The demands of climate activists is unacceptable

[MayGodHeal]

The fact of derailing fossil fuels is a bad omen and going to catastrophe and as I am pretty well aware that there will be health benefits from moving away from fossil fuels. But its never going to work unless you invest in fossil fuels and allow the free market to decide.

As mentioned in other articles it shows that younger people are more interested in cleaning up the environment, that's fine.

Mandates and forced fossil fuel deregulation won't work though along with slaughtering cattle to meet these goals. Basically this is an attack on everything we've worked to accomplished. We fought wars to get fossil fuels. Are we going to war now to end it? This is exactly what the elite wants.

People will debate this to the bitter end but when we're just tearing one another down on the basis of man made climate change, that's just pitifully evil and wrong. And you guys already know where I stand on this.

But when you're tearing down fossil fuels when you have nothing else in place, the cost of living skyrockets. This is the main reason I don't want kids and never wanted them. When you can't make a living and grow because we're constantly beating one another over the head over trivial things like road rage or selfishness then we cant even have a structural society where you don't know what to eat or what to drive anymore. Then what's the point if you're constantly doing this?

I grew up in a semi poor family. My parents fought over finances, my grandparents on both sides got the full American dream and ignore all the evil. Well now we can't ignore it anymore because one of the biggest problems we have now is dependence on fossil fuels and cars.

And we're being threatened to get all this forcibly taken away.

What climate activists mean when they say "end fossil fuels"

The bolder, narrower message of the climate movement, explained.

www.vox.com

 

[Uncle J]

I think they (climate activists and the author of the Vox article) have a very good argument. Human caused climate change is very real and its effects are all around us right now, yet as the article points out the US has actually been increasing its fossil fuel production and exports.

We can see the problem, we know what's causing it, so it stands to reason that we act appropriately. If we don't, obviously the problem will only get worse.

 

[Corn Pop]

I think they (climate activists and the author of the Vox article) have a very good argument. Human caused climate change is very real and its effects are all around us right now, yet as the article points out the US has actually been increasing its fossil fuel production and exports.

We can see the problem, we know what's causing it, so it stands to reason that we act appropriately. If we don't, obviously the problem will only get worse.

Apparently God is so weak the world does not believe if it simply just turned to Christ and repented God would heal the world. I guess thats just another conspiracy theory.

Anyhow good luck to the world paying billions in climate taxes and placing there faith and hope in some elite human authority to save the world who dont really care as long as the 1% are the only ones who xan afford a steak dniner and fly there private jets while everyone else is broke and miserable and enjoying the bugs and living and working slaving there life away for no reaward but a delusion they are saving the planet.

The majority has to save the planet why the elites live large and all the worlds wealth is transfered into there hands in the name of everyones safety and security.

 

[Corn Pop]

The demands of anyone towards someone else is unacceptable. Who has the right to force someone else to live out there world view?.

Can any human prove some sort of right they have over the earth to justify there claim that they have some sort of rule over other human beings?.

 

[Uncle J]

Apparently God is so weak the world does not believe if it simply just turned to Christ and repented God would heal the world. I guess thats just another conspiracy theory.

No, that's a religious belief, along the same lines as believing that sacrificing a goat will appease the gods and make it rain.

Anyhow good luck to the world paying billions in climate taxes and placing there faith and hope in some elite human authority to save the world who dont really care as long as the 1% are the only ones who xan afford a steak dniner and fly there private jets while everyone else is broke and miserable and enjoying the bugs and living and working slaving there life away for no reaward but a delusion they are saving the planet.

The majority has to save the planet why the elites live large and all the worlds wealth is transfered into there hands in the name of everyones safety and security.

I agree with the sentiment behind what you say....the wealthy need to pay more.

 

[MayGodHeal]

I think they (climate activists and the author of the Vox article) have a very good argument. Human caused climate change is very real and its effects are all around us right now, yet as the article points out the US has actually been increasing its fossil fuel production and exports.

We can see the problem, we know what's causing it, so it stands to reason that we act appropriately. If we don't, obviously the problem will only get worse.

Except the solution to the problem is displace and burden people. You can create technology to offer but forcing the end of fossil fuels in 10-20 won't work. It would cost me over $6,000 to make my home EV capable. Standard outlets wont work and I'm expected to change my gas appliances for electric?

I got a lot of other stuff I need my money for and do not have the money to support a fossil fuel cutoff. Now picture other people like this and for those who refuse.

Implementing climate policies will do this and you will have less and even God won't save anyone from this. It's the whole point is to tear everything down.

You can't even buy a new car for less than $25,000 unless its basic and small. And expecting politicans to do this when they can't even get healthcare, light bulbs or how we carry groceries right. They screw everything up. They banned incandescent bulbs causing some people to spent over $1,000 worth of bulbs, so what was the point of the ban if people are still using them?

Enacting climate policies is not going to end well. Ending fossil fuels quickly will cause hell for many. Heck now that they plan on killing cattle people are spending less on other things, like cutting out entertainment. At least I am.

But then maybe we deserve to lose everything we hard for. We may or may not be dealing with climate change but if we're wrong about that we will still have a major risk of losing everything because we rushed off of fossil fuels too quickly.

You have no choice but to take your time with it and leave those alone who want to stick with fossil fuels. I'm not concerned with climate change, if it happens well its pointless to argue if we're the cause of it.

If the system collapses because people are impatient on a system that depends on fossil fuels, well.. who are people going to go after once that happens?

There's a show called The Walking Dead. It shows the dark side of humanity. The evil side shows and currently our system holds back all that evil. You can call it fiction because it is, however we already see the evil side of humanity every day.

So.. I'd be more concerned with just focusing on the technology, it'll take as long as it takes. It's not going to happen overnight and slapping more unnecessary burdens will only lead to more chaos.

California is flirting with economic destruction due to their own policies and that will be one of the first failed states. This article and nobody else will talk about this and even deny it. But when you don't even have people supporting this and instead destroying government property so they don't get ticketed for not having a complaint, zero emissions vehicle it's just the beginning. Its going to get a lot worse because society has already deteriorated. You can't even get Americans to wear masks. They're going to fight a lot harder on Climate policies. We'll destroy ourselves over climate change...

 

[MayGodHeal]

Apparently God is so weak the world does not believe if it simply just turned to Christ and repented God would heal the world. I guess thats just another conspiracy theory.

Anyhow good luck to the world paying billions in climate taxes and placing there faith and hope in some elite human authority to save the world who dont really care as long as the 1% are the only ones who xan afford a steak dniner and fly there private jets while everyone else is broke and miserable and enjoying the bugs and living and working slaving there life away for no reaward but a delusion they are saving the planet.

The majority has to save the planet why the elites live large and all the worlds wealth is transfered into there hands in the name of everyones safety and security.

No, that's a religious belief, along the same lines as believing that sacrificing a goat will appease the gods and make it rain.


I agree with the sentiment behind what you say....the wealthy need to pay more.

Depending on whether the wealthy are already paying their fair share. They're not obligated to feed the poor though.

 

[Uncle J]

Except the solution to the problem is displace and burden people. You can create technology to offer but forcing the end of fossil fuels in 10-20 won't work. It would cost me over $6,000 to make my home EV capable. Standard outlets wont work and I'm expected to change my gas appliances for electric?

You seem to do this every time the topic comes up....claim "they want to force the end of fossil fuels in 10 years", and then use that straw man as the jumping off point for a long rant. The problem is, no one is proposing such a thing.

Even the Vox article you linked to doesn't say the goal is total elimination of fossil fuels in 10 years. It's about phasing out fossil fuel production on federal lands, ending subsidies to fossil fuel companies, turning the trend from increasing fossil fuel production to a decreasing one.

I got a lot of other stuff I need my money for and do not have the money to support a fossil fuel cutoff. Now picture other people like this and for those who refuse.

Good thing no one is proposing a sudden fossil fuel cutoff.

Implementing climate policies will do this and you will have less and even God won't save anyone from this. It's the whole point is to tear everything down.

Conspiracy theory noted.

You can't even buy a new car for less than $25,000 unless its basic and small. And expecting politicans to do this when they can't even get healthcare, light bulbs or how we carry groceries right. They screw everything up. They banned incandescent bulbs causing some people to spent over $1,000 worth of bulbs, so what was the point of the ban if people are still using them?

Enacting climate policies is not going to end well. Ending fossil fuels quickly will cause hell for many. Heck now that they plan on killing cattle people are spending less on other things, like cutting out entertainment. At least I am.

But then maybe we deserve to lose everything we hard for. We may or may not be dealing with climate change but if we're wrong about that we will still have a major risk of losing everything because we rushed off of fossil fuels too quickly.

You have no choice but to take your time with it and leave those alone who want to stick with fossil fuels. I'm not concerned with climate change, if it happens well its pointless to argue if we're the cause of it.

If the system collapses because people are impatient on a system that depends on fossil fuels, well.. who are people going to go after once that happens?

There's a show called The Walking Dead. It shows the dark side of humanity. The evil side shows and currently our system holds back all that evil. You can call it fiction because it is, however we already see the evil side of humanity every day.

So.. I'd be more concerned with just focusing on the technology, it'll take as long as it takes. It's not going to happen overnight and slapping more unnecessary burdens will only lead to more chaos.

California is flirting with economic destruction due to their own policies and that will be one of the first failed states. This article and nobody else will talk about this and even deny it. But when you don't even have people supporting this and instead destroying government property so they don't get ticketed for not having a complaint, zero emissions vehicle it's just the beginning. Its going to get a lot worse because society has already deteriorated. You can't even get Americans to wear masks. They're going to fight a lot harder on Climate policies. We'll destroy ourselves over climate change...

Like I said....a rant entirely based on a straw man. Kinda sad to see you keep getting so worked up over it.

 

[Uncle J]

Depending on whether the wealthy are already paying their fair share. They're not obligated to feed the poor though.

Another Christian who apparently doesn't feel any obligation to be "Christ-like". Fascinating.

 

[MayGodHeal]

Another Christian who apparently doesn't feel any obligation to be "Christ-like". Fascinating.

That is a really weird statement in response to mine.. but I guess it's ok to rob Peter to Paul. The rich already pays a larger percentage than everyone else, but now you want more taxes from them. That's not Christ-like. We don't take what doesn't belong to us. The rich earned that money like everyone else does.

As for other message well how long do you actually think they'll take on this? Certain areas are already taking extreme measures, California is one of them.

Also a side note that Americans are not prepared to go all electric either, especially with EVs.

So well it already will interfere with certain states trying to ban new ICE, let alone automakers switching to an all electric future by 2035. Chances are the homes that are not EV capable wont be capable in 2035.

So regardless you got so many roadblocks to this that its going to be best to take the time, do it slow and easy instead of the so called we need to get off of fossil fuels in 10 years.

The point is you're still going to have to invest in fossil fuels. Isn't that exactly the opposite of what the original article is trying to say?

Basically they want to stop fossil fuel investments despite the fact you're going to need it regardless because realistically even in 2050, people are most likely still going to rely on ICE vehicles. EVs are still a pie in the sky pipedream for many.

Even some countries are delaying the ICE bans. There's going to be quite a lot of backtracking here because the push for the end of fossil fuels is already too soon.

Over 50% Of American Homes Are Unprepared For Safe EV Charging: Survey

Using certified charging equipment is vital for the safety of your home and your EV, a new report highlights.

insideevs.com

 

[Uncle J]

That is a really weird statement in response to mine.. but I guess it's ok to rob Peter to Paul. The rich already pays a larger percentage than everyone else, but now you want more taxes from them. That's not Christ-like. We don't take what doesn't belong to us. The rich earned that money like everyone else does.

I'm trying to remember where Jesus said anything like "the rich earned their money, so they cannot be expected to give to the poor", but I'm drawing a blank.

And it looks like you're of the same mind as another Christian here in that you don't believe public policy should be at all "Christ-like".

As for other message well how long do you actually think they'll take on this? Certain areas are already taking extreme measures, California is one of them.

Also a side note that Americans are not prepared to go all electric either, especially with EVs.

So well it already will interfere with certain states trying to ban new ICE, let alone automakers switching to an all electric future by 2035. Chances are the homes that are not EV capable wont be capable in 2035.

So regardless you got so many roadblocks to this that its going to be best to take the time, do it slow and easy instead of the so called we need to get off of fossil fuels in 10 years.

The point is you're still going to have to invest in fossil fuels. Isn't that exactly the opposite of what the original article is trying to say?

Basically they want to stop fossil fuel investments despite the fact you're going to need it regardless because realistically even in 2050, people are most likely still going to rely on ICE vehicles. EVs are still a pie in the sky pipedream for many.

Even some countries are delaying the ICE bans. There's going to be quite a lot of backtracking here because the push for the end of fossil fuels is already too soon.

Over 50% Of American Homes Are Unprepared For Safe EV Charging: Survey

Using certified charging equipment is vital for the safety of your home and your EV, a new report highlights.

insideevs.com

It seems you're just going to stick to the straw man of "they're planning to end all fossil fuel use in 10 years" no matter what. I'm not sure what else to say or do at this point.

 

[Corn Pop]

Everyone has the right to be passionatr and have strong views about something but there is a line. There are annoying things humans do and thankfully they some are illegal like blocking public access, nothing more annoying than an activist blocking traffic.

Another random annoying thing humans do that should be illegal is when you finally see a parking space and notice some idiot has left a trolly in the park and thats why its empty.

 

[MayGodHeal]

I'm trying to remember where Jesus said anything like "the rich earned their money, so they cannot be expected to give to the poor", but I'm drawing a blank.

And it looks like you're of the same mind as another Christian here in that you don't believe public policy should be at all "Christ-like".


It seems you're just going to stick to the straw man of "they're planning to end all fossil fuel use in 10 years" no matter what. I'm not sure what else to say or do at this point.

Considering the fact the government keeps coming up with new ways to tax people it's still considered theft. They didn't earn that money, the taxpayers did.

Since you must know what their plans are how long will people be able to use their gas vehicles before they ban those or the fuel?

 

[jasonc]

Considering the fact the government keeps coming up with new ways to tax people it's still considered theft. They didn't earn that money, the taxpayers did.

Since you must know what their plans are how long will people be able to use their gas vehicles before they ban those or the fuel?

Don't forget the biggest polluter ,dod.pollutes more then the entire nation and then some .exempt from any emissions laws .

The pact act ? Why did the govt give men and many more the just me that rating knowing for decades that burn pits are carcinogens.its been illegal for decades to burn trash .since probably the 70s .yet the dod did with desert storm ,Somalia and the war on terror .

 

[Tenchi]

The fact of derailing fossil fuels is a bad omen and going to catastrophe and as I am pretty well aware that there will be health benefits from moving away from fossil fuels. But its never going to work unless you invest in fossil fuels and allow the free market to decide.

The climate has always been in flux, growing colder for spans of time and then warmer. In the past, volcanoes have spewed great clouds of ash and carbon into the atmosphere; forest fires have done the same; huge meteors, too, have struck the earth, for many months filling the sky with sun-obscuring dust. At other times, ice ages have developed, blanketing areas of the earth year-round with snow and ice that at present are generally free of both. And yet, here we are; the human race continues, on track to rise in number to double-digit billions.

Climate alarmism isn't about the climate, ultimately, but about frightening folks with an "existential threat" and herding them under government control of a kind that no calm, rational person would ever accept. Fear is a wonderful eradicator of rationality; it prompts hasty, ill-considered action that those who are in control and want to expand that control can easily manipulate to their advantage. Which is exactly what they're doing with dire threats of world collapse if carbon emissions aren't halted entirely. These warnings have been going on for a while now - long enough for us to see that they are extremely bogus. Perhaps it is because this is so that the climate alarmist rhetoric lately has ramped up.

Even if my own country, Canada, reached "net zero" carbon emissions, the effect on the global emission of carbon into the atmosphere will be negligible. But the current alarmist plan of getting to the "net zero" goal will devastate my country in a variety of ways and will require a proliferation of government powers extending far beyond what it has ever had before. This growth of the Mother State is, it seems to me, the real purpose of climate alarmism. To h-e-double-hockey-sticks with the exploding number of people unable to feed and house themselves that has resulted, and the economic implosion of the middle class, and the destructive constriction of food and industrial production, and the glaring hypocrisy of political leaders who squeal about the world ending while flying about on carbon-spewing planes, living in mansion with enormous "carbon footprints," and owning multiple carbon-emitting vehicles. What's important is that we all are terrified of the planet bursting into flames and so are willing to accept any and all "recommendations" of the experts (captured by global elites), however crushing and invasive they are.

There are far better ways to respond to the ever-changing climate of our planet.

 

[Uncle J]

Considering the fact the government keeps coming up with new ways to tax people it's still considered theft. They didn't earn that money, the taxpayers did.

So you don't believe in any taxes or gov't fees at all. That's really weird.

Since you must know what their plans are how long will people be able to use their gas vehicles before they ban those or the fuel?

I've not seen any proposals to completely ban fossil fuel production and use.

 

[Uncle J]

The climate has always been in flux, growing colder for spans of time and then warmer. In the past, volcanoes have spewed great clouds of ash and carbon into the atmosphere; forest fires have done the same; huge meteors, too, have struck the earth, for many months filling the sky with sun-obscuring dust. At other times, ice ages have developed, blanketing areas of the earth year-round with snow and ice that at present are generally free of both. And yet, here we are; the human race continues, on track to rise in number to double-digit billions.

You just showed the flaw in your argument. Past changes in global climate all had identifiable natural causes, whereas the current warming trend we're experiencing doesn't and is only explained when human causes are factored in.

Climate alarmism isn't about the climate, ultimately, but about frightening folks with an "existential threat" and herding them under government control of a kind that no calm, rational person would ever accept.

Why in the world would climatologists want to do such a thing? You ever meet one? Ever attend a climatology conference?

Even if my own country, Canada, reached "net zero" carbon emissions, the effect on the global emission of carbon into the atmosphere will be negligible. But the current alarmist plan of getting to the "net zero" goal will devastate my country in a variety of ways and will require a proliferation of government powers extending far beyond what it has ever had before.

Meanwhile, your country also just experienced its worst wildfire season on record.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-wildfire-season-worst-ever-more-to-come-1.6934284

Folks like you are trying to argue that nothing is going on while the place literally burns down around you.

This growth of the Mother State is, it seems to me, the real purpose of climate alarmism. To h-e-double-hockey-sticks with the exploding number of people unable to feed and house themselves that has resulted, and the economic implosion of the middle class, and the destructive constriction of food and industrial production, and the glaring hypocrisy of political leaders who squeal about the world ending while flying about on carbon-spewing planes, living in mansion with enormous "carbon footprints," and owning multiple carbon-emitting vehicles. What's important is that we all are terrified of the planet bursting into flames and so are willing to accept any and all "recommendations" of the experts (captured by global elites), however crushing and invasive they are.

I'm starting to wonder if nowdays, "Christian" has become a synonym for "conspiracy theorist".

Here's a thought...if you truly believe you can disprove the science behind human-caused climate change, why not write it all up in a manuscript and submit it to a science journal? And before you run back to your conspiracy theory and say "They'll never allow it to be published", once you write it up you can send it to me and I'll use my connections to get it submitted and reviewed.

Sound good?

 

[Uncle J]

And more bad news for Canada...

Canada’s unprecedented fire season burns into fall

"An unprecedented fire season in Canada that began in May is set to roll into October still going strong. About 44 million acres (18 million hectares) have burned this year as 2023 continues its journey deep off the charts when it comes to areas scorched across the nation.

Large fires in the west engulfed hundreds of thousands of acres of forest over recent days as a strong area of low pressure offshore helped crank up winds in the drought-afflicted region. Mixed fire weather signals ahead include wind and some rain for British Columbia and Alberta, a building heat dome in the country’s center and a descent into the coming cold season.

In a typical year, the fire season would be ending or finished by this point. But it may take winter snows to finally smother the longest-lived blazes.

...Large fires continue to burn in eight of Canada’s provinces, nearly from coast-to-coast.

 

[Riven]

I think they (climate activists and the author of the Vox article) have a very good argument. Human caused climate change is very real and its effects are all around us right now, yet as the article points out the US has actually been increasing its fossil fuel production and exports.

We can see the problem, we know what's causing it, so it stands to reason that we act appropriately. If we don't, obviously the problem will only get worse.

What of China? They produce more carbon than the United States, but no one seems to care.

 

[Uncle J]

What of China? They produce more carbon than the United States, but no one seems to care.

What do you mean "no one seems to care"? What exactly do you think should be done?