Last post in this topic and then I'm out. It seems my calls for moderation, a holistic systems approach to ecological stewardship, and my appeals to depoliticize the use of science keep falling on deaf ears.
In short, I would say 100 years of false predictions such as "The polar bears will all be extinct by 2015" or the hockey stick model scandal or the multiple reports of falsified evidence in exchange for grants have been pretty damning. But how about we dig deeper?
When we finally understand the complex interactions of Milankovitch Cycles and solar weather on our climate or can trace the effects of a single thunder storm in Central Europe all the way to South America or all of the thermal sensors we use for data that are mounted in urban areas begin to account for the heat island effect or can predict the weather at an accuracy of greater than 70% on a time scale of far greater than 2 weeks, then I will begin to lend credence to the hypothesis that the change in climate is largely anthropogenic ("man made") in nature.
Until then, I will continue to believe that the changes in climate are largely outside of our control and that the money is better spent on clean air, clean water, and less impact on wildlife habitat.
When did I ever say that? Please provide a quote.
Again, my point is that these "green" and "sustainable" efforts are great for virtue signaling but do fuck all for the environment. I've addressed EV batteries but let's talk LEED building certification which supposed to certify buildings as "green" and "sustainable." Did you know that you can get points on the LEED certification by placing shrubs, park benches, and bike racks in front of your building? I used to work in the field and have literally seen buildings where buildings became LEED certified by simply adding bike racks, window tint, and CFL bulbs (which are filled with toxic heavy metals that can't be disposed of easily. Thanks, Obama!). It's a complete joke.
Do you know have many birds wind generation and solar plants kill? You'd be astounded by the number. Do you know how much wildlife habitat has been lost for wind and solar farms? You'd be astounded by the number. Did you know that almost none of the countries that signed up for the Kyoto Accords or the Paris Accords ever met their commitments and essentially stopped trying after the first phase? I bet you didn't. But hey, at least we're being "green" and "sustainable."
You know what makes me irate and I'm hostile about? The fact that so many people get a hemp bag and Prius and then act smug like they are so "green" and "sustainable." We do so little and then act like we're being "green" and "sustainable" while we trash our economy to be enslaved by a new global banking system under the guise of carbon credits. They want you to literally be able to purchase carbon credits. Think about that.
@wink and @Treetop Flyer capture my argument succinctly.
In short, I would say 100 years of false predictions such as "The polar bears will all be extinct by 2015" or the hockey stick model scandal or the multiple reports of falsified evidence in exchange for grants have been pretty damning. But how about we dig deeper?
When we finally understand the complex interactions of Milankovitch Cycles and solar weather on our climate or can trace the effects of a single thunder storm in Central Europe all the way to South America or all of the thermal sensors we use for data that are mounted in urban areas begin to account for the heat island effect or can predict the weather at an accuracy of greater than 70% on a time scale of far greater than 2 weeks, then I will begin to lend credence to the hypothesis that the change in climate is largely anthropogenic ("man made") in nature.
Until then, I will continue to believe that the changes in climate are largely outside of our control and that the money is better spent on clean air, clean water, and less impact on wildlife habitat.
When did I ever say that? Please provide a quote.
Again, my point is that these "green" and "sustainable" efforts are great for virtue signaling but do fuck all for the environment. I've addressed EV batteries but let's talk LEED building certification which supposed to certify buildings as "green" and "sustainable." Did you know that you can get points on the LEED certification by placing shrubs, park benches, and bike racks in front of your building? I used to work in the field and have literally seen buildings where buildings became LEED certified by simply adding bike racks, window tint, and CFL bulbs (which are filled with toxic heavy metals that can't be disposed of easily. Thanks, Obama!). It's a complete joke.
Do you know have many birds wind generation and solar plants kill? You'd be astounded by the number. Do you know how much wildlife habitat has been lost for wind and solar farms? You'd be astounded by the number. Did you know that almost none of the countries that signed up for the Kyoto Accords or the Paris Accords ever met their commitments and essentially stopped trying after the first phase? I bet you didn't. But hey, at least we're being "green" and "sustainable."
You know what makes me irate and I'm hostile about? The fact that so many people get a hemp bag and Prius and then act smug like they are so "green" and "sustainable." We do so little and then act like we're being "green" and "sustainable" while we trash our economy to be enslaved by a new global banking system under the guise of carbon credits. They want you to literally be able to purchase carbon credits. Think about that.
Is your reusable tote worse for the environment than a plastic bag?
Just how many times do you have to use a 'bag for life' to make it worth it.www.euronews.com
Some feel-good measures might not actually help. It remains to be seen if it’s even feasible to move to widespread use of electric cars.
@wink and @Treetop Flyer capture my argument succinctly.
