A spammer hit this 2019 post and it triggered Jerry to comment.
Well, since this troll has re-opened the topic, let's take another view of this "problem." I contend it is not a problem at all, and that all the real data I can see tells me the "catastrophe" simply isn't going to happen, and that if it does it will not be "manmade" and therefore it is nothing we can actually "do something" about. Even the IPCC has lowered its average "Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity" to something almost NON-catastrophic (yet still too high by all research).
But let us assume for the moment that your blind faith belief in Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming is somehow real, and that we MUST "do something." Good news, we are actually doing it! Bad news, it not only hasn't made a dime's worth of difference except that it costs more and results in the occasional brownout or worse. But let's overlook that, too, and rush headlong into the bright future of 100% "renewable energy" now being mandated by our governments. Can I assume that they will also mandate that the Earth somehow produce somewhere between 200% and 1700% of the known reserves of the minerals required? If they can do that, then why not simply mandate that the seas and temperatures cease to rise?
7 comments:
"the Earth somehow produce somewhere between 200% and 1700% of the known reserves of the minerals required?"
Please explain.
The Republican approach to any issue is twofold. The first thing they do is deny the issue exists; the second thing they do is say that while it does exist, there isn't anything we can do about it. If those two things fail, the last Republican solution is to build a fence around it, sometimes metaphorical, sometimes all too real.
Environmentally, something is up. We see this in insurance rates. Just try to get your cute coastal condo in Florida Isinsured against flood damage for anything less than a fortune. They don't have an income tax down there but you do pay for all that sunshine in other ways.
Is there anything we can do about climate change? My guess is that anything we do is too late. By putting off the decision until we had all the information, we made the decision by default. We made it in the 1990s when Rush Limbaugh came on the air, and Newt Gingrich became speaker. The Supreme Court helped make the decision for us when they equated money with free speech, effectively turning our elections over to the rich. At this point, we can only hope they were right.
--Hiram
I think they like denying science.
They probably were happy with lead in our paint and gas.
I think Republicans just like to deny. This goes for elections just as much as it does for science. Like William F. Buckley, faced with the future, the Republican is to shout out, "stop". And t here are reasons why this lack of action is appealing. For one thing, doing nothing is a lot easier than doing something, at least in the short term. For another, it is hard to blame people for things when they do nothing. It is in the nature of things that if you do something it is rarely enough although it is sometimes to much, and it is almost always the case that with hindsight way can always be found with which it could have done better. Nothing is easier to second guess than the past.
--Hiram
Here we go again. You folks not only want to deny the science, including that from the IPCC, EPA, NASA and Hadley, you wish to deny basic math, physics, and even the reality that 100% renewables from wind and solar is physically impossible! Tell me, please, how you propose to get around physical impossibility? Where does the magic happen, and when?
Republicans like to complain that a glass isn't a hundred percent full, when they wouldn't put any fluid in the glass at all. There are no totally efficient panaceas, no complete solutions to anything. Nothing is certain, data is always incomplete, and rarely are there easy answers to anything. Setting impossibly high benchmarks to anything rarely helps us solve a problem.
The fact that life is uncertain is just as much of decisions to do nothing as it is to do something. If we require certainty in order to make decisions, we will find ourselves in a twilight zone of reason where we both make and not make decisions, and everyone gets headaches because of it.
I do know Trump voters watched "The Apprentice" and thought it was real. For myself, this makes me hesitant to take advice from them.
==Hiram
Jerry, I am still waiting for some clarification.
Hiram, They do not seem to understand the idea of "directionally correct".
They apparently are fine burning at ever higher rates.
Post a Comment