There’s Nothing The U.S. Can Do To Affect Global Temperature

m.knox

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Aug 20, 2003
106,552
60,501
1
LOL.... Democrats want to so dearly believe they and they alone can save the Earth...... So self absorbed. It's all about how they feel................. Their feelings....

Reminds me of what Krugman once said...

"I didn't grow up wanting to be a square-jawed individualist or join a heroic quest; I grew up wanting to be Hari Seldon, using my understanding of the mathematics of human behaviour to save civilisation."

https://issuesinsights.com/2021/09/07/theres-nothing-the-u-s-can-do-to-affect-global-temperature/

“Here’s the most important fact about the Green New Deal: It wouldn’t work,” says the Heritage Foundation’s Nicolas Loris. “Ultimately, fully implementing the Green New Deal would have no meaningful impact on global temperatures.”

Yet if enacted, the law would nevertheless “bring huge changes to our country,” Loris continues, as it “is a wish list for big government spending, expansive government control, and massive amounts of wealth distribution.” It would also allow progressives to implement their twisted definition of “social justice.”

“This deal would fundamentally change how people produce and consume energy, harvest crops, raise livestock, build homes, drive cars, travel long distances, and manufacture goods,” says Loris. But “even if Americans were on board with this radical change in behavior and lifestyle, it wouldn’t change our climate.”

How can he make such a statement? Because his colleague Kevin Dayaratna ran the numbers – and put them before Congress during a 2017 House committee hearing.

“We simulated the environmental impact of eliminating greenhouse gas emissions from the United States completely,” Dayaratna said in testimony.

“Simulation results indicate that if all carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide emissions were to be eliminated from the United States completely, the result in terms of temperature reductions would be less than 0.2 degrees Celsius, 0.03 degrees Celsius, and 0.02 degrees Celsius, respectively. These temperature reductions would also be accompanied by minuscule changes in sea level rise (less than 2-centimeter reduction).”

This isn’t hard to understand when it’s put next to the fact that more than half of the world’s human greenhouse gas emissions are produced by 25 cities, all but two of them in China, none of them in the U.S.
 

roswelllion

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Aug 18, 2003
9,741
8,673
1
I would love to hear from some greenies on this. My wife and I had a couple hour drive in the car yesterday and discussed this subject.
I guess first of all is the source reasonably accurate? [within 100% wrong.] Obviously we can't completely eliminate CO2, Methane and and NO. So if you pick a reduction that is smaller and then double it [100% error] it still comes out to a very tiny impact.

So the discussion went like this.
1. Do the politicians who expose the 10-15 years to the apocalypse really believe what they are saying? We both agreed they really know better. Any disagreement.
2. If they know better then why do they do it? Power and control. We agreed on that. Good so far?
3 Where we started to disagree was why does the public go along with it.? Climate change doesn't poll particularly well and yet we elect folks who support green new deal, we go along with huge subsidies to green energy etc. Is it the media driving our opinions. -yes
4 We hear about scientific consensus and then get reports like this. why
5 we live part time on the Carolina coast. We hear about greater frequency and intensity of hurricanes and yet we can find data that suggests the opposite.

At the end of the drive we were depressed. Whether it is Covid or Climate we decided we can no longer believe anything we hear or read.

Oh well, back to football. At least I know enough about that to believe what I see. [although reading an in game thread is worse the the IPCC report on climate]
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cosmos

m.knox

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Aug 20, 2003
106,552
60,501
1
I would love to hear from some greenies on this. My wife and I had a couple hour drive in the car yesterday and discussed this subject.
I guess first of all is the source reasonably accurate? [within 100% wrong.] Obviously we can't completely eliminate CO2, Methane and and NO. So if you pick a reduction that is smaller and then double it [100% error] it still comes out to a very tiny impact.

So the discussion went like this.
1. Do the politicians who expose the 10-15 years to the apocalypse really believe what they are saying? We both agreed they really know better. Any disagreement.
2. If they know better then why do they do it? Power and control. We agreed on that. Good so far?
3 Where we started to disagree was why does the public go along with it.? Climate change doesn't poll particularly well and yet we elect folks who support green new deal, we go along with huge subsidies to green energy etc. Is it the media driving our opinions. -yes
4 We hear about scientific consensus and then get reports like this. why
5 we live part time on the Carolina coast. We hear about greater frequency and intensity of hurricanes and yet we can find data that suggests the opposite.

At the end of the drive we were depressed. Whether it is Covid or Climate we decided we can no longer believe anything we hear or read.

Oh well, back to football. At least I know enough about that to believe what I see. [although reading an in game thread is worse the the IPCC report on climate]

I genuinely believe that self serving politicians are driving it. They are desperate to feel good about themselves. It's 100% emotion. You and your wife both agree they know the world isn't ending in 15 years, yet..... It's like handing a 10 dollar bill to a homeless guy. You feel good about yourself, and the 10 dollars gets the person a couple quarts for the night, or worse yet, some heroin while absolutely solving nothing.

I was in seventh grade back in the mid 70's. I remember watching a movie how we were going to run out of oil by 1984. In a dramatic ending, the film faded to black....... LOL.....
 

Cosmos

Well-Known Member
May 29, 2001
25,446
17,957
1
This isn’t hard to understand when it’s put next to the fact that more than half of the world’s human greenhouse gas emissions are produced by 25 cities, all but two of them in China, none of them in the U.S.
And to think we Americans pursue an 'out of sight, out of mind' model with respect to climate change prevention. As if we don't breath the same air as China! Hell, I'm old enough to remember when the Cuyahoga River caught fire. Manufacturing is inherently messy even by today's standards. That manufacturing didn't disappear. It simply relocated to China. The incentive: the Chinaman would gladly toil all day in industrial waste for a fish head and a bowl of rice.
 

Latest posts