"CO2 increase is responsible for the global warming" is still a hypothesis. We should not forget that and we also should recognize that the subject CO2 increase is abused by pseudo green politicians who are dictating the industry to a particular form of gaining energy. Mostly there where they have their own lobby.... Here is an interesting paper published at 'Nature'. Global warming preceded by increasing carbon dioxide concentrations during the last deglaciation (harvard.edu) People should be always careful if somebody claims to have seemingly 'understood' a very complex matter, reducing it to one factor! The subject CO2 is not a good argument to get rid of fossile fuels. Also the 'climate change' isn't. The very obvious argument is: We need to get rid of fossile fuels, because they are precious and limited! We have to realize the principle of re- ..means re-cycle, re-newable, etc etc... Also we should move the narrow focus from the climate to the entire environment. The entire climate change subject has degenerated to a pseudo green propaganda. We have a far bigger variety of pollution issues on earth, but there is no broad focus, because there is no power and money to gain...(for instance how to save the sea, how to stop to dump waste, etc etc)...
That is a misrepresentation, Yen! No one serious says it's only the CO2! “There are countless variables that should be taken into account to foresee future climate change scenarios and that we are not able to constrain for the end-Triassic world,” Capriolo cautions. “However, as geoscientists, we warn that the currently ongoing carbon dioxide emissions are similar to those that led to the end-Triassic mass extinction.” Stop listening to Trump & co. all the time, FCOL... Frankly, this makes you an activist with a *certain* disregard for Science... I agree re. the full-on, holistic view re. pollution and exploitation, a circular economy and - I would call it - a rational relationship with Mother Nature, though... But these are ideas of the "green Scientists" and businesspeople etc. Exactly those whom you are attacking in that post... From a rather dubious position of a failed politician and his band of merry liars and sociopaths... An utterly undignified position to be in, for a "Scientist"...
Do you remember the ozone hole? A lot of people said that we stopped using CFCs only because DuPont had the patent expired on them. The point is that it worked. No one talks about the ozone hole anymore because banning the CFC worked. So we did that because it was the right thing to do or because DuPont? At the end of the day.... Who cares? It worked, we have one big problem less. So the whole debate about the origin of the climate change is pointless. Who cares if the earth is getting hotter because the CO2 we are pumping in the environment or because it's a natural cycle, or because it's a combination of both things? There are companies that are getting rich because they produce solar panels, wind turbines, or electric cars, and likely they care a lot about making money and a lot of less about the environment? Again, who cares? It's not a perfect world, and I prefer that a moron like musk makes money selling electric cars, to a bunch of other morons making money selling leaded gasoline or building coal power plants. A good action done because the wrong motivation is still a good action. A problem solved is still a problem solved, no matter if we have another long list of problems waiting to be solved...
well, i will take the risk of boring you with a personal opinion.. -it is a fact that i am 71 yo.. -so i have will reach my statistical EOL in a few months. -so all this green bs will last my time, lol. i will be long-gone from the face of the earth before the icecaps melt, and you guys will have to swim for it. [all of you.] meanwhile, you have an opportunity to learn something from someone who is in all probability older and wiser than you.. [ and that includes gorski.] when i see people gluing themselves to the streets to hinder people with cars with tiny engines that run on fossil fuels to pester them into cars running on batteries, i tend to shake the wise old head and shrug my shoulders.. because those self-same people keep ordering made-in-china bells and and whistles.. billions of them. that they do not even need, because they already have got everything..a roof over their head, adequate food and water, a green car running on batteries for a few miles, a taxman, and a mortgage, a democratic green government, etc.. and by what means do those billions of bells and whistles from china get transported? correct; in billions of 40 feet green containers, carried by thousands of huge ships powered by huge diesels as large as the houses they live in.... time for them to stop ordering blingbling from china. imo.. instead of gluing their hand to the streets. just my two cents. Après moi, le déluge!
@gorski It's nothing to do with Trump. I relate to the 'green' politics in Germany. The green party here is a bunch of degenerated ideologists which only have their power in mind. It's a shame. They betrayed the original green idea. And I relate to the theorists we have here:" Die letzte Generation", the last generation. A bunch of criminal rads in the name of actually noble ideas AKA to save the environment. @acer-5100 You are right. It worked very well at the ozone hole. The huge difference is: It was about artificial pollutants and about a defined polluted area. The chemical mechanisms happened very locally and very specific. If you have such a condition there is ONE general way that always works. Stop the emission of the pollutant! This works everywhere and has worked everywhere. Rivers and other waters (where you even couldn't take a bath in the 80s due to heavy metals) At CO2 it is different, though. It is no 'pollutant' nor is it artificial. It is actually everywhere. Living beings, waters, ground, atmosphere..... It has multiple functions and is a metabolic product, also food for plants. AND: It is just related to a far greater system (climate) which also is influenced by far greater cycles such as sun activity, Milankovitch cycles, etc etc... BTW: The Nature article above suggests: Temperature raises FIRST, CO2 raise lags.... Or in other words. Raising CO2 levels are effect, not cause of global warming..
AfD affiliated and who are they "listening" to, who are they affiliated to? C'mon, man, drop the pretence... As for the Greens - those are German Greens, so be a little bit more precise next time, qualify your sentences... If you do want to split hairs - why don't you do it with proper Scientists and not through AfD filters and blinders...?!?
No it's about communicating the right reasons and motives! The Greens here are like a sect focused on their CO2 level schedules..and by that they violate the constitution and adopt laws which are irrational and inconsistent within themselves.(For instance building more and more coal plants to compensate the nuclear plants)... It is a very important scientific matter to clarify if temperature follows CO2 OR vice versa! We know when temperature is raising the seas cannot hold the same amount of CO2 (as dissolved gas). There is an unfortunate cycle....more temperature, more CO2---more CO2 more temperature! It is within the very scope of valid scientific outcome that if we would do anything to decrease CO2 nothing ever happens to the climate, because a more relevant cause is taking over! So better communicate the right motives why to save fossile fuels and to protect the environment.
I think the second sentence is, more or less a reply to the first one. I mean it's important academically to understand the cause, but practically little changes. I mean, take the example of the electric current, when Volta discovered it, and for many years everybody tough it was a flux of positive charges moving in one direction, then it was discovered that it really was a flux of negative particles moving in the opposite direction. Academically it was a revolution, practically nothing changed. After a couple of centuries we still use the old convention (called conventional current). In the same way, assume we discover that really it's a natural cycle, the temperatures are raising for whatever natural reason, this lead to a natural release of CO2 from the oceans, which in turn, contribute to raised temperatures and so on in what is called positive feedback. Is that a good reason to contribute to the supposed natural CO2 origin, burning fossil fuels like we did since the industrial revolution? I don't think so.
did you check the latest news about the Coral reefs? Many thanks, dear humans for destroying the earth I live in a desert climate, and on those days was so much heat I don't know how other animals can suffer much wave heats
No, Yen, if these guys are contradicting themselves, then WTH...?!? Why take them seriously? Formulate a different strategy and policies and kick them out... Btw, "motives" - I'm not a policeman... But I think you are using "motives" as a poor substitute for "interests" (inter - esse)... A rookie mistake in Humanities but OK...
And a rather deep, velvety smooth voice from beyond rumbles now... "Welcome to the neo-Nazi scam, gentlemen..."
One reason for the huge gain of AfD in Germany IS the poor politics of the Greens! Even because they don't take the people with them and do only realize their ideology for their own power and benefits. I took the German meaning and thought the English meaning would be the same "Beweggrund", has nothing to do with a policeman, but is actually different to "Interesse". origin. Lat:"motivum", also "Motor". Something like."Factors which are responsible that one feels moved to do something." So when relating to Interesse then: Factors which create certain interests.
Rookie indeed... And "alternative" as in "true, proper alternative", not going backward a million steps, FFS!!!
Climate change alarmism is not a mental disorder, it's a well fabricated psyop part of a globalist agenda perpetrated by the Elite to shape the perception of reality, a false reality or so-called matrix. Yes it's hilarious how stupid people can be. They are easily influenced by images painted in red color. Worse, some morons think is not funny when others laugh at those alarmist pics.
hm. what`s funny about it, gorski? well.after we had a major propaganda exercise by the media over the covid pan-panick, and now the co2 net zero pan-panick , and the zelenski comedian pan-panick, it almost looks like they revived the good ole joe goebbels... they just dont make journalists like they used to anymore..;that`s what.