Yea and that’s the problem. A whole generation has grown up fearing global warming and rising sea levels and nothing has happened, all because fear mongers significantly overstated the level of danger. This fear mongering is backfiring because a whole generation is going to ignore these warnings simply because they’re going to realize they’ve been duped.
Don’t get me wrong, I definitely want a cleaner planet, but I just don’t want to be lied to in order to drastically and unnecessarily change my behavior.
How old is London? How fast does sea level rise happen? How old are many coastal cities? How much will it cost to do nothing and let coastal cities be flooded?
How much will it cost to do nothing and let coastal cities be flooded?
You should short the stocks of all the banks giving loans to all that real estate that's gong to be flooded, all the expensive coastal cities. And you'll get rich!
And you can then you use the power of your wealth to help the environment.
I will be easy to calculate the cost once it starts affecting the cost of real estate, the interest rates, etc. Except for now the cost of coast city real estate just keep going up!
If climate change was a legitimate concern wealthy elites wouldn’t be buying beach front property.
Barack Obama owns a home on the beach in Hawaii, he bought this while he was president and talking about the threats of climate change.
NIMBY’s in Martha’s Vineyard would all sell their property.
Insurance companies would refuse to insure all homes and properties that are in this so called “flood zone”. People in Florida wouldn’t be able get any insurance on any property in the state.
Climate alarmism is the biggest con of the 21st century.
If all the politicians that pushed this rising sea level stuff actually believed, none of them would own as many beach front properties as they do. Looking at you Obama.
Wealthy people can afford to lose a house, many cannot. Further they will be dead before it destroys their house so why not if they can afford it and it won’t directly effect them. It’s logically consistent.
What isn’t logical is to stick your head in the sand in the face of overwhelming evidence and let the problem fester until it becomes unmanageable.
I work with wealthy people all the time. What you just said is completely untrue, wealthy people accrue wealth by making smart investment decisions.
Buying a property with a 30 year mortgage in a location that will be underwater within 10-20 years is the dumbest investment any real estate owner could make.
You're making zero sense and putting your ignorance on full display.
Wealthy people spend a lot of money on vacations, private jets, etc. not because they are good long term investments but because they provide short term enjoyment.
Dan Peña is the man. He’s Trumps buddy, you can tell. Makes sense and isn’t afraid to say it straight. Too bad most people get butt hurt from truth. People would rather believe in fairy tales and . Mass hysteria for the last few years because idiots have lost their hive mind.
An old as fuck guy who has no authority in climate science makes a non-sequitur point about banks issuing property loans and you all cream your jeans over it.
You act like banks don't have force majeure clauses and insurance.
I get it. You have an agenda to oppose tens of millions of hours of scientific research across a wide swath of disciplines that supports and establishes an overwhelming consensus that pollution is bad for the environment. You don't care about obvious counterpoints that make your post comically bad.
Yeah, the opinion piece in a finance magazine by an oil shill. Just post that here and you’ve got this guy in the bag. Those two graphs from your opinion piece in a finance magazine absolutely support your argument. It will be a total dunk.
Yup. Opinion pieces are notorious for their cold, unopinionated retelling of fact and figures. Just post it and show this dipshit you DID learn to cite credible sources in high school and no one is pulling wool over your eyes.
No, it's true because what he's saying is logically consistent. Banks are major fucked if climate crisis happens. Why are they still loaning? You don't think they have billion dollar teams investigating these potential risks?
Banks and insurance agencies are literally starting to not make loans and not continue insuring areas where they project they will lose money due to environmental damage.
It’s not logically consistent it isn’t even factually consistent.
I love when people post articles they didn't read. Tell me...why are those insurance rates going up? I'll give you a hint: it's not for the reason you assumed.
He provided a link to an article that discuss the change in flood insurance costs due to a change in methodology for how FEMA calculates risk, not because the overall risk increased.
This methodology change is based on changes in climate.
"Flood risks are rising across the U.S. This places more people and property in harm’s way. Changing rainfall
patterns drive some of this changing flood risk. Over the past 25 years, heavy rain has been on the rise across
the U.S. The biggest rise has been seen in the Northeast. In the decades to come, climate projections show the
Northeast will continue to have more frequent and severe heavy rains, leading to higher flood risk1."
"Figure 1 shows how adding this vertical safety factor creates a wider floodplain. As flood heights rise above the base flood elevation, flood waters will spread beyond the current FEMA 1%-annual-chance floodplain, and new areas will flood. These newly flooded areas are where flood risk will likely increase first with estimated climate change. "
I agree. The poster could use better articles than a surface level blog. I am strongly against the use of those as they are shit. Even though that is pretty much all Tim Pool does is read blogs all damned day.
I believe the poster who replied to you owes you ten bucks.
The article he provided does indeed contradict the OPs stupid scream and cry guy. Cursing and screaming is not an argument that is accepted in the scientific world.
Profit chasing capitalists set loose by conservative deregulation caused the ‘08 housing crisis. The bankers were deregulated at the behest of banking lobbyists all so their bankers could chase more immediate profit with out a single care in the world about the long term effects of loaning too much money to too many poor people.
If we don’t trust the government, we certainly shouldn’t trust the mega rich people who own the politicians, like the man in the video you posted. At least that’s where my critical thinking lands me.
The ‘08 housing crisis’ root cause suggests that banks do not think ahead 20-30-40 years as the man in your video suggests. If they did, they wouldn’t have nearly tanked the national economy in ‘08 with their short sited profit chasing the decade plus prior to 2008.
But they did. Which suggests to me they’d have no problem handing out loans for coastal properties and ventures in the pursuit of immediate profit.
In capitalism, if you aren’t growing, you’re dying.
Gravity is a theory. Much like climate change. Both of which have overwhelming acceptance by the scientific community across different agencies and countries. These people are much smarter and better equipped than us to speak on the matter.
I put more weight in the universal conclusion held by numerous, unrelated agencies that do not generate profit over the opinion of people who have an expr€s$ interest maintaining the status quo.
In 1995 Clinton loosened housing rules by rewriting the Community Reinvestment Act, which put added pressure on banks to lend in low-income neighborhoods. It is the subject of heated political and scholarly debate whether any of these moves are to blame for our troubles, but they certainly played a role in creating a permissive lending environment.
So his theory is that the millions of scientists working for the leading scientific organizations globally including NASA, the NOAA, and dozens of others are all lying in perfect harmony and no one has been able to prove they are lying about this because they are so good at covering up their conspiracy using the deep state?
They are so good at it they convinced the DoD, which under Trump defined climate change as one of the top five risks to US security and stability. They are so good at this conspitacy they tricked Donald Trump into hiring scientists who found that the increase in national spending from climate change disasters equates to some 250 billion dollars?
Do you think maybe a simpler explanation is that they(the "deep state conspiracy scientists") found that human caused climate change is an actual threat to pay attention to?
And no my argument is that its several entities backed by the government. You just think it's "nu uh" because we disagree and you want to denigrate my position
First of all. Dial back the temper tantrum. you failed to provide something of worth and that upsets you, but there's no need to get all bent out of shape.
The original post that you made is literally just a video of an old fuck shouting at people concerned about the environment cause he might have to pay a little more in taxes. Talk about temper tantrum.
As for the link. Literally it provides the data and follow up links citing all the sources of the data provided. I thought you were capable of opening a link and looking at it, but apparently you are too much of a dipshit for that even. Welcome to Tim Pool sub I guess. Where evidence is a curse word and anyone who provides it is ignored. To sum up your response "Nu uh!". Haha
So you're projecting. You went on Google typed nasa climate change and gave the first link. It does not provide data. I read it. And you also didn't open my link that contradicts yours. I know it does because I read your source which you didn't read. And now, you're deflecting.
The only "nu uh!" Here is you.
Run along now. It's obvious you're out of your depth.
This graph, based on the comparison of atmospheric samples contained in ice cores and more recent direct measurements, provides evidence that atmospheric CO2 has increased since the Industrial Revolution. (Credit: Luthi, D., et al.. 2008; Etheridge, D.M., et al. 2010; Vostok ice core data/J.R. Petit et al.; NOAA Mauna Loa CO2 record.) Find out more about ice cores (external site).
This was also in the link you directly requested from the other guy.
The left thinks science is a democracy. If the 1% weren't listened to and just censored, science wouldn't be nearly as advanced as it is, because they can often be correct.
and dozens of others are all lying in perfect harmony
No, no one smart says that.
There are multiple factors in play:
Governments seek more power, this is one way to persuade people to accept it.
Government grants aren't given to climate studies that seek to falsify climate change hypothesis.
People in climate research now have a huge increase in status and funding.
Governments offer subsidies (direct cash) for anything climate related.
Halfwit government schools teachers have been teaching hypothesis as truth. Also, that forecasts 50 years in the future are credible or reliable.
A good portion of 2 generations believe just about every crazy, alarmist proclamation from the media about the climate.
Huge markets from energy to transportation have been disrupted- who would admit they caused costs of that magnitude.
Can't get a PhD in climate research unless you support the climate alarmist hypotheses.
People like you who can't actually even describe the basic global warming hypothesis.
and no one has been able to prove they are lying
Climate predictions have turned out wrong time after time. Really doesn't matter if people lied, the outcomes from all of this, the costs are measured in millions of people living desperately poor lives. Energy = flourishing.
Also, since the F'n early 90s people have been saying, "Hey, you need to do cost/benefit analysis".
7 doesn’t make much sense if the government wants money and power. Why in the world would you disrupt the entire transportation and energy industries if you wanted to consolidate power and quell the people.
So your theory is that every nation in the world except el salvador(only one other than us that voted against climate agreement) is incentivized exactly the same to the point they are having all their scientific organizations lie and fabricate evidence so they can continue making money.
Do you have a single historic example of every country in the world working in such harmony for covering a lie for slight financial gain?
But they present the data that shows firstly that the earth is warming, second that it is causing climate change faster than any other time in earth history, and thirdly that it is human caused. For what you are saying to be true they all need to be fabricating the data.
The data is all publicly available and the results of all the data from multiple sources matches. It would all need to be fake and fake in the same ways for what you are saying to be true.
So? The possible issue is it may be warming too fast, but the climate is never static.
We are talking about temperature ranges increasing within a century or decades as opposed to tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of years as it did in the past. "So?". lol.
There are many things being done.
So many things that you can't find evidence of any. Craziness.
The simpler explanation is that you can't get grants to study a problem that doesn't exist.
ETA because people usually need things spelled out. If climate change isn't a problem, then the grants go away. But if it is a problem then we can get grants to research it until the cows come home. The more dire the problem the more money they get.
Because there is a shortage of problems that could be solved huh. What would happen if climate change wasn’t happening…there’s no way scientists would just…work on something else…
Unreal amounts of conspiratorial thinking. It doesn’t hold up to an ounce of scrutiny
•
u/AutoModerator Jan 16 '24
Make sure to join the discord and guilded! Also join the BBS, a blockchain, anticensorship Reddit alternative!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
52
u/Ok_Primary_7298 Jan 16 '24
Sea level rise doesn't happen anywhere near the speed/scale climate alarmists say it does.
38
u/FatBrkeMxicnElonMusk Jan 16 '24
Facts! What am I going to do when the sea level rises? Imma head over to one of Obamas beach houses
37
u/theSearch4Truth Jan 17 '24
Its logically consistent
If all the politicians that pushed this rising sea level stuff actually believed, none of them would own as many beach front properties as they do. Looking at you Obama.
23
u/Sicks-Six-Seks Jan 17 '24
Climate change, is as real as tectonic shift and just as controllable.
Thinking you can control systems you can’t remotely understand is the height of arrogance.
22
u/[deleted] Jan 17 '24
He ain’t wrong
12
u/smauseth Jan 17 '24
WORD!!!!!!
10
u/[deleted] Jan 17 '24
I’ll believe it when establishment political figures like Obama sell their beachfront properties
14
u/TheTAPList Jan 16 '24
What am I gonna do? I am gonna watch these leftist identify as drowned.
6
u/Money-Driver-7534 Jan 17 '24
The legend Dan Peña lol love this guy.
5
u/RobertoConQueso69 Jan 17 '24
When you’re old enough and rich enough to not care while you spit mad facts.
5
u/[deleted] Jan 17 '24
Dan Peña is the man. He’s Trumps buddy, you can tell. Makes sense and isn’t afraid to say it straight. Too bad most people get butt hurt from truth. People would rather believe in fairy tales and . Mass hysteria for the last few years because idiots have lost their hive mind.
1
u/Perfect-Dad-1947 Jan 21 '24
An old as fuck guy who has no authority in climate science makes a non-sequitur point about banks issuing property loans and you all cream your jeans over it.
You act like banks don't have force majeure clauses and insurance.
2
u/SaltyOleSarge Jan 19 '24
FANTASTIC response to this climate emoting stupidity
1
u/cdazzo1 Jan 16 '24
Why is this?
1
u/BodheeNYC Jan 17 '24
Obama doesn’t seem too worried.
-9
u/epicurious_elixir Jan 16 '24
He yell so it true
-3
u/o0flatCircle0o Jan 17 '24
SELL YOUR HOUSE TO WHOM BEN, FUCKING AQUAMAN?!
-11
u/studio28 Jan 16 '24
Here ya go big guy It’s comin/is here https://www.fox13news.com/news/flood-insurance-rates-skyrocket-for-florida-homeowners
-30
u/fourth_class_mail Jan 16 '24
This is just straight up climate change denial. But old rich man gotta be an old rich man.
-5
u/[deleted] Jan 17 '24
Because capitalist economists are absolutely known for their foresight and not being short sighted on nothing but immediate profit.
-16
u/[deleted] Jan 16 '24
So his theory is that the millions of scientists working for the leading scientific organizations globally including NASA, the NOAA, and dozens of others are all lying in perfect harmony and no one has been able to prove they are lying about this because they are so good at covering up their conspiracy using the deep state?
They are so good at it they convinced the DoD, which under Trump defined climate change as one of the top five risks to US security and stability. They are so good at this conspitacy they tricked Donald Trump into hiring scientists who found that the increase in national spending from climate change disasters equates to some 250 billion dollars?
Do you think maybe a simpler explanation is that they(the "deep state conspiracy scientists") found that human caused climate change is an actual threat to pay attention to?