Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

-1=e^ipi

Members
  • Content Count

    4,631
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

-1=e^ipi last won the day on July 5 2018

-1=e^ipi had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

73 Excellent

About -1=e^ipi

  • Rank
    Full Member

Profile Information

  • Location
    Gender: Agender. Gender roles are dumb.

Recent Profile Visitors

12,831 profile views
  1. So to you, the value of the work of a scientist depends on the policy outcomes they support? Even if they are a well respected climate scientist who is director of the NASA Goddard Institute of Space Studies? The value of the work of a scientist depends on the merits of their arguments and methodologies in their scientific work.
  2. I've explained my various aspects of my position before, not my fault if its too nuanced for you. I support a global pigouvian tax to internalize the externalities of CO2, CH4 and N2O. I think that integrated assessment models, such as those by William Nordhaus, who won the Nobel memorial prize in economics last year, are the best methods we have to evaluate the optimum taxation level. It does not make sense to ignore the free rider problem while trying to get to a global pigouvian tax. I agree with mainstream climate science as it is very well supported if you look at the scientific papers.
  3. On this topic, here is a statement by Gavin Schmidt, a lead climate scientist in NASA: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2019/02/the-best-case-for-worst-case-scenarios/ "But some things can be examined and ruled out. Imminent massive methane releases that are large enough to seriously affect global climate are not going to happen (there isn’t that much methane around, the Arctic was warmer than present both in the early Holocene and last interglacial and nothing similar has occurred). Neither will a massive oxygen depletion event in the ocean release clouds of hydrogen sulfide poisoning all life on land. Insta-freeze conditions driven by a collapse in the North Atlantic circulation (cf. “The Day After Tomorrow”) can be equally easily discounted. " Eyeball, in your opinion, is Gavin Schmidt a naysayer or troll?
  4. This is an interesting misrepresentation tactic that you are employing. We were discussing mainstream estimates of climate changes by mainstream climate economists (such as Nordhaus) who use mainstream climate science to create their mainstream estimates. But then you try to associate my position to that of "a handful of naysayers and trolls"? Please, don't misrepresent me.
  5. I invite you to look at the empirical estimates of the damages of climate change, by economists such as William Nordhaus, who won the noble memorial prize last year. I fail to see how the magnitude of damages are anywhere close enough to lead to mass global conflict. If you disagree then please publish your empirically-based extinction or conflict model in a peer reviewed scientific model. I look forward to reading your peer reviewed paper.
  6. I don't think I've used that terminology in the past. However, the Sahel region of Africa getting wetter due to increased atmospheric CO2 is supported by general climate models. As the Earth warms, its jet streams are pushed poleward, which will make some places, such as the Sahel region, wetter, and other places, such as California, drier. With respect to people misunderstanding the magnitude of climate change, good examples include the Extinction Rebellion in the UK and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez claiming that the word will end in 12 years. The magnitude of climate change simply isn't large enough to be an extinction risk to humans. We should still internalize externalities with a pigouvian tax on CO2, CH4 and N2O, but that's quite a different policy than what some of the ban-everything people in the green movement want to do.
  7. I don't understand what you are trying to convey? You disagree with climate change?
  8. I don't think that underscore is the correct verb to use in this sentence. As a result, it is unclear to me what meaning you are trying to convey. With respect to the green narrative's relationship with reality. There are many groups that misunderstand the magnitude of the problem. You have many denier groups that misunderstand the problem, but also various eco-groups that think that the problem is orders of magnitude larger than it is. The correct and mainstream scientific position is that a doubling of atmospheric CO2 increases the global mean surface temperature by 1.5 to 4.5 degrees celcius. Until you have a political group that points out divergences between mainstream climate science and claims by eco-justice people, the greens will continue to gain power.
  9. All of the parties have weak, and often inconsistent, arguments on climate change. Given the arguments available, the greens arguably have the most convincing/best arguments. They will continue to gain power as long as their narrative is not adequately challenged; this will not happen any time in the near future.
  10. Arguably Bernier has clarified his position in this tweet: So he's not against condemning white supremacy, he's pointing out hypocrisy. That could have been made much clearer a few weeks ago...
  11. Why would I vote for Scheer, when I dislike both Scheer and Trudeau? Scheer is a freedom hating conservative, who doesn't want gays to marry, doesn't want marijuana legal, and wants to sell our country to the dairy cartel. If you and Scheer want my vote so badly, you need to make concessions! Maybe start with abolishing the socialist supply management system, which makes food unnecessarily expensive for poor people and harms our trading relationship with other countries.
  12. There are no good options to vote for. Maybe consider voting for the Libertarian Party as a protest vote.
  13. I agree... but a comment by Trudeau doesn't justify the comment by Bernier.
  14. Boss? I don't support Trudeau. I was supportive of the PPC up until this comment by Bernier. If your interpretation of what Mr. Bernier said is what Mr. Bernier meant, then Mr. Bernier could clarify things. Yet he chooses not to.
  15. Here is a recent article related to this topic: https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2019/04/25/berniers-party-encouraged-organizers-to-court-radical-fringe-group-votes_a_23717471/?utm_hp_ref=ca-homepage
×
×
  • Create New...