Logic and commonsense tells me that if we in the U.S. had clean everything it would not do JACK crap in terms for the world. It would have to be a global effort and China builds from my reading a coal-fired power plant once every week. Sure, Gore and friends can force them with our over regulating EPA BS laws and shit.
I'm going on 35 in October. I can guarantee by the time I'm 70 (if I make it to 70) that technology will be far cleaner than it is today. Look at the past as an example. Look how far industry has gone since the industrial revolution.
Someone mentioned 'kicking back?' That's precisely what I'm doing with my popcorn and watching all the idiots fear monger about "global warming/climate change."
That is a fair point, and it is why we've been pressuring other countries to join in making changes.
I actually don't even know WTF you act like that's not exactly what climate scientists are saying is the entire world needs to take this seriously as this will impact everyone. You keep acting like this is all just a democrat/liberal ploy, when objective study is what other people are actually doing.
And that's the problem is people like you keep focusing on shit like that instead of actually spending the time to learn about the science.
Also like the other person said there are absolutely benefits just for Americans in regulating pollution.
Well no shit it'll be cleaner but you act like it would do that on its own without any motivation (and since you obviously don't think climate change is real, let alone that humans would do anything about it, that obviously isn't one). On top of that you've been critical of the government doing anything about that stuff when it wouldn't even being studied if it was left up to corporate economics.
Attn Global Warming nuts, Obama's iran deal will have a huge increase in carbon fuels with oil going to China where they give a rats behind about burning it clean.
Please continue beating your dead horse, NO MINDS are being changed, NOTHING will happen.
I live in Calif and nobody can predict the weather a week in advance, so don't plan on convincing me sufficient data is being collected, it is not.
And that is why people like you and John Connor are stupid. You paint everyone who is talking about the actual science as being politically focused, because that is what your agendas are.
Wait, weren't you just saying that minds could be changed if only people provided RAW data? Seriously can you make a coherent argument or have any clue what you're talking about?
First, the fact that you don't understand the difference between climate and weather, and then acting like your local TV weatherman being unable to predict exact weather nullifies climate science just shows how empty your argument is.
You refuse to look at the data, but you absolutely know it's not enough? Well obviously, because you've already made up your mind and outright show how total bullshit your stance is because it is not based on evidence or fact and you outright say you don't even care what the evidence is it could never be enough.
So what would be "sufficient data" for you?
15,000 years ago, there were glaciers with ice 1-2 miles high, that covered half of north america and half of europe. Who do we blame for that climate change? Neanderthal's lighting up their campfires?
If you actually bothered to look into this stuff you'd understand that is hardly some unexplained phenomenon that defeats all arguments about global warming.
Yes the climate changes naturally due to various reasons. Those are often taken into account in climate models and have been ruled out as being the main factor driving the warming over the past century.
Facebook
Twitter