It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What should the rest of the world do about America's Climate change denial?

page: 6
12
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 22 2015 @ 02:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

That's the problem, the richest of us are going to be the last to experience the hardship caused by their squandering of resources. And the richest of us are the ones that ultimately drive policy and have the ears of the politicians. So by the time they are on board (if they ever admit to a problem), it may already be too late.


Yup. They've already calculated that the poor and disadvantaged will be both the first hit and the worst hit by climate change. Even though some of the wealthy will be affected, they have the resources and mobility to weather it. The poor do not, especially those who are already at subsistence level living.

So there is a moral/ethical component. The whole "oh why are you putting the environment ahead of people? Why don't you focus on helping the poor?" arguments are myopic precisely for the above reasons.
edit on 22-6-2015 by Quetzalcoatl14 because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 22 2015 @ 03:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

That's the problem, the richest of us are going to be the last to experience the hardship caused by their squandering of resources. And the richest of us are the ones that ultimately drive policy and have the ears of the politicians. So by the time they are on board (if they ever admit to a problem), it may already be too late.


I think we are making progress on ATS about environmentalism and climate change.

Even last summer when I was posting about these things here there were WAY more members shrilly saying all environmentalism is bullsh## and all that.

There are a lot fewer. Even the skeptics seem to have moderated their argument from "climate change isn't real" or "there is no environmental problem" to "we can't do anything about it" or "why should the US have to do everything and not China."

That is progress, even if incremental.



posted on Jun, 22 2015 @ 03:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: buddah6

Your whole premise is horribly deluded. I am almost 70 years old and I have seen this country cleaned from top to bottom. In the mid 1960's, here in Cincinnati, the air was so polluted the only time that you could see more than a mile was after a rain storm. It was like what China and India are today.


I'm not laying blame for pollution on any country, some are more guilty than others.


As an airline pilot, I have been fortunate enough to see much of the world that many people do not. The US has improved far more than any other area of the world. Asia is grossly polluted, as is the middle east. Africa is a cesspool and South America is not far behind.


Again I'm not arguing this point, its pretty obvious they have huge environmental issues.


The Tokyo Accords permits China and India to be exempted from compliance until 2030 because they are emerging economies. My first question is, are we working on pollution or economies? My next question is, why aren't we earmarking our foreign aid to these countries for environmental clean up. If pollution is so important to control, then why aren't we giving pollution control technology to the developing countries with dirty environments.


Great post and more along my concern...The USA uses it might to dictate to other countries what they should or shouldn't do. Like with the drug war, we force other countries to comply with our policies, what will these look like in the future if the USA government is filled with climate change deniers?


Your assertions that the US would use it's military for environmental reasons is absurd! The US could easily buy compliance to environmental laws.


I have no idea what your talking about????


This whole issue is about money not environment! China wouldn't comply to these laws so why not give them a 15 year reprieve to make it appear that they are in compliance. The EPA has cleaned us up so now we want the rest of the world to do the same. That is arrogant and deluded on our behalf.


Again the thread isn't about us doing anything, but what are the other countries gonna do or be able to do when they believe climate change is real and man made but the USA government is in denial????


I will never forget the Al Gore "Chicago Carbon Credit Exchange" scam.


Either way the public pays, either with subsidies to fossil fuel corporations or threw a carbon tax...doesn't matter what way we go were are still gonna pay for it.



posted on Jun, 22 2015 @ 03:38 PM
link   
The point of this thread is what are the current climate change deniers that make up our government, how will this effect governmental policy? How will other countries of the world gonna react to our climate change denial government???


Not what country is polluting the most!



posted on Jun, 22 2015 @ 03:52 PM
link   
a reply to: LDragonFire

I assume you're referring to the republicans who pander to the uneducated who think that spewing pollutants into the atmosphere won't change our planet. It just revolves around oil and lobbyist protecting theirs profits by feeding propaganda. Its the reason for a lot of our stagnant issues in this country. Trying to stop the oil companies money machine is a really hard task to accomplish.

While some may be in denial in the USA the Chinese government is apathetic



posted on Jun, 22 2015 @ 05:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: infolurker
a reply to: enlightenedservant

LOL, high speed rail?

That is what we have cars and planes for. If it is too far to drive, take a plane.

Nobody will use that crap, not economically viable in a country this size.

Build it, and they won't come


I think the opposite. Do you know how many Americans have never been to the other side of the country? True high speed rail would dramatically overhaul domestic tourism. And tickets are usually much cheaper than comparable flights. And once we mastered it, its schedules would be as predictable as any other form of public transportation.

Though I do agree about the sheer scale needed to cover the entire country. I'd push for them to do regional high speed rail systems first, both to get the public accustomed to it & to reduce the initial costs. Then they could link the regional systems over time.



posted on Jun, 22 2015 @ 06:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

Oh, I'm still skeptical.

I just think it's ridiculous that someone wants to punish the US for something when we are far from the worst offenders.

I also think it's ridiculous to punish me for things that have been done in the past that I played no part in.



posted on Jun, 22 2015 @ 06:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

Oh, I'm still skeptical.

I just think it's ridiculous that someone wants to punish the US for something when we are far from the worst offenders.

I also think it's ridiculous to punish me for things that have been done in the past that I played no part in.



Your view doesn't conform with the facts.

Again, the US is the worst offender cumulatively, and second worst presently (only after China).

And, country-level action isn't just about you. You may not want our country having to take some responsibility alongside some other powerful countries. But we need to. And countries that have benefited by impacting the environment the most, hence being wealthier now and having greater capacity, need to do more. It's called fairness.


edit on 22-6-2015 by Quetzalcoatl14 because: (no reason given)

edit on 22-6-2015 by Quetzalcoatl14 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 22 2015 @ 06:38 PM
link   
So, let me get this straight.

OP is more upset that the U.S. has a percentage of people that deny man-made climate change, than the fact that the U.S. is actually putting regulations and legislation in place to combat this boogeyman, to the point that it hampers its own economy, and China isn't doing any of that, but their people all drink the Kool-Aid merrily.

If all Americans believed the Man-Made Climate change dogma, and yet did nothing about it (ala China and India), does that mean that OP wouldn't be upset at the U.S. anymore?

By that logic, if ZERO Americans believed the hype, and yet the U.S. did the most of any country around the world to curtail pollution, OP would still be upset at the U.S.?

I think I just went cross-eyed.



posted on Jun, 22 2015 @ 06:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

Denialism?

I don't deny that climate changes. I do very much deny that the science is settled. And I'm not satisfied that anything has been proven one way or the other about why the climate is changing which brings us back to climate changes, that's what it does.

And the very fact that so many greedy politicians are lining up to tell me how to live my life and take over everything I have because they claim they know better than I do is simply more proof than anything else that they've latched on to this as a means of taking complete control over everything for their own aggrandizement and power. Saving the planet has nothing at all to do with it.



posted on Jun, 22 2015 @ 06:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: BELIEVERpriest
a reply to: LDragonFire

The world should mind its own business, and frankly so should the USA. If the rest of the world wants to see results, they should set an example for the US to follow...but that wont happen, because climate change is not man made, and so far all efforts to stop this boogeyman have turned out to be tax collection schemes.


OMG I can't believe you really said that. So I take it you'll never speak of the US as being a kind of leader every again, right? Unreal.

Please do tell, how in the light of people having better standards of living through the exploitation of cheap energy sources (fossil fuels) would you consider solving the problem without taxation? I'm all for ... anything else, but how do you disincentivize people not to do something they want? In society it seems what we do is target their pockets or their person. Should we jail people instead?

That's right, you don't even believe it exists. So you're not interested in coming up with solutions, cause you know the solutions... you just don't like them. Ridiculous.



posted on Jun, 22 2015 @ 06:52 PM
link   
Kill every last freakin American!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
a reply to: LDragonFire



posted on Jun, 22 2015 @ 06:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

I do very much deny that the science is settled. And I'm not satisfied that anything has been proven one way or the other about why the climate is changing which brings us back to climate changes, that's what it does.


You can say that again. Settled? Seriously? These people can't even agree whether or not the earth is going to freeze because of it, fry because of it, or flood because of it.

When I was a kid, we were heading for an ice age. As an adolescent and young adult, we were going to burn up. As a mature adult, we were going to flood. The only consistency about the "science" is that they change their predictions whenever their predictions fail.

It's a truckload of bollocks.



posted on Jun, 22 2015 @ 06:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: LDragonFire
The point of this thread is what are the current climate change deniers that make up our government, how will this effect governmental policy? How will other countries of the world gonna react to our climate change denial government???


Not what country is polluting the most!


Well, in the past it has affected policy by making us stagnate on addressing it.

However, as I've been posting, the bigger issue is WHAT to do with it.

The biggest fight is over the CBDR concept, which I mentioned. It would require more work on the part of the developed countries due to historic emissions, more capacity, and more tech.

This was partly what made the US not sign the Kyoto Protocol, because it allowed developing countries some time but put a bigger burden on developed nations.



posted on Jun, 22 2015 @ 06:57 PM
link   
a reply to: ProfessorChaos

You from an alternate reality or something? When I was a kid it was all about global warming. Nothing but a few outliers thought we were going into a freeze. Floods are going to happen the same as warming. It's part of it.



posted on Jun, 22 2015 @ 06:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: GUITARPLAYER
Kill every last freakin American!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
a reply to: LDragonFire





I'm sure any lingering radiation from the extensive bombing will be much less damaging than all that horrid carbon polluting we've done.



posted on Jun, 22 2015 @ 06:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: pl3bscheese
a reply to: ProfessorChaos

You from an alternate reality or something? When I was a kid it was all about global warming. Nothing but a few outliers thought we were going into a freeze. Floods are going to happen the same as warming. It's part of it.


First of all, you and I may not be the same age. Secondly, you're making my point.
edit on 6/22/2015 by ProfessorChaos because: typo



posted on Jun, 22 2015 @ 07:01 PM
link   
a reply to: ProfessorChaos

Do explain that second part. I challenge you.



posted on Jun, 22 2015 @ 07:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: pl3bscheese
a reply to: ProfessorChaos

Do explain that second part. I challenge you.


You are making my point by saying you were told of a different climate apocalypse while growing up.



posted on Jun, 22 2015 @ 07:04 PM
link   
a reply to: ProfessorChaos

I think it's looking more ICE AGE than Warming, judging by the precipitation and FREEZING weather records last year.
edit on 22-6-2015 by cavtrooper7 because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
12
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join