Climate Change: Its Not About Climate
They’re going to push for increased defense spending in space to combat “aliens”.
They just want to prevent China from being first to set up mining operations on the moon.
Dave, I’ll paraphrase my understanding of what you are saying and you correct me if I’m wrong:
The western elites are not hammering China for its rising carbon emissions which implies that they know AGW is way overblown because if they truly believed it, they wouldn’t be forcing western citizens to reduce emissions while allowing China to increase unchallenged. Therefore, DF is agnostic about AGW.
My comment: You are basing your opinion of whether AGW is scientifically real on your inference of how sociopathic western elites manipulate the issue politically? Why do you assume they are sane, or even care? Why do you assume that they know whether AGW is real more than anyone else does? This seems a lot like the situation now where so many liberals will automatically believe the opposite of what the Orange Man ever said, simply out of principle. Well that’s granting him a HUGE amount of power, ironically which is the opposite of what liberals would admit to giving him. All he has to do is say something and half the world automatically believes the opposite! I wish I had that kind of power. Wouldn’t it be more logical to analyze issues scientifically, independently of what any corrupt political leaders say or do?
You suggest that if the world was going to end in 9 years then Bill Gates’ farmland would be worthless, and since Gates isn’t hammering China on its emissions, therefore AGW is overblown?
From what I understand, Gates has bought farmland in the midwest which is above the reach of sea level rise (correct me if I’m wrong).
And I don’t think it’s about the world ending that is of immediate concern. It’s primarily about sea level rise which would automatically turn a large portion of the world’s population (including all of Florida) into refugees. This would only increase the value of land remaining above the flooding zone. Secondly, the concern is about weather pattern change, which I doubt would happen to a significant extent within Gates’ lifetime, so not much of a concern to him. Regardless, unless the midwest turns into a barren desert, the land would still hold high value.
Sure, China emits 2x the US carbon footprint. However on a per person basis, china emits half of the US per person average. And they manufacture much of our crap, shouldering a lot of emissions on Americas behalf. We are the country that drives much of the worldwide emissions and also the messaging that climate doesnt matter.
Ok, that’s an excellent “fairness” argument. Let’s follow the “fairness” logic for a moment and see where it leads.
We agree to allow China to expand their carbon production to equal that of the West on a per-capita basis, while the West slowly reduces. China “promises” to start reducing Real Soon Now.
What’s the result? World ends due to too much carbon. In 10 years. Oops, I mean 9 years.
See, it’s not about fairness. It’s about aggregate too much carbon. Earth don’t care if things are per-capita fair. Earth only cares about total global carbon production. And if it goes up, the earth ends in 10 years. Oops I mean 9 years. So I’m told.
The West cannot reduce fast enough to make up for China’s increase to match up to that per-capita level. Fairness = world death.
So while you are right on a “fairness” level, more carbon = world death, regardless of who happens to be emitting it, and why. We will all die because of our alleged ever-so-kind desire to be “fair” to China.
But of course I don’t believe this. Oligarchs would never stand by and let their precious farmland be destroyed. Right now, they are flying private, and blissfully ignoring “China” and that increased carbon while hammering on us to follow their new set of rules. “because, climate.” (last year: “because, pandemic.”)
It just isn’t a credible picture. If it were true, they’d all be acting differently. Superpowers with nukes – historically – have tended to get really upset when someone else threatens to destroy the planet. Fairness doesn’t enter into it. At least, it never has before.
Empire gonna empire. Empire has never done “fairness” in all of history. Not that I’ve seen.
There are so many tools Empire could be using to get China to stop making carbon, if we really believed the world was about to end. Even getting slightly creative, we could really cause trouble if we wanted to, well short of nukes.
And yet – really nobody cares. Not the military, not the CIA, not the State Department, literally nobody.
Again, this is just viewing things from a “Cold War International Relations Framework.”
See, we have an easy culprit: China. They are the ones causing the world to end. And yet we do nothing. We are “helpless.” Instead of banging on them (because, “fairness”), we destroy our own economy?
Empires don’t act this way.
Unless the climate thing is all a sham.
Governor French Laundry wasn’t scared of COVID. That’s why he went to the restaurant. Therefore, COVID is also – largely – a sham.
Same thing here.
[Mark_BC: Yes. If “the world was gonna end” in 9 years, the oligarchs would be behaving a lot differently than they are right now, w.r.t China. That’s my thesis. China, fairness or not, is the 2x largest emitter. A “real” Empire would put a stop to that, fairness or not. That’s just the way Empires have always worked throughout history. Except for now.]
First of all AGW is not a belief system any more than gravity is. If you disagree see if you can jump off a building and stop believing in gravity, let me know how that goes. Global Warming due to CO2 is a scientific fact, has been studied for over 100 years, serious warnings have been posted for more than 50 years, it will not go away if you don’t “believe” in it.
The #1 reason we don’t dictate to China is they are the manufacturers of ALL the stuff that we consume and when in the past we have embargoed or sanctioned them the entire country screams bloody murder for the skyrocketing prices and unavailability of goods. This is also the #1 reason that the US emissions are down and CHina is up.
Everyone talks about ramping back up mfg in the US. Yea! Lets see if we can bring our CO2 back up as fast as we can. Chinas biggest problem is keeping 1.4 billion and counting people working and believing they are climbing the economic ladder…for ever.
The other reason we don’t tell China what to do is because they can say NO and make it count.
Limits to growth, aka Peak Everything is real also and the biggest peak is in shitting our nest. There is so much toxins and pollution in the biosphere that we are dying right now by the millions, 10 million a year just from air pollution a quarter of all children having autisum within a few years, male and female reproduction systems collapsing, endemic malnourishment creating a Fat but sick population, the list is endless. To talk about sea level rise as if that all ya need to worry about is ignorant, it is overall habitat destruction which has already killed off 70% of wildlife, 80% of freshwater species, insects, birds…all life on the planet is affected including humans.
If “the world was gonna end” in 9 years, the oligarchs would be behaving a lot differently than they are right now, w.r.t China. That’s my thesis. China, fairness or not, is the 2x largest emitter. A “real” Empire would put a stop to that, fairness or not. That’s just the way Empires have always worked throughout history. Except for now.
But it’s not about the world ending in 9 years. It’s about CO2 level reaching an unstoppable runaway point where other positive feedback loops kick in, ensuring the planet starts shifting to a new much warmer quasi-equilibrium, and there wouldn’t be anything we could do to stop it. This would flood coastal areas and change weather patterns. But those actual impacts wouldn’t be really felt for many decades down the road, long after the term of any current elite — unless of course they find the cure for ageing and hoard it for themselves, which I wouldn’t be surprised about at this point.
This “quasi-equilibrium” shift is typical of how the climate has behaved over previous millions of years. A sort-of equilibrium is reached that is more or less stable for 10,’s of thousands of years, and then a tipping point is reached where suddenly the climate shifts over several hundred years or millenia to a new radically different new “equilibrium”. The forcing events occurred long before the new equilibrium was reached.
And I’ve said before, I think this is largely a moot argument – I believe we have already passed the tipping point (but what do I know), and even if we hadn’t, there’s nothing any political leaders could do to prevent the burning of the remaining fossil fuels since as PP has explained, society cannot function with out FF’s.
It’s true! Solar energy is very efficient on the Moon and Mining Bitcoin will cost little and be easy to transmit to Earth based as well as orbiting habitats that use bitcoin.
But, it will all happen without the intervention of intelligent meat (fake news).
I have two questions (for anybody):
1. How do you spend Bitcoin during a power outage?
2. What affect does a Grand Solar Minimum have on global climate change?
Mark, Bill Gates is gobbling up thousands of acres of land in Florida which you say will all be flooded in one of the earliest severe effects of AGW.
From what I understand, Gates has bought farmland in the midwest which is above the reach of sea level rise (correct me if I’m wrong). And I don’t think it’s about the world ending that is of immediate concern. It’s primarily about sea level rise which would automatically turn a large portion of the world’s population (including all of Florida) into refugees.
Does that alter your theory any? How about Obama’s retirement home in coastal Massachusetts which is only 3 meters above sea level?
Most likely the great majority of the excess CO2 produced from the industrial revolution is going into the sea and large land based waters due to the tremendous storage capacity there compared to the atmosphere. Some of the oceanic CO2 is being sequestered as calcium carbonate.
My argument wasnt about fairness. If I were in charge, everyone would be reducing carbon at whatever rate was needed to avoid tipping points.
I was simply pointing out that it would be really strange for the USA to avoid its obligations while demanding (even militarily) that the rest of the world do what they aren’t willing to do.
Climate Change and all the other 3E predicaments are just as hard to realize, understand and act upon for the elites as it is for the rest of us as well. Hence all the apparent contradictions that you choose to spin into an ‘its all a con game narrative’.