Nefarious Banana Posted March 12 Report Posted March 12 ^^ Man is truly the alien species on this planet . . . we've refined the art of sh!tt!ng in our nest. Quote
CdnFox Posted March 12 Report Posted March 12 10 hours ago, eyeball said: The tax has reduced emissions and the tax is growing in popularity around the world. People are just impatient. The tax hasn't reduced emissions at all. Harper did more to reduce emissions than Trudeau has done . And it isn't growing in popularity anywhere. And waiting a decade and being concerned that there's no results to show isn't impatience, it's called having observation skills Even the liberals are dumping the tax, you're going on about how popular it is and yet the liberals have given up on it and admitted to failure. Carbon tax Kearney who is all about carbon tax is canceling the carbon tax. It's a complete joke Quote
eyeball Posted March 12 Report Posted March 12 4 minutes ago, CdnFox said: The tax hasn't reduced emissions at all. Yes they have, go look it up yourself. The truth is out there. 5 minutes ago, CdnFox said: Harper did more to reduce emissions than Trudeau has done . Harper only had to engineer a two year global recession first. Good job. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
carepov Posted March 12 Report Posted March 12 9 hours ago, eyeball said: The data also shows that plant and animal species, many that we depend on, are not thriving at all in the face of AGW. Many species are simply unable to adapt fast enough to the changes global warming is causing such as; habitat loss, altered species interactions such as plants blooming earlier than the timing of animal reproduction and feeding cycles, droughts, warming oceans etc. Many species are inching closer to extinction and some are on the brink. Human beings evolved to live in a complex of different ecosystems and a world of diversity and that's disappearing. We won't be thriving for long on a simplified planet with little to no diversity. We may be the weediest species the planet has ever seen but we've never had to make do with nothing more than other weedy species that seem to be increasingly dominating our ecosystems - many of them introduced by us. That's another leading cause of extinction btw. You are conflating a whole mish mash of issues. Overall, all else being equal, a warmer climate will benefit biodiversity: the vast majority of life on earth is in the warmer climates. Luckily for us, the closer we are to the equator, the less warming that is taking place. Also, the increased CO2 is one factor in increasing plant growth, the world is actually becoming greener. I am not saying that all is well in our environment, there are real problems and lets focus on them instead of wasting our resources on such futile efforts of achieving net zero. For example, when bio-rich rainforests are burned down, we all loose in the long term. Why do people burn down rainforests? Because they are poor and cannot afford to think long term. The solution: lift people out of poverty. A key factor that helped reduce the world's poverty rate from 90% to 10% is abundant low-cost energy. In other words policies that increase energy costs make people poorer and harm the environment. Quote
eyeball Posted March 12 Report Posted March 12 2 hours ago, carepov said: Overall, all else being equal, a warmer climate will benefit biodiversity: the vast majority of life on earth is in the warmer climates. Sure, you might see healthy ecosystems after centuries of adaptation. In the meantime between now and then it'll be a tough row to hoe. The pace of adaptation however will be to rapid and challenging for many species to make the transition. 2 hours ago, carepov said: Why do people burn down rainforests? Because they are poor and cannot afford to think long term. Yup, poor people make lousy stewards of their environment alright. 2 hours ago, carepov said: The solution: lift people out of poverty. A key factor that helped reduce the world's poverty rate from 90% to 10% is abundant low-cost energy. In other words policies that increase energy costs make people poorer and harm the environment. This may have been a realistic goal back when there were only 3 billion or so humans but not now with 8 billion and another projected 2 billion to come. We've highgraded the planet's resources and taken virtually all the best it's had to offer with the result being an imbalance of wealth that 95% of humans will never come close enough to catch up with. 2 hours ago, carepov said: In other words policies that increase energy costs make people poorer and harm the environment. Socioeconomic inequality is even worse. 3 hours ago, carepov said: You are conflating a whole mish mash of issues. The range of issues are as complex as they are diverse. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
carepov Posted March 12 Report Posted March 12 46 minutes ago, eyeball said: This may have been a realistic goal back when there were only 3 billion or so humans but not now with 8 billion and another projected 2 billion to come. We've highgraded the planet's resources and taken virtually all the best it's had to offer with the result being an imbalance of wealth that 95% of humans will never come close enough to catch up with. You've got it backwards: 1. World inequality has never been lower than it is today. Simple question: pick a year to be reborn in any random place on Earth, what year would that be? 2. Resources have never been as abundant as they are today, the proof is that, when adjusting for inflation, the cost of nearly all goods are very close to historical lows. Quote
eyeball Posted March 12 Report Posted March 12 8 minutes ago, carepov said: You've got it backwards: 1. World inequality has never been lower than it is today. Simple question: pick a year to be reborn in any random place on Earth, what year would that be? I don't know where you get your rosy view but inequality has been widening globally with the wealthiest seeing their share of income grow faster than those at lower income levels everywhere. 10 minutes ago, carepov said: 2. Resources have never been as abundant as they are today, the proof is that, when adjusting for inflation, the cost of nearly all goods are very close to historical lows It depends on what you mean by resources I guess. It's a complex question for sure but the most telling one in the case of our use if natural renewable resources or natural capital is that which is known as a sink resource - the ability of natural ecosystems to absorb our waste stream and recycle it back into useful products. Like adapting to AGW this process takes time and natural ecosystems simply can't keep up to the demand we're placing on them. Take the draw down of water resources, especially underground aquifers, in the southwest US. There are some 50 million people who depend on water sources that took thousands of years to develop. They've almost been drained dry inside of 100 years or less. 1 Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
Moonbox Posted March 12 Report Posted March 12 On 3/8/2025 at 1:14 PM, I am Groot said: Yes, I know some of you hate Peterson. But he was willing to read Carney's book and give us quotes, and I doubt any of the rest of you will. He's not worth hating, or taking seriously. He's an edgelord bullshitter with opinions on everything, and mostly things he doesn't know anything about. 2 Quote "A man is no more entitled to an opinion for which he cannot account than he does for a pint of beer for which he cannot pay" - Anonymous
herbie Posted March 12 Report Posted March 12 (edited) Talk about insanely hypocritical. The Orange Oaf's hatchet man who's dismantling the US govt made his very fortune under Free Trade, to the extent of building his vehicles in CHINA and shipping them here to sell. As well as profiting from the USMCA. And the disparity? So the guy in Bangladesh now gets 3 spoons of rice a day instead of 2 because some other guy can make $400 billion, and the billionaire is the one that now needs trade protection? F*cking insane. Edited March 12 by herbie Quote
CdnFox Posted March 12 Report Posted March 12 15 hours ago, eyeball said: Yes they have, go look it up yourself. The truth is out there. They haven't, I have looked it up in extensive detail, and misinformation is out there and you're one of the Prime consumers Quote Harper only had to engineer a two year global recession first. Just like Justin engineered covid I'm sure. Which had an even stronger economic impact on Canada than the recession did. Largely because harper was considerably better at managing things than Justin was Harper's policies made the difference. When times were tough he found a way to increase the economy as well as Decreasing people's use of power at the same time through the GST rebate for home improvements. Then a number of other policies made a significant difference Justin failed utterly and it was supposed to be his thing Quote
ironstone Posted March 12 Report Posted March 12 (edited) 1 hour ago, herbie said: Talk about insanely hypocritical. The Orange Oaf's hatchet man who's dismantling the US govt made his very fortune under Free Trade, to the extent of building his vehicles in CHINA and shipping them here to sell. As well as profiting from the USMCA. And the disparity? So the guy in Bangladesh now gets 3 spoons of rice a day instead of 2 because some other guy can make $400 billion, and the billionaire is the one that now needs trade protection? F*cking insane. COP 30 is coming up in Brazil. Here is what they're doing to prepare for it. For a climate change conference, you can't make this up. As always, Canada will send a HUGE entourage. Eight-mile stretch of Amazon forest is felled... to build COP30 road Edited March 12 by ironstone 1 Quote "Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it." Thomas Sowell
Legato Posted March 12 Report Posted March 12 1 hour ago, eyeball said: I don't know where you get your rosy view but inequality has been widening globally with the wealthiest seeing their share of income grow faster than those at lower income levels everywhere. It depends on what you mean by resources I guess. It's a complex question for sure but the most telling one in the case of our use if natural renewable resources or natural capital is that which is known as a sink resource - the ability of natural ecosystems to absorb our waste stream and recycle it back into useful products. Like adapting to AGW this process takes time and natural ecosystems simply can't keep up to the demand we're placing on them. Take the draw down of water resources, especially underground aquifers, in the southwest US. There are some 50 million people who depend on water sources that took thousands of years to develop. They've almost been drained dry inside of 100 years or less. 2 Quote
carepov Posted March 12 Report Posted March 12 2 hours ago, eyeball said: I don't know where you get your rosy view but inequality has been widening globally with the wealthiest seeing their share of income grow faster than those at lower income levels everywhere. https://www.un.org/en/un75/inequality-bridging-divide#:~:text=Overall%2C since the 1990s total,first time since the 1820s. Quote
eyeball Posted March 12 Report Posted March 12 51 minutes ago, carepov said: https://www.un.org/en/un75/inequality-bridging-divide#:~:text=Overall%2C since the 1990s total,first time since the 1820s. It seems your article talks a lot more about growing inequalities, especially on the ground where people live. Amongst the worst was this one in my estimation. In 2018, we saw the world’s 12th consecutive year of decline in global freedom, with 71 countries suffering net declines in political and civil liberties Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
blackbird Posted March 13 Report Posted March 13 When Carney is sworn in as Prime Minister, possible on Friday, March 14, it will be revealing to see what he does with Trudeau's gas and emission cap's law. Will he renounce it and do what is required to cancel the law. This cap required the energy industry to reduce emissions by one third by 2030. Hopefully he will take action and eliminate the cap. Canada needs to be able to compete with the U.S. and the rest of world and start selling oil and gas to many areas of the world so we can be less dependent on the U.S. "To what extent is Carney prepared to depart from the Trudeau agenda and is he prepared to take meaningful steps to address what has suddenly become the country’s top priority? How he chooses to now deal with the government’s planned oil and gas emissions cap will be revealing." Rob Breakenridge: Carney's chance to scrap job-destroying emissions cap Quote
herbie Posted March 13 Report Posted March 13 The worshippers of PP )let's call the pissers for now) are going ballistic with lies and half truths in desperation over poll stats. Just wait until they explode like MAGAtts come election time. 1 Quote
CdnFox Posted March 13 Report Posted March 13 21 minutes ago, herbie said: The worshippers of PP )let's call the pissers for now) are going ballistic with lies and half truths in desperation over poll stats. Just wait until they explode like MAGAtts come election time. Did you need a drool bib? You kind of sound like you need a drool bib. You're obviously foaming at the mouth 1 1 Quote
Army Guy Posted March 13 Report Posted March 13 21 minutes ago, herbie said: The worshippers of PP )let's call the pissers for now) are going ballistic with lies and half truths in desperation over poll stats. Just wait until they explode like MAGAtts come election time. Well lets here some of them....you get it your supporting a government that made it their job to lie,cheat,divide this nation, scandal after scandal, Justins scandals' are still being investigated... pocketed tax payers money into their own companies behalf..with some not even knowing what their ethnic background was , so they made it up to get contracts, one guy did not even know his own name on top of his ethnic background, and you got the balls to speak about half truths...I get it all of this plus a shit tonne more does not bother you, you brush it aside because Thats normal behavior for you, Thats what politicians do...and your morals and values are at the same level... You've sold your sole to a guy that is not interested in Canada but his agenda.... 1 1 Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.
carepov Posted March 13 Report Posted March 13 19 hours ago, eyeball said: It seems your article talks a lot more about growing inequalities, especially on the ground where people live. Amongst the worst was this one in my estimation. https://wir2022.wid.world/chapter-2/ Yes, depending on how you spin it, the world is becoming more or less equal or unequal. I am a citizen of Earth, living in a global village, so to me global inequality is more important that within country inequality. More importantly, world poverty in in incredible decline, there is no other way to spin this data: https://blogs.worldbank.org/en/opendata/september-2024-global-poverty-update-from-the-world-bank--revise So yes, the rich get richer, but not at the expense of the poor whose income growth is lifting hundreds of millions of people out of poverty. 19 hours ago, eyeball said: In 2018, we saw the world’s 12th consecutive year of decline in global freedom, with 71 countries suffering net declines in political and civil liberties This is another good example of issues to focus on instead of global warming. Quote
suds Posted March 13 Report Posted March 13 On 3/10/2025 at 10:57 AM, Iceni warrior said: Yes but a huge proportion of those greenhouse gas emissions are a result of manufacturing exports. If I cut down a tree to build a shed in your garden who is responsible for the tree being cut down? Approximately 60% of China's electrical generation is from coal fired plants and they're still building more. Canada's largest two manufacturing provinces are Ontario and Quebec which have no coal fired plants. Ontario relies mostly on nuclear and hydro electric power while 95% of Quebec's power generation comes from hydro electric. If more of the world's manufacturing was done in Canada.... sure, our GHG emissions would go up. But we'd be doing the world a favour. Quote
suds Posted March 13 Report Posted March 13 On 3/12/2025 at 1:50 PM, carepov said: Resources have never been as abundant as they are today, the proof is that, when adjusting for inflation, the cost of nearly all goods are very close to historical lows. In 2022, Saudi Arabia hit peak oil. New oil discoveries peaked in 1964. Abundant mineral resources which were once easy pickings, are now being mined at higher monetary costs and are more energy extensive. When the costs and energy used gets so high it no longer makes sense to mine the stuff then what do we do?? Our living standards depend upon a growing economy mainly to pay off past and present debts. Growing economies require more energy. Renewable power will still require base load power sources. This is where nuclear makes sense. But you don't build a Bruce Nuclear facility overnight. It's not hard to get rid of fossil fuels, it's replacing them to keep our economy growing that's the hard part. Quote
eyeball Posted March 13 Report Posted March 13 2 hours ago, carepov said: Yes, depending on how you spin it, the world is becoming more or less equal or unequal. I am a citizen of Earth, living in a global village, so to me global inequality is more important that within country inequality. Both are just as important AFAIC. 2 hours ago, carepov said: So yes, the rich get richer, but not at the expense of the poor whose income growth is lifting hundreds of millions of people out of poverty. A flash in the pan on historical time scales. The rich are getting richer mostly at the expense of the planet's natural capital. That is what will cause social capital to wane. 2 hours ago, carepov said: This is another good example of issues to focus on instead of global warming. We should have been focused on this decades ago. Now it's just another convenient excuse for seducing the canine. Just to be sure, you're not talking to someone who has a whole lot of hope for the future, in fact I increasingly think the only hope for the planet is the total collapse of our economy and most of our population with it. I'm afraid our best days and our best chances are long behind us. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
CdnFox Posted March 13 Report Posted March 13 2 hours ago, eyeball said: A flash in the pan on historical time scales. The rich are getting richer mostly at the expense of the planet's natural capital. That is what will cause social capital to wane. Yeah, karl Marx said that. Still waiting on that worldwide Revolution though 1 Quote
carepov Posted March 14 Report Posted March 14 21 hours ago, suds said: In 2022, Saudi Arabia hit peak oil. New oil discoveries peaked in 1964. Abundant mineral resources which were once easy pickings, are now being mined at higher monetary costs and are more energy extensive. When the costs and energy used gets so high it no longer makes sense to mine the stuff then what do we do?? Our living standards depend upon a growing economy mainly to pay off past and present debts. Growing economies require more energy. Renewable power will still require base load power sources. This is where nuclear makes sense. But you don't build a Bruce Nuclear facility overnight. It's not hard to get rid of fossil fuels, it's replacing them to keep our economy growing that's the hard part. We know that commodity demand is growing over time. How about prices? Put together these two graphs: https://www.researchgate.net/figure/The-Economist-commodity-price-index-in-real-dollar-terms-adjusted-by-US-GDP-deflator_fig2_221419034 https://www.bankofcanada.ca/rates/price-indexes/bcpi/ Cleary, as I said commodity prices are near historic lows, despite growing demand. Therefore supply is growing faster than demand. Regarding nuclear, Yes, I agree, nuclear makes sense, just follow the lead of Sweden and France. Quote
Recommended Posts
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.