Thanks. I just got really tired of seeing little but no-budge poles, hard agendas with little regard for actually assessing a hierarchy of reliable evidence... no real conversation. Anonymity of the internet is great in many ways but it also creates pitfalls in that it is so easy to slip into a mode of just "talking to hear yourself speak". I'd like to see some effort at conversation and especially on the really important issues. I think you have already benefited that effort here. Thanks again.

Sorry current world disasters are poor examples when one can go back to dinosaur weather to show worse disasters.

Needing good examples for common sense problems like no electricity or home cuz it burnt down or flooded .

Bet those folks don't need good examples to be convinced. But, I know of one other, with a like this mindset.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TqPnlyZgqC0

Kinda reminds me of a campfire tale on a fight outcome, Whether the dude was big or small who got his self whooped.
Outcome was the same. He got whooped.

They took our jobs! :foot:

For those who distrust government and government funded assessment of climate change here is a link to MIT Technology Review. The Review is wholly owned by MIT and was founded in 1899 and is editorially independent of the University. In 2011 Technology Review received the Utne Reader Independent Press Award for Best Science/Technology Coverage.

This link is to the most recent (Fall,2019) article on Anthropogenic Global Climate Change. Actually I'm providing the full link as well as the same linked shrunk by TinyURL in case the long link gives some problems.

https://tinyurl.com/sswb5ug

https://www.technologyreview.com/f/6...aid.engagement

I'm not going to post a link at this time for surely we will see lots more in this disturbing area of climate news but methane release from wetlands and elsewhere is on the rise and specific locations like the Sudan have been noted and measured and some call the increase "urgent". We can all hope this isn't one of the triggered scenarios that could contribute to an avalanche effect but that seems unlikely even at this early stage. That the Madrid talks have experienced stalls only adds to this mess. There is no guarantee whatsoever that the rate of change will not "switch gears" as unknown tipping points are reached. It's definitely going to get worse before it gets better.

Why are you surprised? The whole mess we're in is mainly due to the fact that the nations most affected by climate change aren't the ones that are causing it and vice versa. Some Pacific countries are set to disappear beneath the waters and of course they're screaming blue murder, but the point is they can't do anything but scream. Meanwhile the US, Australia, China and India are burning coal as if there was no tomorrow because they know they can survive the consequences. The US might lose Florida but they won't lose the entire country like Vanuatu or Bangladesh will.

But if they stop burning coal and oil, their industries will suffer and their people will be thrown out of work. Those people have votes. They are not going to vote for a party that, when it was in government, agreed at some international conference to close down their mines and their factories. Trump got into office largely on the votes of people who had been thrown out of work by the move away from coal and heavy industry. He promised to make coal king again. Conversely, look what happened when Emmanuel Macron tried to cut down French consumption of oil by making petrol more expensive. There were riots in the streets and he had to back-pedal.

Until you find an answer to that, there will be no answer to climate change.

Hello hazel. Actually I'm not at all surprised which is exactly why I authored this thread. Yes, today there are a few countries that are most at risk, but this is a runaway process and in areas we don't even imagine yet. Ultimately it will affect every living thing on planet Earth excepting perhaps bacteria living in rocks deep underground. The sooner we begin to recognize we are almost literally "all in the same boat", the better.

This moron oughta get your back up enorbet - these are the assholes that are our "federal government" here too...

Although, I've gotta give it to Piers Morgan and his crew - I'd give them reputation if they were members here...

In essence - balancing the needs of the economy against environmental matters. Most people are concerned about the environment and climate change, but when all is said and done if people lose their jobs or some luxury as a result of some environmental policy, then that will almost certainly cause them to think again. People will often choose to continue in self delusion if facing the ugly reality means losing something important.

People will look for literature, or studies or opinions which support that delusion then eventually fully accept that delusion as a "truth".

Automobile owners are a good example, there are those who know that it is not an economical or environmentally friendly form of transport, but as they are just one of millions, they do nothing, but continue - as they "need" the vehicle and if they don't drive, others will anyway. So again supporting the delusion against threats becomes an almost automatic response.

Can't have those millions without hundreds of thousands soon to, well who cares we'll be gone‽ :banghead:

Stop press news! Microsoft -- yes, the Evil Empire itself -- says it's going to remove from the atmosphere all the CO2 it has put there!

Now I wonder what that means? Are we talking about CO2 emissions from production of all computer components or just those generated during final assembly? Remember that a lot of components are made in places like China, which makes it someone else's responsibility. They could say of course that they don't make computers, they only make the software.

So what about all the CO2 generated by mass use of computers which their software has made possible? I'm thinking particularly about cryptocurrency mining.

Of course, in a sense it doesn't really matter because the technology to suck all that CO2 out of the air just doesn't exist.

I expect they're not counting hardware that other people run their software on. Just their own data centres etc.

But I don't think blaming Microsoft for cryptocurrencies in particular makes sense.

https://expressinformer.com/microsof...than-it-emits/

Yes Microsoft will even make promises they can't possibly deliver to try to appear "the benevolent dictator... err... father figure" so what else is new?

There is a breaking story that is quite the bombshell. You may not know who or what BlackRock is but suffice it to say they control roughly 10% of the investment wealth of Planet Earth, and they just announced they are no longer interested in fossil fuels. This wasn't just a mere press release but what the main gist of a company wide statement of policy. It is still important for every person to do what they can but as I replied to early responders who asked "What are YOU doing to reduce emissions", not only do I do a lot in my home life but what any of us can do in the form of leverage adds up much more rapidly. If you doubt this, consider how many of us it would take to sway $7,000,000,000,000.00 !!! Yes that's Trillion and 7 of 'em is what BlackRock controls. Investments are based on trust and trust has a great deal to do with not only scientific facts, but public opinion and getting the public to actually read, or even hear about, real, unbiased studies plays an important role. This is very big and it's just the beginning.

It needs to be this big and sooner rather than later, and the blind bickering about what the cause is, needs to be countered and dry up and blow away or we will have whole economies, possibly entire cultures dry up and blow away and that's just considering Homo Sapiens. Try to imagine any country that can no longer generate electricity in a culture where most haven't a clue how to provide anything for themselves, utterly dependent on the supermarket, cellphones, the Mall and the gas station. If you think a country not being able to generate electricity is impossible, you need to look deeper.

The Spectator has already published a denunciation of BlackRock, accusing them of political correctness! Actually they're being hard-nosed. If a public panic about global warming breaks out (and it looks like the Australian bush fires have finally produced one) then petrol-driven cars and oil-fired furnaces are suddenly going to be in the political firing line. There may be emergency legislation against them.

The wealth of the oil companies consists of petroleum and gas reserves still in the ground. If the market for oil crashes, that wealth will become worthless. So it makes sense for big investment firms to get out while the going is good.

Now with the global impact of Covid-19 rapidly approaching 200,000 deaths as of April 23, 2020 and at least some people are waking up to the reality that life can be fairly rapidly disrupted even to the point of large scale death and economic impact, it might be wise (and a little scary) to consider what seems to be developing in Antarctica, especially at Thwaites glacier. Studies over the last 5 years have revealed that it is a huge "house of cards" (think in terms of size like almost twice the size of the state of Pennsylvania and thousands of feet thick) on a downhill slope of smooth ground with sea water leaking in and under the glacier. It could easily calve so fast if it ever reaches the threshold point to cause a rapid rise in global sea level measured not in inches but in feet, possibly even meters.

The recent increasing concern due to ongoing studies have shown as noted by The Guardian that
It seems it could be less than moot whether or not Global Climate Change is "natural" or anthropogenic since few will care much with entire states and whole countries under feet of water, not to mention most of the important port cities of the whole planet, and this could occur within just a decade or two. 200,000 deaths will be spitting in the ocean by comparison.

So you decide - Is it really wise to poo poo all the collaborative Science documenting how this is all unfolding to serve some political agenda or spin doctoring created by those already unimaginably rich and hoping to get richer yet by denying their "contribution" to maintain "business as usual"?