Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
We did not 'save the planet' with implementation of Montreal Protocol because we misunderstood a natural phenomenon in the first place.
Originally posted by Beniboybling
No, like I said I understand it fine. Ozone holes are a natural phenomena yes, but they are still effected by ozone depleting substances like CFCs. Neither sources you've cited deny that, in fact both support it explictly. Therefore the Montreal Protocol was not just a feel-good exercise, but a valid effort to protect the environment that could see the ozone hole heal completely, as opposed to expand by 40%. 😬None of this doing anything to justify complacency on the climate change issue, which again the article you cited, warns against.
What don't you understand, Beni? Carbon Dioxide, nitrous oxide and methane all occur naturally, therefore we should have no concerns that our (humanity's) actions produce extremely large quantities of the gases. The logic and science there is sound.
Originally posted by Robtard
What don't you understand, Beni? Carbon Dioxide, nitrous oxide and methane all occur naturally, therefore we should have no concerns that our (humanity's) actions produce extremely large quantities of the gases. The logic and science there is sound.
I cited the example of Ozone Hole to highlight the fact that we can mistakenly assume a perfectly natural environmental phenomenon as a man-made construct (and) scientific studies are not infallible.
The Younger Dryas event (1400 years period of global cooling) suggests that worldwide rise in CO2 emissions do not necessarily correlate with global warming trend - I have cited relevant studies in this thread.
Shift to eco-friendly practices is a good thing but we need to be pragmatic about it - we need to keep 'economics' in mind while we are at it. Modern civilizations are the outcome of fossil fuel industry - keep this fact in mind.
If you want to be extremely eco-friendly then shift to jungle and stop using modern tools for livelihood.
My disagreement is with the politics of environmental phenomenon - based on studies that argue that an environmental phenomenon (perceived as a danger to mankind) is a man-made construct. There are scientists who are not politically motivated and have conducted studies that suggest otherwise in each case.
Originally posted by Beniboybling
Did you know that renewable energy is already becoming cheaper and more sustainable than fossils fuels? Neat, huh.
Originally posted by Beniboybling
#chinesehoax
Funny thing those two post above, China is investing high-end billion into renewable energy, their renewable energy markets are outpacing their fossil and nuclear ones and China is the current world leader in electrical production from renewable outlets.
They're looking towards the future, I wonder why.
Originally posted by RobtardRight, and yet people continue to cite China as an excuse for their complacency.
Funny thing those two post above, China is investing high-end billion into renewable energy, their renewable energy markets are outpacing their fossil and nuclear ones and China is the current world leader in electrical production from renewable outlets.They're looking towards the future, I wonder why.
Originally posted by Beniboybling
no, I'm sure china will be unable to compete with american coal, which will bring back millions of jawbs. 🙁
History shows that there are always people unwilling to let go of the old ways, be it when electrical power and the internal combustion engine was replacing steam as the standard power source or when the automobile was starting to replace the horse.
"The horse is here to stay but the automobile is only a novelty - a fad." -Some old White idiot Circa 1903
Originally posted by Robtard
History shows that there are always people unwilling to let go of the old ways, be it when electrical power and the internal combustion engine was replacing steam as the standard power source or when the automobile was starting to replace the horse."The horse is here to stay but the automobile is only a novelty - a fad." -Some old White idiot Circa 1903
Speaking of China and coal, what do you make of this:
Coal's not going away tomorrow, neither is nuclear. The idea that investing in renewable energy nigh-insta makes old energy sources magically go away is something the anti clean(er) energy people push and then attack for its obvious nonsense, because they're scum.
But there's no reason why something like solar and wind can't supplement existing power sources now and eventually replace them more and more down the road as technology progresses. What China is doing right now with investing 350+ billion in renewable technologies.
eg We still use steam power in some applications. Is it the dominant like it was 100+ years ago? No, it is not.
eg the internal gasoline and diesel combustion engine isn't going away anytime soon. But other cleaner sources will replace portions of vehicles in use, like we're seeing right now with electric and hydrogen
ps LoL @ your newsouce though
Lmfao, found this article on Baby Trump's emails while checking out the site:
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2017/07/trump-jr-releases-emails-they-support-his-account.php
Some gems:
This [the email] would obviously have been of great interest to the Trump campaign, and Trump, Jr. would have been foolish not to schedule the meeting. In one of the emails he says, "if it's what you say I love it," an entirely appropriate response that also showed an appropriate degree of skepticism. Trump may have assumed that the incriminating information would relate to the uranium transactions that are described in Clinton Cash, but there is no elaboration in the emails.
Beyond that, all we can say is that Trump, Jr. correctly described what he was told and why he agreed to the meeting. Nothing about that process reflects poorly on him at all.
For now, all we can say is that the emails confirm Donald Trump, Jr.'s account, and support the conclusion that once again, the New York Times and the Washington Post have made fools of themselves by trying to fashion an anti-Trump news story out of entirely innocent materials.Could they cuck for Trump any harder? 😂
Originally posted by Beniboybling
Lmfao, found this article on Baby Trump's emails while checking out the site:http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2017/07/trump-jr-releases-emails-they-support-his-account.php
Some gems:Could they cuck for Trump any harder? 😂
I didn't mean to trigger you with the link Beni, my bad.
Originally posted by Beniboybling
Lmfao, found this article on Baby Trump's emails while checking out the site:http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2017/07/trump-jr-releases-emails-they-support-his-account.php
Some gems:Could they cuck for Trump any harder? 😂
I like how they entirely bash the idea of collusion and then propose to know what little Donnie might have been assuming and then add 'we don't know'. Wouldn't that unknown possibility then also apply equally to collusion? Yes it would, if we're being intellectually honest
Yes they most certainly can cuck and will cuck much harder, just wait if (until?) the collusion bears fruit. They'll switch the narrative to: "So he colluded with Russia, who cares if it was to make America great again!" #maga