• You are losing out on amazing benefits because you are not a member. Join for free. Register now.
  • Big Two-Day Giveaway - Win an Amazon Kindle, a Mystery Gadget and Branded Gear. Enter Here.
  • Test your broadband speed and win prizes worth R5,000. Enter here.

UN Says Climate Genocide Is Coming. It’s Actually Worse Than That.

rietrot

Executive Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2016
Messages
9,285
#41
Scientists know what predictions are... educated guesses.
They don't like having to make them... but as Dave says above... in this case they are forced to make predictions.
Lol since when is prophecy considered science.
 

Arthur

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 7, 2003
Messages
22,489
#47
I'd rather go with the climate change believers and be wrong, than go with the climate change deniers and be wrong.
This is a complex issue, not reducible to a simplistic binary. The environment is far too important to be left to the Environmentalists.

My own view is that it seems undeniable that the climate is changing. As it has many, many times before, btw.

But I'm unconvinced that this change is anthropogenic. As is the case in 100% of all previous climate shifts, the odds are rather high that this current one, too, is natural. I strongly suspect that there's pretty much buggerall we as a species can do about it, other than adapt or die.

And I have great confidence in our ability to adapt appropriately.

Moreover, thinking that there's anything we can do to prevent or mitigate climate change is narcissism on stilts, in my estimation, which I readily acknowledge seems to be very much a minority view.

Oh by the way, I think you seriously underestimate just how grim and unbearable the repression and hardship will be should the Climatista policies be implemented.
 
Last edited:

rietrot

Executive Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2016
Messages
9,285
#48
Prophecy = religious mumbo jumbo
Prediction (in this context) = scientifically educated guess

If you don't know the difference between those, then maybe you shouldn't be in this thread?
Well in that case prophecy has more credibility. People like Nostradamus kept his stuff vague enough so that it could be "interpreted". These scientific doomsday dates that come and go is just silly.
 

Sollie

Expert Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2005
Messages
1,257
#49
Prophecy = religious mumbo jumbo
Prediction (in this context) = scientifically educated guess

If you don't know the difference between those, then maybe you shouldn't be in this thread?
Prophecy vs Prediction - perhaps it depends upon your view ... ? ;)
 

rietrot

Executive Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2016
Messages
9,285
#50
This is a complex issue, not reducible to a simplistic binary. The environment is far too important to be left to the Environmentalists.

My own view is that it seems undeniable that the climate is changing. As it has many, many times before, btw.

But I'm unconvinced that this change is anthropogenic. As is the case in 100% of all previous climate shifts, the odds are rather high that this current one, too, is natural. I strongly suspect that there's pretty much buggerall we as a species can do about it, other than adapt or die.

And I have great confidence in our ability to adapt appropriately.

Moreover, thinking that there's anything we can do to prevent or mitigate climate change is narcissism on stilts, in my estimation, which I readily acknowledge seems to be very much a minority view.

Oh by the way, I think you seriously underestimate just how grim and unbearable the repression and hardship will be should the Climatista policies be implemented.
This and it distracts from real environmental issues that we can actually deal with like pollution, erosion, deforestation....
 

McT

The Humble Scot!
Joined
May 19, 2009
Messages
34,341
#51
Unfortunately, it is the generation that follows that will feel the brunt of this most.
 

garp

Executive Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2004
Messages
6,117
#52
I'd rather go with the climate change believers and be wrong, than go with the climate change deniers and be wrong.
This is flawed because there is also a huge economic (and humanitarian) consequence of adopting the policies that believers propose.
 

OrbitalDawn

Ulysses Everett McGill
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
39,661
#53
Dunno, OP.

On the one hand, you have the combined expertise of global experts, and on the other hand you have this guy who has a snowball. Difficult to know who to believe!

lead_720_405.jpg
 
Joined
Apr 5, 2018
Messages
971
#54
Professor Richard Lindzen
(Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology)
The purpose of these claims is to provide a living for the so called researchers doing the 'research'.
Climate change has always been with us: the issue is what causes it. The Yankee Protestants (puritans by origin) would have you believe that if you like it it is bad for you, so must be stopped.
Climate change took place long before there were cars. It reversed itself eventually after the Dark Ages. Nor was that the first : ask the dinosaurs. There was a mini ice age at the time of Shakespeare. Krakatoa influenced the climate for a while. Just ignore these dismal Jimmies.
 

OrbitalDawn

Ulysses Everett McGill
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
39,661
#55
This is flawed because there is also a huge economic (and humanitarian) consequence of adopting the policies that believers propose.
Yes, it's a massive opportunity!

https://newclimateeconomy.report/2018/

Transitioning to this low-carbon, sustainable growth path could deliver a direct economic gain of US$26 trillion through to 2030 compared to business-as-usual.
A new model for sustainable economic growth, according to the report, can come through:

Clean energy systems. By continuing the transition already underway from fossil fuels to renewable energy, decentralizing and using digital technology, we can put in place more resilient, cleaner, cheaper systems and provide energy to more people around the globe.

Smarter urban development. The report calculates that through good urban planning and infrastructure investment, "More compact, connected, and coordinated cities are worth up to $17 trillion in economic savings by 2050 and will stimulate economic growth by improving access to jobs and housing."

Sustainable land use. More sustainable agriculture and forest protection can improve food security including by reducing food loss and waste, and deliver climate solutions.
Wise water management. New technology and better management can help allocate resources, improve sanitation and address the "water-energy-food nexus."

A circular industrial economy.
We need to move away from a take - make - waste economy to one that reuses, repurposes and recycles. "Shifting to a circular industrial economy, combined with increasing efficiency and electrification," says the report, "could decouple economic growth from material use and drive decarbonisation of industrial activities."
A lot of what's necessary is simply creating more efficient cities. Less single-occupant vehicles used for commuting (preferably moving away from using private cars at all, as far as possible), more mass/rapid transit (electric) and active modes, higher density living, more walkable cities.

There needs to be agricultural reform, too. It's simply unsustainable. Artificial meat is looking promising, but it's a bit unclear how easily and fast that can be scaled to replace what we have currently.
 

Swa

Honorary Master
Joined
May 4, 2012
Messages
16,061
#56
LOL, they haven't even been right to a single degree yet. Well at least we have some firm predictions now that when not even half of it has materialised by 2030 the world at large can start being skeptical and by 2040 we can put it down as quackery.

Scientists know what predictions are... educated guesses.
They don't like having to make them... but as Dave says above... in this case they are forced to make predictions.
Educated guesses in science are called theories. Theories have real data to substantiate them. This is all based on something nobody knows anything about and which nobody in the field is seeing. That's the definition of doom prophecies. The whole irony here is that if the policies are implemented it would be detrimental for the countries that would be most affected if any of the predictions came true. Perhaps it would be better to look at the oil cartels who really control the world. There's a saying that goes if America sneezes the world catches a cold. But if the oil companies sneeze the markets catch Ebola.
 

Techne

Executive Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2008
Messages
9,382
#58
Global warming
Climate change
Global climate disruption
Climate genocide...

What is next?
Catastrophic disruptive climate warming
Warming holocaust
Climate war
Climate gulag
Climate justice...
 

Arthur

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 7, 2003
Messages
22,489
#59
A lot of what's necessary is simply creating more efficient cities. Less single-occupant vehicles used for commuting (preferably moving away from using private cars at all, as far as possible), more mass/rapid transit (electric) and active modes, higher density living, more walkable cities.

There needs to be agricultural reform, too. It's simply unsustainable. Artificial meat is looking promising, but it's a bit unclear how easily and fast that can be scaled to replace what we have currently.
And this is the path to utopia? Looks like an unfolding nightmare to me. Can only get there with a) brainwashing and b) jackboots.
 

thestaggy

Honorary Master
Joined
May 11, 2011
Messages
11,690
#60
And this is the path to utopia? Looks like an unfolding nightmare to me. Can only get there with a) brainwashing and b) jackboots.
Don't really see the issue? I'd gladly ditch my car if I had access to reliable and efficient mass transit.

Only one that puts me off is high density living as that comes with a decrease in quality of life.
 
Top