Well, I purchased an electric car, recycle paper and plastics, conserve on household energy use, direct sunlight into the house to supplement its heat thus using less natural gas, and manage my tree farm to absorb CO2 in the air. And I wish I could do more.
How is it remotely in the best interests of the species and the planet that we elect people like trump and his regressive supporters? Yes, we all play a part in AGW, there’s no real way to bend this curve without citzens and their politicians supporting science and scientists. It’s really beyond tragedy all the way to farce, now.
Won’t be so farcical as the years go by, though. At some point, it is INEVITABLE that Mar a Lago will be completely destroyed. Probably won’t make a difference to the psychopath. He’ll employ contractors to rebuild (and not pay them, of course). But the next storm and the one after that, each increasing in wind speed and rain, will simply come back.
But, satisfying as it is to take comfort in knowing trump’s own palace will be destroyed several times over during the course of the next 20-30 years, it’s meaningless in the face of this global challenge.
Thanks regressives!! Destroying American aspirational ethics AND refusing to address an existential crisis. Because of Mexican rapists, I guess.
Oh, and Ted, happy to remind you that you played an outsized role in hastening global climate crises. While Hillary Clinton was not the most attractive candidate, she was so much better than what we got in EVERY way. You and I both know she would have tried to address the climate issue vigorously. It only makes sense if you are reality focused. Which trump and his synchophants clearly are not.
It’s less a problem of pollution that is driving most animals to extinction, it’s “idiots” with guns hunting endangered species. Think Bengal Tigers, Elephants, Rhinoceros , etc.
That is all well and good I commend all Americans who try to do what they think is best for conservation. But there are two other things we don’t seem to consider when we talk of conservation. One is that we are not in this alone. China and India pollute probably ten times or more than we ever did simply because there are more people. While Europe is doing a good job of trying there are still too many cars. #2 is airplanes. Just look at the average airport these days, almost constant take offs and landing. All airplane pollution is already several thousands of feet in the air, some to upper limit of the atmosphere. Though air plane manufactures are trying to cut down on pollutants, no plane is clean they still burn fossil fuel. I am glad we are doing what we can but we are fighting a losing battle, money will win out always. Besides Jesus is coming any day now and will make all things right. (you wish)
The best things you can do to reduce consumption (the only thing that will truly have an impact) is quit driving and quit eating meat. I have and I live a life of luxury unimaginable to billions. I’ve made some small sacrifices due to not having a car but so what!
Factors contributing to the environmental crisis: deforestation, loss of habitat with resulting species extinctions, acidification of oceans with consequent destruction of the oceanic biosphere, increasing human population, lack of education (particularly of females), and so on. But can overthrow of the global system that has created this crisis actually manage to change it? You would have to overthrow, all the different governments of the world, simultaneously. It would not be pretty for the majority of mankind, but it might make a big dent in the population. On the other hand, trying for a global agreement for emission control might help, which is why Trump backing out of the Paris Accords was such a disaster. Either humans learn to cooperate or we die. It’s that simple.
According to EVERY IPCC scientific article, some component of the current warming cycle is NOT caused by humans. In EVERY IPCC article, the author indicates that from 9% to 90% has a natural source of some kind. That means that we could completely eliminate ALL anthropological source for warming and the climate would continue to warm. In 2002, NASA said a 3 degree C to 5 degrees C was inevitable, we might delay it a decade or two but we were incapable of altering it. It makes NO sense to spend money attempting to prevent the unpreventable, should we not begin making plans to mitigate the impact??
Note: Since 2005, the US has reduced its CO2 emissions by 758 million metric tons, the largest reduction of all nations. Between 2005 and 2017 per capita CO2 emissions fell by 19.9%. Source EPAAnd it did not require unilaterally crippling funding of other country’s reduction plans.
On the other hand, China’s CO2 emissions increased by 3,000 million metric tons while India’s grew by 1,000 million metric tons. It appears easy to blame the US for all the ills of the world, unfortunately, the facts would indicate otherwise.
Packratjohn Premium Member over 5 years ago
Sad to think about, but close to true. (I don’t watch an average of five hours of tv a week so that brings the stats down…. right?)
preacherman over 5 years ago
Well, I purchased an electric car, recycle paper and plastics, conserve on household energy use, direct sunlight into the house to supplement its heat thus using less natural gas, and manage my tree farm to absorb CO2 in the air. And I wish I could do more.
twclix over 5 years ago
How is it remotely in the best interests of the species and the planet that we elect people like trump and his regressive supporters? Yes, we all play a part in AGW, there’s no real way to bend this curve without citzens and their politicians supporting science and scientists. It’s really beyond tragedy all the way to farce, now.
Won’t be so farcical as the years go by, though. At some point, it is INEVITABLE that Mar a Lago will be completely destroyed. Probably won’t make a difference to the psychopath. He’ll employ contractors to rebuild (and not pay them, of course). But the next storm and the one after that, each increasing in wind speed and rain, will simply come back.
But, satisfying as it is to take comfort in knowing trump’s own palace will be destroyed several times over during the course of the next 20-30 years, it’s meaningless in the face of this global challenge.
Thanks regressives!! Destroying American aspirational ethics AND refusing to address an existential crisis. Because of Mexican rapists, I guess.
Oh, and Ted, happy to remind you that you played an outsized role in hastening global climate crises. While Hillary Clinton was not the most attractive candidate, she was so much better than what we got in EVERY way. You and I both know she would have tried to address the climate issue vigorously. It only makes sense if you are reality focused. Which trump and his synchophants clearly are not.
Rev Phnk Ey over 5 years ago
Ted. Should you add, “reading comics”?
William Bednar Premium Member over 5 years ago
It’s less a problem of pollution that is driving most animals to extinction, it’s “idiots” with guns hunting endangered species. Think Bengal Tigers, Elephants, Rhinoceros , etc.
Radish the wordsmith over 5 years ago
People won’t stop overpopulating the earth.
When you put bacteria on a petri dish they breed until the food is gone,
then there is a massive die off.
Gary Williams Premium Member over 5 years ago
That is all well and good I commend all Americans who try to do what they think is best for conservation. But there are two other things we don’t seem to consider when we talk of conservation. One is that we are not in this alone. China and India pollute probably ten times or more than we ever did simply because there are more people. While Europe is doing a good job of trying there are still too many cars. #2 is airplanes. Just look at the average airport these days, almost constant take offs and landing. All airplane pollution is already several thousands of feet in the air, some to upper limit of the atmosphere. Though air plane manufactures are trying to cut down on pollutants, no plane is clean they still burn fossil fuel. I am glad we are doing what we can but we are fighting a losing battle, money will win out always. Besides Jesus is coming any day now and will make all things right. (you wish)
GreggW Premium Member over 5 years ago
We have met the enemy and he/she is us.
Mr. Blawt over 5 years ago
we didn’t vote for the party who is trying to do something about global warming, because they weren’t liberal enough so the Republicans keep winning.
mattro65 over 5 years ago
The best things you can do to reduce consumption (the only thing that will truly have an impact) is quit driving and quit eating meat. I have and I live a life of luxury unimaginable to billions. I’ve made some small sacrifices due to not having a car but so what!
martens over 5 years ago
Factors contributing to the environmental crisis: deforestation, loss of habitat with resulting species extinctions, acidification of oceans with consequent destruction of the oceanic biosphere, increasing human population, lack of education (particularly of females), and so on. But can overthrow of the global system that has created this crisis actually manage to change it? You would have to overthrow, all the different governments of the world, simultaneously. It would not be pretty for the majority of mankind, but it might make a big dent in the population. On the other hand, trying for a global agreement for emission control might help, which is why Trump backing out of the Paris Accords was such a disaster. Either humans learn to cooperate or we die. It’s that simple.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2018/10/14/in-the-long-run-larry-kudlow-will-be-dead-and-the-rest-of-us-will-fry/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/were-on-mission-impossible-to-solve-global-warming/2018/10/14/518acff8-ce34-11e8-a360-85875bac0b1f_story.html
Bar Pluc over 5 years ago
According to EVERY IPCC scientific article, some component of the current warming cycle is NOT caused by humans. In EVERY IPCC article, the author indicates that from 9% to 90% has a natural source of some kind. That means that we could completely eliminate ALL anthropological source for warming and the climate would continue to warm. In 2002, NASA said a 3 degree C to 5 degrees C was inevitable, we might delay it a decade or two but we were incapable of altering it. It makes NO sense to spend money attempting to prevent the unpreventable, should we not begin making plans to mitigate the impact??
Note: Since 2005, the US has reduced its CO2 emissions by 758 million metric tons, the largest reduction of all nations. Between 2005 and 2017 per capita CO2 emissions fell by 19.9%. Source EPAAnd it did not require unilaterally crippling funding of other country’s reduction plans.
On the other hand, China’s CO2 emissions increased by 3,000 million metric tons while India’s grew by 1,000 million metric tons. It appears easy to blame the US for all the ills of the world, unfortunately, the facts would indicate otherwise.
Radish the wordsmith over 5 years ago
No one is blaming the US for all the world’s ills.
You can blame the US for not attempting to make the world’s ills better.
The world is aghast that Trump morons are trying to back out of the Paris agreements.
Republicans encourage coal use because the Koch people bribe them.
The world looks up to US, all we have to do is declare peace.
Instead we have morons who build up the military so they can force others to do what they want.
Vote out the red hat morons in November.