Discussions

But I really question the "science" behind your statements. I have no problem with implementing solutions to problems, but the medicine had better have a prayer of working. I don't deny that the climate is changing, it always has, but still doubtful on our impact and any change that would be meaningful, rather than symbolic. Just my opinion. I've been wrong before.

of a holier than thou attitude from the extreme left by the OP.  
The Greens can promise anything under the sun because they have zero chance of forming a govt,& little chance of influencing the next elected govt.

"I really question the "science" behind your statements."  
-----------------------------------------------------  
More politicking than science at work in the op as far as I can tell.

Thinking that we can do something meaningful about climate change by electing a certain government is out of touch with reality.  
 
Compared to global CO2 output, Canadas output is raindrops in a barrel.  
We could cut our emissions by 100% and have almost no impact, while destroying our economy.  
 
Changes ARE already happening, electric cars are finally taking off, there's been a big scientific breakthrough recently with hydrogen fuel cells, cars worldwide have made huge gains in fuel efficiency 40-50mpg is now commonplace. Vehicles less need for gasoline is one of the reasons behind the global oil price decline, at this pace of technology I can quite imagine fossil fuels being phased out by the targeted 2100 deadline, without economically harmful policies.  
 
There's actually evidence that says that up until 2080 or a 2.2°C increase, the world will see a net positive impact, the key word there is net, some places will be harmed of course.  
 
Then looking at the big picture, the earth is currently in a ice age, technically we're in what's called an interglacial period, we've been in an ice age now for 2.6 million years, if you go back before this ice age you find that the earth's atmosphere had much more CO2 than today, at the time of the dinosaurs the world had 5x as much CO2, with all this excess CO2 plant life flourished, the world was warm tropical and covered in rainforests, animals of epic proportions, one might even say that this time period was the Earth's heyday.

Carbon tax would be a joke in my opinion. We all know the money collected from that will just go to general revenue.  
Ever been to a landfill? It's disgusting to see how much waste there is-so many appliances, sofas, bikes, beds, etc. if things were made to last there would be less waste thereby less product being made (and less emissions from factories) to fill the dumps. But everyone wants affordable goods that are just made like crap and only last a few years thereby continuing the cycle. It's not just cars causing pollution. It's the factories pumping out this disposable crap. We have no one to blame but ourselves always wanting something for nothing.  
I agree with the person who said what we do is a drop in the bucket compared to countries like the USA, India and China. I'm not saying we shouldn't do our part but it won't really make a difference in the overall picture.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/05/130515203048.htm  

I have to question the idea that fuel efficient cars or hybreds are the reason for the drop in crude oil prices, if one checks with any of the global sources on fuel consumption nearly all are forecasting gasoline consumption to continue to increase for the next few years, and desiel consumption to increase dramatically.  
 
I think that a drive through parts of southwest Manitoba, southeastern Saskatchewan and much of northern North Dakota would help explain part of the price collapse if one looked at wells producing as compared to 10 -15 years ago, and this expansion happened on a global scale.

Carpe diem said "http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/05/130515203048.htm   "

will completely unravel. Science has now been taken over by the highest bidder! http://www.sott.net/article/277349-Top-scientist-resigns-from-post-admits-Global-Warming-is-a-scam  
 
Edited by SJK, 2015-09-24 14:28:09

https://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-scientific-consensus-intermediate.htm  
 

We will be allowed to hear from Canadian government scientists  

http://www.techinsider.io/elon-musk-on-refugee-crisis-climate-change-2015-9  

Yes the biggest reason is oversupply as you point out, though vehicles becoming increasingly efficient is playing a part, even though consumption is growing, it could have been growing a lot faster.  
 
A family sedan from 1995 would get around 20-25 mpg, now it's up at 40-45, even 60-65 with some ultra compacts and diesels, fullsize gasoline pickup trucks and suvs getting in the 30s nowadays.  
 
Looking at the grander scheme of things, if clean energy advancements, at the rate they are progressing now without government intervention fails to phase out fossil fuels by 2100 and climate change progresses, what will happen? How bad will it be?  
 
We're told that climate change is so terrible, and is going to cause doom to the earth and mankind apparently, or so it seems.  
 
Sure weather will change, oceans will rise, yes, some species will either adapt or go extinct, and others will evolve to fill new ecological niches, the earth will adapt, it always has, change is the nature of the universe, as for humans, I have even more faith in mankind's ability to adapt, and persist.  
 
Technology grows by leaps and bounds when there is pressure, as we have seen by the world wars, or the space race of the cold war, without pressure theres less need for innovation, less advancement of human achievement.  
 
Choosing between climate change or anti-economical policies is not as clearcut as it seems, and as the OP mentioned, change will happen either way.

Carpe diem said "http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/05/130515203048.htm   "

I read your link. I have to ask why anyone should be willing to believe the scientists findings for anthropogenic climate change is any less a load of crap than our climate scientists of the 70's warnings about an impending ice age.  
 
I'm sorry, even if 97% of scientists [b]say[/b] they agree on the cause of climate change, the track record for scientists making predictions regarding earth's climate is in the toilet. Why would a rational person put any stock in what they are saying now?  

I can believe that 97% of scientists believe humans are contributing to climate change. It is a fairly standard belief that you cannot introduce an organism into an environment without it having an impact. Therefore, If the climate has warmed since the introduction of mankind, it is a logical conclusion that humans have had an impact on that.  
 
I find it highly unlikely that there would be a general consensus regarding how much impact has been made by humans. This empirical data can't exist as we don't have a similar ecosystem to observe that has had no human influence.

of inaction outweigh the consequences(or rewards) of action. What if we make the world a better place for no reason at all?

that lowering our emissions would destroy our economy ignores the opportunities presented by alternatives and innovation  

We need to respect it far more than we are. The power of corporations to pollute almost at will in the so called developing countries is an excuse for them to take advantage of those countries and rob them of their resources. We are part of that, especially when we shop in stores and buy clothes made by women and children who makes a dollar a day or less. Our planet is becoming sicker and we as a people, who get our food from this planet are becoming sicker - cancer rates just scratch the services of that problem.  
 
Scientists have warned us for decades and we continue on many levels to live in denial. I just hope we wake up soon enough to leave a sustainable planet for our children and grandchildren. We need a profound level of awakening amongst the masses quickly.

First of all, the claim that ISIS and other terrorist organizations formed because of climate change is absurd, but it's become a favorite line that the left likes to use.  
 
Some of the richest countries in the world are located in the Middle East. However, none of them, with the possible exceptions of Egypt and Jordan, are accepting any of the refugees. That's fine. Those countries have every right to refuse to take them. You may not agree with it, but every country in the world, including Canada, has a right to determine who they allow inside their borders.  
 
Several countries around the world are beginning to realize that they may have jumped on the green bandwagon too soon and are pulling back. Germany, for instance, has backed away from some of it's green initiatives, simply because they can't afford it. Europe is increasingly buying more fossil fuels, mainly Natural Gas, from Russia. Australia, while obviously not a European country, just came to their senses and got rid of their stupid Carbon Tax. Now, of course, the left want Canada to adopt the same policies that have failed in other countries. The left wants it to be our turn to share in the misery.  
 
Those of you with good memories will remember just two years ago, in 2013, when there was a Climate Change Conference held in Europe and just before the conference, it was reported briefly and no doubt reluctantly, by the news media, including the CBC, that the IPCC was concerned that they weren't going to be able to explain the fact that there hadn't been any global warming since 1998. The IPCC actually admitted that there hadn't been any global warming for the past fifteen years and that they couldn't explain why. It was actually funny to watch and quite revealing of the media, because while the IPCC was admitting that there hadn't been any Global Warming, the mainstream news media was busy running stories trying to contradict the IPCC.  
 
I don't normally believe anything that the IPCC or any of the other carbonphobic Climate Change catastrophists have to say about anything, but when the IPCC stated that there hadn't been any global warming since 1998, that was the one and only time that I actually believe them.  
 
I mean, why would the IPCC lie and say that there hadn't been any global warming if there had been? They wouldn't, because they would be hurting their own cause and the whole environmentalist agenda. You could argue that the IPCC was wrong and didn't know what they were talking about, but you would be saying that they are completely incompetent. So, which one is it? Were they lying or are they incompetent? No, in this case they weren't lying. When the IPCC stated that there hadn't been any Global Warming since 1998, they were actually telling the truth for once.  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Edited by Triplethreat, 2015-09-24 18:15:34

http://ipcc.ch/

Summary for policy makers

Triplethreat said "First of all, the claim that ISIS and other terrorist organizations formed because of climate change is absurd, but it's become a favorite line that the left likes to use.     Some of the richest countries in the world are located in the Middle East. However, none of them, with the possible exceptions of Egypt and Jordan, are accepting any of the refugees. That's fine. Those countries have every right to refuse to take them. You may not agree with it, but every country in the world, including Canada, has a right to determine who they allow inside their borders.     Several countries around the world are beginning to realize that they may have jumped on the green bandwagon too soon and are pulling back. Germany, for instance, has backed away from some of it's green initiatives, simply because they can't afford it. Europe is increasingly buying more fossil fuels, mainly Natural Gas, from Russia. Australia, while obviously not a European country, just came to their senses and got rid of their stupid Carbon Tax. Now, of course, the left want Canada to adopt the same policies that have failed in other countries. The left wants it to be our turn to share in the misery.     Those of you with good memories will remember just two years ago, in 2013, when there was a Climate Change Conference held in Europe and just before the conference, it was reported briefly and no doubt reluctantly, by the news media, including the CBC, that the IPCC was concerned that they weren't going to be able to explain the fact that there hadn't been any global warming since 1998. The IPCC actually admitted that there hadn't been any global warming for the past fifteen years and that they couldn't explain why. It was actually funny to watch and quite revealing of the media, because while the IPCC was admitting that there hadn't been any Global Warming, the mainstream news media was busy running stories trying to contradict the IPCC.     I don't normally believe anything that the IPCC or any of the other carbonphobic Climate Change catastrophists have to say about anything, but when the IPCC stated that there hadn't been any global warming since 1998, that was the one and only time that I actually believe them.     I mean, why would the IPCC lie and say that there hadn't been any global warming if there had been? They wouldn't, because they would be hurting their own cause and the whole environmentalist agenda. You could argue that the IPCC was wrong and didn't know what they were talking about, but you would be saying that they are completely incompetent. So, which one is it? Were they lying or are they incompetent? No, in this case they weren't lying. When the IPCC stated that there hadn't been any Global Warming since 1998, they were actually telling the truth for once.                             Edited by Triplethreat, 2015-09-24 18:15:34"

that require a "LIKE" button. Thank you for your common sense approach to the Climate scam!  
 

By what measure did the warming stop in 1998? 2005, 2010, and 2014 have all been warmer.  
 
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/201413

It is human nature to deny something that has consequences we are uncomfortable with or simply don't like.  
 
Whatever you choose to believe with regards to the warming of the planet, the Earth is our home... no one would disrespect their house in the manner that we disrespect this planet. There are billions of other species residing here with us, it is only moral to protect their home, as well as ours.  
 
It is so unfortunate that environmental and climate policy are in the hands of politicians, and a largely scientifically illiterate electorate.