Jump to content

Canada Must Exit Climate Agreement Immediately


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, cougar said:

1. Huh ????  - Bullshit.   You can shove a poor person in a small apartment on the 15th floor, but a rich one will ask for a mansion, you idiot !  Once they have the mansions they start filling them up with stuff - new damage to the environment!

2. Huh ??? - Bullshit.   They take more to accumulate wealth so, then they do not use the wealth to take more........Wow!

3.  What HISTORICAL RECORD ????  My historical record shows we had white rhinos and tigers and occapis and orcas and whales and lots of trees and lots of fish in those dark days when people were starving.  But now we have developed countries.  We have become rich and look what is left of the ecosystems - close to nothing.   Bullshiter !

4.  Exactly what I post is backed by facts.

Yours is a product of a sick mind poisoned by a sick society.

You need to be a capitalist to save the environment - ?   What a croc!

 

1. you're talking about the rich living in apartments and mansions

the poor live on subsistence farms that take up a lot more space and habitat

apartments in the city are a major upgrade on them

which is why people move away from the latter to the former, as they can afford it

2. wealth allows you to do more with less

you get more without have to take more

3. the historical record that as less humans live on subsistence farms, the less land is required to house them, while still having better housing

the historical record that more damage is done to species and ecosystems by poor countries than rich ones

the poorer the country, the more land has to be devoted to agriculture, industry and housing to survive that poverty

4. you have no facts you have feelings

Edited by Yzermandius19
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, eyeball said:

The problem you seem to have is that you insist on 100% consensus before doing anything.  I asked earlier if this standard is based on a principle that is applied any other time we try to determine when taking action on other issues.  I still haven't seen an answer.  

So at what point does consensus become 100 % fact, is it at 51 %, 75 % where are we drawing the line. I ask because there are subject matter experts on both sides, that have used science to prove their theories.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Army Guy said:

So at what point does consensus become 100 % fact, is it at 51 %, 75 % where are we drawing the line.

It sounds like it's generally been drawn between 80 - 95% on both the causes of recent climate change and the need to take action to mitigate our contribution to it.  The strong consensus has been there for a long time now and its remained strong.

Quote

I ask because there are subject matter experts on both sides, that have used science to prove their theories.

Theories don't prove, they explain. Evidence can prove things that give weight to a theory.  If you're looking for 100% consensus you'll never find it in science or anywhere else so I ask again, where else is this absolute standard applied to issues that challenge us? Is it used in your profession? I doubt it and I bet you know it but will lay down your own life, as well as the lives of others, despite the uncertainty.

I mean if 100% is the standard people need before taking action they wouldn't even get out of bed in the mornings for fear they might break their neck on the way to the can.

As for a society that tries to apply such a standard it probably couldn't even cooperate it's way out of a wet-paper bag. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you think I'm a climate extremist you have never actually met one. You should try going outside and talking to real people sometime. I can only conclude:

A: you own a massive amount of Oil shares

B: you're ignorant all the way down to your bones and believe anyone who so much as gives a shit about the environment is your enemy

? you only post to this forum to troll and be contrary and obnoxious as you realize you have nothing intelligent to contribute

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

the poor live on subsistence farms that take up a lot more space and habitat

apartments in the city are a major upgrade on them

which is why people move away from the latter to the former, as they can afford it

2. wealth allows you to do more with less

you get more without have to take more

 

I am lost!    The poor in my neck of the woods live on the street.  What farms you're talking about , I have zero clue and it does not matter as I am sure it would make zero common sense again.

To wrap up your position:  We need to continue to increase our population, because this will help invent the technology we need to save the environment.  We need to prevent poverty - help all those 8 billion get into mansions or apartments at least, so they can "do more with less".  But of course, they all need to be capitalists at heart, or it wouldn't work.   Your historical record in the form of support from Nationalist and Zeitgeist on the past 4 forum pages are solid proof you are correct.  

You rightfully won this one.  I have nothing more to say.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/26/2022 at 9:37 AM, cougar said:

1. Bullshit - three billion people are plenty to make the goods and services; you don't need another 5 billion to start making goods and services for themselves that they want and need !!!  The "economic growth" is a bullshit term by itself - brainwashing propaganda for guys like you.

2.  Bullshit - the most important inventions were made when we were below 3 billion

3. Bullshit - there were no even plastics back then! There were no pipelines of this scale!  There were no machines so large and not so many of them!

4. Bullshit - they might have had even more stupid forestry practices, but did not invade that much space and wipe out that much old forests.

5. Bullshit - when are you going to reach this prosperity when for all I know things have been going downhill for you in the past 30-40 years !!.    More people, more greed, more need!  A vicious circle of which there is no recovering.

6.  Human poverty and war are the only mechanism to keep our population from exploding.   Because of us not keeping our dicks in our pants or not stopping the senseless immigration!

Do I need continue responding to your bullshit arguments!

Population is actually plateauing. Faster than expected.

Even India's population has plateaued. The only continent, whose population continues to increase is Africa.

But overall, the world will hit a plateau between 2050-2070. After which, it will start to decline.

We can improve the way we live, and stop being parasites. Although at a slow pace, we are heading towards that. There are still some industries who are trying to milk the status quo, which is expected. Of course, they use propaganda for the everyday folks to continue to push the same. They use the fear of the unknown to bring fear into them and for them to resist change, on behalf of them. 

We have the technology to improve our system, how we live and how we treat our environment.

The idea of the following, I find to be great. Too bad it's being done by Saudi:

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, eyeball said:

It sounds like it's generally been drawn between 80 - 95% on both the causes of recent climate change and the need to take action to mitigate our contribution to it.  The strong consensus has been there for a long time now and its remained strong.

Theories don't prove, they explain. Evidence can prove things that give weight to a theory.  If you're looking for 100% consensus you'll never find it in science or anywhere else so I ask again, where else is this absolute standard applied to issues that challenge us? Is it used in your profession? I doubt it and I bet you know it but will lay down your own life, as well as the lives of others, despite the uncertainty.

I mean if 100% is the standard people need before taking action they wouldn't even get out of bed in the mornings for fear they might break their neck on the way to the can.

As for a society that tries to apply such a standard it probably couldn't even cooperate it's way out of a wet-paper bag. 

This remark has already been debunked as false, the 80 to  95 % of climatologists, do not agree at all, It was 80 to 95 % of the group that was asked, and not all that were asked were specialized in climatology or any subspecialty. it would be next to impossible to ask them all, I get that, but it would also be false to say that 80 % to 95 % agree...So now how many were actually asked, no one will say, and was the sample from a wide variety of people and places, no one will say, what was the specialties of the people asked?...

All that being said we are going to be changing our economies, our entire energy grid, and the way we live our lives, on these decisions I would hope there was a huge agreement based on science, experience, etc...

Even the ex-leader of green peace disagrees, and he is a climatologist and that has to say something.

Well, I'm pretty sure the earth has been proven to be round and not flat, with 100% of scientists/ astronauts agreeing. But I do agree that some subjects are going to be contentious. but for the most part, science is based on known facts of the "time".

In my profession, there is only a couple of things that are 100 % accurate, and proven by science. Dead is dead, they are not coming back and there is nothing you can do to bring them back. getting shot with a high-velocity round is going to hurt like the dickens, and from personal experience, a piece of grenade shrapnel in the ass also hurts like the dickens and bleeds a lot.

Everything else, well that's where Murphy's law was invented, if it can go wrong it will go wrong. And it does not matter how much time you spend on planning, the plan is garbage upon first contact with the enemy.

Other than that everything else is based on skill and luck and superior firepower with no 100 % certainties on anything. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The World Economic Forum has now called for the end of private vehicle ownership.  To save the planet.  The is the kind of BS that Trudeau, their stooge, will immediately begin to roll out in the background.

And please google it for yourself.  You will find that none of the big MSM organizations have stories that pop up when you google ‘WEF private vehicle ownership’.  Now ask yourself, why is that?

https://www.foxbusiness.com/economy/world-economic-forum-calls-reduce-private-vehicles-by-eliminating-ownership.amp

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, sharkman said:

The World Economic Forum has now called for the end of private vehicle ownership.  To save the planet.  The is the kind of BS that Trudeau, their stooge, will immediately begin to roll out in the background.

 

More chicken little bullshit from you.

Why don't you bawl to the WEF moderator to clean up their anti car posts then? ?

You offer nothing and still complain: a net liability to the forum and the world in general.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

More chicken little bullshit from you.

Why don't you bawl to the WEF moderator to clean up their anti car posts then? ?

You offer nothing and still complain: a net liability to the forum and the world in general.

 

That’s some pathetic whining, big guy.  So you’re a hypocrite too…not surprised.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

More chicken little bullshit from you.

Why don't you bawl to the WEF moderator to clean up their anti car posts then? ?

You offer nothing and still complain: a net liability to the forum and the world in general.

ad hominem

attack the message, not just the messenger

obvious sign of weakness

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...