Deaths from climate change

shop deals on amazon
Advertise with us
Shop deals on ebay
GroupDIY Audio Forum

Help Support GroupDIY Audio Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Jane Fonda has espoused her new theory about climate change at the Cannes film festival.... There is a chance that she was trying to gin up some publicity for her movies.

Hanoi Jane said:
Jane Fonda issued a stark warning about climate change on Saturday while placing the blame on white men.

“We’ve got about seven, eight years to cut ourselves in half of what we use of fossil fuels, and unfortunately, the people that have the least responsibility for it are hit the hardest — Global South, people on islands, poor people of color,” the “Book Club: The Next Chapter” actress said at the Cannes Film Festival.

“It is a tragedy that we have to absolutely stop. We have to arrest and jail those men — they’re all men [behind this].”

The two-time Oscar winner added that climate change would not be possible without racism or the patriarchy, in which “white men,” she said, are at the top.

“It’s good for us all to realize, there would be no climate crisis if there was no racism. There would be no climate crisis if there was no patriarchy. A mindset that sees things in a hierarchical way,” she argued. “White men are the things that matter and then everything else [is] at the bottom.”
Click to expand...

I apologize for sharing this and lowering the IQ of the discussion.

JR
 
ruffrecords said:
Because it takes a lot more money to sink a stand into the sea to fit your windmill on and a lot more money to ensure it and its cables will withstand the hostile environment. Proibably costs a lot more to go out and fix it if it goes wrong too. All these factors are reflected in the price of the juice.

Cheers

Ian
Click to expand...
Aha ok.
 
user 37518 said:
The way you refer to human beings and discard them, and the way you refer to the Earth as if it is the most sacred thing, shows that something is seriously flawed with your way of thinking. But that is not unique to you, it is a common trait in those who define themselves as "tolerant" and "humanitarians".
Click to expand...

It was sarcasm, my dear...
 
cyrano said:
They've been doing that for over a century. Wake up. They don't need your permission.
Click to expand...
I don't think they were censoring twitter and facebook a century ago. ;)

My complaint is not just big tech's involvement but our own government. PRC has very effective programs to control social discourse in China but we discovered surprises in the Twitter files dump about bad behavior by our government right here.

=====

Back on topic I am sensitive to flawed opinions about climate science presented as fact in my daily newspaper, and I consider WSJ less bad than others. Every years at the beginning of hurricane season we hear scary projections about how this years hurricane season will be the worst ever. :rolleyes: This year is no different and I have seen projections all over the place. I don't think I will board up my windows just yet.🤔

JR
 
Apparently there is some discord inside OPEC+ (the + is Russia). Because of Russia's cash needs due to Ukraine war effort, and western sanctions. Russia is shipping lots of oil at below market prices. This is disrupting the cartel's efforts to keep oil prices elevated.

JR
 
Recording Engineer said:
I followed the sarcasm. Is it that everyone is so extreme now that all ridiculousness is taken seriously?
Click to expand...
There is a lot of passive-aggressive blather between the lines (not against the rules). I personally registered it as a subtle dig (I'm old) but only responded to the matters of fact, at the time.

Others picked up on it and ran with it... Just real life on the internets.

JR

[edit- does this mean we should ASSume that Jane Fonda is just kidding? /edit]
 
Last edited:
My3gger said:
Can you please add links for two graphs to help me find more information?
Click to expand...
The second graph appears in various forms all over the place. I haven't been able to trace it's source. The further back in time, the less accurate detailed the data become. They are estimates made by various indirect means or combinations thereof.

What strikes me most about all of this is careful cherry-picking (especially in the time domain) and raw hubris, as if "the science" is settled. We certainly know more than we did 100 years ago, but there's a lot more that we don't understand about various long-time cycles and the impact of geological factors on the oceans and atmosphere among other things.
 
Last edited:
My3gger said:
Sure, if you look at where science was 300 years ago, we probably don't know much even today.
Climatologists claim that significant increase in concentration of the co2 since 50's is the result of of the fossil fuels use, causing weather changes such as atmospheric warming.
https://www.e-education.psu.edu/earth103/node/1018https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021ERL....16k4005L/abstract
Click to expand...
Science is not a popularity contest or measure of who has the most effective messaging, the climate warriors are winning at that.

The question is not whether the globe is warming, but what is the prudent response. "Zero carbon" policy will do more harm than good. Lomborg just published another book citing more substantive things to do with our limited resources.

JR
 
I just received my copy of Lomborg's new book "Best things first" where he shares his judgement of what to focus on first.

I recall a bunch of Chicago economists used to do something similar, but nobody would listen to them.

JR
 

Latest posts

Back
Top