboy
- ha i just read the unrequested user handle. no apologies necessary. but i'm well aware of how my handle can be perceived by othersdeathboy
- sometimes remind ppl what it might mean to me is far different than they may perceive. but i do have a healthy ego. im confident in what i know anddeathboy
- MORE importantly in what I DON'T. But its no ego like i need a big truck or hear myself. Only thing actually care about is learning and growingdeathboy
- Yup, that's the one, good find! I just wanted to reiterate: This was an inter-governmental treaty, with demonstrable evidence that we have a certainT-Dawg
- amount of control over global atmosphere.T-Dawg
- And we can definitely say that we were the primary cause of the rapid atmospheric deterioration before measures were taken.T-Dawg
- To me, this seems like history repeating concerning the climate change debate. With a more sensationalized and polarized media behind both sides of the issue.T-Dawg
- It not the same exact issue, but one is not that far a jump from the other.T-Dawg
- See I'm not full on board with we have definitive control of atmosphere. Or even the effects of the protocol. Even in the forbes many questions remaindeathboy
- The thinning of the ozone layer also seemed to have stop early 1990s before the protocol got tight. i wouldnt be surprised if their is false correlationdeathboy
- with the limited data. I get it you have to make hypothesis with what you know but those are always changing with new info.deathboy
- Holy fuckballs. You just compared climate control of a planet to a building. Exposing you have no real grasp on the subject in the first place. #entrophymonospaced
- wow... and you don't even grasp the comparison... haha ignorance is bliss. im almost jealous of our naivetydeathboy