I don’t remember iron being this dumb on 2p2.
Seems to be a new thing.
5 Likes
People aren’t just going to stay where they are and die. Many will migrate. This will cause wars. As will rich countries competing with each over an ever reducing amount of resources. Some of these wars may well be major. WAAF.
Jmakin helped teach me a while ago that it isn’t important whether you can back up your positions with logic *, the important thing is to make your debate opponent feel bad and lurkers feel bad for agreeing with him. By mocking his dumb belief, hopefully people will be less inclined to repeat climate alarmism in this venue.
Go nuts arguing with normies with whatever bullshit you want, it’s helpful for getting Ds elected and climate legislation and regs passed. But don’t actually stress out about the ridiculousness.
*It’s personally important to me, but has lite practical effect.
1 Like
yea “educating” is clearly 1 word non responses to stuff that’s very easy to look up and validate on your own
per data from the icc report for 2022, we would need to reduce our co2 emissions by 85% by 2050 to have a likely (as in, not 100%) chance of <2 C before 2100. given that our GHG emissions are actually still growing year over year, and have grown nearly 50% in the last 30 years alone - I am not as overly rosy at the outcomes here by 2100 as the non-evidence people like iron like to chuckle about. if they’re serious at all, I hope it’s because they’ve already got one foot in the grave and no children to care about, otherwise it feels extremely fucked up.
1 Like
I mean if you actually want to troll me about this you may as well go for the obvious lines like me driving a 12mpg V8 in 2022, but I guess you can also make a vague reference to an outdated op-ed i wrote several years ago on how to troll right wing deplorables on fb - ironically outing yourself as a troll by doing so
2 Likes
Yeah, its one of those tactics that Karl Rove espouses—make your opponent worry about facts or data. Kind of like
But nonetheless I think outlets like Politico and Aaron Rupar do a disservice by not framing the opponents’ arguments in the best possible light.
1 Like
To show Iron’s cards here is he’s trying to imitate the Yglesias play against climate alarmism, but sadly Iron didn’t take away the right idea. Yglesias and the centrist guys play against climate alarmism when it turns to nihilism aka being so alarmed by the climate that you say there’s nothing we can do or reject anything but Malthusian solutions
In that case yes we should have a sense of perspective and have a positive attitude that through regulation and invention we can beat climate change.
Iron just took away that he should be nonchalant about climate change against anyone being alarmed at all. But being alarmed about anything is the first step in bringing about change. A Yglesias bedbug is that lead pollution is bad and we should things to reduce it, but if the Supreme Court blocked lead regulation and someone said “that’s fucked up” and I said “so what it’s not an extential threat to humanity” then Iron would think of me as a callous shitposter
3 Likes
What in the everloving fuck?
Keep reading, it’s explained.
Pretttty sure we are already in the dark ages redux. Evangelicals will once again destroy science and we will all be fucked
1 Like
Water wars will 100% be a real thing in the next 10-15 years
1 Like
They have already been around for a long time. The first one was 2,500 BC in Samaria. Recently the Russian invasion of Ukraine was partly over water access in Crimea.
1 Like
Ah yes, I see where you outted yourself as a moron. Carry on
3 Likes
Yeah that’s definitely where things will get sticky for California. Otherwise we’re pretty self-sufficient. I’m surprised desalinization hasn’t made more progress.
1 Like
That’s where the discussion turned and ~everybody agrees with the proposition.
The terms are not defined very well: it makes sense to clarify what the time horizon is for “existential”. There are dozens of existential threats on a long enough view and mitigating the risks of many of them doesn’t require a complete upending of the economy. It’s not nearly as simple as handing every oil and gas worker a shovel and some saplings, and every truck driver an electric vehicle.
I think you need to read what he’s responding to.
I’m not sure what learning that gets you. It’s nearly an irrelevant consideration and fairly obvious. I am fully confident that if the average temp went up even 5 or 10 degrees, human beings are resourceful and adaptable enough that some will survive.
So, the chance of every last human being wiped out is basically nil. That’s obvious. Humanity in some form will undoubtedly continue to exist.
The problem is that climate change will lead to a massive amount of death and misery for people who are poor and can’t afford adaptive technologies or to move out of the hellscape that they ultimately find themselves in.
The real play is to learn that climate change will cause many, many people (mostly non Americans) to die. I’m not sure whether or not you have accomplished that yet. And if you have, it’s not clear if you give a shit.
5 Likes
uh read the room
same as it ever was