There is no climate crisis, but Bitcoin does fix very poor incentives and imbalances in energy economics.
I wrote my article on bitcoin being hope for a generation found hopeless because of comments like the one in this video. Young people are feeling overwhelming things, politicians are fanning these flames, and they need hope. Bitcoin doesn’t fix everything, nor does it solve the climate crises, but it’s an important step as a means to an end of better money, investment in renewable energy, and property rights for all, avoiding a dystopian future.
https://twitter.com/greg_price11/status/1633666026620567552?s=46&t=nXE6anzW_yeAqlrgjmS51Q
Discussion
Yeah I know that language is triggering, I do feel it is a concern but I’m not in then”crises” camp that many progressive are in. I struggle to have good terminology for it. But we as bitcoiners can agree on the incentives and energy economics 🤝
Agreed. But I do feel obligated to caveat because its not that the word is "triggering," but merely that it is deeply false based on what the establishment attaches to the idea.
It's just that the dominant parts of that narrative they spin are total lies:
• It causes more and terrible storms (no it doesn't)
• It causes more droughts and forest fires (no it doesn't)
• CO2 is a pollutant (no it isn't)
• That it is bad for plant & animal life to have more CO2 or for the planet to get warmer (no it isn't)
• That its bad for human life for the planet to get warmer (no it isn't)
• That the planet wouldn't be getting warmer if we weren't driving around in cars (not remotely true)
• That it will keep getting hotter forever until everything bursts into flames (not only not true based on it's more base premises, but CO2 as a greenhouse gas has a diminishing effect, basically a "bitcoin halving" like warming effect where no matter how much more we add it will simply stop contributing to the GHE at a certain point - even if it is the most important factor for a warming planet, which is not at all proven or even very sensible)
If you take all these simple facts out of the foundation of the narrative, there just isn't that much left. And it distracts from the REAL problems we have in energy & establishes a framing that will make these problems worse, instead of better.
I ramble here only to make a point. That mindset is absolutely critical, and we have to stop submitting to a frame that is clearly wrong & forces us into a model of thinking that will do more damage than good. But generally I actually agree with your note 😆
Sorry Guy, but I disagree. CO2 is the biggest driver of current climate change, with a large human contribution. CO2 seals the earth's atmosphere (heat is trapped); as a result, the planet heats up more due to the incoming rays of the sun (greenhouse effect).
Is climate change caused by humans?
Hundreds of research institutions worldwide agree that the current rapid rate of climate change is caused by human activity. A US study ( https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/ac2966/pdf )
analyzed 88,125 climate studies and concluded that 99% of the studies agree that humans play an overwhelming role in climate change. With the help of models, it is possible to simulate how the climate would have developed without anthropogenic influences and how it finally developed with those influences.
Here is a summary of many studies including evidence that there is a man-made part to climate change:
https://www.dw.com/en/fact-check-why-climate-change-is-real/a-62482188
re-read what I said:
I never said CO2 isn't a greenhouse gas or doesn't contribute to warming.
I never said that humans aren't having any effect on the climate.
I said CO2 is not a *pollutant*
I said there are tons of holes in the idea that it's the *dominant* force
and I said that there isn't a *crisis.*
None of what you said (regardless of its degree of exaggeration by an apparatus of politically driven and funded science) follows that the world is about to end or that this is a horrific development for the planet or for humanity. Politics has attached this insane leap of logic *without* any evidence supported almost entirely by the belief that humans are an evil force that should never have any effect on the world and if one does arise at all, its a horrible thing that must be stopped.
I'm arguing against an anti-human ideology that turns simple observations into political catastrophes in an effort to get power.
I agree with you, CO2 is not a pollutant per se, but a valuable part of the earth's ecosystem. However - as Paracelsus said - the quantity makes the poison.
CO2 "seals" the atmosphere, causing the heat from the incoming rays of the sun to accumulate (greenhouse effect).
A reduction of CO2 therefore makes sense and - as you rightly say - without panic, but with consistency.
We see Bitcoin as a wonderful opportunity for economic disinflation and as a promoter of renewable energy expansion. We are skeptical about purely centralized solutions - for the following reasons: dysfunctionality, false economic incentives (expansion of the money supply), possible surveillance.
In your estimation, how much CO2 do humans contribute compared to total CO2 emitted?
There is no climate crisis?
Way too much to answer in one tweet, but a good place to start to realize the unreliability of what "political science" produces is to read about "climate gate" to see where the 1940s warming period & subsequent cooling went & why it doesn't show up in these data sets anymore. Then I would also suggest reading "Unsettled" by Steve Koonin who was as deep down the climate crisis rabbit hole you could get and wanted to stress test the data and conclusions as a matter for building an undeniable argument... only to come away realizing how little of the narrative holds any water at all.
He has a very reasoned and pragmatic approach & isn't at all a "right wing conspiracy theorist." And I'll just add to cap it off: the idea that the planet is getting warmer (regardless of how much the models often presented make it look exaggerated) does not at all equate to "crisis" without multiple, rather enormous, logical leaps to follow.
(reminder: I need to get out of the habit of referring to posts as "tweets," they are "notes" now 😆)
I need to get out of the habit to like posts, but rather zap the most valuable ones.
climate change is real 📠
Fiat science
Time for another booster 😂
🫂
my foot got stomped at training last night - we r not not going there lads 😅
Global surface temperature shows clear data. To say that this is "just" fiat science is dubious.
📠
Not disputing that. But the use of hysteric blanket and non-specific terms like ‘global warming’ to indicate something is wrong is a cult at this point.
Dude, posting this shows me how little you've made an honest assessment of this issue at all. You realize that this is *pure* claim based science right? You understand that this chart has nothing to do with measurements and has everything to do with the assumptions already built into the narrative?
There is no "human and natural drivers" thermometer man. Sorry, but this greatly lowers my confidence that you know anything about this issue.
switch on the news and floods will tell u climate change is real 📠
“The News”
😂😂😂
Here is a summary of many studies including evidence that there is a man-made part to climate change:
https://www.dw.com/en/fact-check-why-climate-change-is-real/a-62482188
I posted the graphic because I didn't want to bore you with articles. Here is a summary of many studies including evidence that there is a man-made part:
https://www.dw.com/en/fact-check-why-climate-change-is-real/a-62482188
FYI if your article starts with "fact check" it almost immediately gets put into a bracket of a group of political biased liars with about the worst track record imaginable.
Just for the future I would try to find a source that doesn't sound exactly like the mainstream, corrupt authoritarians that have used that phrase to push disgustingly bullshit propaganda for years.
- This is only a glancing observation for the sake of the strength of your argument in the future among people who don't trust the mainstream.
"A severe drought in Monterrey, Mexico; deaths after a fracture of the Marmolada glacier in Italy; an upcoming heat wave across Europe: ..."
sigh... and it literally starts with alarmist bullshit and equating local droughts to broad, long term climate warming... seriously this already just sounds like the news.
And then cyclones, also totally unrelated and alarmist crap. this is nothing but drivel. Sorry, if you want to post legitimate, honest, self-reflective scientific research, I am happy to look into it. But this is just trash journalism.
Seriously? 🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️
It's not just about the article itself, it's all about the studies that are mentioned in it. For example:
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/ac2966/pdf
Greater than 99% consensus on human caused climate change in the peer-reviewed scientific literature.
tell me you’re a climate change denier, without saying it.
I prefer the more accurate “climate scientism bullshit disrespector.”
Tell me this is about an ideology to you without telling me.
I have never denied that the climate changes, I have never denied that humans have an impact. I made it very clear where I think The Science™ amounts to political nonsense. But you wouldn't be interested I see since its just "climate change deniers" are people who believe in The Science™ and nothing else exists.
Very thoughtful and scientific of you. I'm sure you are well versed on the topic and have great knowledge.
Greater than 99% consensus on human caused climate change in the peer-reviewed scientific literature.
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/ac2966/pdf
It's not just about the article itself, it's all about the studies that are mentioned in it. For example:
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/ac2966/pdf
Greater than 99% consensus on human caused climate change in the peer-reviewed scientific literature
Just history.
German government news. Do you fact check the fact checkers? 😂
It's not just about the article itself, it's all about the studies that are mentioned in it. For example:
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/ac2966/pdf
Greater than 99% consensus on human caused climate change in the peer-reviewed scientific literature.
Ah ok. Gotcha👍So more taxes and restrictions in order to stop the spread. The more i think about this i get the impression that it is positive if the followers of science do as they are told and stop breathing so therefore they are not emitting CO2 anymore.
A reduction of CO2 therefore makes sense and without panic, but with consistency.
We see Bitcoin as a wonderful opportunity for economic disinflation and as a promoter of renewable energy expansion. We are skeptical about purely centralized solutions - for the following reasons: dysfunctionality, false economic incentives (expansion of the money supply), possible surveillance.
Of course, the climate crisis is accompanied by hysteria and sometimes bad politics - but the data showing the global surface temperature is clear. The main reason is the sealing of the atmosphere by CO2 (greenhouse effect). Climate change with its man-made part is real.
Here is a summary of many studies including evidence that there is a man-made part to climate change:
https://www.dw.com/en/fact-check-why-climate-change-is-real/a-62482188
Come on dude, look at his name. Its pure propaganda. He is probably paid by greenpeace or ripple.
No, we are not paid by anyone. Believe me, the mainstream needs to be convinced that bitcoin has a big environmental impact.
*has a positive environmental impact
I get your point but you are not going to win a fight against a billion dollar propaganda machine.
You d be better off exposing the bs instead of playing along with their game.
We are Bitcoiners. Just as you can't stop Bitcoin, you can't stop our engagement. 😉
In the end the shift to clean energy is inevitable for economic reasons already. The rest of the environmental pollution is caused by the corrupt fiat system.
So, eventually as long as we build on Bitcoin, the climate crisis will resolve no matter if the dire predictions are true or not.
The only way we can not survive climate change is by doing what the Davos and FFF people suggest.
I really don't agree that climate change is as big as they say and don't agree on the impact they claim humans have
We would be better off cleaning up plastics and planting trees than we are fighting cowfarts. Their whole narrative is shaky af. They use 10% truth and 90% lies to sell you a narrative that is pushed by fear.
One thing you are right about, the last thing we need to do is follow a set of rich folks and bankers and think they suddenly care about the environment.
O also, the fiat system is a prime mover as you say.
It was big oil themselves that made a policy change to shift their income away from gasoline/combustion engine. They are set on having it come from plastics and petrochemicals.
We are not going to clean up plastics before we under undermine the power they are allowed to siphon from the fiat system.
I get somewhat triggered by eco activists that think it was the people that caused the shift from gas-powered to ('green') battery powered, it's the same investment company just shifting tactics. They still hold the most sway over our politics as they have alway done.
Last thing(sorry for the rant)
To me this video(last climate summit) perfectly encapsulates their mindset.
https://nostr.build/av/nonostr.build_e6314b92b264524e0c719b747e900ddbb1e477cd3db0f0959a5560561, 48042.mp4
All the other things you mentioned are just as important. That is why we need a disinflationary economy like Bitcoin could make possible.
Inflationary vs. disinflationary economy
I'm probably preaching to the choir but
Inflationary money incentivises it being wasted asap instead of hodl'd. And yes, it might speed up investment and the rate of change in society but what you want is the quality of that change/investment to matter more. I mean, what good is change if it leads to pollution and war?
Besides, the flow through channel of all that money holds the 'voting' power(bankers). That needs to shift back to the individual. (Assuming we can trust the average individual with that responsibility. But, if you assume they can't, they will never learn)
I almost agree Michael, but there are good people at FFF too! :)
I disagree. 99% of the good people have left FFF.
Did myself after giving a presentation on integrated energy systems and how decentralized energy can create clean abundance.
Reaction was overwhelmingly negative. They want authoritarian rule and control over others.
Those who are freedom minded have gone elsewhere.
That may be the case, but new ones are being added, and there are even some Bitcoiners there now.
What do Bitcoiners do there? If the concept of the org is to want deindustrialization over real solutions, we have no place there.
And also we don’t need any orgs.
Decentralization for the win.
Some of the FFF people are convinced that an inflationary economic system is part of the environmental damage the world is experiencing. This thought led them to Bitcoin.
No, we are not paid by anyone. Believe me, the mainstream needs to be convinced that Bitcoin has a positive environmental impact.
Here is a summary of many studies including evidence that there is a man-made part to climate change:
https://www.dw.com/en/fact-check-why-climate-change-is-real/a-62482188
This list is a good resource. https://tomn.substack.com/p/notes-for-climate-skeptics
My banner pic was taken in an ice cave around Mt Blanc in France. The ice is long gone - I just can’t imagine just because of me dropping a happy fart inside.