General / Off-Topic Recycle or Die! (the elite environmental thread)

[jasonbarron]

If Danicus wants to stop people from taxing his sandwiches, arguing that the Earth will still be here no matter how crappy things get (duh), or pointing out that humans are 'only' responsible for ~7% of CO2 currently in the atmosphere (which is a completely freaking horrifying bit of trivia), is shooting himself in the foot. Now, pointing out that spending more than the projected total economic impact on mitigation strategies doesn't make much sense when that money could do more good elsewhere, or that imposing limitations with a high cost on personal freedoms, whose actual mitigating impacts are not well understood, may be premature...well that might get some actual traction.

No, I tried that tact early on in the conversation and it didn't work. If you look ack you'll find that it was the proposal of thought policing by the government and Big Tech that got me into this particular conversation in the first place.

The problem with climate change policies (as separate from just hand wringing and blame flinging that typically goes on on a forum) is that they simply don't work, whether we look at them from a single country's economic model standpoint or of the world as a whole; The rest of the world expects the USA to castrate itself economically for little to no advantage to global health (still haven't seen a plan that works to save the planet, for instance) while China sails on to economic super powerdom on the shoulders of carbon emissions and coal fired power. I'm not specifically calling out individuals on this thread, but that's in essence what the climate change movement is all about. Take the "Green New Deal" for instance; not only is it economic lunacy, it wouldn't even fix the perceived problems. What it would do is ruin us, which I'm far more concerned about that then the necessity for me and my children to adapt over the next generations.

 

[Morbad]

No, I tried that tact early on in the conversation and it didn't work.

Well, regressing to attacks on the most unassailable components of the topic, or irrelevant tangents, sure isn't going to work either.

Take the "Green New Deal" for instance; not only is it economic lunacy, it wouldn't even fix the perceived problems. What it would do is ruin us, which I'm far more concerned about that then the necessity for me and my children to adapt over the next generations.

The Green New Deal, from what I've seen of the current proposal, is not a practical solution, and pointing that out is the most sure fire way for it to be reworked or scrapped. One has to be careful that they aren't relying on misconceptions in their arguments, and ensure that they don't appear to be just lobbying for big energy. The masses on both sides are fickle and react irrationally to even the appearance of such biases.

 

[Shinji Ikari]

No, I tried that tact early on in the conversation and it didn't work. If you look ack you'll find that it was the proposal of thought policing by the government and Big Tech that got me into this particular conversation in the first place.

The problem with climate change policies (as separate from just hand wringing and blame flinging that typically goes on on a forum) is that they simply don't work, whether we look at them from a single country's economic model standpoint or of the world as a whole; The rest of the world expects the USA to castrate itself economically for little to no advantage to global health (still haven't seen a plan that works to save the planet, for instance) while China sails on to economic super powerdom on the shoulders of carbon emissions and coal fired power. I'm not specifically calling out individuals on this thread, but that's in essence what the climate change movement is all about. Take the "Green New Deal" for instance; not only is it economic lunacy, it wouldn't even fix the perceived problems. What it would do is ruin us, which I'm far more concerned about that then the necessity for me and my children to adapt over the next generations.

Australia already tried the carbon tax (Carbon pricing is the real name) and they didn't get "castrated" economically, once more, you are speaking out of your fears and misinformation. It's funny though, it was industrial countries like the UK that started to push for plans to tackle climate change decades ago (remember Margaret the iron lady?), ever heard of the Kyoto Protocol? What about the Montreal Protocol? They are both big cities of developed countries.

 

[jasonbarron]

Well, regressing to attacks on the most unassailable components of the topic, or irrelevant tangents, sure isn't going to work either.



The Green New Deal, from what I've seen of the current proposal, is not a practical solution, and pointing that out is the most sure fire way for it to be reworked or scrapped. One has to be careful that they aren't relying on misconceptions in their arguments, and ensure that they don't appear to be just lobbying for big energy. The masses on both sides are fickle and react irrationally to even the appearance of such biases.

Say what? I'm not sure how that's a comeback, or even what your point is: the Green New Deal and those who proposed it (we have -12 years to turn the ship around or we're all dooooomed!) are being taken very seriously by many. I'd say that characterizes those on the left who push this agenda, be they simple forum rubes or higher up policy makers.

 

[Morbad]

the Green New Deal and those who proposed it (we have -12 years to turn the ship around or we're all dooooomed!) are being taken very seriously by many. I'd say that characterizes those on the left who push this agenda, be they simple forum rubes or higher up policy makers.

That's exactly the sort of misrepresentation I was referring to.

The drafters of the New Green Deal do not think we are 'doomed' in the sense you imply. They think, with good reason, that we have maybe a dozen years to to act to limit global average temperature rise to 1.5C above pre-industrial levels and thus avoid some of the more negative impacts of climate change.

It's hard to take your arguments seriously if you cannot even attack an actual position. Stop watching media circuses, read the Green New Deal proposal, then argue against that.

Here's the text: https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-resolution/109/text

If you're attacking the first half, you're not going to get much traction, because you'd be wrong. Whole lot of holes in “Green New Deal mobilization” though...

 

[Shinji Ikari]

Do you own guns Jason?

 

[jasonbarron]

That's exactly the sort of misrepresentation I was referring to.

The drafters of the New Green Deal do not think we are 'doomed' in the sense you imply. They think, with good reason, that we have maybe a dozen years to to act to limit global average temperature rise to 1.5C above pre-industrial levels and thus avoid some of the more negative impacts of climate change.

It's hard to take your arguments seriously if you cannot even attack an actual position. Stop watching media circuses, read the Green New Deal proposal, then argue against that.

Here's the text: https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-resolution/109/text

If you're attacking the first half, you're not going to get much traction, because you'd be wrong. Whole lot of holes in “Green New Deal mobilization” though...

Your smug condescension is well noted, CMDR. Also, your partisan reconstituting of the facts. Yes, putting a timer on it isn't meant to imply doom at all lolol. Finally: I don't give a flying eff whether you don't take me seriously or not. I certainly don't take you seriously on much of anything, so fair is fair I suppose.

@Gregg Rulz ok of course.

 

[Patrick_68000]

So now we're comparing climate change to a major asteroid impact in the sense that it will "wipe out" humanity?

Yes you will be certainly the last of the dinosaurs that will disappear.

 

[Shinji Ikari]

@Gregg Rulz ok of course.

Do you happen to use strawmans as targets? You seem to be good at it.

 

[Morbad]

Your smug condescension is well noted, CMDR.

Stop calling me CMDR. This isn't Elite, and I don't actually command a spaceship.

Also, your partisan reconstituting of the facts.

I haven't changed or misrepresented any facts and your perceptions of partisanship are a reactionary delusion on your part.

Yes, putting a timer on it isn't meant to imply doom at all lolol.

It's not. A sense of urgency, sure, but the implication of doom isn't in the proposal.

Finally: I don't give a flying eff whether you don't take me seriously or not. I certainly don't take you seriously on much of anything, so fair is fair I suppose.

I wasn't talking about me.

You don't need to be concerned with how I perceive you. I am not active in any political or media circles. I am not a voter. I do not set policy. I do not have any say in policy.

I was pointing out that those that do have a say, and the voting public at large, will not find your your arguments, which mostly seem to be a mix of baseless paranoia, ignorance, and prejudice, to be particularly convincing. Not everything they find convincing is sound and not every one of your opinions is unfounded, but your willful misinterpretation of the positions you appear to be against is going to help push opinions, and policy, in that very direction.

 

[Phisto Sobanii]

Do you happen to use strawmans as targets? You seem to be good at it.

I enjoy Morbad's and Jason's posts. Are we here to discuss, or win?

Try the former!

 

[RELSPI]

This isn't Elite, and I don't actually command a spaceship.

gasps

 

[Phisto Sobanii]

gasps

Need a GIF? I can get you a good GIF.

first one is always free

 

[Shinji Ikari]

I enjoy Morbad's and Jason's posts. Are we here to discuss, or win?

Try the former!

I'm open to discussion but for some reason Jason discusses things that have little to do with what we say.

 

[Phisto Sobanii]

I'm open to discussion but for some reason Jason discusses things that have little to do with what we say.

Then take that for what it's worth. Maybe he's wrong, but it's a perspective out there that people hold.

 

[Shinji Ikari]

Then take that for what it's worth. Maybe he's wrong, but it's a perspective out there that people hold.

And it's worth little, not all opinions have the same weight. A discussion is about adressing what your partner said not about what you think is easy to adress.

 

[jasonbarron]

Stop calling me CMDR. This isn't Elite, and I don't actually command a spaceship.



I haven't changed or misrepresented any facts and your perceptions of partisanship are a reactionary delusion on your part.



It's not. A sense of urgency, sure, but the implication of doom isn't in the proposal.



I wasn't talking about me.

You don't need to be concerned with how I perceive you. I am not active in any political or media circles. I am not a voter. I do not set policy. I do not have any say in policy.

I was pointing out that those that do have a say, and the voting public at large, will not find your your arguments, which mostly seem to be a mix of baseless paranoia, ignorance, and prejudice, to be particularly convincing. Not everything they find convincing is sound and not every one of your opinions is unfounded, but your willful misinterpretation of the positions you appear to be against is going to help push opinions, and policy, in that very direction.

Sorry about all those "CMDR's" buddy. If you don't like how I address you, feel free to quit engaging me.

Yes, doom is implicit in those statements

As to your last point; the lunatic over reaction and bizarrely harmful policy prescriptions in the making could be said to be doing the same.

@Gregg Rulz ok , strawman? Ok, you've lost me. What was your point?

Edit: nevermind, you were just being a smart alleck, I get it now

 

[Shinji Ikari]

@Gregg Rulz ok , strawman? Ok, you've lost me. What was your point?

Edit: nevermind, you were just being a smart alleck, I get it now

"... for some reason Jason discusses things that have little to do with what we say."

 

[jasonbarron]

"... for some reason Jason discusses things that have little to do with what we say."

No, I discuss the things you guys say, but interject my own counterpoints which you fail to grasp which is a completely different thing.

 

[Shinji Ikari]

No, I discuss the things you guys say, but interject my own counterpoints which you fail to grasp which is a completely different thing.

I certainly don't say the world is going to end yet you argue against some things I say based on that statement, and I do not grasp your counterpoints because they are wrong, disingenous or irrelevant.