Quote from: cool4y on November 20, 2018, 07:39:24 AM

Quote from: bones261 on November 16, 2018, 05:07:20 PM

Quote from: Spendulus on November 16, 2018, 04:57:36 PM

All right, let's go back to that assertion. I understood it and rejected it.

Let's break this down into two pieces, and handle the "why" first. This is a logical fallacy, as it creates a choice between "the moral and ethical" and "the corrupt and lying." (or whatever)

That's not hardly ever all there is as to the range of motivations for individuals let alone groups.
Basically it's lying by presenting two false choices. It's no more authentic than your using arguments of ridicule, or implying that someone that doesn't agree with you is a conspiracy wacko.

Secondly let's look at "steps taken to solve climate change."

Proposed steps singly or jointly have not been shown to have any more than a tiny effect on Co2 concentration.

Thirdly let's consider "create sustainable, renewable energy systems."

Many of these are over promised, overly expensive, underperforming junk.

"Fourth let's look at "getting rid of CO2 is good."

More logical fallacies. Corrected, the assertion would be "A 1% reduction in human CO2 emissions has XYZ value." No it is not a priori good to "get rid of CO2." CO2 is a natural part of the atmosphere and the earth and ocean.

I'll have to agree. Plant life needs CO2 in order to survive. The goal is to get the amount of CO2 at some kind of equilibrium rather than eliminate it completely.

I couldn't agree more CO2 is essential for lifeanimals exhale it, plants sequester it. It exists in Earth's atmosphere in comparably small concentrations, but is vital for sustaining life. Since the Industrial Revolution, energy-driven consumption of fossil fuels has led to a rapid increase in CO2 emissions, disrupting the global carbon cycle and leading to a planetary warming impact. The issues arise when there is excessive amount of CO2.

But we haven't come close to excessive amounts of CO2. Excessive amounts would be when there is more than enough to:
Warm and melt the poles;
Make Siberia, Northern Canada, and Antarctica habitable;
Put enough moisture into the atmosphere (via heat) to water the Sahara;
Make atmospheric water to be enough to block bad cosmic radiation;
Make atmospheric water enough so that the cosmic radiation that gets through turns the water into H2O2 so that multitudes of deadly diseases are killed off by peroxide bleaching;
Etc.

All this is why the one-worlders are making CO2 look bad. If there were more CO2 in the atmosphere, all of the above would happen, populations would explode, the one-worlders would lose control, we wouldn't need a medical, and people could become free, healthier, and happy.

Cool