The 5 characteristics of global warming consensus denial
- Thread starter futurecurrents
- Start date
Everyone is concerned about the deforestation of the world. The vast majority of it is taking place in regions which we have zero control over.
Forests in the U.S. are growing, btw.
Plants are doing better since CO2 has increased. Crop yields have benefitted from more CO2. It's a fact.
Does that mean you don't give a damn about starving people and would like crop yields to fall back to early 20th century levels? I hope that isn't what you believe.
as a true conservative I believe we should be conserving the oceans and the rain forests.
Luckily for my internal consistency that concepts also works with a free market as long as our natural resources are priced in such a way that they can be replaced or cleaned up.
I believe that our natural resources are getting leased out or sold far too cheaply. The costs of cleanup must be factored into the use.
Its why I can not believe enviornmentalists like fc are concerned about CO2 but advocate nuclear.
They are freaking nuts. We have never stored nuclear power safely so there is no way we are factoring in true costs.
Luckily for my internal consistency that concepts also works with a free market as long as our natural resources are priced in such a way that they can be replaced or cleaned up.
I believe that our natural resources are getting leased out or sold far too cheaply. The costs of cleanup must be factored into the use.
Its why I can not believe enviornmentalists like fc are concerned about CO2 but advocate nuclear.
They are freaking nuts. We have never stored nuclear power safely so there is no way we are factoring in true costs.
The nuclear/energy problem would be solved practically overnight if we could figure out how to make a viable fusion reactor. Like, curing cancer, the solution has been just incredibly elusive. I'm afraid we are still decades away from both.
The same with advanced solar cells and advanced batteries. The big breakthroughs we need always seem just out of reach.
I have pisspoor on ignore so never see his nonsense unless somebody quotes him, like you did here.
"Plants are doing better since CO2 has increased. Crop yields have benefitted from more CO2. It's a fact."
The real facts are that crop yields are up far more thanks to crop rotation, Miracle-Gro, irrigation, improved herbicides and improved pesticides than to unplanned increases of CO2 to dangerous levels.
In the last 100 years the earth has gone from about 3 molecules per 10,000 to 4 molecules per 10,000 - dangerous levels my ass. Whatever kunt2. If you want dangerous levels, put a plastic bag over your head for 30 minutes then measure the CO2 level in the bag.
CO2 has been 10 to 20 times higher in previous warm periods. The earth didn't burn up and is still here. So are we and so are plants! (did you really say, Miracle-Gro?
)Just because CO2 acts as a fertilizer of course doesn't discount other innovations in farming. It's still a fertilizer to plants, dumbass.
I don't really give a crap whether you read what I have to say or not. There are others who read it who are more important than a little moron like yourself. C'est la vie, idiot