Trump administration predicted seven degree increase in global temperature by 2100

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by RootBeerMan, Sep 28, 2018.

  1. RootBeerMan, Sep 28, 2018
    Last edited: Sep 28, 2018

    RootBeerMan macrumors 65816

    RootBeerMan

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    #1
    They know that we are headed for a monumental catastrophe and they are going to do nothing about it. They would rather accept the fate they are imposing on the world, rather than jump in and attempt to avert the crisis. Trump, his masters and the people in their political sphere would prefer to see the world burn and millions die, rather than take the painful steps now in an effort to stave off catastrophe. We could do it. It would take a Manhattan Project level of commitment from us, and the rest of the developed world, but it is doable. People on all sides of the issue would have to STHU and support it, but we have the ability to do it. Trump will not, though. He, his enablers and his followers would rather see the world wrecked.

    Trump administration predicted seven degree increase in global temperature by 2100


    https://thehill.com/policy/energy-e...ion-predicted-seven-degree-increase-in-global

     
  2. hulugu macrumors 68000

    hulugu

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2003
    Location:
    quae tangit perit Trump
    #2
    Thanks for posting this. I'm sure the "well, I'll be dead by then" crowd will wade in soon along with the "the models are wrong because they can't predict the weather so..." cadre.

    We're in real trouble. But, the inflection point to deal with climate change in a non-painful way was 2000, ever since then we've been increasingly unable and unwilling to do anything. It's a failure of our political system and our economic system.

    Things are going to get expensive and difficult. And, it's because we frittered away our margin.
     
  3. NT1440 macrumors G5

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    #3
    Frankly speaking, because of the US's inaction on climate change over the last few decades, combined with us being the #1 emitter of greenhouse gases (the military is the largest emitter on the planet), that makes us complicit in the impending humanitarian crisis we will see in our lifetimes. This system is not equipped to make the changes necessary to prevent the shattering of literally hundreds of millions of lives.
     
  4. hulugu macrumors 68000

    hulugu

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2003
    Location:
    quae tangit perit Trump
    #4
    Yep. As I've often said, there are signs that the Arab Spring was in part predicated by decreasing crop yields caused by climate change. The mixture of flooding, desertification, and warming will kill thousands and make refugees of millions.

    The scariest thing I've heard was at a border technology conference when the sellers of fencing and weaponry talked about these issues as the reasons to harden borders and ensure that refugees could not enter a country.
     
  5. NT1440 macrumors G5

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    #5
    That exact scenario is playing out under the newly signed on war on drugs by 120+ countries at the UN. They'll get weaponry in the name of it somehow being related to drug controls, but it doesn't take a genius to look around and see that all the countries of the world are arming themselves for upcoming (domestic) conflict.

    The masters of the universe have already decided, we'd rather kill the ecosystem and countless lives rather than move to a new economic model.
     
  6. dannyyankou macrumors G3

    dannyyankou

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    Location:
    Scarsdale, NY
    #6
    Yet people laughed Obama said climate change is the biggest threat to our national security.
     
  7. NT1440 macrumors G5

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    #7
    Because those people have a vested interest in not changing our system at all, and the rest are just their rubes.
     
  8. dannyyankou macrumors G3

    dannyyankou

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    Location:
    Scarsdale, NY
    #8
    And because they’re paid by special interests like oil companies that don’t believe in renewable energy. It’s sad.
     
  9. PracticalMac, Sep 28, 2018
    Last edited: Sep 28, 2018

    PracticalMac macrumors 68030

    PracticalMac

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2009
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    #9
    This was off the cuff topic I posted a couple months back, read it here.

    In short, this is my #1 concern over anything else (even terrorists).

    (oh, and what we may have to eat in future)
     
  10. DearthnVader macrumors 6502a

    DearthnVader

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2015
    Location:
    Red Springs, NC
    #10
    If only Rev. Al Gore and St. Hillary had been elected, all this would have been avoided.:rolleyes:

    I know, we can fix it with tax.:p
     
  11. hulugu macrumors 68000

    hulugu

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2003
    Location:
    quae tangit perit Trump
    #11
    Thank god someone made this partisan before we got to post #11—I was hoping we could have the exact same arguments again.
     
  12. RootBeerMan thread starter macrumors 65816

    RootBeerMan

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    #12
    Some people just want to watch the world burn.

    If either of those two had been elected the probability is certainly higher that we would at least be doing something, rather than nothing but watch the disaster unfold. As for your more flippant comment that just shows that you've swallowed the wreckers propaganda, hook, line and sinker, and never given any real thought to the matter.
    We can start to fix the problem by cutting taxes on renewable energy, electric and hydrogen vehicles and nuclear power. We can give tax incentives to individuals and businesses to adopt solar and other carbon neutral power sources for their homes and businesses., as well as vehicles. We can do many things by freeing the market and incentivising the country to switch over to carbon neutral tech. We need a crash program to build as many safe nuclear plants as we can, as fast as we can. And we need to shut down every US coal and oil fired plant immediately and help other countries to make the switch as rapidly as possible. Doing what you and Trump want is imposing a death sentence on millions and that should be unacceptable.
     
  13. T'hain Esh Kelch macrumors 601

    T'hain Esh Kelch

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2001
    Location:
    Denmark
    #13
    [​IMG]
     
  14. hulugu macrumors 68000

    hulugu

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2003
    Location:
    quae tangit perit Trump
    #14
    And, even if they failed to do something at least Gore et. al. wouldn't have spent real effort denying that climate change exists and is man-made, thus pushing us even further behind on potential solutions.
     
  15. s2mikey macrumors 68020

    s2mikey

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2013
    Location:
    Upstate, NY
    #15
    Yep, here we go. We’re all gonna die if everyone doesn’t give up their property, cars, job, business and everything else. Move all the little people into stacked one bedroom apartments in the city. No cars. Walk or bike please. No more AC either. No more home theater systems or big TVs. Y’all just sit there and behave.

    Oh yeah, as for the rich people like Al Gore, he gets to keep his 30,000 sq foot mansion and so does everyone in Hollywood. They are exempt. So are politicians and other "special" folks. That’s exactly how this will go if they get their way. As I’ve always said, as soon as the climate change elitists give up their posessions and walk the talk then I’ll consider it. Until then? Stay out of my life.

    Oh and yeah, I’ll say it: me and my kids will be long gone by the year 2100 so I really don’t care anyways. Sorry. I ain’t taking one for the team.
     
  16. RootBeerMan thread starter macrumors 65816

    RootBeerMan

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    #16
    Hyperbole, much? Your rant just goes to show that you never put a single thought into the issue and have let talk radio and their ilk fill your head with nonsense. As I have stated many times this issue can be addressed almost wholly with free market solutions and with no major losses in the freedom arena. Yeah, we're going to have to switch from fossil fuels to other means. It's a small price to pay in order to secure a future for our kids and grand kids.
     
  17. hulugu macrumors 68000

    hulugu

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2003
    Location:
    quae tangit perit Trump
    #17
    The right-wing's response to this has shifted from "nah uh" to "well maybe, but it's not people" to "oh well, it's impossible anyway."

    It's a structurally amoral response that totally ignores free-market solutions and in fact tries to undermine free-market attempts.

    That was the whole point of the carbon credit system, originally designed by economists and championed by people like Al Gore. And, the system was just attempting to create a market for carbon and price in externalities like CO2 production that are normally not included in the free-market.

    And, the right tore it to piece, using a long-running ad hominem argument to attacking Gore for his dumb house and his international flights rather than wrestle with the actual economics.

    Now, we see that the renewables are increasingly cost competitive, and yet, there's almost no interest in the right to use these products. Which is ironic considering that the rural people they often champion probably have the most to gain by building small-scale local energy cooperatives that can power a house, a ranch, or a farm without much trouble.

    You can't run a stadium and a skyscraper on solar panels easily, but a 1,200-square foot ranch house and a barn runs just fine off a well-designed solar array.

    But, whatever. I'm not surprised or particularly disheartened anymore. The third-world gets this stuff. And, they're going to figure out how to make very good, cheap systems and eventually it will be Vietnam or Indonesia that will have enough money to build dikes and barriers, while Florida drowns.
     
  18. jerwin macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    #18
    "we might as well give up now, so we will."

    http://nymag.com/daily/intelligence...ts-catastrophic-warming-by-2100.html#comments
     
  19. s2mikey macrumors 68020

    s2mikey

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2013
    Location:
    Upstate, NY
    #19
    Hey, I’m down with logical, sensible, efficient, sustainable and NON-economy destroying energy solutions. Most people are. It’s is hard to argue though that many of the pundits and chest thumping climate changers aren’t willing to walk the talk. My rant is quite valid. Nothing to do with talk shows which I don’t listen to anyways. Far too often, when you read between the lines of these climate change ideas it just comes back to US taxpayers footing the bill, our economy suffering, wealth being transferred from the USA to somewhere else, and other draconian changes that just screw the working class. Like super high energy bills and carbon taxes. Not into that.

    Propose a realisitic solution as I highlighted above and everyone will be on board.
     
  20. jerwin macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    #20
    avoid the tax-- use renewables.
     
  21. hulugu macrumors 68000

    hulugu

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2003
    Location:
    quae tangit perit Trump
    #21
    Right. The carbon tax is again, just a way to price the externalities of energy production. Don't want to pay the tax, don't produce carbon, or mitigate it.

    Already 100 countries have some kind of carbon tax, or a "cap-and-trade" system, including Portugal, South Korea, Mexico, Australia, and China.

    I'll say this, my house and the summer cabin are both energy producers these days, with rainwater harvesting systems, solar panels, and a geothermal system. We also grow food at both—though the cabin basically feeds the cleverest among the local deer, rabbits, and javelina. So, for me a carbon tax might just raise the price of gasoline, and I suspect my outlet will have deal with whatever tax arrives on my airline flights and rental cars.


    The tax credit system was designed so that intensive carbon producers—like a coal power-plant or an automobile factory—could buy carbon credits and create a market for people who produce almost no carbon money. This meant that carbon production would arguably decline overtime, and that we would have a market allowing smart people to find market value—i.e. profit—by figuring out how to lower their carbon production.

    Now, I'm not sure such a system would really work as market can be gamed, but that was the entire idea.

    We're now left with a carbon tax as the only way to force people to produce less carbon.

    The right killed the market idea, so now we're going to a tax.

    And, again, in 1998 we had a margin that gave us at least a decade of testing out programs and considerations and let us tinker. We blew that margin. So, if we don't want to deal with the worst case scenarios of 2100, we're going to need to undergo painful change.
     
  22. RootBeerMan thread starter macrumors 65816

    RootBeerMan

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    #22
    Matt Taibbi, over at Rolling Stone asks the obvious question about this report and issue. Is Trump a nihilist? Probably, but so are most of his supporters and most Republican politicians, where the coming climate change disaster is concerned. They'd rather watch the world burn than make even minimal moves in the direction of fixing or even mitigating things.

    https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/trump-white-house-climate-change-731440/

    Read the rest at the link. It's a good article.
     
  23. PracticalMac macrumors 68030

    PracticalMac

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2009
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    #23
  24. s2mikey macrumors 68020

    s2mikey

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2013
    Location:
    Upstate, NY
    #24
    Rolling Stone - The ultimate left-wing *news* outlet. Do they even cover music anymore? Nope.

    Fix the energy issue without taxing us to death and ruining our way of living and people will be on board. Im sure of it. But every single "solution" involves draconian taxes/fines and economy killing regulations.
     
  25. RootBeerMan thread starter macrumors 65816

    RootBeerMan

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2016
    #25
    I see that, as usual, you did not read the article, as you completely failed to address even one issue that was covered in it. Why do you even bother to comment? And yes, RS covers music on a daily basis, online and in print. But you wouldn'y know that as you seem to stick solely to Faux news and Breitbart.
     

Share This Page

24 September 28, 2018