What do you think of climate change?

[Theo520]

Government That Wants You To Take Climate Change Seriously Invites Foreign High School Kid To Testify Before Congress | Babylon Bee

 

[phaster]

Government That Wants You To Take Climate Change Seriously Invites Foreign High School Kid To Testify Before Congress | The Babylon Bee

given TRUMP and the rest of scientifically illiterate politicians and pundits who are at the controls AND running things into the ground,… perhaps a foreign high school kid (that appreciates science) is what is needed to point out to the idiots in charge that they are really screwing up!!!

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

god have mercy on the USA

www.TinyURL.com/CCpolitics

or do you think mr. science would be a more appropriate witness for congress to listen to?!

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[EndTimes]

sigh,… political . . . nonsense.

Speaking for yourself again?

The LEFT is riddled with Satan’s approval

 

[Theo520]

Houston Ranks No. 1 in America in Renewable Energy Use — No, Really - PaperCity Magazine

 

[tori2323]

climate change is real. I’d rather believe trained and experienced scientists who confirm this many times over than people with no scientific background who have read a couple of articles on the internet and watched a few people on TV and say it is a hoax.

Taking care of our earth is important and necessary. God created the earth for us. Pollution and the overall warming of the earth are issues that must be dealt with.

I personally do little things to help, like drinking from a reusable water bottle to reduce plastic consumption and brushing my teeth with a bamboo toothbrush. It’s not much, but it’s something. I believe if we all combined did little things to help our planet, then our planet would be in a much better place. There is nothing wrong with switching to a more natural eco-friendly lifestyle.

Obviously, people can go to the extreme and start saying ridiculous things like having abortions or using contraceptions to limit the population “because having children harms the planet”. I laugh at people like that. As Catholics, we must never support things like that.

But there is nothing controversial (or nothing should be controversial) about eating less meat and using bamboo toothbrushes.

 

[EndTimes]

Of course Climate Changes… It’s been changing from Earth’s Beginning…
I’ve never met one person who’s denied that Climate Changes…

 

[Theo520]

Biden bows to radical left by pledging to cancel Keystone XL pipeline​

//www.foxnews.com/opinion/daniel-turner-biden-bows-to-radical-left-by-pledging-to-cancel-keystone-xl-pipeline-americans-would-suffer

Former Vice President Joe Biden is continuing to move from the left, to the far-left, to the radical fringe in a desperate effort to capture the enthusiastic support of the followers of self-described socialists Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y. Nowhere is this more true than in Biden’s dangerous positions on energy issues.

If Biden defeats President Trump in the November election and sticks to his pledge to dramatically change energy policies to move toward the radical Green New Deal, the American people will suffer. We can all expect to face disruptive energy shortages, big energy price increases, an increased dependence on foreign countries outside our hemisphere to meet our energy needs, and a massive increase in unemployment in the U.S. energy industry.

The latest example of Biden’s irresponsible leftward lurch on energy policy is his recently announced promise to overturn President Trump’s approval of the Keystone XL pipeline – a pipeline that would safely transport up to 830,000 barrels of Canadian crude oil to Nebraska, from where it would be sent by pipeline to U.S. refineries on the Gulf Coast each day.

 

[phaster]

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Climate change could collide with coronavirus to create a summer from hell

With the mercury set to soar to unprecedented levels in 2020, climate experts fear that record-high temperatures will make lingering coronavirus restrictions far more challenging.

Scientists are increasingly concerned that the combination of global warming, a deepening economic crisis, and pandemic lockdowns could make for a long and sweltering season.

Utility companies turning off power due to lack of payment during the hottest months could even turn into a major public health threat, and cooling centers may not suffice if restrictions prevent too many people from congregating inside.

…Older Americans and other vulnerable communities are already disproportionately affected by the coronavirus crisis. More severe medical problems, along with economic woes, could compound the usual summer stressors.

“…The very people who are becoming sick and dying during the pandemic are the same ones who are most negatively affected by climate change,”

Climate Change, Coronavirus Could Cause Summer Misery | Digital Trends

COVID-19 Is a Symptom of a Bigger Problem: Our Planet’s Ailing Health

The COVID-19 outbreak is a global tragedy. COVID-19 is a reminder of how vulnerable even our modern, technologically advanced societies are.

The biggest lesson is that COVID-19 is more than an illness. It is a symptom of the ailing health of our planet. Humanity’s dysfunctional relationship with nature has caused this wider disease. Understanding this root cause is critical, if we want to rise stronger after the crisis. COVID-19 is a zoonotic virus—meaning it spilled over from wild animals to humans—and evolved into a pandemic due to the now well-established risk cocktail of the 21st century: ecosystem destruction, species loss, global warming, colliding with risky human behavior like illegal wildlife trade. All of this has played out in a globalized network of trade and travel.

…After COVID-19, nothing will be the same. When we overcome COVID-19, we should not risk what we have won. We should do what we can to stabilize our environment, our support system. We need to think about how we can restore nature by living life differently.

One thing is clear. We cannot just develop a vaccine for COVID-19, call it “job done” and rev the economic engines back into the red. We need to use the reboot to incentivize sustainable innovation and green investment.

COVID-19 Is a Symptom of the Planet’s Ailing Health | Time

 

[Theo520]

Fracknation: A Feature Documentary

FrackNation was made after Phelim McAleer confronted GASLAND filmmaker Josh Fox at a Q&A in Chicago. McAleer asked Fox about instances of water being lit on fire well before fracking occurred in America and why he didn’t include that information in GASLAND . Fox said the information “wasn’t relevant.” McAleer disagreed and put their exchange on YouTube. Fox sued to have it removed. That’s when McAleer realized there was more to the story of fracking than Josh Fox was letting on.

FrackNation was funded by 3,305 backers on Kickstarter who generously donated $212,265 to have us investigate the truth about fracking. All funds from oil and gas companies or their executives were explicitly rejected. FrackNation is a film by the people, for the people.

 

[silentwitness]

phaster:

What do you think of climate change

I would like to see government directed research in renewable energy initiatives without the global (and national) carbon commitments and penalties.

 

[Ender]

I would like to see government directed research in renewable energy initiatives without the global (and national) carbon commitments and penalties.

Searching for “renewable energy” is a bit like looking for a perpetual motion machine. The one energy initiative in which I would support government involvement would be developing fusion technology. The rest is simply a waste of money. Fusion, however, would provide virtually limitless power and solve pretty much everyone’s problems. You might wonder why it doesn’t get more support from the greens given that it would do what they claim to want.

 

[phaster]

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Trump’s dream of oil rigs off Florida’s coasts
Jun 12, 2020 | 5:30 AM

The U.S. Interior Department tweeted Wednesday that a Politico report about plans to jump-start oil exploration off Florida’s coasts was “fake news.”

As much as we would like to believe Interior, we don’t. Not for a second. The president and his administration have demonstrated an unlimited capacity for lying. And the Interior Department is headed by a one-time oil industry lobbyist, David Bernhardt, who’s been happy to carry the energy industry’s water while serving in the federal government.

Besides, and maybe most important, the president has made no secret of his desire to see more oil rigs off the coasts. He wants 'em, bad.

…the president has made clear his desire for “energy dominance,” and he’s had his eye on the Gulf Coast since Inauguration Day.

He’s issued a series of orders and proposals since taking office that would open up areas of the Gulf and the Atlantic to exploration and drilling.

So far, at least, Florida politicians have maintained a bipartisan consensus in opposition to oil drilling off the state’s coasts. Republican Sens. Rick Scott and Marco Rubio have made clear they don’t want it. Even Ron DeSantis, the president’s No. 1 fan, has opposed the president’s drilling dreams.

DeSantis supported a U.S. House measure last year to permanently ban drilling off Florida’s Gulf Coast, a measure that won support from 26 of 27 Florida House members (Ted Yoho was the lone holdout). Trump had promised to veto the ban but he needn’t have worried; the bipartisan bill was never given a hearing in Mitch McConnell’s Senate.

Trump’s not about to give up on letting the oil industry go to work off Florida’s coasts, especially if he wins a second term and no longer has any reason to care what Floridians think.

We already know what they think. In 2018, 69% of voters approved a state constitutional ban on drilling in waters controlled by the state (about nine miles off the western and southern coasts and three miles off the eastern coast).

…if you think another Deepwater Horizon spill is less likely today, don’t forget the Trump administration’s attempts to undo — at the oil industry’s urging — some of the safety regulations Obama’s administration put in place to prevent more spills.

More drilling, less safety regulation is this administration’s goal.

Floridians don't want oil rigs, but Trump does - Editorial - Orlando Sentinel

 

[LeafByNiggle]

Searching for “renewable energy” is a bit like looking for a perpetual motion machine. The one energy initiative in which I would support government involvement would be developing fusion technology. The rest is simply a waste of money. Fusion, however, would provide virtually limitless power and solve pretty much everyone’s problems. You might wonder why it doesn’t get more support from the greens given that it would do what they claim to want.

There is no ideological opposition to fusion research. In fact there isn’t much opposition at all. It would be great if it can be made to work. But it is a tough nut to crack. I suppose it will be done some day. But at this point we just don’t know how far off that day is.

 

[Ender]

There is no ideological opposition to fusion research.

Sure there is: the Sierra Club opposes it (I think - I couldn’t access this site):

Nuclear Power | Sierra Club

Yes, I know this blurb is about fission, but the web page search was this:

Fusion Reactors. The dangers posed by the probable releases of tritium used by fusion plants, the problems with decommissioning these plants, and their high costs lead the Sierra Club to believe that …

This is actually not surprising. For all those communities who believe the earth is overpopulated as it is, the last thing they want to see is access to unlimited power which would have the effect of not only growing populations, but also allowing people to move into wilderness areas in even greater numbers. They see unlimited power as a curse, not a solution.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

Fusion Reactors. The dangers posed by the probable releases of tritium used by fusion plants, the problems with decommissioning these plants, and their high costs lead the Sierra Club to believe that …

This is actually not surprising. For all those communities who believe the earth is overpopulated as it is, the last thing they want to see is access to unlimited power which would have the effect of not only growing populations, but also allowing people to move into wilderness areas in even greater numbers. They see unlimited power as a curse, not a solution.

You left out the rest of that 1986 statement that is now 34 years old:

should not be pursued at this time.

and this was only in reference to commercial deployment.

They go on to say that they are not opposed to continued research into fusion. Speculating about what they would say if fusion became practical and certainly speculating that their motives are tied to views about population are totally unsupported. We cannot just assume motives for people or groups based on our speculation

 

[JanR]

This planet has been undergoing climate changes since its very beginning. Why is this being looked at as something new?

 

[Ender]

You left out the rest of that 1986 statement that is now 34 years old:

I was having trouble with my browser; as I said, I couldn’t access that web site. There are others, however:

Why Green Energy Means No Energy

“Fear of Fusion: What if It Works?” Leading environmentalist Jeremy Rifkin: “It’s the worst thing that could happen to our planet.”

Paul Ehrlich: Developing fusion for human beings would be “like giving a machine gun to an idiot child.”

Amory Lovins was already on record as saying, “Complex technology of any sort is an assault on human dignity. It would be little short of disastrous for us to discover a source of clean, cheap, abundant energy, because of what we might do with it.”

Now, admittedly these are old quotes (back in the 70’s), but it isn’t at all clear that this midset has changed. Any group concerned about overpopulation or the over-use of resources would see fusion energy as an unmitigated evil.

The opposition to fusion research is ostensibly tied to the concern that whatever money is spent there is just that much less available for research on “renewable” sources, but the effect is the same: opposition to fusion.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

Some three billion have virtually no energy by our standards.

And you can bet that if something as high-tech as fusion is developed these 3 billion will be the very last to benefit, which has always been the case for high-tech solutions. I’m not saying that is an excuse to reject fusion power. I am all for it. I just think that marketing it as primarily for the poor is disingenuous.

Now, admittedly these are old quotes (back in the 70’s), but it isn’t at all clear that this mindset has changed.

First, it never was a widespread mindset, even among environmentalists. These are cherry-picked quotes. Second, it isn’t all that clear that this mindset has gained in popularity. If anything, I think it has declined. Of course, any project that spends money will be objected to by people who think the money could be better spent. That is universal, and says nothing specifically about attitudes toward fusion specifically.

Any group concerned about overpopulation or the over-use of resources would see fusion energy as an unmitigated evil.

Is this sarcasm, or did you mean it? Because I cannot make sense of it.

 

[Ender]

Is this sarcasm, or did you mean it? Because I cannot make sense of it.

If you were concerned about overpopulation and the resource demands billions of people put on the planet what position would you take on a technology that promised to increase both? Just a guess: you would more than likely consider it pretty awful.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

LeafByNiggle:

Is this sarcasm, or did you mean it? Because I cannot make sense of it.

If you were concerned about overpopulation and the resource demands billions of people put on the planet what position would you take on a technology that promised to increase both? Just a guess: you would more than likely consider it pretty awful.

But fusion power, if it was a reality, would reduce the demands on traditional resources by those billions of people. We could grow more food, have cleaner air, cleaner water, more control over our climate, all from fusion power. What’s not to like, from the point of view of someone concerned about overpopulation?