gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 18
th, 2011 at 5:05pm:
Quote:I can't believe I have to explain this, but hey, this is wha thappens when you deal with right wingers I guess.
You asked for prove that these conditions have never occured before.
I asked you the same question back, because, like perceptions, you are not 5 billion years of age. So, how do you know they didn't happen?
Do I need to write it out in baby language for you? Seriously?
Oh gods, are you actually THAT stupid???
You asked for proof that the 'current climate conditions' didn't happen before...AND I told you that there IS no proof...
IF there isn't any proof that this hasn't happened before then AGW is NOT a viable concept...
To talk in 'baby language'...if the same things HAVE happened , in the past, long before humans developed 'industrial technology'...then Climate Change doesn't have anything to do with Technology....
Can you 'FINALLY' work it out???? The fact that the very same changes to climate have happened LONG before humans started producing Co2 means that Co2 has NOTHING to do with Climate Change...
I'm going to put this into point for for you, so you can hopefully get the picture and realise what the debate is bout:
* No one is arguing anymore that climate change is not real, yet the argument is whether humans have accelerated climate change because of carbon emissions. Catch up on the debate, Human-Caused climate change is the actual thing even Abbott is debating, not JUST climate change in general. We know climate change exist and always happens. You know how? the ice age.
* Considering humans weren't around 5 billion years ago, any evidence about that time becomes meaningless, unless you can show that climate change had the same effects in regards to its veracity and enhancement over time. Good luck with that. Like you said, you weren't around then, you can't prove that the weather patterns were as strong/the changes were as fast etc.etc.
* If you're hard right, aren't you meant to believe that the world was created only like 2000 years ago or so, and that dinosaur fossils were only a trick by god to reveal true believers?
* The argument is also whether we put action into place to reduce human-caused climate change, to hopefully reduce the veracity of climate change. No one denies that the climate will change. It's whether we can reduce the effects of it by reducing our emissions that theoretically accelerate it.
Are you also going to suggest CO2 is a harmless gas like mavisthebevishead? Someone should inform the science community because there's not much point in them continuing research if the hard right nutters have found the answer!
I ask you again, do you have evidence that climate change was the SAME veracity and had the same acceleration over time 5 billion years ago? No? Then shut up and do some research about what the debate has always been about.
Not to mention that if we want to revolutionize our economy we must put into action policies that will begin to transform the way we do things. I know the hard right things progression is the most horrible thing in the world, but you can't seat here and constantly go "over time enhanced technology will become available." Technology advancement depends on demand and expectation. there is a reason we don't have a self-driving car but have increased the speed of our computers x1000 since their introduction. Work out why.