Are both sides full of excrement when it comes to climate change?

[NiftyNiblick]

The conservatives deny human causation,
which is scientifically preposterous.

The way we caused it, however, and this is obvious,
was by excessive procreation and overpopulation.

Everything else is charging the symptoms with being the cause.

It would be stupid to think that humans should live like so many Woodstock hippies
in order to not pollute the planet.

Nobody is willing to address the OVERPOPULATION ISSUE, however.
That's the REAL Inconvenient Truth.

If we don't have the stones to do that,
I favor just living however the hell we want, environment be damned,
because all of the WOKE solutions won't lead to jack shit.

I'm too deep into my life to keep my house at 90º in the summer and 55º in the winter
or to drive some kind of stupid car that I don't want.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

The conservatives deny human causation,
which is scientifically preposterous.

The way we caused it, however, and this is obvious,
was by excessive procreation and overpopulation.

Everything else is charging the symptoms with being the cause.

It would be stupid to think that humans should live like so many Woodstock hippies
in order to not pollute the planet.

Nobody is willing to address the OVERPOPULATION ISSUE, however.
That's the REAL Inconvenient Truth.

If we don't have the stones to do that,
I favor just living however the hell we want, environment be damned,
because all of the WOKE solutions won't lead to jack shit.

I'm too deep into my life to keep my house at 90º in the summer and 55º in the winter
or to drive some kind of stupid car that I don't want.

The Left has latched onto Gorebal Warming as a means to bring about political and social changes they want. It is an excuse, not science, not a consensus--unless you are a Leftist then it is a consensus that Leftist ideas should be pushed on everyone.

If the Gorebal Warming crowd, like that little Swedish troll and her minions are, were truly concerned about the climate and not Leftist politics, they'd be railing against aircraft contrails that are easily eliminated at little cost. But that would defeat their plan to force social and economic change on the planet.

https://e360.yale.edu/features/how-airplane-contrails-are-helping-make-the-planet-warmer
https://www.rmets.org/metmatters/contrail-clouds-and-climate-change
https://www.bing.com/search?pglt=41...=edge..69i57j0l8.6575j0j1&FORM=ANNTA1&PC=DCTS
https://www.earthdata.nasa.gov/learn/sensing-our-planet/on-the-trail-of-contrails

The science says they have a big effect, possibly greater than anthropogenic CO2, on the atmosphere. But these aren't something that can be used to force societal change, so they are ignored.

Gorebal Warming is about politics, not the environment.

 

[Saint Guinefort]

The conservatives deny human causation,
which is scientifically preposterous.

The way we caused it, however, and this is obvious,
was by excessive procreation and overpopulation.

Everything else is charging the symptoms with being the cause.

It would be stupid to think that humans should live like so many Woodstock hippies
in order to not pollute the planet.

Nobody is willing to address the OVERPOPULATION ISSUE, however.
That's the REAL Inconvenient Truth.

If we don't have the stones to do that,
I favor just living however the hell we want, environment be damned,
because all of the WOKE solutions won't lead to jack shit.

I'm too deep into my life to keep my house at 90º in the summer and 55º in the winter
or to drive some kind of stupid car that I don't want.

Actually those two are the same issue. AGW (Climate change) is a function of overuse of fossil fuels and land use changes (eg deforestation) on large scales. Those large scales are a function of the addressable market...in other words: the people.

Either issue will require extreme solutions that few if any actually have the guts for. One of the sets of solutions is more humane overall but harder economically.

At the end of the day, though, we are stupid animals and we'll just go ahead and decimate our societies by ignoring all the science anyway. If the solution didn't have any "costs" we'd do it. If it has even a modest cost we as humans seem incapable of responding rationally.

 

[NiftyNiblick]

The Left has latched onto Gorebal Warming as a means to bring about political and social changes they want. It is an excuse, not science, not a consensus--unless you are a Leftist then it is a consensus that Leftist ideas should be pushed on everyone.

If the Gorebal Warming crowd, like that little Swedish troll and her minions are, were truly concerned about the climate and not Leftist politics, they'd be railing against aircraft contrails that are easily eliminated at little cost. But that would defeat their plan to force social and economic change on the planet.

https://e360.yale.edu/features/how-airplane-contrails-are-helping-make-the-planet-warmer
https://www.rmets.org/metmatters/contrail-clouds-and-climate-change
https://www.bing.com/search?pglt=41...=edge..69i57j0l8.6575j0j1&FORM=ANNTA1&PC=DCTS
https://www.earthdata.nasa.gov/learn/sensing-our-planet/on-the-trail-of-contrails

The science says they have a big effect, possibly greater than anthropogenic CO2, on the atmosphere. But these aren't something that can be used to force societal change, so they are ignored.

Gorebal Warming is about politics, not the environment.

Global Warning is both man made and destructive to the environment according to valid science.

We do desperately need radical social and economic changes on this planet
but compromises in the standard of living aren't part of the change we need.

The United Nations should be able to ENFORCE China's old one child policy on the entire globe.
That's the REAL answer, and even then, it might be too late.

We've fucked ourselves into dystopia,
when all we really had to do was throw a fucking bag on it.
And the poor, globally, were probably the worst offenders.

Probably too late now.

At my age, I'm going to keep my house at whatever temperature I want,
drive whatever kind of car that I want,
and eat whatever the fuck I want as well.

What's MY downside to doing that?

 

[NiftyNiblick]

Actually those two are the same issue. AGW (Climate change) is a function of overuse of fossil fuels and land use changes (eg deforestation) on large scales. Those large scales are a function of the addressable market...in other words: the people.

Either issue will require extreme solutions that few if any actually have the guts for. One of the sets of solutions is more humane overall but harder economically.

At the end of the day, though, we are stupid animals and we'll just go ahead and decimate our societies by ignoring all the science anyway. If the solution didn't have any "costs" we'd do it. If it has even a modest cost we as humans seem incapable of responding rationally.

I'm now too old to be worried about it at this point.
I have no grandchildren to live in the post-apocalyptic dystopia.
I'm going to live the last chapter of my life as well as I can manage.

 

[Saint Guinefort]

I'm now too old to be worried about it at this point.
I have no grandchildren to live in the post-apocalyptic dystopia.
I'm going to live the last chapter of my life as well as I can manage.

That's good.

 

[IBDaMann]

Are both sides full of excrement when it comes to climate change?

There are far more than merely two sides. You have only chosen two incorrect views to compare.

The conservatives deny human causation,

Human causation of what? No human has ever formally and unambiguously defined the global climate in any way that doesn't violate physics right out of the starting gate. This is because Climate Change is a Marxist religion based on HATRED and intolerance, and religions never define their terms.

which is scientifically preposterous.

But then we have to realize that you are an undereducated leftist who doesn't even know what science is. Let's let that sink in. You are presumably a grown adult, and you never learned what science is. I bet you take great pride in remaining completely ignorant on the matter. What you should have written, if you had any intention of being correct, was "Conservatives deny the existence of the Climate goddess and deny the fundamentalist dogma of my profound faith, which holds that the demonic "human activity" has the evil superpower to violate the laws of thermodynamics and to create energy out of nothing, both increasing the earth's average global temperature and generally spreading evil o'er the land, for which Climate serves Climate Justice and punishes humanity for its carbon sins."

Yes, conservatives generally mock the scientifically illiterate and mathematically incompetent, such as yourself, who are too stupid to ever call booooolsch't when you should, but who believe sincerely that their faith in Climate makes them science geniuses. Oh sure, you'll admit up front "I'm no scientist ... BUT ..." and then you'll proceed to pretend that you are a science genius and say things like "Not worshiping as I do is scientifically preposterous." Too funny.

While we're on the subject of your scientific illiteracy, what are some of your favorite Climate prayers? I like to survey the Climate faithful and keep my finger on the pulse of the trends in their church. A good one that was shared with me recently goes like this:

Mother Climate,
Controller of our precip,
Hallowed be thy name.
When Global Warming comes,
Thy will be done,
as the acidifying sea level rises.

There's a rosary for this, by the way. I should capture it in a motivational poster. It's truly beautiful.

The way we caused it, however, and this is obvious,
was by excessive procreation and overpopulation.

The profoundly religious, such as yourself, make unsupported assertions like this about the completely unfalsifiable and totally undefined, i.e. you gibber meaningless shit that nonetheless deeply resonates with your soul. Allow me to join in. Ummm, our carbon sins are totally ripping the moral fabric of our society to shreds ... and ... ummm ... capitalist GREED is killing us all with fossil fuels ... and ... ummm ... Chik-fil-A is preventing the UN from reaching its Climate goals.

How did I do?

Everything else is charging the symptoms with being the cause.

Everything else is simply obfuscation that you haven't defined a single thing and are merely raving incoherently, probably while foaming at the mouth.

Hint: you don't make any sense. Define your terms first.

It would be stupid to think that humans should live like so many Woodstock hippies
in order to not pollute the planet.

It would be stupid to write what you wrote without explaining what pollution has to do with anything you were talking about previously. You just kind of sprung it on us without warning. Is that because you are raving incoherently?

Nobody is willing to address the OVERPOPULATION ISSUE, however. That's the REAL Inconvenient Truth.

The inconvenient truth is that you haven't explained what overpopulation has to do with Climate Change. Remember, you haven't even told anyone what Climate Change supposedly is, or what the Global Climate is, and you are expecting everyone to connect the dots to overpopulation, which you haven't even shown is the case.

Do you think you might get around to defining your terms, supporting your assertions and explaining your argument? ... or is that considered "poor form" when one is raving incoherently.

If we don't have the stones to do that, ...

Who is "we"? Am I included? I'm guessing that not too many people will "have the stones" to carry out something that is only understood in your mind. It's OK to rave, but after you wipe the froth from the corner of your mouth and the spittle from your shirt, you really should make it a point to interpret your beautiful but unintelligible language.

I favor just living however the hell we want, environment be damned, because all of the WOKE solutions won't lead to jack shit.

If it's WOKE, it's not any sort of solution. It's a problem that needs to be solved or fixed, or at the very least, prevented from exacerbating other problems.

 

[NiftyNiblick]

There are far more than merely two sides. You have only chosen two incorrect views to compare.

I had forgotten all about this fucking idiot.

You're still around, EyeBee?
How've you been?

 

[IBDaMann]

Global Warning is both man made and destructive to the environment according to valid science.

TRANSLATION: My religious dogma, which is known as "The Thienth" holds that Global Warming is a mighty forcing/miracle that results from the demonic superpowers of "human activity."

Remember, you have no business commenting on what the actual body of science holds. Everything you have to say in that regard is summarily dismissed and the opposite is usually given consideration. You still haven't defined any of your religious terms, e.g. Climate, Climate Change, Global Warming, etc ...

Also, you wrote "according to valid science." What science do you believe is invalid? Just list it all here, in this thread.

We do desperately need radical social and economic changes on this planet but compromises in the standard of living aren't part of the change we need.

This is some seriously funny shit. Way too funny. I'm need to catch my breath.

First, who is "we"? Is this the Marxist "we" that means "other people besides me"? Am I included in this "we" because I really do not need any radical social and economic changes. In fact, I want my plain old ordinary unstolen free elections back.

Second, how do you imagine radical social and economic changes without lowering anyone's standard of living? ... or did you mean "compromises to your standard of living aren't what we need."?

The United Nations should be able to ENFORCE China's old one child policy on the entire globe.

Should? Did you use the word "should"? Let me get this straight, the UN should be able to enforce China's policy on the entire globe, yes? But of course! This is just common sense. It's so clear when you put it that way. The UN should definitely impose every country's policies onto every other country ... that makes so much sense ... or were you saying that the UN should only impose China's policies on the rest of the globe because that won't have any impact on anyone's standard of living?

That's the REAL answer, and even then, it might be too late.

This made my day.

We've fucked ourselves into dystopia,

We? Who is this "we"? Am I included in this "we"? What have I done to fuck you over?

If you wouldn't mind, go down the list of JPP members and specify how each one has fucked you over. That would add clarity to what you are saying.

when all we really had to do was throw a fucking bag on it.
And the poor, globally, were probably the worst offenders.

Aaaah, so you take the "Prosperity Gospel" view of your Climate Change faith. Interesting.

At my age, I'm going to keep my house at whatever temperature I want, drive whatever kind of car that I want, and eat whatever the fuck I want as well. What's MY downside to doing that?

When your time comes to be judged, your name will not be found in the Book of Climate Justice and you may never set foot in the promised land of Climate Ground Zero.

 

[IBDaMann]

I had forgotten all about this fucking idiot.

Please go back to forgetting about me. I'm not worth your time.

You're still around, EyeBee? How've you been?

Awesome! Thanks for asking. How's your religion working out for you? Uplifting?

As long as I have you, how much should my taxes be increased in order to solve the world's overpopulation problem?

 

[NiftyNiblick]

As long as I have you, how much should my taxes be increased in order to solve the world's overpopulation problem?

I'm a reasonable man as always, EyeBee.

Just give what you can afford.

 

[IBDaMann]

I'm a reasonable man as always, EyeBee. Just give what you can afford.

The problem is that the government will throw me in jail if the amount I determine I can afford is less than the amount they determine I must be taxed.

I was just wondering how much new taxation I should be supporting, because I really want to solve this existential crisis, although it might already be too late.

 

[NiftyNiblick]

The problem is that the government will throw me in jail if the amount I determine I can afford is less than the amount they determine I must be taxed. I was just wondering how much new taxation I should be supporting, because I really want to solve this existential crisis, although it might already be too late.

I would guess that assuming your income level is appropriate to your likely productivity,

you can just pay the FICA and you'll have done your part. Thank you.

In fact, we can just let Bezos and Musk kick in your share. Fuck them.

 

[IBDaMann]

In fact, we can just let Bezos and Musk kick in your share. Fuck them.

Why fuck them? Are they in the "to be demonized" class that your faith proselytizes? Did the value that Bezos added to society exceed your religion's permitted quantity?

 

[NiftyNiblick]

Why fuck them? Are they in the "to be demonized" class that your faith proselytizes? Did the value that Bezos added to society exceed your religion's permitted quantity?

They're to be demonized because I personally don't like them. That's all it takes for me.
If people were honest, that's all it takes for anybody.

Bezos, in particular, killed a retail industry that I personally liked much better than the internet.

Do most younger people like shopping on-line better?

Why should I give a fuck about that? I obviously don't.

I liked Amazon when they were selling books, CDs, and DVDs.
Now, they can pound sand.

 

[Saint Guinefort]

They're to be demonized because I personally don't like them. That's all it takes for me.
If people were honest, that's all it takes for anybody.

Bezos, in particular, killed a retail industry that I personally liked much better than the internet.

Do most younger people like shopping on-line better?

Why should I give a fuck about that? I obviously don't.

I liked Amazon when they were selling books, CDs, and DVDs.
Now, they can pound sand.

Amazon is evil. And like the Devil it offers all these wonderful benefits for the lazy (like myself) who can jump on and order anything they want and get it within a day or two. But the cost to my fellow humans is ENORMOUS. As you noted Amazon has decimated a lot of stores and the treat their employees like shit, so for all the benefits I get from Amazon I have to ignore all the evil done in my name by Amazon.

Amazon is another test of how strongly we hold our ethics. Right now I don't feel like I'm living up to my ideals.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Amazon is evil. And like the Devil it offers all these wonderful benefits for the lazy (like myself) who can jump on and order anything they want and get it within a day or two. But the cost to my fellow humans is ENORMOUS. As you noted Amazon has decimated a lot of stores and the treat their employees like shit, so for all the benefits I get from Amazon I have to ignore all the evil done in my name by Amazon.

Amazon is another test of how strongly we hold our ethics. Right now I don't feel like I'm living up to my ideals.

100 years ago, Sears did what Amazon does now. They had everything. You bought it by catalog and snail mail, but it amounted to the same business model.

You could get a house kit from Sears back then. Amazon sells small house kits today:

Amazon isn't something new, it's the SOS packaged in a new way.

 

[IBDaMann]

They're to be demonized because I personally don't like them.

You should probably have mentioned this aspect in your OP. It definitely goes to credibility. i.e. you HATE those who add value to society, just like any other Marxist loser who wants to destroy "capitalism."

If people were honest, that's all it takes for anybody.

Yes, it goes to credibility. You equate "honesty" with your petty HATRED for capitalism, for adding value to society and for bringing happiness to humanity. Do you consider yourself a miserable fuck?

Bezos, in particular, killed a retail industry that I personally liked much better than the internet.

Bezos killed a non-competitive industry that did not benefit society as well as he could. Your complaint is with all of the people who are so much happier with Amazon than with the previous inefficient and costlier business models on which you were performing fellatio. All Bezos did was offer the world something better. It was the world that opted for that something better, in defiance of your desire for something worse for society.

So say it: "Fuck society!" "Fuck humanity!" "Fuck the world!" ... go on, say it. Remember, they're to be demonized because you personally don't like them.

Do most younger people like shopping on-line better?

Better questions:
Does everybody (statistically) prefer the convenience of purchasing online? Of course they do.
Do women (statistically) prefer window shopping in actual stores? Of course they do.

Start aligning your expectations with human nature.

Why should I give a fuck about [human nature]? I obviously don't.

Of course not. Marxists necessarily deny human nature. This is why Marxism always brings widespread misery before collapsing in on itself. You should have mentioned in your OP that this was your position. It goes to credibility.

I liked Amazon when they were selling books, CDs, and DVDs.

You liked Amazon when you were buying only books, CDs and DVDs. Why don't you limit your purchases from Amazon to books, CDs and DVDs? You know,... that which you control?

Now, they can pound sand.

You mean now you can pound sand, yes?

 

[ptif219]

The conservatives deny human causation,
which is scientifically preposterous.

The way we caused it, however, and this is obvious,
was by excessive procreation and overpopulation.

Everything else is charging the symptoms with being the cause.

It would be stupid to think that humans should live like so many Woodstock hippies
in order to not pollute the planet.

Nobody is willing to address the OVERPOPULATION ISSUE, however.
That's the REAL Inconvenient Truth.

If we don't have the stones to do that,
I favor just living however the hell we want, environment be damned,
because all of the WOKE solutions won't lead to jack shit.

I'm too deep into my life to keep my house at 90º in the summer and 55º in the winter
or to drive some kind of stupid car that I don't want.

Spoken like a true loyal globalist

 

[IBDaMann]

Actually those two are the same issue. AGW (Climate change) is a function of overuse of fossil fuels and land use changes (eg deforestation) on large scales.

So you are one of those scientifically illiterate and mathematically incompetent morons whose gullibility has caused you to fall easy victim to Marxist scammers looking to convert you to one of their useful idiots.

There is no such thing as a fossil fuel, unless you are going to identify some particular fossils that are sold commercially as fuel, or identify specific fossils that use fuel.
There is no such thing as "over use" of a fuel.
Currently, there is no deforestation problem anywhere. I know you believe there is, but if you were asked to connect the dots from "land usage" to "climate change", you'd end up a gibbering idiot.

The bottom line is that you are simply OBEYING orders to regurgitate what you have been told to preach. You have no idea what any of your words mean. You have no idea what this "global climate" is supposed to be; you never demanded any formal, unambiguous definition. You have no idea what science is; you should be embarrassed. You were ordered by cowards to post online what they were to ashamed to post themselves, so that you would look the fool instead of them. You fell for it.

My recommendation is that you ditch your Climate Change religion now and minimize your future regret.

Either issue will require extreme solutions that few if any actually have the guts for.

There are no issues. Few people have the desire to fix something that isn't broken. Your imaginary crises are just that, i.e. imaginary. You should ditch your fucked-up religion. Note that NiftyNiblick is amongst your congregation. You can't possibly think that he is a science genius either. If you take a moment and notice that all of your congregation is comprised of undereducated leftists who have no business commenting on science, you'll see clearly that you should be ditching your religion faster than a buck flees from a stinky hunter wearing bells and flashing lights.

One of the sets of solutions is more humane overall but harder economically.

Nothing can be a solution if there is no problem.

At the end of the day, though, we are stupid animals and we'll just go ahead and decimate our societies by ignoring all the science anyway.

That is exactly what you are doing. Oh, the irony.

Ditch the religion. Let me know if you have any questions.