People will need to consider turning vegetarian if the world is to conquer climate change

The point is: I would have no difficulty getting past Colorado.

tgsam

 

There is A LOT of wilderness in America. Anyone who flies regularly and doesn't think America is MOSTLY wilderness is flying up and down a coast.

 

I disagree with your premise that by improving air quality we will do significant and irreparable harm to the environment.

 

I have learned to take hyperbolic statements with a grain of salt. As a conservative no one has to tell me about the dangers of communism or socialism. But to insinuate that the man-made global warming movement is a giant communistic/socialistic conspiracy is absurd. Everytime we conservatives disagree with a position we call it a communist conspiracy. Segregation was a communist conspiracy. Floride in water was a communist conspiracy. It gets a little tiresome.

And to predict that by improving air quality we would destroy the global economy is equally absurd. I don't question your 60% figure; in fact I suspect we would have to reduce green house gases by more than that - more like 75%. But that would be done over a 40 year period which would mitigate whatever economic consequences there would be. And look at all the huge negative economic consequences if it is man-made and we do nothing.

Now I will say something that may surprise some of you. I hope global warming is man-made for a simple reason. If it is man-made we can do something about it; if it is not man-made but the result of natural forces there is not a bloody thing we can do about it and we may all be in a world of trouble, economic and otherwise.

 

Nothing can be done about it period. Man's efforts are nothing more than pissing in the ocean. Plus, we can't afford it.

 

If it's man-made we cannot afford NOT to do something about it. If the global temperature increases by 3 degress C. within the next century as expected, it will have a negative affect on insurance, food production and national economies.

 

I agree. Hyperbole gets tiresome. Which is why I generally don't use it. I did not say the man-made Global warming movement (interesting that you characterize it this way!) is a communistic/socialistic conspiracy. I said the Socialists are using the argument (or movement if you prefer) to their advantage. Men of action always use men of ideas to further their goals.

Hyperbole.

Improving air quality is not the same as reducing CO2 by 75%. I'm all for air quality. Reducing CO2 by 75% in 40 years is NOT ACHIEVABLE. Not even in the eyes of the most ardent serious Environmentalist.

You misunderstand me, Buddy. If there was something reasonable that could be done, that would be an interesting dilemma for me. But there is NOTHING that man can do, short of returning to pre-industrialized society (the penultimate goal of Socialists), to impact CO2 levels enough to make one iota of difference to the Earth's notional man-made temperature problem. You spend billions or trillions of dollars on this, the sun flares up for 5 years or something, and you've just pissed away the economy for nothing.

Sorry Buddy - I can tell your heart is in the right place and you honestly believe in what you say. I just think you've been duped if you think this has anything to do with actually making changes to the environment.

Religion is the opiate of the masses. The same guy that said that, inspires those who will use this science-based religion to further their class-warfare agenda. And that's not hyperbole. That's just fact-based opinion.

 

<There is A LOT of wilderness in America. Anyone who flies regularly and doesn't think America is MOSTLY wilderness is flying up and down a coast.>

How much ancient forest remains in the U.S. and the world?

In the U.S., most of the giant bald cypress were logged out by 1910. By boat I've journeyed the length of the Blind River that runs into Lake Maurepas. and I've seen the enormous stumps left by thousand-year-old trees. Not one of the giants was spared by the loggers.

Man is clever, but he is not wise.

tgsam

 

more or less carbon doesnt "improve" air quality.

carbon taxes also have negative effects.

if the temperature increases by 3 degrees as you say, what exactly will the negatives be? will there be any positives? is the current temperature "perfect"?

are you worried that the climate change will kill people? how many? yunno what kills people by the millions, right now? poverty and lack of economic development. why are you not worried about that?