Food for thought.

[dkovic77]

Do some research of your own , it's all out there. At the current rate of collapse China's population alone will be 50% of what it is today.

Hmmmm and China is the world you say? I have and of china had some decline in their population it wouldn’t be a terrible thing.

I think they could get there by just showing the video of that guy talking.

 

[Chobham]

Oh no I wasted enough time listening to him first talk ad nauseam and then fold under questioning. Please provide someone else and their thoughts for me to consider.

You seem to have locked everything into this specific person as an authority. A clinical psychologist wouldn’t be much of an authority on this issue, now if you found maybe someone who has a strong background environmental sciences, agricultural sciences, etc to back up your population discussion that would be good.

I did watch him have his ass handed to him when he was in his field of observing human behavior and he couldn’t keep his argument together with some basic questioning.

So yes, call me a skeptic on the power of his observation and your reliance on choosing him to start this thread.

I will hang up and wait for your next disappointment of a podcast selection. Might not give it a full listen if it is the same guy wearing a mask though.

You haven't listened to anything, or understood, so far everything you've posted is bullshit.

 

[dkovic77]

You haven't listened to anything, or understood, so far everything you've posted is bullshit.

Oh I listened, and even found another link to share that I listened to as well. Do you only listen to the ones where no one questions him, that make you feel better?

Anyone can talk, it’s when you can keep your argument when being questioned- then I’m interested. He cannot, and it looks like you seem to share his same disdain for being questioned.

 

[Chobham]

What questioning by whom? If you have some content pink it or post it. So far all I've heard from you is bullshit.

 

[dkovic77]

What questioning by whom? If you have some content pink it or post it. So far all I've heard from you is bullshit.

Go back and look, please.

 

[Chobham]

Go back and look, please.

I saw the Newman interview, years ago. She ended up looking like a fool. I'm surprised that CH4 let the whole interview out.

"So what you're saying...."

 

[DeluxAuto]

The OP must have picked up Peterson's new book published by Fisher • Price: "Jordan Peterson: My First Intellectual."

 

[Chobham]

The OP must have picked up Peterson's new book published by Fisher • Price: "Jordan Peterson: My First Intellectual."

And you must be intent on making your name in journalism by mimicking Newman.

 

[JohnEngelman]

Once again you post the past, none of which I dispute........yet here we (humans) still are. And if you go back even futher into the paleo-climate you find that at one time the global temp was ~5C higher than it is today AND that period was one of the most bio-diverse periods in the planets history. Of course that was before humans were around which brings me back to the assertion that it's NOT about the planet, just about "ME."

The current rate of demographic projections indicate that by 2100 the human population will be 50% of what it is today and 'climate change' has nothing to do with that. That demographic collapse will bring with it a commiserate collapse in pollution of any sort.

Fine, you want to attack the fossil fuel industry. Precisely how is this transition made and how? What are the consequences for the lowest quintile of the global population as a result of your 'policies?' I can tell you're about to find out over the next year and little of it is going to have anything to do with any policy any government can concoct.

You make a few good points. Nevertheless, when the average temperature was higher than it is now the ocean level was also higher. Much of what is now the United States was under water. The last two summers give an indication if what we are going to be experiencing.

 

[JohnEngelman]

Peterson posts here as "JohnEngelman."

Why do you associate me with Jordan Peterson? I think he is arrogant and disgusting. I disagree with him about the environment. I suppose I could endure listing through the entire video. I would rather Chobham explain what he says in his (I mean Chobham's) own words.

 

[DeluxAuto]

And you must be intent on making your name in journalism by mimicking Newman.

You hero worship Musk, Trump, and Peterson, but please keep wailing against the Liberal Hollywood Elite because those three are certainly not Hollywood. No sirree, Bob.

 

[icanhelp1]

That only indicates that the climate is changing. It's always been changing. Fine, exactly how are any measures proposed going to make a difference? For example, you have to drive an EV for 100K miles to reach net 0 and that's assuming you have no major repairs along the way (the parts to repair will require even more energy mostly powered by diesel).

"Green" energy is a bullshit myth being sold to the public by individuals who will enrich themselves by the public buying into that notion. Paying attention to what's going on in Europe? Nah, you and the rest of the self-entered, virtue signaling, bitches don't have a clue. Want a clue? The Earth will be here long after the last human walks the face of the planet, that being a given you aren't saving the Earth, just you're sorry assed life.............and guess what" No one cares about you.

Energy makes the world go round, including the food you eat, So, EXACTLY, what are you going to give up to make this dream come true,

being aware that those demanding you sacrifice aren't going to give up a damn thing? So unless you're willing to live the life of the mad bomber, and you're still here on-line, and you don't live in the dark, you're full of shit.

^^^^^^^
THAT!!!

 

[icanhelp1]

Once again you post the past, none of which I dispute........yet here we (humans) still are. And if you go back even futher into the paleo-climate you find that at one time the global temp was ~5C higher than it is today AND that period was one of the most bio-diverse periods in the planets history. Of course that was before humans were around which brings me back to the assertion that it's NOT about the planet, just about "ME."

The current rate of demographic projections indicate that by 2100 the human population will be 50% of what it is today and 'climate change' has nothing to do with that. That demographic collapse will bring with it a commiserate collapse in pollution of any sort.

Fine, you want to attack the fossil fuel industry. Precisely how is this transition made and how? What are the consequences for the lowest quintile of the global population as a result of your 'policies?' I can tell you're about to find out over the next year and little of it is going to have anything to do with any policy any government can concoct.

We should, at this moment in time, begin planting billions of trees and developing technologies to scrub CO2 emissions from our atmosphere till people of sane minds can approach global warming with a comprehensive plan to include nuclear. Buying shit from China does nothing more than transfer the problem from us to them while destroying our economy.

 

[phrodeau]

2:50 “the UK, the home of the industrial revolution that lifted the world out of poverty.”

When did that happen? I’m pretty sure that there’s still plenty of poverty in the world.

 

[DeluxAuto]

We should, at this moment in time, begin planting billions of trees and developing technologies to scrub CO2 emissions from our atmosphere

That's literally happening right now and has been for decades. Clue yourself in.

 

[John_von_Neumann]

That only indicates that the climate is changing. It's always been changing. Fine, exactly how are any measures proposed going to make a difference? For example, you have to drive an EV for 100K miles to reach net 0 and that's assuming you have no major repairs along the way [...].

Your information is out of date, again, gramps. Try 60,000 miles for breakeven, or even 30,000.

 

[icanhelp1]

That's literally happening right now and has been for decades. Clue yourself in.

That's literally happening right now and has been for decades. Clue yourself in.

These carbon capture and recapture hubs are still on paper and are predicted to be extremely costly and inefficient. Guess who’s throwing money and resources at it, BIG BAD OIL! I’m willing to bet Biden’s EPA will slow any timely building of these hubs to a crawl. Much more research s needed. Environmental studies are also needed, how the extraction of such high volumes of CO2 from a hub site would affect the ECO system of that area.

 

[Lazaran]

Some clever video editor should digitally project a montage of all the recent environmental catastrophes likely linked to excess greenhouse gasses from human activities, as well as catastrophic environmental pollution events linked to the fossil fuel industry, on the wall behind JP as he drones on about the death and destruction being caused by green energy climate activists.

That would be funny AND sad.

 

[dkovic77]

I saw the Newman interview, years ago. She ended up looking like a fool. I'm surprised that CH4 let the whole interview out.

"So what you're saying...."

What I’m saying is, he looks like a fool when questioned… and can barely hold his own when anyone remotely gives him any sort of push back. Seems like a calmer version of DJT.

Somewhere this guy said bleach cured COVID didn’t he???

 

[Chobham]

What I’m saying is, he looks like a fool when questioned… and can barely hold his own when anyone remotely gives him any sort of push back. Seems like a calmer version of DJT.

Somewhere this guy said bleach cured COVID didn’t he???

Seriously???? LMAO

 

[Chobham]

China's dilemma.

Let It Rot

This presenter dives into the social impacts of the CCP's policies.

 

[Comshaw]

Once again you post the past, none of which I dispute........yet here we (humans) still are. And if you go back even futher into the paleo-climate you find that at one time the global temp was ~5C higher than it is today AND that period was one of the most bio-diverse periods in the planets history. Of course that was before humans were around which brings me back to the assertion that it's NOT about the planet, just about "ME."

The current rate of demographic projections indicate that by 2100 the human population will be 50% of what it is today and 'climate change' has nothing to do with that. That demographic collapse will bring with it a commiserate collapse in pollution of any sort.

Fine, you want to attack the fossil fuel industry. Precisely how is this transition made and how? What are the consequences for the lowest quintile of the global population as a result of your 'policies?' I can tell you're about to find out over the next year and little of it is going to have anything to do with any policy any government can concoct.

Of course the climate has always been changing, but what you ignore is the fact that in every instance of drastic climate change, there was a catalyst for that change. Today the largest proven contributor to climate change is the actions taken by the human population. And the largest action we have taken that influences climate change is the burning of fossil fuels. What we do we can undo, as long as we don't wait to long, don't ignore it or try to blame it on something other than what is.

As far as your example of the EV, no large human endeavor, that I'm aware of, has ever been successful right out of the gate. It's always been a slow progression, a learning experience as we find the path to make what ever endeavor we are engaged in better. The fact that we can even get to net-zero, which was only a dream 10-15 years ago, is a testament to that. Insisting that we should be at the finish line when we have just begun the race is ignorant or disingenuous.

Green energy isn't just about reducing emissions or CO2. Our entire civilization is based on and run by a finite energy source. It will run out, there is no doubt about. No one, on either side of the energy debate disputes that. However, there are those like yourself who insist we have enough oil to last a few (100 or so) years. That is extremely short-sited and self-centered. Short-sited because those who use that argument refuse to consider the long range implications of that choice, refuse to consider what we are leaving for our children's, chlidren's, children. Self-centered because the majority of those who use it are also those who profit from it. Both of those opinions are a "fuck those in the future as long as I get mine now!" mind set.

Once again you post the past, none of which I dispute........yet here we (humans) still are. And if you go back even futher into the paleo-climate you find that at one time the global temp was ~5C higher than it is today AND that period was one of the most bio-diverse periods in the planets history. Of course that was before humans were around which brings me back to the assertion that it's NOT about the planet, just about "ME."

The current rate of demographic projections indicate that by 2100 the human population will be 50% of what it is today and 'climate change' has nothing to do with that. That demographic collapse will bring with it a commiserate collapse in pollution of any sort.

Fine, you want to attack the fossil fuel industry. Precisely how is this transition made and how? What are the consequences for the lowest quintile of the global population as a result of your 'policies?' I can tell you're about to find out over the next year and little of it is going to have anything to do with any policy any government can concoct.

It isn't and never was about "saving the planet". Earth will be here long after humans go the way of the Dodo. It may not be the one we recognize and can live on, but it will be here and I am of the opinion that there will be life. Maybe not what WE think of as life, but it will be here. Trying to stop and reverse global warming is all about saving the human race. We face a lot of self-made opportunities for the demise of our species: atomic weapons, global warming, the end of fossil fuels, over population. In my mind we need to address all of those, but global warming and the end of fossil fuels are two of the largest and most immediate concerns.

It appears, the gist of what I get from the first two paragraphs of your post, you are arguing that since global warming is about saving the human race and since the population will collapse in a matter of years because of over population, even if global warming was a problem, we should grab for any economic profit we can because things are going to collapse anyway. A rather narcissistic view. We should grab what we can now, shouldn't try, because it will fail anyway? FFS

Deniers of global warming have never come up with a factual, valid argument to refute it. "We shouldn't try because it will cost money" isn't a valid argument. "We shouldn't try because the world is going to hell in a hand basket anyway" isn't a valid argument.

Comshaw

 

[dkovic77]

China's dilemma.

Let It Rot

This presenter dives into the social impacts of the CCP's policies.

And you see this presenter has more gravitas because he doesn’t seem so smug.

It’s the difference in the presentation style, a report vs a speak to camera testimonial of the previous offering. It didn’t help the first guy the very next link in the queue was the one where the anchor was carving him up like a Turkey.

I’m sure the CCP powers that be would prefer this recent posting wasn't out there for consumption, but was the message was crafted was much stronger and clearer.

This where you tell us they are the same guy, one using a filter? If so, he should always use the filter.

 

[JohnEBbad]

The man catalyst for change is the sun's natural fluctuations. It ebbs and flows; not in a steady state (i.e., it is the strange attractor of a chaotic system). Much of our change can be directly attributed to that, but the religion of man-made climate change is a community of deniers (and opportunistic hustlers).

 

[DeluxAuto]

The man catalyst for change is the sun's natural fluctuations. It ebbs and flows; not in a steady state (i.e., it is the strange attractor of a chaotic system). Much of our change can be directly attributed to that, but the religion of man-made climate change is a community of deniers (and opportunistic hustlers).

Climate change deniers came after climate change science was established. What cycle of the ebb and flow are we in now that's wreaking havoc on our planet?