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.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

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.