Why do people not believe in climate change?


#101

Or forumosa.

Researchers have identified poo-flinging as a sign of intelligence


#102

Not now, heavens, not in 20 years. But growing up, I loved going to the farm and help grandpa milk the cows and make his rounds on summer break. I always took walks through all the fields and creeks discovering sundry things. I always got poison ivy every summer though.


#103

But Herr Jotham, wouldn’t that be state intervention in the free market? :runaway:

Let’s say Trump (ha!) said to the Indian government: fine, guys - here’s 50 billion dollars. You have to spend it on American PRT technology. You guys are going to be the first people on the planet to implement space-age efficient, low-cost, solar-powered transport. We’re going to see all those dollars flow back into the pockets of rich American businessmen, and you guys are going to get some awesome tech, for free, that will solve your disgraceful urban pollution and traffic-jam problem for 20 years at least. A whole bunch of low-income families will get a lot more employment opportunities because of the dramatically lower cost of transport. Oh, and incidentally, it’ll reduce your carbon emissions by about 30%.

Phew! For a moment I thought it was the bad kind of intervention. Keepin’ the market free… :whistle:


#104

Well, yes, it isn’t exactly free-market when the government chooses, decrees winners and losers instead of the free market. Such as when government was bailing out banks, but not all of them, for example. But much of government spending is like that, not totally conforming to the free market, because they often don’t discipline their buying spree, think about getting bang for buck, like most individuals do, and that creates some distortions in the market…, but governments will spend. Not to mention corruption that such plans create between government officials and those companies, or a select company, such as what happened in the Solyndra scandal, in which Obama was pouring taxpayers money on that company for alternative energy, and they took that money and absconded.

So you may be right that it should be vetoed for other economic reasons, which issue didn’t come into play during the discussion. There are millions of angles to look at an issue.

But my point was to counter Finley’s contention that I should veto the bill just because it incidentally helps global warming when it might have other positive benefits for the environment and unemployment, which is a different angle. I think he could have used a better illustration, because you’re right, that should be vetoed, but for an altogether different reason than Finley stated.

One of the great things I like about Trump is that he tries to get good deals for government spending, for the taxpayer, much like individual taxpayers would their own affairs. Business savvy certainly has a place in government spending.


#105

I was being facetious. Ask yourself: “what would Donald Trump do?” My point was, he’d do it precisely because it benefits his rich supporters. We know he doesn’t care about the environment as such. A lot of international aid is like that.

I actually agree with jotham that this should not be done. My preferred option would be to say to Indian politicians: WTF is wrong with you people? India produced some of the 20th century’s most famous physicists, and here you are complaining that your homegrown pollution problem is (a) inevitable and (b) somebody else’s fault? Go talk to your technologists and businessmen and help them find a solution.

Giving the Indian government 50 billion US$ would probably just result in a bunch of well-connected people acquiring nice new cars and houses.


#106

Okay how about this. Jotham, how should India move forward?


#107

Oh yes, that smell of cow poo, brings back fond childhood memories, too. As a funny anecdote, a few months ago, they stripped a part of the grass at Jinmei Riverside park. As I walked past the stripped down soil, a familiar yet elusive smell permeated my nostrils. Took me a while to place it. Oh, yes, they had used cow manure as fertilizer. Very ecological. Pity Bobby had already digged into it…


#108

Giving any developing country any amount of money will definetively end up in a Swiss or offshore bank account. It is te nature of teh beast.

Same with help as infraestructure -no technical know how in maintenance, no desire to improve unless it benefits their own pocket, which only happens with shoddy maintenance- or anything from computers, solar panels, etc. that will be destroyed before its befenits are shared.

At least India -that I know of- does not have the external debt as an added burden/excuse.

Again, most government officials in India -and elsewhere developing nations- were trained in the Western first world, which means they also have that ingrained “changing technologgie sis too expensive”, “global warming is a fad” and other Western ideas, like cars are a necessity. Add that to local victimhood, Stone age ideas about religion, women, castes/social classes… and that si why we are where we are. Same in Inmdia, same in Central America, same in South East Asia. Can’t change teh economic structure without changing teh power structure and that ain’t happening.


#109

[quote=“finley, post:105, topic:158975, full:true”]
I was being facetious. Ask yourself: “what would Donald Trump do?” My point was, he’d do it precisely because it benefits his rich supporters. We know he doesn’t care about the environment as such. A lot of international aid is like that.[/quote]
This is exactly what Obama did and Democrats do, and we have a very good illustration, like I said before with Solyndra.

The Indian economy has been pretty socialist, central planned over the years, which means they haven’t been creating much wealth or capital. I would suggest the countries with more free markets and capital are the countries where concern for the environment has the wherewithal to do something about it. Everyone wants a clean environment; it’s not that there isn’t a will, but that there isn’t a way.

You hear Where there’s a will, there’s a way. But I say, where there’s a will and capital, the way is open. Cuba and the old Soviet Union and China has/had environment problems because they are/were so poor in capital, not because no one cared. The reason is that when capital is limited, there are competing priorities. Food might be number 1, and environment number 6, for example. Where there is more capital, more priorities can be assumed.

From what I’ve heard, India has recently loosened it’s decades old socialist model under Modi and is doing really well now, and should soon improve environmental situation to boot going through their Industrial Revolution. But existing environmental problems goes hand-in-hand with its previous socialist policies.


#110

Well, I think they did just a week ago when they re-elected Modi.


#111

Today was not as hot as yesterday and it was quite a bit warmer about two hours ago. Now that the sun has set, I think things are cooler but I am not sure why. I am, however, concerned. I am sure that there is some kind of trend here but I am not sure what, but we cannot afford to wait to find out. We need to ACT NOW!!! I am accepting donations via paypal, youtube, facebook and other sites that may or may not exist but the reality is that I need the money especially since I am not sure what is happening and how it is going to affect me.


#112

NOW YOU SEE IT NOW YOU DON’T
The Magic Disappearing $100 Billion Climate Fund
Shocking news—the magic $100 billion climate fund appears not to be taking shape! Even optimistic estimates say the fund is $40 billion short, and developing countries say that understates the problem. The Financial Times:

Climate ministers from Europe, India, Brazil and South Africa have gone to Beijing in recent weeks, hoping to sustain momentum from the Paris talks despite the Trump administration’s dismantling of US regulations meant to limit American emissions.

But discussions have quickly run up against the issue of financing. “Developed countries have not met their commitments. In their reports a lot of their commitment is in the form of development aid. That doesn’t meet the commitment to contribute to new funds,” China’s top climate change negotiator, Xie Zhenhua, told a briefing on Tuesday. “A lot of countries don’t want to chip in. I said to the European minister: that’s your problem as developed countries. It’s your responsibility to work together and sort it out.”

First world donors have been busily relabeling other foreign aid as contributions to the climate kitty. For developing countries, this is a cheat—they expect $100 billion in new money.

Or, to put it more accurately, they are not nearly stupid and naive enough to believe the lies Western diplomats tell when trying to bamboozle naive green voters at home that they are “Doing Something” about climate change. So they don’t really expect all that money, but hope to use these commitments to pry something out of the West. Also, since the West will certainly default on these bogus commitments, developing countries have all the justification they need to blow off their own commitments when the time comes.

This, one notes, is the house of cards that the last Administration claimed was a big piece of its legacy.

In any case, China, who the clueless Western press has tried to spin as the new hero and leader of the climate movement, is craftily working to widen the north south rift, piously calling on the selfish northern countries to make good on the $100 billion in new money. This failure will, of course, provide China with justification to walk away from any targets it wishes. After all, the West welshed first.

Climate diplomacy has become the leading forum in our time for hypocritical posturing and the politics of pretense. Until the green movement wises up, develops a serious and pragmatic agenda, and pursues a strategically sound political approach, this sorry state of affairs is likely to continue.

Oh dear… this cannot be good. And I had really hoped for the best… does this mean that I won’t get my share of the $100 billion to mitigate the effects of the climate ON ME? I mean, I was planning to use my share to winter in tropical climes to reduce the effects of climate change on me and without this money, how am I going to go to the Caribbean for my green cruise? As I am buying three house plants to offset my emissions, I think that this is patently unfair. Who is going to reimburse me for my plants? and for the anguish of not being able to summer in the south of France? HELP!


#113

A pretty interesting video on why we are so bad at thinking about climate change


#114

Not as entertaining as a YT video with people explaining how we should feel and react to climate change, but it’s a good, more technical read. It’s written by a scientist who also listed all his sources.

Interesting thing: it’s from 2012, and all his points and data are still valid as of 2017.


#115

I’m not sure how old the video is, but it’s interesting that the warmers still don’t get it, if they think it has to do with presentation. They presented themselves very clearly on the matter. The reason interest has fizzled, is because people began to see it’s political and dishonest. Al Gore at one time was the chief spokesman. The video doesn’t even mention the scandals, which was huge influence on public opinion, messing with data and the famous hockey stick. Warming science became synonymous with unscrupulous. And finally, warming isn’t happening now despite the increase in warming gases.

More and more people are being exposed to real science instead of political science as they become familiar with ocean cycles and sun cycles, etc.


#116

Are those cycles influenced by Russia, though?

I can already guess there will be an article on Vox, Salon and Buzzfeed very soon explaining how natural events are a Russian conspiracy.


#117

hmm, you may have a valid point, ha. There are many Russian solar physicists who are predicting global cooling. But the science and doubt against global warming is everywhere, not just Russia. :wink:

The sun defines the climate, not carbon dioxide. So says eminent Russian space scientist, Habibullo Abdussamatov (Dr. Sc. – Head of Space research laboratory of the Pulkovo Observatory).


#118

How come all the regressive media outlets haven’t touched this yet?

Trump doesn’t care about climate change! Russia doesn’t care about climate change!! Trump = Russia = confirmed^3


#119

Hey, don’t give them any ideas! They’re probably not smart enough to come up with something like that on their own. :slight_smile:


#120

Echo…

Echo…

Flooded echo chamber.

No echo chamber :slight_smile: