And deniers are luddite morons who think we can fix global warming on short
notice when it gets a lot worse but we can't screw it up in the meantime.
Your fix is regulate now, so that in the far future it can all be nice? Why
regulate north america, and the eu, and not the BRIC's or indonesia, etc? For
this is what will happen, in reality. Regulating is your fix, rather than
technology? I'd focus on substituting better power sources, rather than order
people about, and this would be worldwide. What's the incentive for China to
shut down coal burning? Regulate?
-----Original Message-----
From: meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net>
To: everything-list <everything-list@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Sat, Dec 13, 2014 2:01 am
Subject: Re: real A.I.
On 12/12/2014 9:35 PM, John Clark wrote:
On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 5:23 PM, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net> wrote:
> Nobody bothered to explain that it might have been
> volcanoes or asteroid strikes as well as oribtal variations
> and they did that because it's completely irrelevant to
> current global warming. We know that CO2 has increased from
> 300ppm to 450ppm and that we put about twice that amount into
> the atmosphere.
But nobody has a solution for excess CO2 that won't kill far far
more people than climate warming ever will, or at least
environmentalists don't.
Donald McKay, withouthotair.com, has spelled out exactly what it will
take and it doesn't kill anybody and it doesn't cost anymore than a small
war. In fact everybody knows what the solutions are, it doesn't take some
future discovery. It just takes the will to demote fossil fuel to few
specialized applications.
Environmentalists don't have solutions for anything because
environmentalists are silly irrational people who mix ridiculous
pessimism (global warming will kill us all) with ridiculous
optimism (windmills will save us all) and who believe it's a
virtue to think with your gut and not with your brain.
And deniers are luddite morons who think we can fix global warming on
short notice when it gets a lot worse but we can't screw it up in the
meantime.
> So how the Earth warmed or cooled in the distant past is just
> your attempt at diversion.
It's a diversion from the fantasy that the Earth's climate has
always been the same and there is one true temperature that
everything should be at.
Which is another bullshit attempt at diversion. It's completely
irrelevant to whether a 4degC global temperature increase over 50yrs will
cause extensive suffering, death and economic damage. And note that 4degC
increase is the projected worldwide average increase as of 2100. The oceans
tend to lag, so that corresponds to a 5 or 6degC increase over the
continents. And it doesn't mean the temperature increase goes to +4degC and
then stops. Under your do-nothing scenario it will still be rapidly
increasing as it crosses through +4degC in 2100.
Brent
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
