To all climate change deniers: Say miraculously you're right and "global warming" doesn't pose an actual threat, what is the downside of advancing our technology and creating better, cheaper, cleaner sources of energy regardless?
@K1lgore, well im not against cleaner sources but certain things like the government forcing companies to make more ecologicaly friendly stuff isnt always the way to go. Like the car companies for example, they have to make a certain number of electric/hybrid cars and thats not necessarily what the market wants and it makes the company lose tons of money on each car. (hybrid jeeps) i agree about advancing the technology because right now as far as i can tell its not as cost efficient as it could be, but i havent done a ton of research so i may not be 100% on all my points
@PandaPoots, I see your points. But i'd say environment the market just to be safe
@K1lgore, i might just be dumb and for some reason am not comprehending what you are saying but what does "enviroment the market" mean?
@PandaPoots, Oh I put in the greater than symbol but I forgot you can't type certain symbols in the comments lol
@K1lgore, ohhh ok thanks for clarifying ahaha
@K1lgore, no one is against being more environmentally friendly, but it's more how do you do it. Helping the environment is great, but we don't want to sacrifice the economy by adding billions of dollars of regulations in the form of cap and trade and other such ideas. That's even if the ideas worked. Cash for clunkers was suppose to be to help the environment, but ended up not helping and costing the tax payers lots of money
@Oujosh29, jobs related to climate change are growing at an enormous rate. It's one of the largest job growth industries. How does that not help the economy?
@K1lgore, most people who are labeled "climate change deniers" or "science deniers", do believe in climate change. We agree we should pollute less. We agree in having more than just coal power plants.
However, we don't believe that human beings are responsible for the majority of warming that has been seen since the end of the 1960s. We remember that in the 1990s it was acid rain that was going to defoliate the forests and screw the world. Then in the early 2000s it was global warming. (Too bad we have been on a 0.1 degree per decade cooling trend the last 15 years.) and now its climate change, because that's less specific and harder to argue against.
But let's talk science. 50 years is NOT statistically significant, given that the earth is about 4.5 billion years old. We have ice cores from Greenland and Antarctica that we can tell the temperature changes for the last 450,000 years from due to the ice layers. We can also see how much CO2 is in those layers. Continued.... (1/2)
@Coozination, (2/2) They show that there is nothing unusual about the current global temperature. They also show there is nothing unusual about the rate of change that was seen in the late 90s/early 2000s.
The video is a climate scientist talking about what I said. There are 4 of them.
Sorry for the long rant. I just hate the "climate change/science denier" label that's used to try to discredit people because they don't believe the same as someone else.
@Coozination, Im not sure where you're getting your statistics from about world temperature, but from what I found on NASA's official website (one of the most scientifically credible sources) it says that's the world's temperature was the hottest in 2016 in the last 136 recorded years, and 16 of the 17 warmest years have been since 2001. It's also not the current temperature that's the problem, it's the rate that it's been changing since humans started releasing carbon into the air, which is faster than the climate has changed in the past (it began to climb in the 80s). We're worried about the future, not about now. The only reason we're talking about it now is so we can prevent it before it's too late. Humans are definitely contributing and responsible for the co2, though we don't produce as much as we once did, any little bit put out into the air has a big impact because it's outside of the natural cycle meaning that the co2 has no where to go which is when it causes damage.
@Coozination, And honestly, even just the chance of human contribution should cause us to be more cautious
@K1lgore, devil's advocate here, because it's expensive as fvck to advance any tech, and I'd rather put the money into genetics or space travel off the top of my head
@K1lgore, its not just the climate too. Its our environment and ecosystem we are definitely destroying too and there's way more visible evidence to it than there is evidence to climate change
@K1lgore, stepping over people's rights to do so. Rights not given to us by other people, but innately given rights
@iOS10, jobs are not beneficial to the economy by themselves. If I break your window, you'll hire someone to fix it. I could hire you to sit still fit 40 hours a week. Neither scenario helps the economy
@K1lgore, The downside is spending the necessary amount of money to do so. And the loss of other services while everyone focuses on energy.
@K1lgore, in general? I think the argument is:
"But that's haaaard... I just want my easy stuff i already haaaaave!"
@K1lgore, I did provide the video as part of my evidence. If you are open to new information, I suggest you watch them. They are only 10minutes each. It addresses the CO2 issue you mentioned and the rate of increase. I will try to find the articles I have read before.
I agree human are releasing more CO2. It's a fact. One of my first points was the fact we need to pollute less. I said we should have different sources of energy and not rely on just coal.
My point is this. Yes, we have an impact on the climate. To what degree do we impact it? That's the question.
@Sheep Rider, are you seriously saying that people who have jobs, which give them money to spend, doesn't help the economy?
@Coozination, Here's the thing: the rate that the earth is heating up perfectly correlates to when humans started to release amounts of co2 into the air. It's not just a coincidence that the earth started to heat up right as co2 became an issue. We definitely have a significant impact regardless of how much we release. As I stated before, any excess co2 outside of the natural cycle (even just small amounts) can cause the issue at hand. Just like anything else, changing the natural cylce can throw it off, the extra co2 is not absorbed like it is natural ways. Even though we aren't releasing as much co2 as we were, we're still doing just as much damage, it's just not as obvious.
Your question has already been answered, there isn't a specific answer yet, but it correlates with when we started releasing co2 and the change is steeper than it's ever been before. Not a coincidence.
@Chicochang, How helping the environment stepping over anyone's rights? Not being a smartass, genuine question here
@K1lgore, As I've mentioned before, my mom believes in climate change, but doesn't feel humans really play that big of a roll (she's a scientist and has definitely done her research), but I don't know if I agree with her.
Regardless, the climate is changing and I want advancement of technology so bad. Why are we STILL burning coal and using gasoline? We could have 100% electric cars that hold charges and have good horse power by now if we actually tried improving the technology just a decade or so ago.
If there is anything I really want society to focus on in the next 20 years, it's getting us to the future the 1950's imagined.
@Chicochang, How is it stepping over people's rights? I don't the right to go and pollute upstream of a city, but I have the right to effectively pollute the entire atmosphere? Realy sucks for anyone living on a small island for example, but why should I care if I bennefit from the act? This is what regulations are for. This is why we have the FDA to make sure drug companies don't properly test their product just because it's more profitable.
@K1lgore, I cba to read all of this but in about 30 years we should be running on 100% renewable energy which is awesome
@iOS10, Yes. It's called the broken window fallacy. It's the biggest fallacy is economic politics.
@K1lgore, most people are all for cleaner, cheaper energy, but what the left has been pushing the last couple of decades is neither. However the left gets rich off of them just like the right did with oil and that's all they really care about.
@K1lgore, I'm not a true believer on global warming but I do think protecting the environment and making it cleaner is very important.
@Basil Fawlty, exactly! Like plastic soup and whatnot...
I like this one because the world might possibly literally get cooler if people took actions to reduce human impact of global warming
@SimonPetrikov, cool enough to cause Antarctica to gain billions of tons of ice?
Its climate change not global warming. There are natural cycles of climate change and were on a rise right now.
update- alright guys the race is close lets see who wins here
@Guy Fawkes, you are right about the name, wrong about the rest.
@ReeseBobby, explain please? Id like to understand
@Guy Fawkes, "Vaccines don't cause autism. There are natural factors in the syringes that make the chances of autism rise right now."
@Guy Fawkes, The current shift in temperature is way steeper than anything else before. I'm not saying that the climate doesn't shift naturally, but right now now it's changing too rapidly to reasonably call it natural.
@ReeseBobby, youre right about being unable to reasonably call it natural and thats at least partially due to misspeaking on my part because i didnt mean to suggest that we (the sh*tty people that we are) had no impact whatsoever.
@Guy Fawkes, my apologies then.
@ReeseBobby, no no, no need. You were correct friend its on me :)
@Soon, i cant tell what youre going for here hahaha??
@Guy Fawkes, Lol well it seems mean now that I see you're so reasonable. Just a play on what you said: the first part was correct, but the second part negated the validity of the first part
@Soon, ahhhh hahaha that makes much more sense. Yeahhhh i have a habit of misspeaking to people who i forget will assume that im an unreasonable jackass of the internet (as we all do)
@Soon, "those things are not related"
@Guy Fawkes, I got you bro, climate change muhfvckers liquid explosive dinosaurs is just making it happen at an irregular rate! SCIENCE BITCHES
@Medic135, its those damn thunder lizards what made the earth spicy
@Guy Fawkes, I agree but we are definitely accelerating it
I was on board with GW until I found out that the international science community has been silencing any study's that give evidence against it.
It bugs me that this scene isn't where he says that line
tfw you accidentally post a new comment instead of replying.
@ReeseBobby, Why the hate man? We just said basically the same thing
@Soon, I couldn't tell. Seemed like either you believe vaccines causes autism and climate change is real, or you don't believe vaccines cause autism and think climate change is fake.
@Soon, sorry if that's not the case.
World is flat illuminati is real global warming is a lie and wizard people rule everythong
@BigfootUnibrowMan, NOT THE THONGS!!
Oh shjt debates
Yesser.. there was a misspeaking on my part and that was addressed a bit further up :)
Global warming will happen whether we want it to or not. All people are doing right now is choosing what generations will feel the brunt of it.