• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Accelerate Like a ‘Speeding Freight Train’ in 2018

Moderate Right said:
Where did I say that? Decades of scientific research and current knowledge, backed by liberals themselves, show that no matter what we do, the best we can do is limit the size of rising temperatures. In other words, all we can do is delay the inevitable. That's what the facts show. The same facts that you liberals want to flaunt.
Click to expand...

If we can limit the size, then not all of the warming is inevitable. Agree?
 
Moderate Right said:
Trump is not a dictator and with Trump as president and pulling us out of the Paris accord, it is other countries who have been called out for not doing their fair share to fight global warming, not the US and it is liberals in Paris, home to the Paris accord, who are protesting increased taxes on fossil fuels.
Click to expand...

He is not a dictator. He is a representative elected by the people to be their spokesperson and their representative. If that's not what conservatives really believe, why vote for someone who says things they don't like? And even if you want to say they may not agree with THIS particular position of his, why don't they at least object to his position on THIS particular topic? They seem to be fine with it. So we are forced to conclude that it is not us putting anything in their mouth. It is just them electing people to be their spokesperson. And so when he speaks and you don't secretly really like it, that's our problem?
 
Moderate Right said:
Where did I say that? Decades of scientific research and current knowledge, backed by liberals themselves, show that no matter what we do, the best we can do is limit the size of rising temperatures. In other words, all we can do is delay the inevitable. That's what the facts show.
Click to expand...

That's NOT what the facts show. I don't know where you got that idea.

"Human‐induced climate change requires urgent action. Humanity is the major influence on the global climate change observed over the past 50 years. Rapid societal responses can significantly lessen negative outcomes."
-American Geophysical Union

"The evidence is incontrovertible: Global warming is occurring. If no mitigating actions are taken, significant disruptions in the Earth’s physical and ecological systems, social systems, security and human health are likely to occur. We must reduce emissions of greenhouse gases beginning now."
-American Physical Society

"The scientific understanding of climate change is now sufficiently clear to justify taking steps to reduce the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere."
-National Academy of Sciences
Click to expand...
 
gfm7175 said:
How does one even measure the temperature of Earth as a whole? How many thermometers would you use, and at what location(s)?
Click to expand...
Smart scientist who spent their entire career studying this, know how to complete these measurements.
 
gfm7175 said:
How does one even measure the temperature of Earth as a whole? How many thermometers would you use, and at what location(s)?
Click to expand...
Thousands. Located in many places. More recently, satellites.


There is no such thing as a "greenhouse gas"... A colder gas cannot heat a warmer surface... this notion denies the 2nd law of thermodynamics...
Click to expand...

Would it surprise you to learn that nobody is claiming a "colder gas is heating a warmer surface?"
 
Conaeolos said:
So what policy do you suggest?
Click to expand...

  • Cap and trade
  • incentives to use renewable energy
  • discourage subsidy of fossil fuels
  • promote electric vehicles
  • Provide third world countries with technology to limit their emissions
From a layman's perspective, those are five that I'd start with. Experts in the field may have others.
 
MTAtech said:
  • Cap and trade
  • incentives to use renewable energy
  • discourage subsidy of fossil fuels
  • promote electric vehicles
  • Provide third world countries with technology to limit their emissions
From a layman's perspective, those are five that I'd start with. Experts in the field may have others.
Click to expand...

Reduce energy consumption by household to pre-1900 levels
Forced steralization & euthanasia
Raze the suburbs & replace with trees
Move remaining populations back into concentrated areas

The list goes on and on.
 
Samhain said:
Reduce energy consumption by household to pre-1900 levels
Forced steralization & euthanasia
Raze the suburbs & replace with trees
Move remaining populations back into concentrated areas

The list goes on and on.
Click to expand...
Thank you for your ad hominem.
 
Speaking of "triggered". No one needs a "safe space" from posters without the backbone to identify their political leaning in writing.
Deuce said:
You said "tree huggers" want to kill everybody and someone does it back and you get all triggered, do you? :lamo

Ok chief. Have fun in the safe space.
Click to expand...
 
MTAtech said:
Thank you for your ad hominem.
Click to expand...

Those are expert opinions, just like the ones you provided. They are under the umbrella of population control, which is one of the least talked about solutions, even though its the "best" solution.

Nobody wants to talk about it because its icky, but if you are serious about altering the planet's ecological and climate makeup, you have to engage in population controls.
 
Vern said:
er uh Taylor, I cant help but notice you cowardly avoided a documented example of hypocrisy (and flaming hypocrisy at that) to simply repeat your obedient and of course deluded "example". And look, now you have specific details. Hey, since we don't have to back up what we post I can theorize that Bernie buys carbon offsets just like fox news. Oh that's right, you're pretending not to see my documented example of hypocrisy. So when you work up the courage, please address the documented hypocrisy of fox news and how that affects your trust in them.
Click to expand...
Unlike you, I don't read Fox News, I don't watch Fox News, I don't listen to Fox News. Fox News isn't running for office or wanting to control policymaking in this country. I could care less what Fox News does or doesn't do, especially on an issue like this.
 
smallvoice said:
Speaking of "triggered". No one needs a "safe space" from posters without the backbone to identify their political leaning in writing.
Click to expand...

Pathetic deflection, attempting to divert from the hypocrisy you've just displayed. All I did was mirror your posting, and you got up in arms about it. Next.
 
Unable to address my post? No surprise. You are dismissed.
Deuce said:
Pathetic deflection, attempting to divert from the hypocrisy you've just displayed. All I did was mirror your posting, and you got up in arms about it. Next.
Click to expand...
 
smallvoice said:
Unable to address my post? No surprise. You are dismissed.
Click to expand...

Address what? "Tree huggers want to kill people?" Why would I address that?
 
Samhain said:
You know what creates zero greenhouse gases? Not being alive.
Click to expand...

Well said. That's exactly the problem. Unless we get population under control we're all goners. I read recently that the CURRENT global population exceeds by 50% what earth's resources can sustain. We also need to get away from the idea that the only successful economic system must be based on continual growth.
 
Waddy said:
Well said. That's exactly the problem. Unless we get population under control we're all goners. I read recently that the CURRENT global population exceeds by 50% what earth's resources can sustain. We also need to get away from the idea that the only successful economic system must be based on continual growth.
Click to expand...

You read that, did you?
 
Waddy said:
got a problem?
Click to expand...

I think you are spot on. Combine population growth with consumption based economies and the inevitable will happen. I really don't understand why people do not accept this as a given.
 
Vadinho said:
I think you are spot on. Combine population growth with consumption based economies and the inevitable will happen. I really don't understand why people do not accept this as a given.
Click to expand...

If you don't acknowledge this as the core of the problem, then all you can do is work the fringes.
 
Taylor said:
I suppose we should do what Bernie does. Exclaim, "The future of the planet is at stake!!" then hop on a private jet.
Click to expand...

I always did find it hilarious hearing Bernie, Leo, Gore, and Obama talking about how we all need to do our part fighting climate change.
 
Anthony60 said:
I know, that's what I say. DiCaprio, Gore, Brad Pitt, Daryl Hannah, etc... But, for some reason we are supposed to listen to them about this. If they have some pointers on pretending to be someone else, I'm all ears. But this? No thanks.
Click to expand...

"We have met the enemy and they are us." -- Pogo
 
Nap said:
I always did find it hilarious hearing Bernie, Leo, Gore, and Obama talking about how we all need to do our part fighting climate change.
Click to expand...

Conservatives claim to support individual freedom but Sean Hannity opposed same-sex marriage, therefore individual freedom isn't important.

Right? That's the logic we're going with here?
 
Deuce said:
Conservatives claim to support individual freedom but Sean Hannity opposed same-sex marriage, therefore individual freedom isn't important.

Right? That's the logic we're going with here?
Click to expand...

Where did I say climate change wasn't important? I merely think it is hilarious that the people like the ones I listed have the nerve to talk about how we need to curb our carbon emissions and want to impose carbon taxes that will decimate the poor and working class while flying private jets all over the world.

Also, as far as individual freedom and same-sex marriage it would largely depend on what Hannity's views are. You can believe marriage should be between a man and woman and still be for equal rights and individual freedom. Marriage is a religious institution and in my opinion the government shouldn't be involved with it, however as long as the government shows favorable treatment to married couples then those same benefits should be applied to same sex couples.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom