Top Physicist Freeman Dyson: Obama Has Picked The ‘Wrong Side’ On Climate Change

a reply to: mc_squared

Like i told JRod...only a fool would say that we should be burning fossil fuels if we want to maintain a healthy environment.

I understand the science behind what you are talking about. But I also understand that having a working knowledge of how various elements within the global environment works is a very, very long way to solving the irreducibly complex riddle that is "Global Climate".

So I am all for scientists doing what scientsts do: study, observe, and seek to understand. Where my tolerance ceases is when that is then turned and applied as a way to increase taxation. Science doesn't make me poorer. Thats politics. This is a political discussion.

If it were to continue without talk of "carbon credits", without solutions varying from wind energy (where, on the hottest days, the windmills sit motionless, and on the windiest days we have no energy storage to make use of the turbines) to electric cars (the amount of carbon created firing a coal electric generator and charging that electric car is just as bad as the emissions controlled exhaust coming from a gas burning engine), and without trying to find ways to decrease the amount of my own money....maybe.

But on a wallet already straining under the burden of ACA, income tax, skyrocketing local property taxes, and a diminishing return on my middle class paycheck....i just can't muster up any more concern. Im all tapped out.

a reply to: Phoenix

I'm surprised. You'd think a man of his esteem would follow the science instead of the politics, instead he himself is turning climate change into a political debate.

So science is science until it is not. Double slit.

originally posted by: Thecakeisalie
a reply to: Phoenix

I'm surprised. You'd think a man of his esteem would follow the science instead of the politics, instead he himself is turning climate change into a political debate.

So science is science until it is not. Double slit.

That's quite a funny take on it when he commented on politicalization of the issue as the reason for his not continuing climate studies.

originally posted by: jimmybob
The fact missing was that when the earth's temperature rises, CO2 emissions rise hundreds of years later.  This is because the Ocean heats up and then releases CO2.

Right now, the ocean is absorbing CO2.

Over 97% of the CO2 on this planet comes from the Ocean.

Not in the way that matters.

The rest is volcanoes , industry ,cars ,animals and plants.
Maybe we should have a Carbon breathing tax thrown in as well for good measure.

The change from a stable 280 ppm to 400 and barreling upwards rapidly is nearly 100% caused by humans mining and burning fossil fuels, CO2 which never previously participated in the surface and ocean ecology for 50 to 500 million years.

There is no natural explanation.

originally posted by: mbkennel

There is no natural explanation.

Ancient Aliens!









...

a reply to: mbkennel

when will that yield the development of true alternatives?

Is the issue that alternatives are not as easy to meter out for profit (and tax)? The fact that our fate is chained to petrochemicals by way of the buttresses that support our entire economy?

Its like cancer. You know its gonna kill you....but being powerless to stop it, what else do you do? Become hyperaware so that you can agonize over each moment that passes?

Im just not sure what to do. Its such a political problem that there's not really a lot to hope for overall.

a reply to: mbkennel

Your right about the increase in CO2 from 280 to 400 ppm which I didnt discuss. This hasnt been this high since the dinosaurs and if it continues may be great for vacationing reptillian aliens. However, you have to be carefull when saying we have 400 ppm as an absolute constant. Kind of like having 400 ppm CO2 in your garage untill you open the door. The absorbtion potential of the planet hopfully can bring levels back to normal over time. When ice cores are taken the measurement represents an average over many many years and a very general statement is made about ppm CO2 levels 800,000 years ago. The CO2 ppm levels are hopefully a small blip which will not affect the overall CO2 average over the centuries .
We need to have alternate fuels like hydrogen powered cars etc. but our governments do not have the guts to stand up to the staus quo and change our path from pollution to clear blue skies.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Where my tolerance ceases is when that is then turned and applied as a way to increase taxation. Science doesn't make me poorer. Thats politics. This is a political discussion.

If it were to continue without talk of "carbon credits"

So what’s stopping you from being a part of this more constructive conversation then? You seem pretty reasonable, but some of your digressions are coming off more like the usual denialist talking point junk. No offense, but I’m just calling it like I see it.

You know plenty of us here want to have this conversation. Lord knows I’ve tried before:

Fighting Global Warming Without Carbon Taxes

But nobody seems to want to talk about that. All they want to do is bitch and moan about the gubbermint, and use topics like this to point the finger at their political enemies. That’s why some of us here end up spending all our time mediating this topic from the mountains of implanted rhetoric it invites, rather than ever having a constructive conversation about solutions or anything like that.

Going off associating all the science with carbon credits is really hyperbolic (hence why I say it just sounds like the usual denier fluff). Do you know there are plenty of leading climate scientists who are against that option? James Hansen is probably the most famous climate “alarmist” in the world. Here’s an op-ed he wrote about it in the NY Times:

Cap and Fade

But at the heart of his plan is cap and trade, a market-based approach that has been widely praised but does little to slow global warming or reduce our dependence on fossil fuels. It merely allows polluters and Wall Street traders to fleece the public out of billions of dollars.

Those are the words of a scientist deniers have labeled "Al Gore's right hand man".

Meanwhile there are loads of other alternatives that do not make you poorer, some even make you richer. I live in one of the few places in the world that actually has a carbon tax. Yet it doesn’t cost me anything. You know why? Because the tax is revenue-neutral. I get all that money back through other incentives like reductions in my income tax. In fact, because I tend to use less carbon than the average bear, I’m actually making money in this equation.

You know who is losing a lot of money in this equation? Oil companies and other utilities that rely on our heavy consumption of fossil fuels. That’s exactly why they’re politicizing this debate and manipulating it with disingenuous memes about how it’s engineered to take your money. It isn’t really – it’s actually taking their money. But they want you to believe it’s yours so you’ll help fight their battle for them.

That's all this phony debate is. The science is concrete and long-proven.

Man-made climate change is simply another tool of the left to take money from the people, control its use including use for purposes far different from why they claim it was taken, and the growth of their power over individuals and businesses. Anyone who not only supports, but fights for the "truth" of man-made climate change is nothing but a supporter of the left, progressive agenda to be dictators of America.

They should not only be ashamed, but treated as the liars they are...and ignored.

originally posted by: mc_squared
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Meanwhile there are loads of other alternatives that do not make you poorer, some even make you richer. I live in one of the few places in the world that actually has a carbon tax. Yet it doesn’t cost me anything. You know why? Because the tax is revenue-neutral. I get all that money back through other incentives like reductions in my income tax. In fact, because I tend to use less carbon than the average bear, I’m actually making money in this equation.

You know who is losing a lot of money in this equation? Oil companies and other utilities that rely on our heavy consumption of fossil fuels. That’s exactly why they’re politicizing this debate and manipulating it with disingenuous memes about how it’s engineered to take your money. It isn’t really – it’s actually taking their money. But they want you to believe it’s yours so you’ll help fight their battle for them.

That's all this phony debate is. The science is concrete and long-proven.



So if I read that right...they take your money, give it back to you and since you get more back, you support what they are doing to others. Sounds like a typical taker who doesn't care where their goodies come from as long as they get them.

edit on 10/16/2015 by WeAreAWAKE because: (no reason given)

a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

No you didn't read that right. You seem incapable of reading anything without projecting your blatant partisan bias all over it. Your response right after my last post was a PERFECT example of the brainwashed political rhetoric I was talking about there, so thanks for highlighting my point right on cue.

I was talking to bigfatfurrytexan because I'm interested in having a constructive conversation with someone on the other side of the political fence for once. Take your childish Liberal bashing somewhere else please.

originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE
Man-made climate change is simply another tool of the left to take money from the people, control its use including use for purposes far different from why they claim it was taken, and the growth of their power over individuals and businesses. Anyone who not only supports, but fights for the "truth" of man-made climate change is nothing but a supporter of the left, progressive agenda to be dictators of America.

They should not only be ashamed, but treated as the liars they are...and ignored.

But I kinda believe in Man Made Global Warming and I get my information and Data used to make that decision from Scientists and Scientific papers. I also don't want any dictators of America. So where does that leave me?

a reply to: mc_squared

Pandoras box was opened.

What you are complaining about is the same thing I complain about: the the moronic masses pretend to play politics by arguing from a predetermined position (often handed to them via their media du jour).

The reason I don't pitch on on solution finding? Its not my bailiwick. I am really good at what i do....and it isn't climate science.

ETA: Im not caring much whether someone doing science was affiliated with Al Gore, unless its not science they are actually doing.

a reply to: mc_squared

Thanks...but no. I'm quite happy to state my beliefs here on ATS just as others do. If you don't like it...don't listen (or read). And, might I add...telling someone else to shut up is pretty....ready for it....liberal.

originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE
a reply to: mc_squared

Thanks...but no. I'm quite happy to state my beliefs here on ATS just as others do. If you don't like it...don't listen (or read). And, might I add...telling someone else to shut up is pretty....ready for it....liberal.

Liberals do tell others to shut up, sure. But, so do...wait for it....Conservatives.

a reply to: amazing

I would simply suggest looking at who is to gain the most from this and if those are the ones preaching it...you may wish to reconsider.

a reply to: amazing

I'm sure some do. I don't. As far as I know, ATS is for the expression of beliefs, ideas and discussion. I don't think there is room for individuals who tell others to shut up or go away. Do you?

originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE
a reply to: amazing

I would simply suggest looking at who is to gain the most from this and if those are the ones preaching it...you may wish to reconsider.

I see what you're saying, but there are a lot of fossil fuel, big oil, big power companies, fracking companies, entrenched auto companies that are in it to gain billions if man made global warming is false. That's following the money, right?

originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE
a reply to: amazing

I'm sure some do. I don't. As far as I know, ATS is for the expression of beliefs, ideas and discussion. I don't think there is room for individuals who tell others to shut up or go away. Do you?

You are correct. I don't tell people to shut up either. I never do that, and I never overtly insult anyone by calling them stupid or anything like that. I just took issue with your (my perceived notion) statement that it's mainly liberals that tell others to shut up. You know that's not true and a gross generalization.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: mc_squared
What you are complaining about is the same thing I complain about: the the moronic masses pretend to play politics by arguing from a predetermined position (often handed to them via their media du jour).

Well we're definitely on the same page there. It would be nice to see someone with the energy though *sigh*. As you can see this slight shimmer of sane conversation is already fading into the background of the usual energy-sapping poo-litical twaddle.