Sure, but this is like saying that we should not single out Al Capone because, hey, there were other deadly mobsters surrounding him. No doubt, many others are not leaping to the cause, but we’re supposed to be the effing U.S. of A. There used to be a global authority that came with that awesome responsibility. I know many on this forum are naturally cynical and sarcastic, and critical to such distinctions, but that used to mean something for the world order. If we can’t see the consequences from eroding that (not naturally, say, by giving up land or becoming less economically relevant but giving it away for free decades before it should happen), well, then we’re pretending to feel good that things will just work themselves out somehow in the long run.
It’s not like that at all. It’s like saying Al Capone was the deadliest mobster and pretending that the other mobsters were well behaving chore boys. ’
You’re talking about the US and A and its leadership position in the world. How is it that Chomsky is silent on Obama’s non-existent actions against climate change while Trump is the worst criminal in human history? Doesn’t make sense to me at all.
Yeah, look, I don’t know about Chomsky’s positions in everything. I don’t even follow his stuff closely. All I know is that how the thread opened, I didn’t disagree with the point.
But I do believe there is some intellectual self-pleasuring about all of this in the pubic discourse on the matter, like a person insisting on arguing the semantics of what caliber bullet they were hit with instead of attending to the fact that they are bleeding out on the sidewalk.
of course i know that.i took geology cuz it was the easy class. fun fact we’re supposedly still in the ice age. but these are large supercycles that can range a million years so its really nothing we should be concerned in. heres some info below.
anyways human impact is clear. the severity of that impact is what isnt. i get the argument that it is exponential. but we are nowhere close to where it should be a concern. im not about to let some worry wart scare me with his extrapolations. im like the king of extrapolation. i tell people im going to die with a net worth of 500m in the bank.
bottom line in the last 100 years. it has gotten hotter by about 1 degree fahrenheit or half a celsius. in that time frame sea levels have risen by 6 inches. now i know for many of us 6 inches is a lot. but to some of us it isnt really.
your cloud argument is possible. i dont know. i dont care. what i do know is whats happened in the past. so although its nice to hear your science fiction. at this stage. i’m not buying it. we can measure how fast things are changing and react approrpiately. its like driving a car. you dont always need to hit the breaks becasue there is a car ahead of you. often times you can just keep speeding and swerve to the other lane then cut them off because they are slow.
and just so we are clear. if the temperature rises by 2 degrees. thats about a foot more water. ur not going to drown from a foot more water. i suggest you move to a new place with a higher perspective.
Scientists have recorded five significant ice ages throughout the Earth’s history: the Huronian (2.4-2.1 billion years ago), Cryogenian (850-635 million years ago), Andean-Saharan (460-430 mya), Karoo (360-260 mya) and Quaternary (2.6 mya-present). Approximately a dozen major glaciations have occurred over the past 1 million years, the largest of which peaked 650,000 years ago and lasted for 50,000 years. The most recent glaciation period, often known simply as the “Ice Age,” reached peak conditions some 18,000 years ago before giving way to the interglacial Holocene epoch 11,700 years ago.
". Where does that leave our other contemporary leaders who have done nothing about climate change while knowing fully well that it’s happening. Macron, Xi Jinping, Obama, Younger Bush, Putin, Bolsonaro and Narenda Modi first come to my mind. "
What do you mean by “have done nothing?”
Are you saying that Macron, Xi Jinping, Obama etc. have not done anything about Climate Change?
What world have you been living in dude?
Almost all the bullshit you said above are factually incorrect. And I don’t have time to correct all the bullshit. You should try to write some papers on this issue to teach scientists their own fields. It would be awesome. lol
“ust so we are clear. if the temperature rises by 2 degrees. thats about a foot more water. ur not going to drown from a foot more water.”
What makes you think that it will just rise a foot? You just made a simple proportion and reached that result, I guess… It is just that easy. 
So if the the sea levels rises, you recommend to move to a higher perspective?
Well, what are you going to the with 160 million Bangladeshis when their whole country gets under water? And that is just the Bangladesh, not accounting the island nations all around the world. Are you OK to open your borders for them? I bet you are not.
But I guess you don’t care as long as you have 500 million dollar in the bank.
From the figures you gave did you notice how long it takes ice ages to end?
When the house is on fire, throwing a cup of water on it is equivalent to doing nothing.
That was the rate of change before so I am just basing it on the past.
I can guarantee your country will not be fully flooded in our lifetime. And 165m will not die from climate change.
Build a tree house. Problem solved.
Yeah, because you assume like a dumbfuck that Climate models are just so easy like an interest rate that you just multiply the past (which is also inccorrect) with time. That is it! Who says that your assumption is correct? You? As an expert on the field?
Who cares about my lifetime? So I should be OK if Climate Change does not affect me but screws up the next generations?
I guess you don’t have children so you don’t give a ■■■■. I don’t have a child, either, and do not intend to have one. But I still give a ■■■■ no to screw the next generation of humans and animals because of my actions today. That is our difference.
And if you have children, well, I guess they and your grandkids will spit in your grave when the time comes.
first of of course that is what i assume, that is what happened. i could easily be mistake and i can easily change my mind should hte data change. we can easily measure the rate of change and guess what it isnt increasing to the point that you are saying. i’ll sub to your ideas when ur ■■■■ is more concrete. right now, urs is pretty much hyperbole.
its not that i dont care. at some point, i will care. its just not right now because ur doomsday scenario is not very likely at all. and the rate of change is so slow that people should be able to adapt to the new normal with relative ease. so no need to be such a pansy.
“and the rate of change is so slow.”
How did you determine that?
The assumption is that the rate change you determined is constantly proportional. How do you know that?
Slow according to whom? And you say you can adjust the whole world economy immediattely? What the ■■■■ are you talking about?
What you say here is just bullshit you make up out of your ass. I guess 't should have been really hard for you to both study for CFA and become a climate scientist at the same time. Bravo!!!
Have you ever heard of Dunning-Kruger effect?
I just told you 1 feet in 200 years, is that not slow? I’m saying if it does ramp up. Well be able to see it before you drown over 1 feet. So relax.
I find global warming greatly over hyped. I wish I could find more sensible people discussing the issue instead of it being like a discussion of religion (what seems to be happening in this thread, for example)
These are the two sources I find most intellectually honest
https://www.copenhagenconsensus.com/copenhagen-consensus-climate
Why don’t you define Dunning Kruger for me? I bet just like your climate knowledge, you’ll get it wrong (unless you realize you don’t know and Google the right answer before responding. Even then, chances are good you’ll get it wrong )
You look so confident about knowing this Climate Change issue more that the climate scientists. 
Moron!!!
Why didn’t you answer the question about your assumption about the change being proportional, moron? I did not ask your “opinion” on whether it was slow or not. I asked you how do you know that the rate of change is going to stay constant in the future. Do you understand English?
Oh so I’ll take it you realize you know nothing about both climate change and Dunning–Kruger
I declare victory over the snowflake.
Lol it prolly isn’t constant. It’s just a guess to use past performance. Unlike you who’ll just assume the worst will happen. No need to fret. I swear you’re like an old woman.
Sure. 
Well, why do you think we should care about your guesses?
As a CFA would you care about the guesses of a, let’s say, project manager working on a bridge about stock valuations or derivatives, etc. I bet you would not and would laugh off your ass to his guesses. Well, you may think similarly that climate scientists would laugh their asses off your guesses, too. However, you think you are so smart to make guesses anyway.
Moron Dunning-Kruger patients!!! lol