huntmmup wrote:Just answer this one question: in a hypothetical world where all else stayed the same, if the levels of CO2 in our atmosphere increased 1000x, would the temperature of the planet increase or decrease?
It would go up.
Can you answer, how much it would go up if we increased it by 0.02%?
Are we in trouble when CO2 gets to 0.045% or 0.05% or 0.1% or what is the level where we are in trouble?
Nobody disputes that everything else being equal, which it never is because the climate has varied and will continue to vary no matter what we do, that CO2 puts upward pressure on the average temperature. They question that is unknowable is how much and the equally important question is what are the effects of that upward pressure.
huntmmup wrote:The "solution" is very simple, hedge our bets. Reduce greenhouse gas emissions as much as possible, but dont go crazy with it. If all the scientists, governments, scientific organizations are all wrong and have been lying to us for some ridiculous reason, and all the science has been faked, then ok we lost some money and maybe a little standard of living. If they are right though, then we will have potentially saved our kids and grandkids from a terrible environmental problem. Not hedging when the upside is avoiding screwing the planet for our kids and grandkids and the downside is .06% of gdp just doesnt make any logical sense.
It is an extremely costly hedge. That is the problem. It is easy to say, hey it's only .06% of gdp. Well that is 10,000 million dollars just in the U.S. Think what can be done with $10,000,000,000. And that is just one year. It is 10 times that without including the compounded growth. That is a huge cost.
Bluesky2012 wrote: ohioboy wrote:
I want to know how long before Spinner and Bluesky go on a date.
He's not my type. Sorry spinner
How do you know, you've never met me?
For all I know, you could be a hot chick. Although, my wife would have something to say about it
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.