What I can do to Reduce the Effect of Climate Change in the Future

I thought i saw a change in your recent posts,Farmer . Welcome to the light side of the Force.

Just one point in the massive evidence for human climate change, of which frugoal is clearly unawarr. There are natural processes which kept Co2 at cosistent levels over time, by sequestering carbon in carbon sinks, foexample by dead plant material being buried and taken out of circulation.Over milliomns of years of pressure and devay, that became our fosxsil fuels. We are burning millions od tons of that carbonsequpesotper. Oover millions of years. and putting it back in thpe armopsphere and natural processes work too slowly to cope. Yes climate chosnge isreal. Yes we are the caus. Yes it is FRUGAL1 who is the HOAX.

I only made three statements of fact. Can you refute even one with evidence to the contrary?
I only asked you to draw one conclusion. Is that too hard for you little butterfly? Does it require too much thinking for your little butterfly brain? Or do you have to go ask Uncle Donny if it's OK to do some of your own thinking?
Do you reject these ideas because you think they're wrong, or do you reject them based on who they're coming from?


If it's fraud, show me. Prove I'm wrong and I'll admit it and thank you for it as well.

That's you and your kind - you are denialists of common sense.
You can't find any evidence to support your claims, so you make **** up.
Pathetic.

Glad you shared that. Your opinion carries much weight.

Light as a feather...

I've shown you evidence. If you know of some other, present it to me. Or refute mine. You won't do either because you don't know what you're talking about, you're just repeating crap you've seen on BS websites.
I'm giving you the chance to present a reasonable argument and all you can do is insult me. What kind of a conversation is that? Trading insults is what children do. Is that it, Frug. Are you a twelve year old trapped in an adults body?

You've shared fabricated 'evidence' from fake BS web sites.

Somebody owes you a brain...

The USDA,which farmers base billions of dollars in crop decision on, has moved its cimate zones one zone north because of climate change since the 60s. Common sebse enough for you?

That means somebody's climate zone has moved one zone south.
Common sense dictates that there is an equal & opposite reaction to every change.

Do you understand the concept?

Climate change is not tied to human activity, we just react & adapt to what the planet does because we have no control over it.

That is stupid and false. Is there an equal and opposite reaction to an atomic bomb? To the sun warming the earth? Your scienve sucks.

when Fugg'l speaks, I see the rising trend of govt by the kakistocrats.

Scince by the Christian SCientists.
Race relations by the KKK
Foreign diplomacy by the homeboys

No. Ii means everybody'zones moved one zone north becsuse more of the sun' vheat has been trapped by more greeenhouse gasses in the atmospere.

As it relates to 'carbon footprint', the problem doesn't go away even if they stay where they are.

So, to all the alarmists out there, again, what are ya gonna do?

If you are serious your belief in global warming, logically we should be talking about how to deal with it, not the impossible task of stopping it (unless of course we adopt a policy of genocide).

I'll start.

First: Stop belly-aching about costal development. The most aggressive estimates of sea level rise put the problem at least 100 years away. Right away we should stop subsidizing costal development with federally subsidized flood insurance (why did we ever have it?). Then let the market decide when we abandon the 'old' waterfront with development. Nobody will care about those 100 year old buildings anyway, they would probably would have been torn down anyway.

Second: If you're serious about reducing CO2, lose your stupid aversion to nuclear power. Learn how to do it safely and economically instead. Stop your stupid 'not in my backyard' **** about nuclear waste. We spent over $10B on the safest possible nuclear waste storage site and then abandoned it because of NIMBY. And then left all the waste sitting around where it was in 'barrels' you stupid fucks!

Sorry, I got carried away. Stepping away from the soapbox now.
Any other ideas?

Its interesting that, in most coastl US states North of the Gulf, this argument about "subsidizing coastal development" is a party line issue. GOP wants to continue the subsidies by guaranteeing the first dollar of all claims to rebuild, whereas the Dems want to guarantee the first dollar AFTER a private sourced insurance ( thus putting ALL the responsibility of, say, the first 10 million on the homeowner and the developers)

I think in Fla and Louisiana its non partisan issue, both the Dems and the GOP are in the home-builders pockets.

Nuke power needs to be rethought for increased designs of Th reactors and molten salt reactors .

Anytime farmerman speaks, the room grows darker... let the bright light of truth shine

There was a push on, i dont know how far it got , to change flood insurrance to ONCE. You get the money to rebuild or get out once.. After that it is only on you. Its not open ended

There! I just wanted to see that again.

Thermo dynamically youre right. Weve probably gotten to qn almost "no turning back" point now. We can stall an inevitable sea level rise until the planet decides to turn back to a cryogenic future by the addition of all this ice cold fresh water into the ocan streams like the post Wisconsin Ice Age period when a "presumpscott" depositional environment occured in the high latitudes of the North.

Absolutely.

Not to say we stop renewable wind & solar when they make sense. I still can't find good numbers on whether they do or not, and I've tried. Are these incredibly cheap solar panels on my roof just the result of Chinese subsidies and prolusion there or what.