Values derived using methodologies are not facts. I work with data and sometimes have to use methodologies to simplify and make complicated "facts" useful. In many cases, it's all you can do. Once the values are derived, they magically become hard facts to many information consumers, even those who should know better. These values are often passed along and used out of context in other calculations like a game of telephone.
A 2-3 degree increase over the next 100 years while devastating would be fantastic and I'd take it in a heartbeat even though the havoc and death caused by 3 degrees of warming over a 1750 baseline would kill most land animals and turn the oceans acidic but there is no way it stops there and there is no way it takes that long. People have problems understanding what feedback loops are and the power of the exponential function.
What do you do with these extreme temperature fluctuations? Do you depend upon your heating and cooling to get by?
Go preach your doom on a street corner with the other religious freaks.
No, I am pretty sure this thread is about Climate Change so I think I'll keep discussing it here. Whatever your opinions are on my actions are of really no consequence to me as you're not capable of contributing meaningfully to the discussion anyway. I might as well be talking to a termite.
Shouldn't you be heading post-haste to New Zealand to build a CC fallout shelter? You're wasting time. The end is near.
These guys use social justice warrior science where any fact or point can be changed with fluidity inferences.
Michael Lewis's book Premonition follows the story of one group of health care professionals and COVID. I recommend it to anyone still breathing.
Then you should read "And the Band Played On" about the early AIDS epidemic. They made it into a movie which I didn't care for but the book was great. "The Hot Zone" was very good as well about the origin of Ebola.
Between the government collusion to silence anyone not aligned with their beliefs, the forced adherence to guideline for COVID, the ongoing hemorrhaging of taxpayer dollars that are not being appropriated correctly yet going to very specific and divisive efforts we are very quickly allowing our government to become socialistic and if it isn't cleaned up and some common good found soon it's going to result in a lot more lost freedoms than we can imagine.
This got me curious as to just how much governments are spending on the two different categories of energy. It turns out governments spent $5.9 Trillion annually on fossil fuel subsidizes but only $1.2 Trillion on clean energy.
www.iea.org
Good article that talks specifically about that and how the carbon debt from batteries and the overarching risk to energy costs long term to get to the point where we can produce enough energy for EV's is massive. The statement below was telling to me because it also points out the overriding issue that even IF you can get half the worlds car park to EV it still only reduces world oil use by 15%. It's hard for me to get behind something so costly with so little overall value rather than a common sense approach that funds initiatives to make current ICE's more efficient while there is ongoing refinement of other alternatives with a goal to moving to a more sustainable option or options in the future.
Gee whiz, I’d love to see the source of the data that you use to make this claim.
It was well known in late summer of 2020 that the reaction had been overblown, that the virus was nowhere near as lethal as had been claimed, that hospitals in most localities were not being overrun, and that lockdowns were killing the country economically and socially. We know now that even the death rates had been falsely inflated.
What is “clean” energy?This got me curious as to just how much governments are spending on the two different categories of energy. It turns out governments spent $5.9 Trillion annually on fossil fuel subsidizes but only $1.2 Trillion on clean energy.
So nearly 5x more money still goes to fossil fuels over clean energy.
Global government spending on clean energy transitions rises to USD 1.2 trillion since the start of the pandemic, spurred by energy security concerns - News - IEA
Global government spending on clean energy transitions rises to USD 1.2 trillion since the start of the pandemic, spurred by energy security concerns - News from the International Energy Agency
Medical Economics. Dec 14.2022
It was probably higher. Excess deaths were higher than that. Was there a sudden spike in yaws, dropsy, and scurvy that went unreported?
Or, hear me out, COVID deaths were massively over-counted or mislabeled (die from late-stage cancer but COVID positive = COVID death) to take advantage of the money given for every COVID death at the medical facility. And to make the vaccines and other measures taken by power-hungry leaders seem even more necessary.
