The vast majority of the papers either didn't mention it, or fell in the 1%-50% range

Anyway, that was enough for him to start raging on me

Which is dumb of him.

Indeed

It's actually a really interesting subject

I wish we didn't all have to be divided into these "for" and "against" camps

One of my favorite channels that covered the debate was potholer54. He didn't just cite studies, but showed how the data was acquired and other such related topics.

My take on it is this: whether it's our fault or not, stewardship is a good thing and we should strive to be as eco-friendly as possible, within reason. Resources are finite, after all.

I'll agree with that - seems pretty reasonable

Cheers.

As said earlier, IMHO the best way to go green is from the ground up. Top-down impositions don't work, and only breed resentment, because they're almost always done in a heavy-handed, non-nuanced sort of way, like carbon taxes/credits. Political and capitalistic will can be a powerful motivator for change, for example with electric cars and alternative fuel sources.

IMHO, we really need to go nuclear.

nobody gains any power or control from bottom-up solutions.

I think you need to separate the science of climatology from the political movement of Greens. They're not the same thing and in fact often contradict each other. Greens almost completely ignore nations where emissions are going up and attack nations where they are going down. Greens oppose nuclear and fracking both of which reduce CO2.

And neither of them do cost-benefit analysis so their projections are usually wrong.

Agreed about "green" politicians. As demonstrated, the trend among their lot is to use climate change as a smokescreen for communism, ironically enough. China also has a vested interest in keeping them going, esp. since they ignore Chinese pollution. But the climate scientists who are supporting them, at most they're doing bad science. They're not really supposed to do cost benefit analysis, that's not their field.

the people signing the checks and setting the strategy don't give a rat fuck about the environment. it's just a power grab.

the footsoldiers may or may not be earnest in their beliefs, but they're just being herded by sociopaths for ulterior motives.

Wonder why the Social-ISTS are always such SocioPATHS?

we have to be careful here and make a distinction between the regular folk who just have an overabundance of empathy and a shortage of sense, and the actual evil who are manipulating the good nature of the regular folk.

and the reason why high level socialists tend to be sociopaths is because sociopaths don't choose their victims randomly. they pick people who are most easily manipulated.

i.e., those with lots of empathy

I'm a simple man. I see global elites murder thousands of my brothers in 2001, I vote for the most opposed candidate in 2020.

Jeb?

please clap.

Jeb's a softie. I don't think he could pull off what Bush and his yale buddies did in 01. :-)

Thoughts? 🤔 Seems pretty strange if the odds of being in a mass shooting is like (0.00001%) then the odds of being in two subsequent ones should be (0.00001)² = 0.0000000001%. 🤔🤔🤔 And for it to happen to multiple people... 🤔🤔🤔🤔

https://youtu.be/kFr0wM0MSdQ

People need to stop blaming their poor life choices on capitalism

If you have a full sleeve tattoo on both arms and are complaining about your inability to pay rent that is squarely on you

Orange Man Bad
*Laugh Track*

http://dlvr.it/RFHpVL

@Tiberius i agree with this, but fuck you.

You dont seem to like me much

I suppose its understandable

Im certainly an aquired taste at the best of times

After this attempted coup there is going to be alot of Uniparty arrests and alot of Deep State parasites removed from their positions.

Its going ti be comedy gold for months

what coup?

the fake impeachment?

Yeah @Mooncrest

The deep state has too much power. I highly doubt Trump will do anything other than delay their tyranny.

The way its being organised by the Deep State suggests its a Coup.