5 ms·

> All of this will lead to predictable outcomes: More war, more humanitarian crises, more mass-migration, strain on food supply, etc... How convenient to blame

> All of this will lead to predictable outcomes: More war, more humanitarian crises, more mass-migration, strain on food supply, etc... How convenient to blame this all on climate change. Makes it easier for the incompetent, corrupt, and downright evil people running our governments, who created these disasters in the first place with their absurd policies, to "save us" with yet more absurd climate policies. When these policies -- predictably -- make things even worse, they will surely claim we must pass even more onerous, confiscatory, job destroying "climate legislation". When this happens you can re-post your comment after incrementing a few numbers.

oshkarr 5y ago
[flagged]
- furgooswft13 5y ago
  Nothing needs to be done to address made up fear porn, besides to stop watching it.
  - simion314 5y ago
    If you had the skill to do some algebra and understand soem physics I could link some simple video that would prove that CO2 causes global warming , but I assume you don't believe the data in physics and math books either.
    - newsclues 5y ago
      If you think complex systems like the global climate are easy to understand with some algebra and physics, you likely are truly capable of understanding the full picture.
      - simion314 5y ago
        It is easy to understand that putting more CO2 in atmosphere has a heating effect. So let me split the problem in small parts and see where you get lost 1 do you believe in chemistry,physics and math ? 2 do you believe CO2 is generated when burning stuff? 3 do you believe the CO2 in atmosphere is rising? 4 do you believer that more CO2 means more heat is trapped on the surface? 5 do you believe that the global warming is significant to have an effect? 6 if yes are you maybe just of the opinion that all will be fine and we just need to wait until new tech will solve this ? I admit that you can just say "sure I believe in science but the numbers/measurements are false because of the "green industry lobby around the entire world that paid all the scientists in all countries and also went in tiem and modified 400+ years records" , then yes, science can't help you.
    - furgooswft13 5y ago
      I really don't care. The "solutions" are always far worse than the "problem". Thus the "problem" needs to be hyped up beyond all sanity to the point where Stephen Hawking is claiming Earth's atmosphere will be like Venus in 30 years. That won't happen, but sometimes I wish it would, soon, as I'd take burning alive in a sky of fire over having to endure any more of this climate doom circle jerk retardation.
  - idiotsecant 5y ago
    Physics doesn't stop being true because you don't believe in it. That's why it's physics.
    - furgooswft13 5y ago
      Yea...gravity isn't going to crush me into a puddle just because a bunch of morons on the internet claim it will. That "thing" exists is not proof you have any clue what you are talking about.
- ericmay 5y ago
  Well that's probably true for what I'll call Wal-Mart libertarians (similar to Wal-Mart wolverines in college football - some will appreciate that), but many people who have actually studied libertarianism would have argued for quite a number of things, ranging from carbon markets to increased government action. For example, many libertarian flavors hold that the environment is a common good. You can't pollute the river upstream from me because that affects my water and deprives me of property and resources - you'd have to compensate for that. Other libertarians simply believe that markets solve problems better than governments do (hard not to argue with that right now) and that a carbon market that could actually price the damage we do to the environment would be good and also in-line with very principled arguments. I'd also argue that really libertarians haven't had much of a way of influence in American politics and this is strictly the failure of the USG (Republicans and Democrats) to take action. Also, the vast majority of people can't be bothered to take personal action either - like spending more money to buy local produce or traveling by plane less. Let's not scapegoat a tiny margin of people when we're all very, very wasteful.
  - evol262 5y ago
    > Other libertarians simply believe that markets solve problems better than governments do (hard not to argue with that right now) Considering that the supply chain problems can be laid squarely at the feet of "markets" assuming that everything would operate in a vacuum like an econ textbook and imploding once external pressure interrupted things, it's very hard to argue with that. > I'd also argue that really libertarians haven't had much of a way of influence in American politics and this is strictly the failure of the USG (Republicans and Democrats) to take action. The principal problem with this argument is the "no true Scotsman" attitude of "real libertarians" compared to other "real libertarians". I don't know what "libertarians" are to you, but the obvious answer is that if they haven't had much of an influence in American politics, it's because their policies and stances aren't popular. Most of the Western world experienced unregulated market dynamics in the robber baron era, and arguably again in the last 10-15 years. We've been there and tried it.
    - ericmay 5y ago
      > Considering that the supply chain problems can be laid squarely at the feet of "markets" assuming that everything would operate in a vacuum like an econ textbook and imploding once external pressure interrupted things, it's very hard to argue with that. I mean yea... we had a gigantic pandemic and people were getting sick. We can also attribute the fact that you have goods and services and a vaccine in your arm to the same markets. Certainly the government helped in some ways but it also completely botched the response to the pandemic. > The principal problem with this argument is the "no true Scotsman" attitude of "real libertarians" compared to other "real libertarians". No this isn't that. If you're going to bucket list a bunch of people and say "blah blah blah libertarians think this" then I'm going to point out why that's incorrect and not representative of general libertarian philosophy which is a lot more than what is being discussed in the OP. It's not a fair characterization, and clearing up misconceptions is a fair thing to do. "Libertarians think X" "No they actually think X,Y,and Z". > I don't know what "libertarians" are to you, but the obvious answer is that if they haven't had much of an influence in American politics, it's because their policies and stances aren't popular. Great so then why are we blaming them again? If you want to say "they did have an influence" then fine, I'll say that Communists and such have had a big influence too. > Most of the Western world experienced unregulated market dynamics in the robber baron era, and arguably again in the last 10-15 years. We've been there and tried it. I'm not sure what your point is here. I guess in response I could say we experienced uncontrolled Communism during the 1940s-1980s and now again with the CCP. We've been there and tried that.
- tamaharbor 5y ago
  Or when ‘scientists’ came to the opposite conclusions forty years ago. You can understand the confusion.
  - idiotsecant 5y ago
    The science is clear and undeniable. It's simple physics. CO2 traps heat. https://climate.nasa.gov/system/charts/15_co2_left_061720.gif https://climate.nasa.gov/system/charts/15_co2_left_061720.gi... If you can look at this chart and not understand why man-made climate change is a real phenomenon I'm not sure what to say. FUD about whether some scientist 40 years ago understood this or not is completely irrelevant. You don't need to "trust" anyone to understand this. It's incredibly simple.
  - tenuousemphasis 5y ago
    Forty years is a fuck load of climate science. You're familiar with how science works right? New data often leads to a better understanding of the world and an increased ability to predict the future.
  - polotics 5y ago
    The year 2000 called and wants its climate denialism trolling points back. Have you not seen the memo, now it's all about adaptation and impact minimisation now.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
simion314 5y ago
>How convenient to blame this all on climate change. Makes it easier for the incompetent, corrupt, and downright evil people running our governments, who created these disasters in the first place with their absurd policies, to "save us" with yet more absurd climate policies. What absurd policies? I suspect you can blame the lack of policies , like those oil extraction where they buts soem excess gas just because it is not profitable enough to use it. But I am waiting for you to please explain how an anarchy would have done better or some wild capitalist society with no legislation would have done better for the environment.
- furgooswft13 5y ago
  The environment is fine right now, and according to you, no policies have been in place to "help it". So I guess "anarchy" or "wild capitalism" works just fine. The economy on the other hand is in total ruins, largely because of policies related to COVID-19, which also had a marginal impact on emissions. Imagine policies that have significant impacts...
  - evol262 5y ago
    > The economy on the other hand is in total ruins, largely because of policies related to COVID-19, which also had a marginal impact on emissions. This is the reddest of herrings. The government's role is to strive for the security and safety of its citizens. "Policies related to COVID-19" are part and parcel of that. The economy is "in ruins" not because of "policies related to COVID-19", but because in striving for squeezing every last drop of profitability out of things, a "just-in-time" model was adopted for everything under the sun, which fell apart at the first real obstacle. It's a supply-side crunch from the bottom of the chain on up. Companies which are depleted of capital in order to line people's pockets are unable to jumpstart the process fiscally, and decades of mistreating workers is backfiring as a labor shortage which *should* drive increased wages is leading only to calls for bailouts and government intervention, or _anything_ other than paying market wages. Don't blame governments for unfettered capitalism being an ouroboros.
    - 5y ago
legulere 5y ago
Evilness is not a personality trait. Calling people evil only shows a lack of willing to try to understand the reasons behind the actions of those people. There is no big rich lobby for decarbonization yet. People in governments fight climate change mostly because they believe in it or because they think they can further their career with it (like everyone in top positions).

oshkarr 5y ago

[flagged]

furgooswft13 5y ago
Nothing needs to be done to address made up fear porn, besides to stop watching it.
- simion314 5y ago
  If you had the skill to do some algebra and understand soem physics I could link some simple video that would prove that CO2 causes global warming , but I assume you don't believe the data in physics and math books either.
  - newsclues 5y ago
    If you think complex systems like the global climate are easy to understand with some algebra and physics, you likely are truly capable of understanding the full picture.
    - simion314 5y ago
      It is easy to understand that putting more CO2 in atmosphere has a heating effect. So let me split the problem in small parts and see where you get lost 1 do you believe in chemistry,physics and math ? 2 do you believe CO2 is generated when burning stuff? 3 do you believe the CO2 in atmosphere is rising? 4 do you believer that more CO2 means more heat is trapped on the surface? 5 do you believe that the global warming is significant to have an effect? 6 if yes are you maybe just of the opinion that all will be fine and we just need to wait until new tech will solve this ? I admit that you can just say "sure I believe in science but the numbers/measurements are false because of the "green industry lobby around the entire world that paid all the scientists in all countries and also went in tiem and modified 400+ years records" , then yes, science can't help you.
  - furgooswft13 5y ago
    I really don't care. The "solutions" are always far worse than the "problem". Thus the "problem" needs to be hyped up beyond all sanity to the point where Stephen Hawking is claiming Earth's atmosphere will be like Venus in 30 years. That won't happen, but sometimes I wish it would, soon, as I'd take burning alive in a sky of fire over having to endure any more of this climate doom circle jerk retardation.
- idiotsecant 5y ago
  Physics doesn't stop being true because you don't believe in it. That's why it's physics.
  - furgooswft13 5y ago
    Yea...gravity isn't going to crush me into a puddle just because a bunch of morons on the internet claim it will. That "thing" exists is not proof you have any clue what you are talking about.
ericmay 5y ago
Well that's probably true for what I'll call Wal-Mart libertarians (similar to Wal-Mart wolverines in college football - some will appreciate that), but many people who have actually studied libertarianism would have argued for quite a number of things, ranging from carbon markets to increased government action. For example, many libertarian flavors hold that the environment is a common good. You can't pollute the river upstream from me because that affects my water and deprives me of property and resources - you'd have to compensate for that. Other libertarians simply believe that markets solve problems better than governments do (hard not to argue with that right now) and that a carbon market that could actually price the damage we do to the environment would be good and also in-line with very principled arguments. I'd also argue that really libertarians haven't had much of a way of influence in American politics and this is strictly the failure of the USG (Republicans and Democrats) to take action. Also, the vast majority of people can't be bothered to take personal action either - like spending more money to buy local produce or traveling by plane less. Let's not scapegoat a tiny margin of people when we're all very, very wasteful.
- evol262 5y ago
  > Other libertarians simply believe that markets solve problems better than governments do (hard not to argue with that right now) Considering that the supply chain problems can be laid squarely at the feet of "markets" assuming that everything would operate in a vacuum like an econ textbook and imploding once external pressure interrupted things, it's very hard to argue with that. > I'd also argue that really libertarians haven't had much of a way of influence in American politics and this is strictly the failure of the USG (Republicans and Democrats) to take action. The principal problem with this argument is the "no true Scotsman" attitude of "real libertarians" compared to other "real libertarians". I don't know what "libertarians" are to you, but the obvious answer is that if they haven't had much of an influence in American politics, it's because their policies and stances aren't popular. Most of the Western world experienced unregulated market dynamics in the robber baron era, and arguably again in the last 10-15 years. We've been there and tried it.
  - ericmay 5y ago
    > Considering that the supply chain problems can be laid squarely at the feet of "markets" assuming that everything would operate in a vacuum like an econ textbook and imploding once external pressure interrupted things, it's very hard to argue with that. I mean yea... we had a gigantic pandemic and people were getting sick. We can also attribute the fact that you have goods and services and a vaccine in your arm to the same markets. Certainly the government helped in some ways but it also completely botched the response to the pandemic. > The principal problem with this argument is the "no true Scotsman" attitude of "real libertarians" compared to other "real libertarians". No this isn't that. If you're going to bucket list a bunch of people and say "blah blah blah libertarians think this" then I'm going to point out why that's incorrect and not representative of general libertarian philosophy which is a lot more than what is being discussed in the OP. It's not a fair characterization, and clearing up misconceptions is a fair thing to do. "Libertarians think X" "No they actually think X,Y,and Z". > I don't know what "libertarians" are to you, but the obvious answer is that if they haven't had much of an influence in American politics, it's because their policies and stances aren't popular. Great so then why are we blaming them again? If you want to say "they did have an influence" then fine, I'll say that Communists and such have had a big influence too. > Most of the Western world experienced unregulated market dynamics in the robber baron era, and arguably again in the last 10-15 years. We've been there and tried it. I'm not sure what your point is here. I guess in response I could say we experienced uncontrolled Communism during the 1940s-1980s and now again with the CCP. We've been there and tried that.
tamaharbor 5y ago
Or when ‘scientists’ came to the opposite conclusions forty years ago. You can understand the confusion.
- idiotsecant 5y ago
  The science is clear and undeniable. It's simple physics. CO2 traps heat. https://climate.nasa.gov/system/charts/15_co2_left_061720.gif https://climate.nasa.gov/system/charts/15_co2_left_061720.gi... If you can look at this chart and not understand why man-made climate change is a real phenomenon I'm not sure what to say. FUD about whether some scientist 40 years ago understood this or not is completely irrelevant. You don't need to "trust" anyone to understand this. It's incredibly simple.
- tenuousemphasis 5y ago
  Forty years is a fuck load of climate science. You're familiar with how science works right? New data often leads to a better understanding of the world and an increased ability to predict the future.
- polotics 5y ago
  The year 2000 called and wants its climate denialism trolling points back. Have you not seen the memo, now it's all about adaptation and impact minimisation now.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]

simion314 5y ago

>How convenient to blame this all on climate change. Makes it easier for the incompetent, corrupt, and downright evil people running our governments, who created these disasters in the first place with their absurd policies, to "save us" with yet more absurd climate policies. What absurd policies? I suspect you can blame the lack of policies , like those oil extraction where they buts soem excess gas just because it is not profitable enough to use it. But I am waiting for you to please explain how an anarchy would have done better or some wild capitalist society with no legislation would have done better for the environment.

furgooswft13 5y ago
The environment is fine right now, and according to you, no policies have been in place to "help it". So I guess "anarchy" or "wild capitalism" works just fine. The economy on the other hand is in total ruins, largely because of policies related to COVID-19, which also had a marginal impact on emissions. Imagine policies that have significant impacts...
- evol262 5y ago
  > The economy on the other hand is in total ruins, largely because of policies related to COVID-19, which also had a marginal impact on emissions. This is the reddest of herrings. The government's role is to strive for the security and safety of its citizens. "Policies related to COVID-19" are part and parcel of that. The economy is "in ruins" not because of "policies related to COVID-19", but because in striving for squeezing every last drop of profitability out of things, a "just-in-time" model was adopted for everything under the sun, which fell apart at the first real obstacle. It's a supply-side crunch from the bottom of the chain on up. Companies which are depleted of capital in order to line people's pockets are unable to jumpstart the process fiscally, and decades of mistreating workers is backfiring as a labor shortage which *should* drive increased wages is leading only to calls for bailouts and government intervention, or _anything_ other than paying market wages. Don't blame governments for unfettered capitalism being an ouroboros.
  - 5y ago

legulere 5y ago

Evilness is not a personality trait. Calling people evil only shows a lack of willing to try to understand the reasons behind the actions of those people. There is no big rich lobby for decarbonization yet. People in governments fight climate change mostly because they believe in it or because they think they can further their career with it (like everyone in top positions).