With the month long heat wave.
“Why don’t you call anymore?”
They move the goalposts.
“It’s going to be a problem in Africa”
“It’s going to be a problem in 50 years”
"It’s futile to do anything unless China stops polluting "
“Electric cars pollute more than ordinary cars”
According to my father in law: everything’s fine, actually. It’s hot, sure, but it’s been hot before. The actual problem is that The Weather Channel has started to get political/go woke and push an agenda.
So next time it’s so hot the power grid can’t take it or your house is destroyed in a flood or forest fire, it’s just that pesky Weather Channel!
They complain about how weird and unprecedented the weather has been the last few years, but if I so much as mention the word “climate” an awkward silence descends. I also had a guy hint at some weird conspiracy theory about the sun recently.
“Climate change has existed for years, it will not harm us”
Some are now pivoting to “Climate change is good so we shouldn’t do anything about it.” A US representative fork Wisconsin said that recently, since it means Wisconsin would be warmer during the winter.
“hottest summer on record? Give it a rest, they say that every year!”
Also I’m in the UK which has been raining and dreary for the last month so it’s not getting as much coverage here.
“hottest summer on record? Give it a rest, they say that every year!”
That’s funny because it’s true. Also sad. Mostly sad actually.
They’re so close…
It’s all a hoax, it’s not a big deal, it’s just hot out.
My family is from Iowa, where they’ve had record breaking storms 3 out of the last 5 years, heat waves lasting longer than ever in history, record cold, and to top it off, wildfire smoke for the first time ever. (Note that this is after they made fun of Cali for being Cali and being on fire). No, none of these events have registered as connected in any way.
Nothing will ever convince these people. They are immune to evidence and argument.
logic will never convince them because they aren’t arguing from a position of logic. It’s about conforming to the beliefs required to be part of their tribe and/or protecting themselves from coming to terms with the harsh realities of climate change. It’s reactionary against a challenge to their beliefs.
You would need to first convince them to consider that their respected authorities could be wrong. But within this reactionary mindset, being wrong is disgraceful. So unless they lose respect for their leaders or manage to shift away from believing fallibility is disgraceful, I don’t know if they can be convinced.
You can’t reason someone out of a position they didn’t reason themselves into.
maybe if you can convince them that global warming helps out joe biden they will be against it.
You see it’s a conspiracy, Sleepy Joe wants us to keep using fossil fuels so the liberals will vote him back it so it looks like he’s doing something! The last thing he wants is for us to stop using fossil fuels! I bought an EV today just to spite him
most electric plants use coal or natural gas. EV isnt any “cleaner” than a small gas engine.
deleted by creator
They would rather make up for lies than admit they are wrong
Wow - are people really disbanding friendships over climate change stuff? Are you sure you were that good of friends prior? Id question all that. As for “deniers” , I dont think people questioning all of this are deniers, they are simply asking legit questions. Remember, this Climate thing has been being pushed/sold to us for like 60+ years now. We’ve been “Dead” numerous times now but pretty much none of it has come to fruition. So, can you blame people for being a tad skeptical? I dont.
I also get frustrated with those that seem to ignore the very real concerns of the “working person” who finds it a little hypocritical that many of the loudest climate change activists(celebs, athletes, politicians, etc.) tend to NOT walk the talk. So, they can fly private jets, own 4 homes, two yachts and have Lamborghini collections but Im expected to eat bugs, drive a lame EV and ditch my perfectly good appliances? Yeah, sorry, thats a tough sell, IMO.
I see some clean energy initiatives that do appear to make some sense. Slow adoption, logical solutions, etc. should be the way. Not slam dunk, draconian changes that wreck our energy girds and reliability. There should be a happy-medium here is what Im getting at. Im tired of the extremes and most people seem to be also.
As for “deniers” , I dont think people questioning all of this are deniers, they are simply asking legit questions. Remember, this Climate thing has been being pushed/sold to us for like 60+ years now.
If you deny 60 years of research how are you not a denier? The only people with doubts at this point have no clue about science, sorry.
60 years of doom, gloom and sure destruction which has resulted in… nothing. Your science isnt working out. Its clear that we dont fully understand how this all works as we only have data from a tiny fraction of the Earths total history. Again, the predictions that have been harped on over the last several decades have all turned out to be false of greatly exaggerated. Those are the real facts.
Hey, at least you’re answering OP’s question.
Maybe so - you’ve also made your position on this clearly evident. Question nothing, just do what you’re told. Thats cool. :)
lol where’d you get that line from?
What line?
question nothing, just do what you’re told.
The doom and gloom predictions have always been about slow but inexorable changes in the climate. Not that suddenly a mega hurricane is going to rip Florida out of the ground and toss it into the ocean, but that weather is going to get worse and more extreme, that sea levels will rise, and more and more places will gradually become uninhabitable as conditions get worse. There won’t be single things that you can point to and say “that one was global warming”, it’s about trends that are harmful for us in the long term. If you eat a chocolate bar’s worth more calories than you burn every day, it sounds like doom and gloom to say you’ll gain 200 pounds if you don’t change anything, and you won’t be able to point to any one meal as something to be concerned about because that’s not really out of the ordinary for a day… but slowly and steadily, you’ll gain weight, and if nothing changes you will get there eventually.
And even though you aren’t owed dramatic destruction, and shouldn’t require it to believe the thousands of people who study this as their life’s work and all agree that things are dire and not getting better fast enough… you’ve literally just lived through the hottest twenty or so days in recorded history. Is that a coincidence, do you think?
Here ya go. The “experts” have a terrible batting average. Its embarrassingly bad. The end of the article/listing even has a quote from an IPCC scientist about how all of this nonsesne is mostly just financially driven aka “wealth redistribution” (surprise!) versus actually about the climate. Sorry.
Talk about an agenda. Wow. Get a better resource. Of course businesses want you to think nothing needs to change. That would mean they make less profit and maybe have to do things differently.
I’m not even going to bother giving much detail because it seems like it won’t matter, but just about everything you said in this comment is wrong. We’ve had the hottest temperatures on record this year, and this has happened many time for years slowly getting worse. How is that nothing? Sure, we’re not dead, but no one (reasonable) predicted that.
As for the data we have, it goes a lot longer than human history. There are many ways to get that information. We also know CO2 traps heat better. You can test this yourself if you feel like it. It’s simple stuff to understand, but some people want you to think it’s the “elite climate scientists” pushing something you can’t understand.
Why is it wrong? Climate disasters have been being predicted and spewed about for a long time. What I understand is that there is more here than meets the eye. Look into more and you’ll understand better. Try sources without agendas for best results.
Climate disasters have been happening. You’re just told that they were supposedly predicting sudden collapse, which is not the case. It’s a slow ramping up, eventually becoming (likely) unstopable but still it will be relatively slow.
For example, ice is white so it reflects sunlight (aka heat). As it melts, the reflective index of the earth decreases and we absorb more heat, melting more ice, reducing the reflective index, and so on. Here’s the arctic sea ice levels, including for 2023 so far. It’s way down. It’s just data and doesn’t have “an agenda.” The people telling you that some other people have “an agenda” have an agenda though.
Friendly reminder that it’s not about denial anymore. It’s about how urgent is the existential threat of tipping points and how radical and fast should we act.
One side says, let’s stay reasonable, let’s not hurt the economy, don’t panic because of the these crazy Greta maniacs. Source: We managed a lot of crisis in the past, sometimes it’s not that hot, lobby money.
The other side says we have to hit the breaks immediately or a lot of people are going to die. Source: Science.
Can you elaborate on the “hit the brakes immediately” or we’re all going to die statement? What “Science” backs this claim up? Legit science please, not from agenda-laden website.
The IPCC report is what you‘re looking for! And since it‘s it‘s almost impossible to even reach the goal of 1,5 degrees, we should hit the breaks better sooner than later. It‘s not an „oopsie“ problem we would face otherwise. People are already dying.
No - Im not looking for anything, actually. I just would prefer that those that chest-thump about this stuff would walk the talk and take a “lead”. But they refuse. What does “hit the brakes” mean? Are the rich going to also hit the brakes? Or is this all on us “little people” as usual?
What are you basing the existential threat claim on? I don’t think I’ve heard a credible scientist ever claim it’s going to end our specie. The yearly excess deaths estimates I’ve heard vary from few hundred thousand to couple million a year in 2050 - 2100.
While your numbers, if factual (no source posted), are statistically correct (in that it won’t make our species go extinct), you have to remember a simple fact: those numbers represent individual human lives. Family, friends, neighbors, your pizza guy, etc. Pretty brutal to be so flippant about.
Also, this doesn’t take into account the potential for cascading environmental system failures that could be caused by such warming. These unknowns could greatly change the equation.
I realize you are mainly arguing the point in response to “existential threats” being bandied about, but it’s a weird stance to take here.
It’s a real issue and actions needs to be taken to prevent the worst case scenario but I find it not useful when people extraggerate the dangers of it. It makes people suspicious about what other things we’re being misled about.
https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/climate-change-and-health
Exactly - it is your duty to question the Government and the scientists that work for them. Lets be honest, the Govt’s track record for truth is a tad suspect and thats being extra nice. As I said earlier, the alarmists have been selling this to us(or trying to) in differently wrapped packages now for several decades. Even back in the 1970’s there were hysterical claims being made. None of it came anywhere close to being true. So, logically, people question it.
More importantly, people question the mitigation tactics which seem to only affect the lower/middle classes directly. Another tough thing for the average Joe to swallow.
