3 ms·

> extreme weather patterns cause Y billion dollars of damage We have no idea what global warming related Y is yet, so we can't give him that number. But Pruit

> extreme weather patterns cause Y billion dollars of damage We have no idea what global warming related Y is yet, so we can't give him that number. But Pruitt isn't someone who is going to listen to reason anyway, he is paid to protect the fossil fuel industry.

metalliqaz 9y ago
I take your point, but I'm not really talking global warming here. I'm just going with the stuff everyone can see right now. Rising sea levels, drought, hurricanes, etc. The idea being that you get Pruitt to respond without having to invoke the buzzwords that shut everything down.
- ceejayoz 9y ago
  The talking points have moved from "it's not happening" to "it's not our fault" in the last decade or so. The response would just be "the science isn't settled on whether humans caused that" and stuff like "plants need CO2, so maybe it's good!"
  - metalliqaz 9y ago
    Strangely enough, there seems to be a believe among non-science-literate liberals that CO2 is a poison. Obviously this is not the case and plants can increase biomass like gangbusters with extra CO2, as long as they have the sunshine and water. There might even be a measurable difference in certain crops. I imagine that would be little consolation after losing major fisheries to the secondary effects of ocean acidification.
    - jackmott 9y ago
      >plants can increase biomass like gangbusters with extra CO2, as long as they have the sunshine and water. There might even be a measurable difference in certain crops. Not universally true, some plants will be negatively affected by the co2. Either way its not the case that we are going to get amazing plants or that plants will grow to solve the situation.
  - anderspitman 9y ago
    This. They've started saying things like, "The earth goes through natural cycles. How do we know this isn't normal? There weren't any humans around to cause the last ice age." Honestly I can't event say I completely disagree with that logic. But for me I'm not willing to risk being wrong about climate change.

metalliqaz 9y ago

I take your point, but I'm not really talking global warming here. I'm just going with the stuff everyone can see right now. Rising sea levels, drought, hurricanes, etc. The idea being that you get Pruitt to respond without having to invoke the buzzwords that shut everything down.

ceejayoz 9y ago
The talking points have moved from "it's not happening" to "it's not our fault" in the last decade or so. The response would just be "the science isn't settled on whether humans caused that" and stuff like "plants need CO2, so maybe it's good!"
- metalliqaz 9y ago
  Strangely enough, there seems to be a believe among non-science-literate liberals that CO2 is a poison. Obviously this is not the case and plants can increase biomass like gangbusters with extra CO2, as long as they have the sunshine and water. There might even be a measurable difference in certain crops. I imagine that would be little consolation after losing major fisheries to the secondary effects of ocean acidification.
  - jackmott 9y ago
    >plants can increase biomass like gangbusters with extra CO2, as long as they have the sunshine and water. There might even be a measurable difference in certain crops. Not universally true, some plants will be negatively affected by the co2. Either way its not the case that we are going to get amazing plants or that plants will grow to solve the situation.
- anderspitman 9y ago
  This. They've started saying things like, "The earth goes through natural cycles. How do we know this isn't normal? There weren't any humans around to cause the last ice age." Honestly I can't event say I completely disagree with that logic. But for me I'm not willing to risk being wrong about climate change.