http://phys.org/news/2016-05-sea-level-islands-solomons.html
These islands are gone or greatly reduced and whole villages have been moved and that land is gone forever now, not to come back.
But, no big deal, right? Lots of land left around the world.
Besides, all that extra CO2 is helping grow bigger plants, right?
08 May 16
Originally posted by sonhouseBut....it was only a few years ago a conservative lawmaker brought a snowball to work to prove to his fellow lawmakers there is no global warming. Does this mean he was wrong?? 😲😲😲
http://phys.org/news/2016-05-sea-level-islands-solomons.html
These islands are gone or greatly reduced and whole villages have been moved and that land is gone forever now, not to come back.
But, no big deal, right? Lots of land left around the world.
Besides, all that extra CO2 is helping grow bigger plants, right?
08 May 16
Originally posted by sonhouseIn the case of the Solomon Islands, the people can be moved. The only real question is whether we are morally responsible to share in the cost of moving them.
http://phys.org/news/2016-05-sea-level-islands-solomons.html
These islands are gone or greatly reduced and whole villages have been moved and that land is gone forever now, not to come back.
But, no big deal, right? Lots of land left around the world.
I must note that humans have reclaimed far more land than has been lost, so the worlds land masses are increasing.
The real pain will come when very expensive properties start to be affected. Then people will realise that it would have been cheaper to do something about it sooner.
08 May 16
Originally posted by vivifyThere is no need to raise taxes. Why does everyone seem to think higher taxes are the only way to deal with climate change? Taxes are a powerful policy instrument but it is where the taxes are that count not how large they are. What we need it better focused taxes. So for example stop subsidising fossil fuels with tax money.
The destruction of the world isn't worth the possibility of raising taxes to prevent it.
Originally posted by twhiteheadI agree. I was merely pointing out that *if* the need to raise taxes in order to deal with climate change arises, it's not the worst reason to do so. The mere possibility of raising taxes seems to be enough for conservatives to dismiss the seriousness of climate change.
There is no need to raise taxes. Why does everyone seem to think higher taxes are the only way to deal with climate change? Taxes are a powerful policy instrument but it is where the taxes are that count not how large they are. What we need it better focused taxes. So for example stop subsidising fossil fuels with tax money.
Originally posted by sonhouseScientists keep promising that Washington DC and New York and the left coast will one day be under water.
http://phys.org/news/2016-05-sea-level-islands-solomons.html
These islands are gone or greatly reduced and whole villages have been moved and that land is gone forever now, not to come back.
But, no big deal, right? Lots of land left around the world.
Besides, all that extra CO2 is helping grow bigger plants, right?
Well why aren't they yet? I'm getting pretty pissed. ðŸ˜
I plan on doing my part by eating an extra can of beans every day and buying another SUV and having about 30 kids.
09 May 16
Originally posted by whodeyAnd move to Denver. And you can legally get stoned too. Co-incidental?
Scientists keep promising that Washington DC and New York and the left coast will one day be under water.
Well why aren't they yet? I'm getting pretty pissed. ðŸ˜
I plan on doing my part by eating an extra can of beans every day and buying another SUV and having about 30 kids.