vvvslaxman Posted January 11, 2025 Author Posted January 11, 2025 https://www.cnn.com/weather/live-news/los-angeles-wildfires-palisades-eaton-california-01-11-25/index.html Deadly Los Angeles wildfires: New evacuation orders as biggest blaze stretches east This doesn't seem to be ending.
Alam_dar Posted January 11, 2025 Posted January 11, 2025 8 hours ago, Muloghonto said: I think anthropogenic climate change is real but we should not be spending a single dollar on it. Reason: 5 years ago the UN released a decisive paper on how we have till 2035 to reduce emissions else we reach point of no return. Okay. Well SINCE that report came out, we have a net positive increase in total emissions. Meaning recommendation isn't working and we are in a scenario of 'your mom has stage 5 palliative terminal cancer, do u still wanna perform surgery ?'. The answer is no, because at this point surgery won't save her and all i can do is make her last days Comfortable. The same answer is the only rational answer re: climate change policies. We are reaching point of no return in a decade and we are still increasing emissions. So at this point any and all money we spend to address climate change = waste. I don't agree with this approach. 1. Firstly, you have to admit that Trump and the right are the biggest fools who are even unable to see the clear cases like climate change. They openly lie. They have no morals and no decency. 2. And their lies are playing role if we are loosing this war, which you didn't acknowledge. Just imagine, if they have joined the war against climate change, then we perhaps had better chance to defeat it, or to postpone it. 3. The solution is to go for renewable energy as much as possible and public transport, but Trump and the right are the biggest hurdle in it.
G_B_ Posted January 12, 2025 Posted January 12, 2025 Hmm what happens to house insurance... This fire will result in more of a financial legacy than deaths etc. Not only California but other places like Florida.
vvvslaxman Posted January 12, 2025 Author Posted January 12, 2025 5 hours ago, G_B_ said: Hmm what happens to house insurance... This fire will result in more of a financial legacy than deaths etc. Not only California but other places like Florida. They sensed the risk and cancelled their insurance last year. Many were without insurance for their million dollar homes. Some went with privat insurance which was 4 times more expensive. G_B_ 1
Muloghonto Posted January 12, 2025 Posted January 12, 2025 15 hours ago, Alam_dar said: I don't agree with this approach. 1. Firstly, you have to admit that Trump and the right are the biggest fools who are even unable to see the clear cases like climate change. They openly lie. They have no morals and no decency. 2. And their lies are playing role if we are loosing this war, which you didn't acknowledge. Just imagine, if they have joined the war against climate change, then we perhaps had better chance to defeat it, or to postpone it. 3. The solution is to go for renewable energy as much as possible and public transport, but Trump and the right are the biggest hurdle in it. Your agreement or disagreement is irrational. Explain to us why we should spend a dime on climate change when solutions aren't working. We are not required to throw money at a problem if the solution doesn't work.
R!TTER Posted January 12, 2025 Posted January 12, 2025 15 hours ago, Alam_dar said: The solution is to go for renewable energy as much as possible and public transport, but Trump and the right are the biggest hurdle in it. No, the only solution to this problem is to reduce consumption! There is literally no other way This is what no one will tell you because it hurts their bottom/top line & practically your income as well
Alam_dar Posted January 12, 2025 Posted January 12, 2025 15 minutes ago, Muloghonto said: Your agreement or disagreement is irrational. How? It is fact based and cannot be denied. 16 minutes ago, Muloghonto said: Explain to us why we should spend a dime on climate change when solutions aren't working. We are not required to throw money at a problem if the solution doesn't work. The efforts undertaken by China, Scandinavian countries, and the U.S. (under Democratic leadership) have made significant strides in reducing emissions through impactful initiatives. However, lasting progress requires collective action from both governments and the public. In the U.S., this progress has been hindered by misinformation spread by Trump and the profit-driven right wing, which has actively undermined Democratic efforts and public initiatives aimed at combating climate change. Even if these left-leaning efforts don’t achieve 100% success, they still play a crucial role in slowing the pace of environmental destruction for future generations. The right wing, which often claims to champion family values and the well-being of children, reveals its hypocrisy by contributing to the destruction of the planet’s future. It should reflect on the harm its actions and ideologies have caused to the world. China aims to peak its carbon dioxide emissions before 2030 and achieve carbon neutrality by 2060. Recent analyses suggest that emissions may peak before 2025, ahead of the 2030 target. Countries like Sweden and Denmark have set ambitious goals to achieve net-zero emissions by 2045 and 2050, respectively. Preliminary estimates indicate a 1.9% decrease in U.S. greenhouse gas emissions in 2023 compared to the previous year, while the economy grew by 2.4%. Inflation Reduction Act (IRA): Enacted in 2022, the IRA represents the largest U.S. investment in clean energy and climate action, projected to deliver a reduction of 1 billion tons of greenhouse gas emissions by 2030. This legislation aims to position the U.S. to cut emissions in half by 2030.
Alam_dar Posted January 12, 2025 Posted January 12, 2025 25 minutes ago, R!TTER said: No, the only solution to this problem is to reduce consumption! There is literally no other way This is what no one will tell you because it hurts their bottom/top line & practically your income as well I fully agree with reducing consumption. However, steps like mass transportation system is still necessary in one way or another to achieve the task of reducing consumption. The biggest consumers are rich wealthy (mostly right wing supporters). A rich person like Trump consumes perhaps 100s of times more resources than an average American person. The entire world should agree to at least tax 30% of the wealth of businessmen and rich people globally.
Muloghonto Posted January 12, 2025 Posted January 12, 2025 11 minutes ago, Alam_dar said: How? It is fact based and cannot be denied. The efforts undertaken by China, Scandinavian countries, and the U.S. (under Democratic leadership) have made significant strides in reducing emissions through impactful initiatives. However, lasting progress requires collective action from both governments and the public. In the U.S., this progress has been hindered by misinformation spread by Trump and the profit-driven right wing, which has actively undermined Democratic efforts and public initiatives aimed at combating climate change. Even if these left-leaning efforts don’t achieve 100% success, they still play a crucial role in slowing the pace of environmental destruction for future generations. The right wing, which often claims to champion family values and the well-being of children, reveals its hypocrisy by contributing to the destruction of the planet’s future. It should reflect on the harm its actions and ideologies have caused to the world. China aims to peak its carbon dioxide emissions before 2030 and achieve carbon neutrality by 2060. Recent analyses suggest that emissions may peak before 2025, ahead of the 2030 target. Countries like Sweden and Denmark have set ambitious goals to achieve net-zero emissions by 2045 and 2050, respectively. Preliminary estimates indicate a 1.9% decrease in U.S. greenhouse gas emissions in 2023 compared to the previous year, while the economy grew by 2.4%. Inflation Reduction Act (IRA): Enacted in 2022, the IRA represents the largest U.S. investment in clean energy and climate action, projected to deliver a reduction of 1 billion tons of greenhouse gas emissions by 2030. This legislation aims to position the U.S. to cut emissions in half by 2030. There has been zero strides in reducing emissions. 2024 is the year of highest recorded emissions. We have less than 10 years left and no reduction. Therefore solutions are not being implemented and spending money on it is a waste. You can't expect us to give u money when u can't show results.
BacktoCricaddict Posted January 12, 2025 Posted January 12, 2025 Arson investigations underway https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna186949
BacktoCricaddict Posted January 12, 2025 Posted January 12, 2025 14 minutes ago, Muloghonto said: There has been zero strides in reducing emissions. 2024 is the year of highest recorded emissions. We have less than 10 years left and no reduction. Therefore solutions are not being implemented and spending money on it is a waste. You can't expect us to give u money when u can't show results. A major irony is that climate activists oppose nuclear energy. They're not anti climate change. They are anti corporate. Anti development. Elitists. It's just another blind-faith religion. Muloghonto 1
Muloghonto Posted January 12, 2025 Posted January 12, 2025 2 minutes ago, BacktoCricaddict said: A major irony is that climate activists oppose nuclear energy. They're not anti climate change. They are anti corporate. Anti development. Elitists. It's just another blind-faith religion. Funny how climate activists say they are achieving reduction in emissions but can't show it in data. They are basically scammers. They find a real problem, propose bs solution that does nothing except take ur money.
R!TTER Posted January 12, 2025 Posted January 12, 2025 (edited) 10 minutes ago, BacktoCricaddict said: A major irony is that climate activists oppose nuclear energy. They're not anti climate change. They are anti corporate. Anti development. Elitists. Not all of them, & it'd be wrong to say that all development going across the world, or in India, is useful. I'd argue most of it is just for making more $$$ in the end or, in the case of China, also taking/grabbing more territory! Edited January 12, 2025 by R!TTER
Alam_dar Posted January 12, 2025 Posted January 12, 2025 28 minutes ago, Muloghonto said: There has been zero strides in reducing emissions. 2024 is the year of highest recorded emissions. Have you really read my post? Have you not read that: The US has already reported reduction in emission. Preliminary estimates indicate a 1.9% decrease in U.S. greenhouse gas emissions in 2023 compared to the previous year, while the economy grew by 2.4%. While it increased in China, and it will continue to increase and peak in 2025. And only after that it will start decreasing gradually. And you didn't even answer the rest of my post and points.
Muloghonto Posted January 12, 2025 Posted January 12, 2025 8 minutes ago, Alam_dar said: Have you really read my post? Have you not read that: The US has already reported reduction in emission. Preliminary estimates indicate a 1.9% decrease in U.S. greenhouse gas emissions in 2023 compared to the previous year, while the economy grew by 2.4%. While it increased in China, and it will continue to increase and peak in 2025. And only after that it will start decreasing gradually. And you didn't even answer the rest of my post and points. Show me GLOBAL emissions data that shows net emissions reduction. What one country does not doesn't is irrelevant. If you wish to argue that emissions reduction is working then show us global data that there is net reduction of emissions globally. If you cannot, then it means your solutions are snake oil scams and not worth spending a dime on. So show us data.
Alam_dar Posted January 12, 2025 Posted January 12, 2025 (edited) 32 minutes ago, Muloghonto said: Show me GLOBAL emissions data that shows net emissions reduction. What one country does not doesn't is irrelevant. If you wish to argue that emissions reduction is working then show us global data that there is net reduction of emissions globally. If you cannot, then it means your solutions are snake oil scams and not worth spending a dime on. So show us data. Are you a kid that you cannot understand if the challenge is not met 100%, still the left leaning efforts will significantly decrease the destruction. Thus, it is not even a question of net reduction, but even decreasing its pace is a partial success and must be done for the sake of our planet and our children, while neglecting it is the biggest crime against humanity. The US and EU have already succeeded in decreasing the emission. China will also join in this negative emission in 2025 (earlier it was estimated to 2030, but China made a huge progress). The increase is still shown by countries like India and many more other developing countries. Developing nations prioritize economic growth, often relying on fossil fuels for affordable energy (like India has to rely on coal). Political opposition to climate policies, especially in fossil fuel-dependent regions, hampers progress. While the global situation is dire, there are signs of hope. Global CO₂ emissions may begin to decline by the 2030s if current trends in renewable energy adoption, technological advancements, and international cooperation continue. However, Trump will bring a downfall not only to the US but to the entire world with his madness of denying any climate change. And the right wing is equally criminal for supporting Trump. As I previously said, the right wing is the biggest hypocrite. It champions morals and family values and children, but it will slaughter our children for its benefits. Trump and his far right wing supporters are the CURSE for humanity with no decency and no morals. Edited January 12, 2025 by Alam_dar
vvvslaxman Posted January 12, 2025 Author Posted January 12, 2025 1 hour ago, BacktoCricaddict said: Arson investigations underway https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna186949 I was uber curious about the starting point. But it was not one place. There were about 5 or 6 fires in different parts of LA. I doubt it is athe result of an arson
G_B_ Posted January 12, 2025 Posted January 12, 2025 8 hours ago, vvvslaxman said: They sensed the risk and cancelled their insurance last year. Many were without insurance for their million dollar homes. Some went with privat insurance which was 4 times more expensive. Like insurers refused to provide insurance? Or are you talking about the state? If private was expensive then, now will be terrible... I pay 550usd a year for comprehensive home and contents insurance in london.
Muloghonto Posted January 13, 2025 Posted January 13, 2025 (edited) 7 hours ago, Alam_dar said: Are you a kid that you cannot understand if the challenge is not met 100%, still the left leaning efforts will significantly decrease the destruction. Thus, it is not even a question of net reduction, but even decreasing its pace is a partial success and must be done for the sake of our planet and our children, while neglecting it is the biggest crime against humanity. The US and EU have already succeeded in decreasing the emission. China will also join in this negative emission in 2025 (earlier it was estimated to 2030, but China made a huge progress). The increase is still shown by countries like India and many more other developing countries. Developing nations prioritize economic growth, often relying on fossil fuels for affordable energy (like India has to rely on coal). Political opposition to climate policies, especially in fossil fuel-dependent regions, hampers progress. While the global situation is dire, there are signs of hope. Global CO₂ emissions may begin to decline by the 2030s if current trends in renewable energy adoption, technological advancements, and international cooperation continue. However, Trump will bring a downfall not only to the US but to the entire world with his madness of denying any climate change. And the right wing is equally criminal for supporting Trump. As I previously said, the right wing is the biggest hypocrite. It champions morals and family values and children, but it will slaughter our children for its benefits. Trump and his far right wing supporters are the CURSE for humanity with no decency and no morals. 100% ? You have to prove that you have met the challenge even 1% towards the goal. Ie, show that you have made ANY progress in net emissions reduction. If you cannot, then it's wasted money and u r asking us to spend money over something that isn't fixable and therefore not worth spending money on. So show us IPCC data on emissions by the year and show us you have met the challenge even 1% by even 1% reduction of emissions. I can accept progress and pay for it even when it's not sufficient progress. But if you show zero progress and instead regress, then explain why you deserve my funds. Net emissions may decline by 2030 is not worth it, since 2035 is the cutoff for 30% reduction of 2018 emission levels else its point of no return. So it's time to show progress now, showing progress only in 2030 is too late and already failed project. We are not here to learn incrementally we are here to meet deadline of the UN. and once deadline is missed, there is zero point in any green energy effort as it's already point of no return Edited January 13, 2025 by Muloghonto
Alam_dar Posted January 13, 2025 Posted January 13, 2025 48 minutes ago, Muloghonto said: 100% ? You have to prove that you have met the challenge even 1% towards the goal. Ie, show that you have made ANY progress in net emissions reduction. If you cannot, then it's wasted money and u r asking us to spend money over something that isn't fixable and therefore not worth spending money on. So show us IPCC data on emissions by the year and show us you have met the challenge even 1% by even 1% reduction of emissions. I can accept progress and pay for it even when it's not sufficient progress. But if you show zero progress and instead regress, then explain why you deserve my funds. Net emissions may decline by 2030 is not worth it, since 2035 is the cutoff for 30% reduction of 2018 emission levels else its point of no return. So it's time to show progress now, showing progress only in 2030 is too late and already failed project. We are not here to learn incrementally we are here to meet deadline of the UN. and once deadline is missed, there is zero point in any green energy effort as it's already point of no return The point of no return for limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius is projected to be reached by 2035. If that target is missed, the next objective will be to keep warming below 2 degrees Celsius. Should this also fail, the subsequent goal will shift to staying under 2.5 degrees Celsius. With each degree of warming, humanity will not face extinction, but future generations will endure severe losses and unprecedented destruction. What Trump and the right wing are doing, however, is reckless and dangerous. By denying the existence of climate change, they are steering us toward complete devastation. Developed countries have a responsibility to lead by example and raise awareness among their citizens about the urgency of this crisis. Unfortunately, the ignorance promoted by Trump and the right wing isn’t confined to the U.S. alone. Their harmful rhetoric and policies are influencing people in developing countries as well, spreading their destructive ideology across the globe.
Recommended Posts