Yzermandius19

they don't know how much oil or coal we have they keep finding more constantly and all the claims that we will run out of these fuel sources in the near future keep getting proved wrong time and time again but you keep falling for the ever moving goalposts not only that but as technology increases you can use less oil and coal and get more energy produced leading to less waste of those resources their calculations do not factor these things in they just assume that no more resources will ever be found and the technology that exploits them will never improve population increases relative to the current rate of resource consumption are the only factors they account for just like Malthus did which was why he was wrong and why Quarks and Quirks are also wrong they miss the forest for the trees

https://news.mongabay.com/2018/08/earth-has-more-trees-now-than-35-years-ago/ the earth has more trees now because fossil fuels are more efficient than burning wood this has saved a lot of trees over the centuries and resulted in less polluted cities with more greenery I know you were told that fossil fuels are bad for the environment but that is totally ahistorical wood used to be the main fuel source which is bad for trees and bad for air quality where they are burning wood en masse coal put the first big dent into reducing deforestation, followed by oil not only is oil good for saving trees, but it increases the production of arable land increasing the earth's carry capacity, far beyond a mere 2 billion if the earth could only sustain 1.8 billion people then the population would only be 1.8 billion the earth's carry capacity hasn't been that low for almost 100 years that stat is false on the face of it

deforestation is not a problem except in specific areas in general more trees are growing than are being cut down the more Co2, the more trees

indefinitely quirks and quarks doesn't have a clue what is talking about carrying capacity isn't fixed technology drives carrying capacity population growth drives technological growth that's why Malthus is wrong

his top priority is bribing voters with other people's money and some of their own Trudeau makes it rain raise the debt ceiling, yo

the BLM/Antifa riots took over sections of some cities to drive out police presence, to police themselves from the streets, and crime rates in these areas naturally skyrocketed sounds like a more effective insurrection than the capitol riots by several orders of magnitude, all they did was barely delay a vote, whoop dee doo neither is even close to an actual insurrection, but the media pretends otherwise because Orange Man Bad calling the capitol riots an insurrection is utterly ridiculous and is proof you consume far too much media propaganda if you actually believe that if you think that is an insurrection, you have no idea what the word even means and your hatred of Trump and those who support him very likely clouds your judgement if the situation was reversed, Trump won the election and Biden supporters rioted, there would be no claims of insurrection from the media and Trump haters some Republican partisan hacks would call it an insurrection and everyone would laugh at their ridiculous hyperbole but because it was Trump supporters who rioted and Trump held a rally, Democrats and the media called it that instead and blamed Trump for it, so a lot more idiots parrot that as undisputed fact

there are plenty of resources regardless of the current rate of consumption as technology improves it will consume less resources to produce a high standard of living China and India will reduce their pollution the wealthier they get climate doomsday is a myth

the capitol riots were no more an attempt to overthrow democracy than the BLM riots yet I only hear this insurrection canard being used in reference to riots where the participants supported Trump and never used in reference to riots where the participants don't support Trump when BLM supporters do it, it's "mostly peaceful protestors" when Trump supporters do it, it's "white supremacist insurrectionists"

then it will go down and current carrying capacity can handle 10.8 billion and then some the environment will likely be better off by then just as it is better off today than 50 years ago and was better off 50 years ago than 100 years ago the more civilization thrives, the less damage is done to the environment, the least developed civilizations do the most damage so if you want to help the environment, preventing them from developing is exactly the wrong way to go about it only after they lift themselves out of poverty are they going to start worrying about environmental concerns, this is why all biggest environmental movements are in the most developed nations China and India will care a lot more about the environment, once they become first world nations getting them to stop polluting now isn't going to work and Canada virtue signaling about it isn't going to move the needle with them either

human advancement has developed rapidly over the last few centuries because of growing populations that is coming to end dealing with the fallout of that will be a bigger problem by several orders of magnitude than overpopulation and if you idiotically believe in overpopulation being some massive problem in spite of the facts good news for you the population is already started to shrink in many developed nations and will start to shrink worldwide in the not too distant future so you are getting what you wish for even though you should have been more careful what you wished for the population bomb doomsday prediction was proved wrong as such overpopulation predictions get proved wrong time and time again throughout history yet people still keep buying into them because some expert claims the sky is falling

we don't have too many people the current resources more than support current population levels and then some and the population isn't going to grow much before leveling off and shrinking there is no shortage of arable land to feed the population there are more trees than ever in the last several hundred years de-forestation is only happening in specific areas, not in general, in general the trend is the opposite

the luddites believe that the climate doom justifies their seizing control of economy and outlawing the greatest tools of human advancement yet developed to appease the carbon god which will impoverish and starve people but that's okay because they believe in overpopulation too burn the village to save the village is the only solution to these clowns human success is the problem only once humans are just surviving, if that and no longer thriving only then will the environment be pleased with their self-flagellation

the world is not overpopulated and underpopulation is going to be a bigger issue than overpopulation in the future Japan knows various experts have been saying we'll run out of fossil fuels for centuries and yet we continue discovering more and making such predictions look stupid time after time yet the "experts" keep predicting it over and over again enough with the Malthusian doomsday predictions already some people are so gullible that no matter how many doomsday predictions are made some will keep believing it, no matter how times they are made a fool of Millerites never die, the Climate Apocalypse keeps getting re-scheduled too enjoy the great disappointment forevermore, true believers lulz

sounds nowhere near worth the cost no wonder your proposition is such a hard sell to the rest of the world and hasn't gained much ground except in virtue signaling fake countries who are laughing stocks and perfect examples of what not to do Canada's self-esteem is already way too high based on meaningless "accomplishments" more of that isn't a good thing it would just make Canadians more delusional and their priggishness even more insufferable Canada deserves to be knocked down a peg not feel better about itself

and other countries are just supposed to give that up because Canada is dumb enough to do so? good luck with that, it's never going to happen, regardless of what Canada does in fact other countries aren't as keen to cut their own throats so Canada doing so will simply serve as an example of why not follow their lead

expecting Canada to lead the world is going to end in disappointment nobody cares about what Canada does it is incapable of leading the world what benefit would leading the world even provide Canada with anyway? things that don't matter for $1000, myata

the paradox doesn't get solved the world isn't going to follow Canada's example or "move forward" so virtue signaling accomplishes nothing and results only in downsides the only way to move forward from coal is for coal to be come significantly more expensive as a fuel source than the alternatives without government intervention until that happens, moving forward does no good the only solution is the free market government bans do not address the issue

Hamas victimized those they claim to govern by using them as human shields blaming Israel for that is dumb, they didn't shoot rockets at themselves

it wasn't just fascists, mistakes were made, an overly broad brush was used and interning people for thought crime or pre-crime is lame af anyway

actually Canada treated Italians quite poorly in WWII, interning them, though on a smaller scale than they did for the Japanese

I did just that criticizing without dehumanizing but because I called you out on dehumanizing "Muslim haters" who you were categorizing as such for dubious reasons you claimed I supported the murder of Muslim families stop lying everyone who doesn't agree with your ridiculous dehumanizing generalizations are evil and hateful according to you those who agree with your dehumanizing are the only ones you claim aren't being hateful and evil your actions prove this to be the case

the Nazi holocaust deniers claimed the same thing about Jews in their concentration camps

you claim everyone who disagrees with your dehumanizing "Muslim haters" is dehumanizing Muslims by criticizing them only those who agree with you dehumanizing "Muslim haters" are not dehumanizing Muslims by criticizing them

obvious lesser of two evils is obvious, and it isn't Israel no need for morally nihilistic false equivalencies just because neither side is totally innocent

s'all good you admit when you are wrong and correct yourself which is something a lot of posters on this forum should learn from being wrong is not a bad thing, because when you realize it and adjust your views accordingly then you are constantly learning, and you end up being right far more often than those who never admit when they are wrong and stubbornly cling to false beliefs this is why things like reason, mathematics and science has increased human knowledge to such a great degree, the process of constantly looking to disprove faulty assumptions, thus the least wrong ideas usually rise to the top, and the wheat gets separated from the chaff thinking that one is right all the time is not only boring, but it leads to mental stagnation