Are people finally going to admit that climate change is a huge emergency? With the blazing heat and floods it should be obvious?

Question

Oigit · Accepted Answer

Take politics and peoples feels out of the issue. Let the scientist and engineers take the lead. Because the it's already been weaponized like everything that is turned political. Also people feelings and protests do not make you automatically give them the knowledge needed to fix the issue. It also turns people off when it comes to the subject. So people become a hell of a lot less likely to have a honest open dialog about it.

If anything you can apply that to many current issues and many that even after generations have not been solved.

Guy13 · Accepted Answer

Climate has been changing since the foundation of the world... let it go as it the combination of uninformed, secular humanistic thought against a Creator, God, and lunacy pervades the Subject. The sole purpose of "Climate Change" is too suck other people's money into special interests in the form of Business, Equity, and straight-up bribery/pocket lining. It is all about making a created entity (Earth) a god and of course demonstrating man's fallen nature and sinfulness grounded in Greed.

menina · Accepted Answer

I agree with you, it's pretty obvious. But from what I've seen many people are still in denial. If you mention that climate change is real, they either attack you or call you crazy.

BlacklightShade · Accepted Answer

I hope people wake up. This mass denial is killing everyone.

OpenClose · Answer

I'd somewhat try to avoid associating climate with weather. That's how you end up with GOP politicians who will literally take a snowball to congress and say "See, it's snowing. Climate change is fake."

But yeah, the science is settled on this. There's a reason we "climate change denialist" because it is denialism. Head-in-the-sand.

And you know what? any party who wants to deny it basically gives the opposing party a monopoly on the solutions. They hand it right over. Here in the US, there might actually be some GOP arguments for, you know, conservation. But nope. Thumbs in ears. Basically handing this entire topic to the DNC so they can monopolize the solutions. Genius. Absolutely genius.

Luckily there's records of everything, so we get to make it very clear in the history books exactly who did this and remind everyone of the mentality that caused it.

Hilariously enough, the fossil fuel industry contributed a LOT to providing the evidence of climate change. They basically kept creating new studies to try to disprove it, and the data simply contributed to the evidence.

The military established it as fact ages ago, with it informing certain policies in the middle-east, as well as emergency response allocation.

Speaking of the Middle East, Saudi Arabia and the UAE have been spending unbelievable amounts of money trying to overhaul their economy away from fossil fuels.

Climate denialism is pretty much restricted to a subset of science-illiterate people in the anglosphere.

Investigator · Answer

The climate is always changing, the real question is "is there an ecological problem that is happening whether or not humans are involved and, if so, to what degree are we the culprit?"

Every response to the problem of climate change hinges entirely on the two foundational premises: either A) the climate is always changing and humans have had a negligible impact on it, and whatever change we have had, we can mitigate or B) humanity is the problem, so only the extinction of the species can solve it

Some people may claim "that's a strawman. Nobody seriously believes exterminating people is the solution", but that's only because it's an irreconcilable conclusion. If we run decades of scientific experiments and publish a myriad of peer-reviewed articles that all point to humanity existing as the reason for climate change--as in, the singularly-biggest factor--then what? We cannot both exterminate ourselves and enjoy the results of a cleaner world where we don't exist.

The only sensible solution is to say "humans can fix whatever negligible impact on the climate that we've had"; there is no other option. Once we reach that conclusion, then we can start somewhere, such as "what part of the human experience presently generates the most amount of ecological damage?", because what we're slowly building up to is "how much are people willing to sacrifice, in the service of 'climate change'?" Most people want to save the climate, in a way that doesn't negatively impact their standard of living. But, if that standard of living is contributing to the deteriorating of the climate they want to save, we've reached an impasse. Something has to be give.

TL;DR If climate change is largely the by-product of society and the people living in, and we don't want to end the human race, what are people willing to sacrifice in order to save the climate?

MarkRet · Answer

There are people in the world who fully acknowledge that climate change is a huge problem, but they'll always be outnumbered by denialists, rich greedy corporate types, and third-world working class schmucks who always say, "You can't shut down our lead processing factory! We'll lose our jobs!"

When George W Bush was president, his administration denied global warming for years, always looking for some denialist scientist to back up their view. When Bush's administration couldn't find any more denialist scientists, they finally acknowledged that global warming was a problem, but did nothing, saying simply that it would be bad for business.

Chazmatazz269 · Answer

The debate isn’t about whether climate change is real or urgent. The debate is whether or not it’s compounded by human hubris and therefore whether or not there’s anything we can do about it.
Problem is, our current sociopolitical system isn’t prepared either way. The left blindly trusts the pseudoscience that has been telling us the planet won’t last another 20 years for the last 50 years. Ell oh ell! The right doesn’t believe we’re the problem or the solution, so there’s no point in wasting good money on a solution. Ell oh ell! Welcome to two-party capitalism! Pop some corn, sit back and enjoy the show!

Anonymous · Answer

We should be encouraging global warming to at least mitigate if not end the ongoing Quaternary ice age and bring the earth back to a more inhabitable Greenhouse climate such as dominated 85%+ of its history.

The alternative is to remain in the current an ice house/age Climate.

This is not a good thing as it means shifting periodically between around ~100,000 year Glacial freezes (with Miles of ice Crushing much of the northern and Southern Hemisphere and short growing seasons) intersperse with brief ~10,000 year inter-glacials (where it is slightly less cold). The end of one we may otherwise be approaching soon.

It is very short term and short sighted thinking to oppose global warming. Moving a few cities is a minor problem compared to what the return of the ice will do to our planet. We need to control the climate of the earth NOT try to leave it as is.

Anonymous · Answer

I don't think anyone is denying that climate change is real. We all know for a fact that the climate has been changing and going though cycles for billions of years. When humans made their way to the Americas only a few thousand years ago it was during an ice age. That was literally only seconds ago in the context of Earth's history. I think a lot of people find the idea that humans have caused climate change to be a little egocentric and self-important. I do think humans have contributed to it and sped things up a little, but the notion that we will be able to reverse it is very naïve.

notwoke · Answer

Nope, a total farce. It's gets hot every year. Carbon pollution is a complete hoax. the only actions the government is interested in are the politically expedient ones and the ones that make the elite rich. That should tell you all you need to know. There's no shortage of high impact ideas to reduce carbon that no one is talking about. here's a list of some ideas that would reduce carbon on the air but no one talks about it because there's no money or votes to be gained:

Shrink the size of houses being built

reduce the number of pets

reduce the population

reduce meat consumption

reduce overeating in general

restrict air travel

restrict air conditioning

restrict organic farming

reduce international shipping by on shoring manufacturing

restrict business with countries still building coal plants

restrict exersize

MiseriaCantareAFI · Answer

Both parties actually do believe the earth is warming, if you talk to most people.

The problem lies within, where the two parties differ on global warming... and that's, what's causing it to happen

Republicans don't want you thinking that it's the very things that are causing it, OIL, AND NATURAL GASES.

INDUSTRY

Anonymous · Answer

not a chance. Maybe when your elitist alarmists get rid of their private jets, I'll think about it. Or when they go after the countries which are actually contributing the most crap into the oceans (it's not the USA). Or when they all sell their seaside mansions that they keep buying, while at the same time telling US that the oceans are gonna rise so much that entire states will be under water if we don't use paper straws and electric cars.

You can believe what you want, but you can't fault someone for using common sense and agreeing with the things I just listed because they're all undisputable facts, unlike your argument which can't scientifically show that anything we're doing is actually causing or increasing climate change.

hahahmm · Answer

Scientists just said we have the ability to cool the poles and it would be very easy to do. We also know how to create machines that fix the atmosphere. Humans are very clever.

Not that I believe "global warming" is man made. Yes, the earth is warming but that doesn't mean it was caused by humans.

Msputiton · Answer

Some will others won't.  It all depends what their party tells them to believe

FunkyMonkee · Answer

No, because it's all bullshit!!

Where do you see any flooding?

Why would Barry Soetoro blow $10,000,000 on a mansion on the shoreline if there was a risk of flooding?

Why are there lakes and rivers drying up if there's supposed to be flooding?

Kiran_Yagami · Answer

That depends. Are you willing to go to war with India and China to make them do their part? Because China emits more greenhouse gas and throws out more pollution than every country in the west combined, and India isn't far behind. If you aren't willing to make them stop, then anything you say is a joke and no one should ever take you seriously.

nawtee_me · Answer

Why is it that no one who want something to be done about global warming will admit that cities, concrete and asphalt roads are a big contributor as well as carbon emissions? Why don’t we go back to dirt roads and horse and buggy’s? All of this heats up the atmosphere so we should do away with it all.

jshm2 · Answer

Don't be silly. You still have flat earthers, anti-vaxxers, and atheists how think they are onto bigger "emergencies".  It really is a "Noah get the boat" situation.

SiberFox · Answer

If you really think its a problem go shit on corporations in asia since they do 80% of the pollution.
Start demanding nuclear energy since its the most productive and cleanest snergy source.
Leave the regular folks alone.

Anonymous · Answer

There are a lot of people who think it's a conspiracy or bs to push products/agendas

AngryCarl · Answer

It's not an emergency until MY house is underwater. THEN it becomes an emergency.

OddBeMe · Answer

The 40% deplorables will never admit it. Goes against their world view.

boredgal · Answer

I don't know why people aren't scared about this.

exitseven · Answer

If climate change works the way the democrats say it does I will not have to move south after I retire.

Googlemyahoo · Answer

Pollution actually kept the earth colder. The clean air is allowing more solar radiation warming the planet

Anonymous · Answer

It's an emergency caused by vast overpopulation and development ruining landscapes and waterways

oohyeh72 · Answer

Maybe removing all the sand from the oceans to create virtually everything around us is the issue.

KrakenAttackin · Answer

Dude, stop with the hysterical nonsense. Climate change has happened before and will happen again. Buying EV's and paper straws won't change a thing.

MrTaboo · Answer

No, because more people look at facts than listen to dooms day global warming freaks.

Twalli · Answer

But it snows (sarcasm). Except, that's actually the argument against it.

Anonymous · Answer

The existence of heat waves and flooding is nothing new and doesn't prove anything. We have had those long before all these climate scares. It's anomalous but not unprecedented.

jimmy2 · Answer

No it is what it is you should read the Bible the earth will burn up

Dargil · Answer

It will be increasingly proven to be the greatest hoax in history. It's all about Communist/Globalist control over how people live. It is the Gaia religion.

CloudMassacre · Answer

People will deny it to their dying breath

NotTacocaT6969 · Answer

They’ll admit it when they’re dead.

Kelly6 · Answer

Hard to tell truth to cult members

maximumpower · Answer

It's cyclical.

Anonymous · Answer

In a word: no.

Shamalien · Answer

HAARP

Are people finally going to admit that climate change is a huge emergency? With the blazing heat and floods it should be obvious?

Most Helpful Opinions

What Girls & Guys Said

Are people finally going to admit that climate change is a huge emergency? With the blazing heat and floods it should be obvious?

Most Helpful Opinions

What Girls & Guys Said

We're glad to see you liked this post.