Is this happening due to global warming?

Klytus

Omono
Messages
1,300
Reaction score
27
Location
Singing Pines Tyneside-England
USDA Zone
8a
I think the biggest problem we all face going into the future is organised crime.

Organised Criminals are not all that smart and their behaviour does not change if they seize the reigns of a community,company or country.

They simply change the laws so they are immune from justice and carry on bullying.

With carbon taxation there is no change,merely the same criminals getting one over the plebs.

It's what they do,and it's who they are.
 
Last edited:

Attila Soos

Omono
Messages
1,804
Reaction score
54
Location
Los Angeles (Altadena), CA
USDA Zone
9
Al,

Again, I point to my arguments not against the idea, but to my objection to tactics and attitudes of those global warming true believers.

That's a good start, accepting the idea that pollution is bad for everybody, and not just for the democrats.:)

Do I assume that all data is somehow tainted, well, given that apparently some of the leading researchers aren't really being quite as forthcoming as one would hope, I have no idea how some of the rank and file deal with their research...

I am sure that you do not assume that all data from all sources are tainted. The trouble is that overall, all data points toward the same general trend. It would be hard to believe that we are part of a worldwide conspiracy, scientists against conservatives.:)

The issue for me is, should be impoverish ourselves and destroy our society tilting at this windmill? For me, given all the self-interested parties (research grants, private investments
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/nov/03/al-gore-conflict-of-interests )

I'll remain skeptical.

Who is talking about impoverishing ourselves and destroy society? Personally, I am all for enriching myself and improving society? It is really strange that somebody would think, that just because I am against pollution, I am trying to impoverish myself and destroy everything this country was built on. Quite the opposite! Until now, I thought that pollution is the one that will impoverish and destroy us. That's exactly why I am against it.

Yes, I am also skeptical of the tactics that some groups are advocating. We need to work out together how can we solve this challenge.
 
Last edited:

Attila Soos

Omono
Messages
1,804
Reaction score
54
Location
Los Angeles (Altadena), CA
USDA Zone
9
With carbon taxation there is no change,merely the same criminals getting one over the plebs.

It's what they do,and it's who they are.

Yes, carbon taxation is a strange animal. It can be used for good, as well for profit. So, I am not sure that it is a good idea, at all. Every time governments start using additional taxation for something, it smells disaster to me.

(that's why I voted for Bush last time, thinking that he will reduce taxes, reduce spending, reduce deficit, reduce big government.. boy was I wrong!)
 
Last edited:

Klytus

Omono
Messages
1,300
Reaction score
27
Location
Singing Pines Tyneside-England
USDA Zone
8a
Have they done enough to demonize those who resist corruption?

Probably not,the bulk of that is probably yet to come.

But they cannot force you to watch it.

There is some interest in prohibiting the warping of childrens minds in school but i'm afraid the Political class of today would not find that to be in the interest of themselves,their offspring or their ideology.
 

rockm

Spuds Moyogi
Messages
14,182
Reaction score
22,183
Location
Fairfax Va.
USDA Zone
7
"Who is talking about impoverishing ourselves and destroy society? Personally, I am all for enriching myself and improving society? It is really strange that somebody would think, that just because I am against pollution, I am trying to impoverish myself and destroy everything this country was built on. Quite the opposite! Until now, I thought that pollution is the one that will impoverish and destroy us. That's exactly why I am against it."

If you take a look at what's happening in Copenhagen, "carbon taxes" etc. you will note that it is developed WESTERN societies that bear the financial burden of the "solutions" offered up. While it is understandable that smaller less economically developed nations have smaller financial responsibilities, how can one sanely explain how emerging economic behemoths like China and India (and other s) sidestep these new regulations? I have no doubt that you're all for being rich, but being hopelessly naive (not you, but others) about transferring wealth from developed nations to those doing the most polluting per capita (China) doesn't make much sense.

"Yes, I am also skeptical of the tactics that some groups are advocating. We need to work out together how can we solve this challenge. "

Baiting Republicans, calling them dimwits and worse, unfortunately has become Democratic sport in the last few years. It is perfectly acceptable to call Rs murders, equate all capitalism as evil, insult those with a simple difference of opinion them as heartless monsters. (yeah, I know the right did the same to Ds. But does that make it acceptable?) Until both right and left get that villifying the other is no way to solve problems, this issue is pretty much dead in the water.
 

Attila Soos

Omono
Messages
1,804
Reaction score
54
Location
Los Angeles (Altadena), CA
USDA Zone
9
"Who is talking about impoverishing ourselves and destroy society? Personally, I am all for enriching myself and improving society? It is really strange that somebody would think, that just because I am against pollution, I am trying to impoverish myself and destroy everything this country was built on. Quite the opposite! Until now, I thought that pollution is the one that will impoverish and destroy us. That's exactly why I am against it."

If you take a look at what's happening in Copenhagen, "carbon taxes" etc. you will note that it is developed WESTERN societies that bear the financial burden of the "solutions" offered up. While it is understandable that smaller less economically developed nations have smaller financial responsibilities, how can one sanely explain how emerging economic behemoths like China and India (and other s) sidestep these new regulations? I have no doubt that you're all for being rich, but being hopelessly naive (not you, but others) about transferring wealth from developed nations to those doing the most polluting per capita (China) doesn't make much sense.

"Yes, I am also skeptical of the tactics that some groups are advocating. We need to work out together how can we solve this challenge. "

Baiting Republicans, calling them dimwits and worse, unfortunately has become Democratic sport in the last few years. It is perfectly acceptable to call Rs murders, equate all capitalism as evil, insult those with a simple difference of opinion them as heartless monsters. (yeah, I know the right did the same to Ds. But does that make it acceptable?) Until both right and left get that villifying the other is no way to solve problems, this issue is pretty much dead in the water.

Well, this last post of yours, there is no point for me to repeat it. I whole-heartedly agree with everything you say here.
 

Bill S

Masterpiece
Messages
2,494
Reaction score
28
Location
Western Massachusetts
USDA Zone
5a
Yes, carbon taxation is a strange animal. It can be used for good, as well for profit. So, I am not sure that it is a good idea, at all. Every time governments start using additional taxation for something, it smells disaster to me.

(that's why I voted for Bush last time, thinking that he will reduce taxes, reduce spending, reduce deficit, reduce big government.. boy was I wrong!)

Carbon capture on whole is still being invented, yes there are some technologies that are workable now, but EXPENSIVE. Did you hear the interview of Obama where the interviewer asked him if he realized that cap and trade will triple to quadrupal our energy costs.?? Hear Obamas answer?? Yes, I don't care, we have to do it. Can you say global economy in the toilet, if you think it's bad now, wait. How about the fact that it's just the industrialized nations (not including China) who have to pay for it by the regs they are trying to pass for treaties. Ever see some of the polluting the third world countries accomplish?

By the way, there isn't much coming from the white house I put much credance in. On top of trying to run us into the ground, Pres. O has surrounded himself with a bunch of crooks, liars, and thieves, with a power hungry agenda to rid the rich of thier money, and give it to the deserving bunch sitting on thier asses waiting for it.

I also never said that I thought pollution had no effects, I know it does. Anyone ever fly over Atlanta, and watch out the windows? If you do you will see this small area that puts out a plume that stretchs for miles, you can see it, most likely a power plant, and I can't imagine living down wind of that. Is it the reason the earth is warming? It more than likely contributes, albeit a very small part, IMHO. Part of my reasoning is people take up such a small space on the planet, and to think we can alter the cycles of the whole earth, and be the only cause is arrogant. I also saw first hand as the Conneticut River went form cesspool to a real river again, all we did was to not dump our sewage into it.

Data pointing to a warming trend is only that, data showing warming, not what effected what, and i say that because there are a lot of causes behind GW, including the release of carbon dioxide, and mathane naturally, not by humans, but ma Nature.

I got involved with this due to the blindness to accept what our dear politicians are trying to hornswaggle us with, just because they say it, it's funny but those same people blame the same problem on Rush, Beck, et. al., they can spew some B.S., but not that much hot air. Being naive about this issue should be a crime, because it should be looked at, but approached in a responsible way.

After all that I have to say now that Cap and trade will work. As soon as it goes into effect, your gasoline, natural gas, electricity, coal, plastics, and other oil products will cost so much to use that most will have to stop using them, hence the carbon emmissions will come to a halt, and the world can head for the next ice age.

Until solar wind, and geothermal power come to the point they are reliable, cost effective, and done at the individual level ,fossil fuels will be here to stay. Too bad nukes have the rep they do, this is the wave of the future, but not in my back yard.
 

Klytus

Omono
Messages
1,300
Reaction score
27
Location
Singing Pines Tyneside-England
USDA Zone
8a
Their solution to the problem of parasitism was more parasitism.

Fraud within fraud and fleas upon fleas and all that.

Whatever happened to 'Read my lips,they will not raise your taxes'.

The truth is that 'they' did not raise your taxes as 'they' were his obfuscation.

To them it was 'We' who raised your taxes.

Things don't change that much do they.

Why 'they' you ask?

Who else would be reading his lips?

Mr Clinton's legacy is said to speak for itself so i won't venture there.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vnUv7y4U2T0

It's like if they know those people are liars then why do they vote?

Do they need their heads tested?

I suspect heads are tested and every four years we all get to see how easily those heads are duped into parting with yet more money in exchange for hatred and loathing.

Too much hatred and loathing is not without it's usefulness either,plenty of taxes can be raised whilst hatred and loathing is foisted upon foreign enemies and directed at domestic opponents of taxes for war.

These issues never get better in the morning.

But hey,tis the season to be jolly.

Who knew the weather could be so exciting?

In Europe it is possibly better understood that the EU is to become a tool of legalising whatever scams are lobbied and paid for.

A big rubber stamp marked appoved in many languages on a weighty tome reading 'Weather Tax.'

Is the scheme patented and by whom?

We may never know the answer to that and will have to contend with 'Let's you and him fight' in the short term.

In the medium term it will be creating confusion over the issue and then a period of propagandic inactivity

In the long term and as the flow of tax money stretches the belts of more scientific reearchers,opinion shapers and concensus formers we will all be told it's working and the people willing to admit it's rot will be put out of work and replaced.

Hence more corruption and cowardice are manifested in society.

And then it won't be working and the tax grab will start over.

Well maybe.

My question is who does it benefit to offer B/S as an excuse to raise taxes,especilly in Europe where we are disadvantaged by too many languages.

One could look at Spain during the conquest of the new world,taxes raised to do God's work,God's work was actually the mass extermination of all middle and south American cultures.

My suspicion is that this 'Carbon Tithe-Tax' will provide liquidity for similar liquidations.

That is the goal,population reduction and not climate or warming blah blah blah.

Not really any fair and equitable solutions there

It's not hard to imagine a government offered a carrot and a stick to tax the undesreables out of existence,it's not hard to imagine a grass roots uprising and crushing of such spurred on by a false flag perhaps.

That sort of thing is a speciality of some governmental departments.

It's not hard to imagine the powers that be turning on the unjust government who attacked it's own people,dejavu perhaps.

Could lead to a more dangerous world,gotta raise those taxes to kill them all...

At present a taxation scheme can be scientifically proven to exist,man made Global War without the ming could be proven to be escalating and a political climate Change is the manner by which the US punters were encouraged to feel involved in this decision process.

Too far fetched or ridiculous?

There is no law to prevent the far fetched and ridiculous from becoming law,perhaps at home but certainly not the foreign policy.
 
Last edited:

Otis

Seedling
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
Is it the reason the earth is warming? It more than likely contributes, albeit a very small part, IMHO. Part of my reasoning is people take up such a small space on the planet, and to think we can alter the cycles of the whole earth, and be the only cause is arrogant. I also saw first hand as the Conneticut River went form cesspool to a real river again, all we did was to not dump our sewage into it.

Data pointing to a warming trend is only that, data showing warming, not what effected what, and i say that because there are a lot of causes behind GW, including the release of carbon dioxide, and mathane naturally, not by humans, but ma Nature.

Back when the first few enlightened people were trying to sound the alarm on water pollution the response they received was similar to what climate change deniers are saying now, as in the quote above. So much of the earth's surface is covered with water, they argued, there is no way that humans could possibly affect it in any serious way. Fifty years ago most cities and towns straight-piped their sewerage into nearby rivers and streams, as did most industries. There was no problem because the current took the pollution away, and eventually it went to the ocean, and the oceans were so big they could absorb it all and clean it. What eventually changed that thinking to the extent it has been changed was a combination of scientific research, education of the public and government regulation. I'm glad the Connecticut River is doing better than when ignorance, short term self interest and greed dictated how people treated it. I'm glad the scientific community recognized what was happening and what needed to happen to remedy the situation, I'm glad the citizenry was educated on the problem and I'm glad the government stepped in and instituted and enforced regulations to change the harmful behavior patterns. Of course, the Connecticut is far from being a healthy and vibrant aquatic ecosystem, but it is better than it was.

Human activity has changed not only the entire earth but the earth's atmosphere, as well. This is not a theory, it is an indisputable fact. It is true that the greatest portion of CO2 in earth's atmosphere is produced by natural causes, but that level has remained more or less consistent for a long, long time. That natural level of CO2 is easily absorbed by the oceans and forests of the planet. It is the additional CO2 that has been showing up in ever increasing amounts since about the time of the Industrial Revolution, the CO2 generated by the burning of fossil fuels, that is causing the conditions that contribute so significantly to the climate change we are currently beginning to take note of. Our consumption of fossil fuels and the resulting increase in CO2 levels has overcome the ability of natural systems to absorb the CO2 and prevent it from becoming concentrated in the atmosphere. This is scientific fact. CO2 is a greenhouse gas. Greenhouse gasses are not theoretical; they too are a proven scientific fact.

Changes are happening now that cannot be reversed in short order. In addition to overall warming temperatures, we are beginning to experience rising sea levels, greater incidence and greater severity of both flooding and drought, spreading of disease and disruption of natural life cycles in wildlife, to name but a few issues of concern. It is only the beginning. Even if all fossil fuel consumption were to end tomorrow, many of these effects would continue for years to come. And our consumption of fossil fuels is increasing, not decreasing. No one can say exactly how all this will play out over time, but some of us will be around to see it. Future generations will wonder at our failure to act in a more intelligent and responsible way.

It is sad to see there are so many climate change deniers among the people who enjoy bonsai as a hobby. It might have been hoped that tending to plants would increase people's sensitivity to the earth and the intricate systems that support all the life on our planet. Unfortunately a significant portion of the population as a whole is in a state of denial on this critical issue. It can only be hoped that science, education and active government regulation can work together to limit the damage that has been done and continues to be done.

As to the politicization of the climate change issue, consider this: as weak and spineless as so many of the Democrats are, at least the current administration is making an attempt to combat the climate change crisis. Republicans, on the other hand, not only censored scientific information for the 8 years of the Bush/Cheney administration, they ran a ticket in '08 whose answer to the climate change question was "Drill, baby, drill!"

And one other thing - the messages from planet Klytus are just plain bizarre. The atmosphere there must be really thin.
 
Messages
2,774
Reaction score
31
Location
Michigan, USA
USDA Zone
5
Lessee here... on one side you've got the vast majority of the world's scientific community saying that accelerated warming of the earth's climate is real and undeniably exacerbated by human activity, and on the other side you've got experts like Rush Limbaugh, Glen Beck and Will Heath in a state of uninformed denial and adding to the problem every time they open their mouths. Lets all go stand out on the shrinking polar ice caps and think it over.

Otis, since you brought my name up...

Do you deny that the climate trend over the last ten years has been toward cooling?

Do you deny that climate has changed over the years and that there were ice ages as well as tropical ages long before man was around?

Do you deny the facts I posted earlier that the big bad poisonous gas politicians are trying to tax and control is nothing more than carbon dioxide and that water is the biggest producer of this gas, not man?

Do you deny that plants, including trees use this gas and that the severe clear cutting of our world has had a large, if not larger role in the increased levels than SUVs or light bulbs?

Do you also deny that the green house gas that is most prevalant and most dangerous is plain old water vapor?


It is easy to claim that "accelerated warming of the earth's climate is real and undeniably exacerbated by human activity" but it is a far other thing to back such claims up with facts.

Sure the climate is changing, it always has, hell most of North America was once covered under a moving sheet of ice.....damn good thing global warming happened back then, hey? :rolleyes:

...Although many species didn't think it was a good thing when the ice first rolled in.....


but there is very little disagreement on the effects of the CO2 emmission, and the need to drastically reduce this emmission. There are many controversial issues in science, but the negative effects of human polution and waste on our globe is NOT one of them. We all know that the emmission of billowing smoke that blackens the skies (plus other gases, invisible to the eye), and pollutes our water cannot be sustained indefinitely without backfiring on us. How complicated is to understand that?
The complicated part is realizing first that CO2 is not the most prevalent greenhouse gas, water vapor is.

The second thing is to realize that water, not man is the biggest producer of CO2, problem is, they can't tax the water, or stop it for that matter.


You want to drastically reduce CO2?

Plant more trees, stop clear cutting, trees and other plants take CO2 and convert it to oxygen, imagine that!

It's really not that complicated at all.



Will
 
Last edited:
Messages
2,774
Reaction score
31
Location
Michigan, USA
USDA Zone
5
..... yep i drove my Explorer to work today
Hey, I drive an Explorer also, a Sport Track, and I log about a hundred miles a day.

Pollution is a bad thing, no matter if it comes from a steel plant or from a volcano erupting, from autos or from gamma rays, it all is bad for one species or another. I'm all for increasing fuel economy and reducing emissions, I recycle and I minimize the use of pesticides and herbicides on my properties. I grow food, I compost, I support the land through donations, license, and volunteer work. But I draw the line when government tries to dictate to me what I can drive, what light bulb I use, and then tries to tax me and my great grandchildren for global warming.


Save the world? To paraphrase George Carlin, the world ain't going any place, it'll still be spiraling slowly into the sun long after we are all gone, eventually every trace of mankind will be erased as well, except maybe plastic, then it will simply be the world, plus plastic.


It amazes me that people are running around like Chicken Little worried about climate change that has always happened and will always happen. Chances are, being the intelligent beings we are, we will all nuke ourselves out of existence long before we can have any major impact on the climate, at least not anything a few million years without humans won't correct.

Think the surviving cockroaches will eventually do bonsai?


:rolleyes:


Will
 
Last edited:

rockm

Spuds Moyogi
Messages
14,182
Reaction score
22,183
Location
Fairfax Va.
USDA Zone
7
"It is sad to see there are so many climate change deniers among the people who enjoy bonsai as a hobby. It might have been hoped that tending to plants would increase people's sensitivity to the earth and the intricate systems that support all the life on our planet. Unfortunately a significant portion of the population as a whole is in a state of denial on this critical issue. It can only be hoped that science, education and active government regulation can work together to limit the damage that has been done and continues to be done."

Likewise it is sad to see someone who does bonsai so willing to condemn others for being free thinkers. I am not denying climate change. What I AM denying is "Climate Change." The difference being that the first is probably happening--exactly who's fault it is is not really clear--nor does it make much difference at this point.

We should indeed try to lessen our impact on the planet.

The second is a large, loud, mostly obnoxious and extremely pious belief system in which man is evil and should be exterminated. It is infested with "enlightened" mandarins (look it up skippy :eek:) set on imposing their will at all costs at the expense of people like me --and my children.

The growing "enlightened" stridency is not only bothering "non-believers" like me. It's even getting to some of you liberals:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12/14/AR2009121402719.html

"Climate Change" beliefs are quite a toxic stew -- akin to fundamentalist religions--full of humorless, superior people who squeak when they walk, set on forcing the rest of us to believe everything they do. Those under 30 have no idea of pollution was (leaded gas, burning rivers, etc.) and how far we have come. Of course we should strive to a lot more---I'm just not sure I'm willing to mortgage my son's future to make you and your squeaky friends happy.

I am not in a state of denial, nor am I unwashed and unenlightened. I need no "education" or "re-education" (if you're into Orwell). As far as "active" government intervention, be careful, you may get what you ask for...Ever read 1984? Probably not, since that book sounds dated to those under 25...
 
Last edited:

Klytus

Omono
Messages
1,300
Reaction score
27
Location
Singing Pines Tyneside-England
USDA Zone
8a
Even at this late stage in the game there is an equitable solution but it is a long shot.

The US government has merely to recognise the trade and brokerage of carbon credits represents a breach of trust and then enact a law to establish the illegality of the practice.

I suspect they will fall quite a distance from that mark.

What happens then?

The house of cards that has been built wouldn't exactly come crashing down into it's pseudoscience foundation but it would be a start in a better direction.
 
Last edited:

Bob

Mame
Messages
148
Reaction score
0
Location
Aliquippa, Pa.
USDA Zone
6
Back when the first few enlightened people were trying to sound the alarm on water pollution the response they received was similar to what climate change deniers are saying now, as in the quote above. So much of the earth's surface is covered with water, they argued, there is no way that humans could possibly affect it in any serious way. Fifty years ago most cities and towns straight-piped their sewerage into nearby rivers and streams, as did most industries. There was no problem because the current took the pollution away, and eventually it went to the ocean, and the oceans were so big they could absorb it all and clean it. What eventually changed that thinking to the extent it has been changed was a combination of scientific research, education of the public and government regulation. I'm glad the Connecticut River is doing better than when ignorance, short term self interest and greed dictated how people treated it. I'm glad the scientific community recognized what was happening and what needed to happen to remedy the situation, I'm glad the citizenry was educated on the problem and I'm glad the government stepped in and instituted and enforced regulations to change the harmful behavior patterns. Of course, the Connecticut is far from being a healthy and vibrant aquatic ecosystem, but it is better than it was.


Good post Otis. The six words that I boldfaced describe corporate America perfectly IMHO.

Bob.
 

rockm

Spuds Moyogi
Messages
14,182
Reaction score
22,183
Location
Fairfax Va.
USDA Zone
7
Jeez, is it me or is it getting awfully pious in here? Almost like being in a Baptist church at tithing time...

Um, as an unemployed worker, I'd LOVE to have one of those self-interested corporations hire me and pay me, so I can support my family. Corporations are not walking evil incarnate. OF COURSE they're self interested. That's how it works. They work for their interests so they can survive and progress (the fact that many of the biggest are also among the biggest philanthropic organizations around seems to go mostly unnoticed).

It is this rote demonization of corporate interests and stereotyping and pigeonholing that is part of the big turn off for me with "Big Green" interests. If "Corporate America" is so evil, why'd you buy that wide screen TV--what's up with the washing machine and the home heating system, how'd you get to work today?--the subway car, bike or automobile you used wasn't made by Fred Flintstone.

Sure, there are companies that abuse the environment. I don't really think those companies actually ENJOY doing that, and many of them actually look for ways NOT to do it...
 

Klytus

Omono
Messages
1,300
Reaction score
27
Location
Singing Pines Tyneside-England
USDA Zone
8a
here is an idea you can float to the Top Trumps corporation,Presidential Top Trumps.

Factual Data in the hand you are given.

Military Expendature

Terms of Office

Immigration totals

Deficit accrued

Enemies killed

Pardons given

It would make for an interesting game.
 

Otis

Seedling
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
... Likewise it is sad to see someone who does bonsai so willing to condemn others for being free thinkers. I am not denying climate change. What I AM denying is "Climate Change." The difference being that the first is probably happening--exactly who's fault it is is not really clear--nor does it make much difference at this point.

We should indeed try to lessen our impact on the planet.

The second is a large, loud, mostly obnoxious and extremely pious belief system in which man is evil and should be exterminated. It is infested with "enlightened" mandarins (look it up skippy :eek:) set on imposing their will at all costs at the expense of people like me --and my children.

"Climate Change" beliefs are quite a toxic stew -- akin to fundamentalist religions--full of humorless, superior people who squeak when they walk, set on forcing the rest of us to believe everything they do. Those under 30 have no idea of pollution was (leaded gas, burning rivers, etc.) and how far we have come. Of course we should strive to a lot more---I'm just not sure I'm willing to mortgage my son's future to make you and your squeaky friends happy.

The statement above is an example of a tactic commonly employed by climate change deniers - steer the conversation away from factual information by resorting to mockery and insults, launching into attacks on the character of those with whom they disagree. Al Gore is the poster boy for this kind of treatment. Here the writer declares that people who are concerned about the very real threat of climate change think "man is evil and should be exterminated". Where did that idea come from? It did not come from anything said in this discussion. Those he disagrees with on this issue are "humorless, superior people who squeak when they walk (???), set on forcing the rest of us to believe everything they do." What prompts this aggressive, bullying sort of behavior? Can't your point of view be argued on its merits? To be a "free thinker" means a lot more than simply having a poorly informed opinion and slapping down those who disagree.
 

Otis

Seedling
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
... You want to drastically reduce CO2?

Plant more trees, stop clear cutting, trees and other plants take CO2 and convert it to oxygen, imagine that!

It's really not that complicated at all.

Will

Actually, it is extremely complicated. Climate change will be (is) one of the greatest threats to our continued existence that the human species has ever encountered. Some of the finest human minds are already engaging the problem and more and more will in the years to come. The only way the climate change crisis can be seen as uncomplicated is to be Will-fully ignorant of its reality.
 
Top Bottom