The opposite of get in the water and cool down…

[jethreauxdawg]

I think you miss the point.

It is not political.

I'm not "scared" because some political person told me.

I'm concerned because I've read the papers.

I'm scared because so many say "that's bologna" because someone they disagree with politically said it.

I swear some people would set themselves on fire to spite some rando's politics

Again, the people telling you fossil fuels are killing the world and we need to quit using them keep burning them faster than anyone else. But feel free to stay scared.

 

[Jacknut]

Perhaps you could link some of these papers so that we may be enlightened as well.

 

[Boom Boom]

Again, the people telling you fossil fuels are killing the world and we need to quit using them keep burning them faster than anyone else. But feel free to stay scared.

Um, you seem to think a couple high profile arguable cases of this proves it for everyone.
Is this how you think people should treat religion?

 

[Jacknut]

Um, you seem to think a couple high profile arguable cases of this proves it for everyone.
Is this how you think people should treat religion?

Strawman. Stay on topic.

 

[The Cooterpoot]

My balls sweat when the climate is hot. My nipples get hard when it's cold. We need a climate taint. Somewhere in the middle would be good.

 

[Darryl Steight]

That’s one thing that irks me about mixed drinks in plastic cups. Go to a beach bar down here and you take your cup back and ask them to use the same cup and they won’t. So we waste a cup, but good news! It has a paper straw!

I stand behind my previous statement that the paper straw was the worst invention of the 19th century, and that the resurgence of such as a political touchstone is the scourge of modern humanity.

 

[Boom Boom]

Strawman. Stay on topic.

Thats not a strawman. The strawman would be saying "hey, that one guy is a hypocrite so none of your facts or reasoning counts!", which is what he is attempting.

 

[ChE1997]

Again, the people telling you fossil fuels are killing the world and we need to quit using them keep burning them faster than anyone else. But feel free to stay scared.

Again, You keep talking about the politicians.

Which is completely missing the point.

It's
The
Science.

There is unequivocal evidence that Earth is warming at an unprecedented rate. Human activity is the principal cause.

For your reading: It's not hard to find

More than 99.9% of studies agree: Humans caused climate change.​

Out of 88,000 peer reviewed papers on Climate change from 2012-2020. Only, 28 were sceptical it was caused by Humans...

Radware Bot Manager Captcha

Evidence - NASA Science

Takeaways The rate of change since the mid-20th century is unprecedented over millennia. Earth’s climate has changed throughout history. Just in the last 800,000 years, there have been eight cycles of ice ages and warmer periods, with the end of the last ice age about 11,700 years ago marking...

climate.nasa.gov

A search for human influences on the thermal structure of the atmosphere - Nature

The observed spatial patterns of temperature change in the free atmosphere from 1963 to 1987 are similar to those predicted by state-of-the-art climate models incorporating various combinations of changes in carbon dioxide, anthropogenic sulphate aerosol and stratospheric ozone concentrations...

www.nature.com

https://www.science.org/doi/abs/10.1126/science.1084123

https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGI_Chapter02.pdf

Climate change: The evidence and our options - Perspectives on Behavior Science

Glaciers serve as early indicators of climate change. Over the last 35 years, our research team has recovered ice-core records of climatic and environmental variations from the polar regions and from low-latitude high-elevation ice fields from 16 countries. The ongoing widespread melting of...

link.springer.com

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02646811.2018.1450895

 

[jethreauxdawg]

my last swing. I apologize for saying “politicians”. 99.5% of the people funding those studies condemning fossil fuel use burn more than than the average person. Keep scared, brother. I gotta get back to chopping up this tree blown down by the storm so I can heat my house this winter.

 

[Hugh's Burner Phone]

4C higher temps would be a destruction of civilization.

Period. says every respectable climate scientist.

It would shift the climate north by 1000 miles. A large number of farmland would be unable to grow the crops it does now...

Any coastal city would require seawalls as the sea level would be 3-9 feet higher. In Mississippi, Moss Point and Pascagoula would be an Island As would Pass Christian. Gulf shores and Orange Beach are under water. Baton Rouge would be on the Gulf.

Naples and Boca Raton are the southern end of Florida

Clean Energy was required to make the US energy independent. And it is required to grow to keep us energy independent.

As for pulling people out of poverty, if every church in america sponsored a homeless person. each church would have to take care of 0.5 homeless person. If only the Jesus has said take care of them****

$175.3 billion. That is how many dollars it would take to bring every person in the United States up to the poverty line... The US Defense budget, increased $100 billion since 2022. If we wanted to "End Poverty" we could without even noticing it in the budget..

As noble as the thought of ending poverty is, it will never happen. There will always be poor people. If minimum wage was increased tomorrow to $100,000/yr and those without a job were given that in UBI, then in short order you'd see prices on everything dramatically increase. I remember my dad telling me when my parents were recently married he got a raise to $250/wk. He remembered him and mom talking about how would they ever spend that much money. $6.25/hr and they thought they had hit the lottery.

 

[ChE1997]

my last swing. I apologize for saying “politicians”. 99.5% of the people funding those studies condemning fossil fuel use burn more than than the average person. Keep scared, brother. I gotta get back to chopping up this tree blown down by the storm so I can heat my house this winter.

Cite?

And thanks for using a renewable source for heating.

 

[mstateglfr]

My balls sweat when the climate is hot. My nipples get hard when it's cold. We need a climate taint. Somewhere in the middle would be good.

You think the taint is between the balls and nipples?


17 that's wild.

 

[WrapItDog]

Tony Heller
@TonyClimate

The heatwave of 2023 isn't in the ballpark of past US heatwaves like 1936. Your red hot map is uninformative propaganda. #ClimateScam

 

[Boom Boom]

my last swing. I apologize for saying “politicians”. 99.5% of the people funding those studies condemning fossil fuel use burn more than than the average person. Keep scared, brother. I gotta get back to chopping up this tree blown down by the storm so I can heat my house this winter.

"People funding those studies". Who would they be?

Scared? Brah, it ain't fear to recognize the smart move and want that. It's fear to ignore reality. Keep scared, sheep.

 

[Boom Boom]

As noble as the thought of ending poverty is, it will never happen. There will always be poor people. If minimum wage was increased tomorrow to $100,000/yr and those without a job were given that in UBI, then in short order you'd see prices on everything dramatically increase. I remember my dad telling me when my parents were recently married he got a raise to $250/wk. He remembered him and mom talking about how would they ever spend that much money. $6.25/hr and they thought they had hit the lottery.

That's....not how economics works. Some goods would go up in price. Others wouldn't at all, because the cost to bring them to market hasn't changed and there will always be someone willing to do that for a given profit.

People that are bad with money will always be bad with money, no matter what you give them. Those people will always be "poor". There's a big range of "poor" though.

 

[Hugh's Burner Phone]

That's....not how economics works. Some goods would go up in price. Others wouldn't at all, because the cost to bring them to market hasn't changed and there will always be someone willing to do that for a given profit.

People that are bad with money will always be bad with money, no matter what you give them. Those people will always be "poor". There's a big range of "poor" though.

I'd be willing to bet the goods most frequently purchased by poor people would be the ones increasing in price. Now whether that's through natural supply and demand or corporations seeing an avenue to increase profits it would happen. Yachts, computers, and high end cars may not go up but you can guarantee mid priced cars, phones, etc would.

 

[ChE1997]

I'd be willing to bet the goods most frequently purchased by poor people would be the ones increasing in price. Now whether that's through natural supply and demand or corporations seeing an avenue to increase profits it would happen. Yachts, computers, and high end cars may not go up but you can guarantee mid priced cars, phones, etc would.

I'll take that bet.

The "Goods most frequently purchased by poor people" has been studied. and Surprise, it's things EVERYONE SPENDS MONEY ON. Mainly the things people need to survive. And since you cannot horde food, transportation, rent, utilities, or cell service, I'm betting that they would not "go up in price". It might ake a little time for the market to adjust if everyone got money at once. But we have data on that from COVID with the Trump Checks....

The most common uses of CARES Act EIPs were spending, housing, and bills.

These findings add to a growing body of research on EIPs. Not surprisingly, research also shows that EIP uses, amount spent, and how quickly funds were spent vary by income level and employment status with those making $40,000 or less allocating more to essentials than higher income recipients

Trump Checks showed it's good for the economy to provide a universal basic income. Because the poor spend all the money while the rich save it. Spending is better than saving in our economy. Saving money only helps the saver. Spending helps many.

The impact payments translated to stronger economic growth as well. The stimulus payments enacted under the CARES Act were estimated to have boosted the country’s economic output by 0.6 percent in 2020, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

On average, nearly 75% of the total expenditures for [Poor] families went to food, transportation, rent, utilities, and cellphone service

 

[Boom Boom]

I'd be willing to bet the goods most frequently purchased by poor people would be the ones increasing in price. Now whether that's through natural supply and demand or corporations seeing an avenue to increase profits it would happen. Yachts, computers, and high end cars may not go up but you can guarantee mid priced cars, phones, etc would.

In the short term, sure. But in short order prices on non-supply constrained goods will go back to where they were. Because their price is dictated by a set cost plus a small profit, and doesn't respond to demand. Otherwise, all of modern econ theory is wrong, markets don't react to maximizing profit, new entrants don't respond to profit opportunity, things are just dictated by corporate overlords.

No, economics is not a morality play. Just because you want prices on those things to go up as "punishment" because "those people" aren't supposed to get free money, doesn't mean that it will. Economics doesn't care about morality or what hurts your feelings.