AI and climate change believers will stay on Twitter and Threads while the humanity believers are converging here.

Their emissions will go up for sure as their industrialization continues. They also promised at Paris targets they knew were achievable and not what was necessarily desirable to lower emissions and focus on emissions intensity ( co2 per unit activity whatever that means) instead of cuts.

Yes

Washington post

Xi just said on Wednesday they’ll ignore Paris agreement and they’re already the world’s largest greenhouse gas emitter. They’ve building coal plants like crazy. You need to learn more.

They’ve already violated so many agreements. EVs are a future tech and big business if it wasn’t they wouldn’t be pouring money into it for the climate

China will sign anything and violate it at will. So what if 194 states signed something do you think this is proof of something? The climate cult think they can actually tell you temperatures 125,000 years ago!

Yep keep rambling the same punchlines and ignore the contrary evidence I provided above.

Real intelligence is realising that you know nothing. Always assuming the every person you are speaking to is more intelligent and more wise than you are. This is how you find the flaws in people arguments. You do not find the flaws in arguments by assuming the person you are speaking to is stupid and dumb.

What is extremely telling is when a person attacks your characteristics instead of addressing the argument. You can not win a debate by feeling superior to the other person. Always remain humble.

At least thats working for me when I deal with people I disagree with. Its very enjoyable watching them contradict themself.

You only believe in something when you lack evidence. Like I can’t prove God exists but I believe he exists.

I used to believe in the tooth fairy and Santa clause as well. Then I grew up.

It’s not a human race problem.

It’s a ideology problem.

Lack of faith in the almighty.

Rejecting our creator and man trying to play God. A Tale as old as time.

Exactly, well said. We don’t have the data. We can only go off biased assumptions.

So we dont have the data to make any conclusions.

So it’s best not to make any conclusions at all. Rather than push narratives like man and cow farts cause climate change without conclusive evidence.

Clearly, there’s an agenda at play to pushing human and cow farts causes climate change story for politics and has nothing to do with scientific truth.

Correlation can not be considered “a proof” using the scientific method.

Statistics 101:

1)correlation does NOT mean causation.

2) Larger sample data set is more valid than smaller sample data set.

Wow you cherry picked data of us coming out of the little ice age in the Victorian era.

130 years of data is nothing in the grand scheme of things.

Now do the same from the Viking era or Roman era. Or basically any time before 10000 B.C.

There is no evidence that co2 emissions led to to climate change in any climate science academic literature.

Ice core date from all around the world shows co2 levels follow global temperatures.

There’s been no change of trend in sea levels since records began in 1880s.

If anything we are in Co2 drought. Increasing co2 levels has increased crop yields helping feed the worlds growing population.

Below 200 ppm plants die. Currently we are at 412 ppm. Plants grow optimally in co2 concentrations of 1500 ppm.

then better find better methods cuase nobody will follow current ones.

doesn't matter if climate change is real or not as long as it doesn't improve current standards of living most ppl won't care.

most will trade any "future disaster" for a "current enjoyment/survival"

One good start might be stop using climate change as an umbrella term for a lot of stuff. It's like calling nazis to the right, that won't just make ppl care + each individual problem under the "climate change" umbrella has different causes and potential solutions.

Should we stop using fossil fuels to reduce CO2 emission? is that the best solution? does higher CO2 levels cause enough damage to use such a nuclear solution? current "alternative" electricity generations actually work? if they don't work, is it right to ban use of energy?

CO2 levels are a single thing

plastic waste is another problem, with different nature, more centered around comsumption of wasted full low time preference products that brake too quickly and are not repaired. It's confusion and distracting to put these two under a single umbrela term such as "climate change"

a more focus aproach at indivual problems will work much better.

or finding a constant that units all or a group of problems.

IMO inflation is that thing, people can't care about the future when money doesn't work. They consume without any moment stoping to think if there's any better use for money since it's melting in their hands.

same goes for other aspects of life.

TLDL focus dividing problems into smaller parts that actually can be solved + fuck inflation