Climate Change - increasingly horrible disasters loom
...............
there is so much out there about this - I don't really need to provide a lot of sources - a quick google search will find you thousands of links
of course there are the climate change deniers
and there are those who say what little we can do won't be nearly enough
just one link:
from the article:
"Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree*: Climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities. In addition, most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position. "
couldn't resist one more link - story about Siberia, one of the coldest places on earth where there is human habitation - they now face 100 degree days and multiple wildfires caused by them
https://eos.org/articles/siberian-heat-w....
.
https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.7163473
Why climate change on the farm means a big bill for Canadian taxpayers
To get an idea of the financial toll extreme weather is taking on this country's agriculture industry, look no further than the government of Saskatchewan's books.
The Prairie province had forecast a surplus of more than $1 billion for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2024, but fresh budget documents released last month show that surplus has completely evaporated, leaving Saskatchewan with an approximate $482-million deficit for the year instead.
The reason for this dramatic reversal? In large part, drought and a resulting increase in government crop insurance payouts.
Taxpayer money already supports the agriculture industry in Canada to the tune of billions of dollars each year, and some say the bill will go up as climate change-driven natural disasters make it harder for farmers to eke out a living.
"We are going to see more droughts, more pests, the yields won't be as good," said Guillaume Lhermie, director of the Simpson Centre for Food and Agricultural Policy at the University of Calgary.
But extreme weather — from drought to wildfires to "heat domes" to flash floods — has plagued farmers from coast to coast in recent years.
Keith Currie, president of the Canadian Federation of Agriculture, said while the disaster relief funding is welcome, severe weather events are becoming so commonplace that the entire system may need to be re-evaluated.
No Luciom it ain’t great having warmer weather here …
https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.7163473
No Luciom it ain’t great having warmer weather here …
The thing killing CDN farmers is the carbon tax and the governments ideas on herbicides
Still no data on how much stuff gets produced at the end of each year anyway, I see.
Nothing else matters but let's pile the comments, the anecdotes, the financial situation of provinces (???), not the only single thing we are talking about which is, at the end of everything that's happening, HOW MUCH IS CANADA PRODUCING in agriculture?
Is it dramatically lower than in 2005? 2010? Show me
This video shook me up a bit. Sabine is very skeptical and while not a climate change denier, she was something of an anti-alarmist in the past.
Tldw: There's still a chance we might have a few decades to work on this, but it looks like we might not.
Not new to me but it's hard to understate the seriousness. War is way underestimated as a problem, the video mention it but I dont think really appreciates what the powerful countries will do when they desperately need resources. When two+ of them are competing for these resources then it could be carnage.
There is hope that isn't mentioned at all. She says that there are things we can do but we can't agree to do them. They wont be true once the impact seriously hits the rich coutries. The one 'quick' desperate measure is to block sunlight with dust - I'd still bet that will happen because it will be doable, fast acting and there will no alternative. The cosnequences in the atmosphere are unknown but who will care at that point? There is even talk of moondust in space:
The newly proposed solution uses dust readily available on the moon's surface, so it would be simpler, cheaper and more effective compared to previous methods, researchers argue. (Launching from the moon requires much less energy than launching from Earth, because lunar gravity is just one-sixth as strong as that of our planet.)
Finally!
Not new to me but it's hard to understate the seriousness. War is way underestimated as a problem, the video mention it but I dont think really appreciates what the powerful countries will do when they desperately need resources. When two+ of them are competing for these resources then it could be carnage.
There is hope that isn't mentioned at all. She says that there are things we can do but we can't agree to do them. They wont be true once
don't be surprised if we consider you guys lethal threats though
I think we should do our damdest to avoid it.
Not sure you'll be objecting to extreme desperate measures when 50+ is normal along with the accompanying ferocious weather systems..
I think we should do our damdest to avoid it.
Not sure you'll be objecting to extreme desperate measures when 50+ is normal along with the accompanying ferocious weather systems..
man well before that we have used nuclear weapons to kill poor people in third world countries and fixed the problem that way, and you know that.
ofc that scenario is never going to happen because these grotesque exaggerations are completely insane, but IF the problem actually exists we start by killing everyone in subsaharian africa and we move from there.
we might have to forget cacao but that's about it, it's not like our livelihood depend on trade with that area in any meaningful way
Blimey!
I prefer the dust to the homicidal lunacy. Still think we should try to avoid it.
if (again a scenario that is completely absurd, related to the climate) it become Mors tua vita mea, you either kill or get killed.
but any problem you think might happen would already be solved by nuclear (plants not bombs), so it just means people don't want to solve it yet.
just build more reactors per population than France did and you are done
Europe is on the verge of having a 50 degree day. Planet is still getting warmer. Sorry without some very organised policies this is coming whether you believe in it or not.
Mars is cold btw. very cold
Global Warming (which they had to rename "climate change", because 20 years ago they said by the year 2025 we were supposed to have already all been fried up dead and drowned by the ocean by now) is just another arm of a fake agenda by the global dictators to help them gain ultimate control and fulfill their plan to take over the entire planet but just becasue all you obedient demobrats vote/cheer for them it doesn't at all mean they have you're backs. They want total control over you as well, which is why President Trump always says "they're not coming after me, they're coming after you".
Global Warming (which they had to rename "climate change", because 20 years ago they said by the year 2025 we were supposed to have already all been fried up dead and drowned by the ocean by now) is just another arm of a fake agenda by the global dictators to help them gain ultimate control and fulfill their plan to take over the entire planet but just becasue all you obedient demobrats vote/cheer for them it doesn't at all mean they have y
It can both that true that people are pushing climate change to increase control and more importantly, profits and that the climate is warming leading to some ****ed up situations that needs to be addressed.
We went through this with surveillance, EVs and pharmaceuticals, precious metals and a lot of doomsday horseshit and we will continue to go through it.
Global Warming (which they had to rename "climate change", because 20 years ago they said by the year 2025 we were supposed to have already all been fried up dead and drowned by the ocean by now) is just another arm of a fake agenda by the global dictators to help them gain ultimate control and fulfill their plan to take over the entire planet but just becasue all you obedient demobrats vote/cheer for them it doesn't at all mean they have y
Who said by 2025 that ?
Is that the same kind of affirmation like the one claiming people want life in prison for trump for what he got guilty for lately about hush money ?
Or it is just usual exaggeration ?
Because I don’t remember that at all .
Still no data on how much stuff gets produced at the end of each year anyway, I see.
Nothing else matters but let's pile the comments, the anecdotes, the financial situation of provinces (???), not the only single thing we are talking about which is, at the end of everything that's happening, HOW MUCH IS CANADA PRODUCING in agriculture?
Is it dramatically lower than in 2005? 2010? Show me
if you don’t believe yield is important, greater losses isn’t an issues , higher taxes and subsidies , higher insurance cost , etc isn’t an issue on profitability well I just don’t know what to tell you .
Bigger do not mean better .
Higher gdp as a whole do not necessarily means the economy is better if gdp per capita getting much lower , despite the country producing more as a whole shrug .
Apply that to agriculture….
If we produce more but we gain less , meaning we need to produce more just to get the same , how in the hell is that a positive outcome ?
That is what climate changes do in Canada for agriculture ….
So to think with even higher temperatures for agriculture is good for us , u are very wrong .
FWIW u can see here in the last 5 years agriculture isn’t following the growth of the country .
https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/...
And here going further at like 1997 we see how agriculture gdp isn’t keeping its share in Canada economy …
https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/Canada/...
So when u say climate change is good for agriculture in Canada don’t WTF u talking about …
If Canada can heat up just a little bit, I might make a trip there every now and again
In order to save the climate, the EU just increased tariffs on chinese EV massively (not as much as Biden did, but still a lot).
As usual the left says something and acts to the contrary, when will people learn?
The EU is not the left.
It's right and going further right at a pace
I agree
For the foreigners amongst us. The president of the european comission is currently Ursula von der Leyen
Von der Leyen is a member of the centre-right Christian Democratic Union (CDU) and its affiliated europarty, the European People's Party (EPP).
The EPP: The European People's Party (EPP) is a European political party with Christian-democratic,[4] liberal-conservative,[4] and conservative[5][6] member parties.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_P...
If you really thought the EU was socialist you'd be vehemently against both it and Italy's membership of it.
The current EU commission includes socialists as part of the coalition.
The current EU commission operated socialist choices wrt the environment and green insanities.
It isn't the EU that it is socialist, it's EU specific policy choices, and the current commission, that are. The EU is just a federation of states.
In general on economics the EU is more to the right than Italy, but in recent times that changed.
Now with these elections things should change again a little toward my preferences.
The eur isn't socialism, free circulation of capitals isn't socialism, free markets aren't socialism
Well... it's pretty clear that to be a member you have to agree to free movement of people. Without that it's just the EEC.
How do you feel about that?
Well... it's pretty clear that to be a member you have to agree to free movement of people. Without that it's just the EEC.
How do you feel about that?
Now that it has been clarified it doesn't guarantee welfare, fine actually. As you can remember i am pro open borders at no welfare.
It also helps putting countries in fiscal competition between them which is a very important outcome of such a policy.
I was happy when romanian people could finally come into Italy easily and with far less bureaucracy for ex. For some of them it didn't work out well, they tried elsewhere. Many stayed succesfully.
That's how immigration is supposed to be, no burden for the failures on the country that opened the borders.
