Is climate change a problem?

Organic pesticides are extremely toxic too. It's funny that people think nature was designed to accommodate humans instead of the other way around. Nature does us no favors, so why worship it?

arsenic and asbestos are organic, apple seeds contain cyanide.  plants have their own protections, they don't want to be eaten lol  less people healthier planets it's just common sense.

exactly, the irony for me is hysterics over this but not so much for the wars, murders and creative ways we have come up with to kill one another, we seem to be a rather fickle species when it comes to the methods and reasons for death.  Seems the true priorities are a bit askew.

Planet is fkn fine.

It is not alarmist if it is truth.  You dont grasp this truth or many other truths.

Your ego is in fear and that is why it creates mental blockages to truth.

Ego is the greatest danger to humanity, that, you have yet to grasp, and your ego will never allow to be grasped much less comprehended.

For the narcissist, ones self-ego is the one, the total, divine supremacy and all else is blocked out, true or not.

..."Narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) involves a pattern of self-centered, arrogant thinking and behavior, a lack of empathy and consideration for other people, and an excessive need for admiration. Others often describe people with NPD as cocky, manipulative, selfish, patronizing, and demanding." see LINK.....

You know what happened to the boy that cried wolf one too many times? They threw him to the wolves, and everyone lived happily ever after.

AL Gore said we have only 10 years left to live in 2006.  13 years later, AOC said that we have 12 years left in 2019.  The left is crying wolf.

Al Whore said the coasts were going to be under 10-20 feet of water. Al Gore then bought a 9 million dollar house on the beach.

Here are 18 examples of the spectacularly wrong predictions made around 1970 when the “green holy day” (aka Earth Day) started:
1. Harvard biologist George Wald estimated that “civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind.”
2. “We are in an environmental crisis which threatens the survival of this nation, and of the world as a suitable place of human habitation,” wrote Washington University biologist Barry Commoner in the Earth Day issue of the scholarly journal Environment.
3. The day after the first Earth Day, the New York Times editorial page warned, “Man must stop pollution and conserve his resources, not merely to enhance existence but to save the race from intolerable deterioration and possible extinction.”
4. “Population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supplies we make,” Paul Ehrlich confidently declared in the April 1970 issue of Mademoiselle. “The death rate will increase until at least 100-200 million people per year will be starving to death during the next ten years.”
5. “Most of the people who are going to die in the greatest cataclysm in the history of man have already been born,” wrote Paul Ehrlich in a 1969 essay titled “Eco-Catastrophe! “By…[1975] some experts feel that food shortages will have escalated the present level of world hunger and starvation into famines of unbelievable proportions. Other experts, more optimistic, think the ultimate food-population collision will not occur until the decade of the 1980s.”
6. Ehrlich sketched out his most alarmist scenario for the 1970 Earth Day issue of The Progressive, assuring readers that between 1980 and 1989, some 4 billion people, including 65 million Americans, would perish in the “Great Die-Off.”
7. “It is already too late to avoid mass starvation,” declared Denis Hayes, the chief organizer for Earth Day, in the Spring 1970 issue of The Living Wilderness.
8. Peter Gunter, a North Texas State University professor, wrote in 1970, “Demographers agree almost unanimously on the following grim timetable: by 1975 widespread famines will begin in India; these will spread by 1990 to include all of India, Pakistan, China and the Near East, Africa. By the year 2000, or conceivably sooner, South and Central America will exist under famine conditions….By the year 2000, thirty years from now, the entire world, with the exception of Western Europe, North America, and Australia, will be in famine.”
9. In January 1970, Life reported, “Scientists have solid experimental and theoretical evidence to support…the following predictions: In a decade, urban dwellers will have to wear gas masks to survive air pollution…by 1985 air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching earth by one half….”
10. Ecologist Kenneth Watt told Time that, “At the present rate of nitrogen buildup, it’s only a matter of time before light will be filtered out of the atmosphere and none of our land will be usable.”
11. Barry Commoner predicted that decaying organic pollutants would use up all of the oxygen in America’s rivers, causing freshwater fish to suffocate.
12. Paul Ehrlich chimed in, predicting in 1970 that “air pollution…is certainly going to take hundreds of thousands of lives in the next few years alone.” Ehrlich sketched a scenario in which 200,000 Americans would die in 1973 during “smog disasters” in New York and Los Angeles.
13. Paul Ehrlich warned in the May 1970 issue of Audubon that DDT and other chlorinated hydrocarbons “may have substantially reduced the life expectancy of people born since 1945.” Ehrlich warned that Americans born since 1946…now had a life expectancy of only 49 years, and he predicted that if current patterns continued this expectancy would reach 42 years by 1980, when it might level out. (Note: According to the most recent CDC report, life expectancy in the US is 78.8 years).
14. Ecologist Kenneth Watt declared, “By the year 2000, if present trends continue, we will be using up crude oil at such a rate…that there won’t be any more crude oil. You’ll drive up to the pump and say, `Fill ‘er up, buddy,’ and he’ll say, `I am very sorry, there isn’t any.'”
15. Harrison Brown, a scientist at the National Academy of Sciences, published a chart in Scientific American that looked at metal reserves and estimated the humanity would totally run out of copper shortly after 2000. Lead, zinc, tin, gold, and silver would be gone before 1990.
16. Sen. Gaylord Nelson wrote in Look that, “Dr. S. Dillon Ripley, secretary of the Smithsonian Institute, believes that in 25 years, somewhere between 75 and 80 percent of all the species of living animals will be extinct.”
17. In 1975, Paul Ehrlich predicted that “since more than nine-tenths of the original tropical rainforests will be removed in most areas within the next 30 years or so, it is expected that half of the organisms in these areas will vanish with it.”
18. Kenneth Watt warned about a pending Ice Age in a speech. “The world has been chilling sharply for about twenty years,” he declared. “If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age.”

Wolf! Wolf!

I would have loved to hear a green day alarmist actually predict the energy industry was going to swap to cheaper and cleaner natural gas and also use coal scrubbing technology on all coal plants, all without government involvement.

Nuclear is superior, if the alarmists can be silenced long enough.

I agree that nuclear is a far better option than anything else we currently have available. I personally pin my hopes on cold fusion, but that is both experimental and highly theoretical. This being said, nuclear power is subject to its own downfalls, but nothing that mitigates its superiority as an energy source. I just find it funny that renewable energy sources were posed as such a clear and obvious alternative, when in reality they are not.

None of the energy sources reliant on the sun (sun creates wind too) are actually renewable. Toxic waste from turbines and panels won't be simply shipped off to China like we could in the 80's. China won't take any of it now.

Yes, true, both the sun and the materials required to harness its radiance are finite in their existence. However, that period of time required for any significant toll to be taken on those resources is so large that it becomes irrelevant. The toxic waste produced from 'renewable' sources is minuscule, yet still should be a consideration.

That's actually not true. the amount of fossil fuels required to manufacture the amount of turbines and panels to meet current Electric grid capacity is much more than you think. Toxic waste was just another problem.

By human standards, the amount of resources needed to construct these turbines and panels is considerable. Put that into the context of natural resources still out there and the lifespan of the sun, and it becomes minuscule. We wont run out of light or the means to harness it any time soon. However, they are expensive in terms of economic impact and destructive to the environment within their own right.

Anywhoo, to avoid getting into an argument that is only indirectly related to the topic, let's settle on agreeing that nuclear energy is a viable alternative and these 'renewable' energy sources are not the single solution to reversing climate change.

I'm just saying "renewable" is very misleading. There are all sorts of components that go into a solar panel that are not renewable at all.

I don't disagree. 'Renewable' is not an accurate term, but sometimes inaccurate terms need to be used in the context of a conversation.

For the time being.

Insults aside, do you own sources of alternative energy?  If not, your advocating for fixing something that not even yourself fixes.  This is hypocrisy.

Nah...he just wants to ignore the science of electricity drop off due to resistance in power lines, making power transfers from day side to night side a pipedream. It's also a problem with solar farms in deserts located far away from cities.

 

Most Hybrid-Franken-Trumpanzee see LINK  souls are dark with narcissism, lies and deceit. Sunshine of truth is visible light to vampire human.

Billions of galaxies and trillions of worlds.......and what of EARTH ?

The humans could care less about the world they INFEST - DEGRADE  - MUTILATE otherwise the statement would not be relevant.

It is inevitable that this small orb end up like one of its neighbor planets: VENUS or MARS...a better example would be Earth's MOON

just a short distance away and completely barren of life as it is known on EARTH,  pockmarked with crater impressions, and no atmosphere...

Earth ends up as a barren cinder of a world floating like the other planets around a sun which itself will ultimately end up as a brown dwarf

On a Galactic timeline EARTH amounts to a "SO WHAT"  !   another planet bites the dust as trillions of others have over the eons..SO WHAT

Will the HUMAN PARASITES have learned a LESSON ?  as they attempt to venture out into the unknown beyond the world they DESTROYED ?

............NO............they will carry their DISEASE of POWER and CONTROL to other worlds and species ?  they are PARASITES.....seeking a 

new host....nothing more....these pathetic creatures are in denial of what their species truly is...especially towards themselves...

Soon enough the humans will encounter predators of them....by other species.....just a matter of time...

For NOW the humans are the greatest THREAT to themselves and all other life forms inhabiting this world.....the EARTH does not need HUMANS

to exist...so regardless of outcome to the HUMANS...EARTH will continue in whatever state it exists in regardless...

The HUMANS are a temporary glitch in the span of time....