RIP Internal Combustion Engine - General Motors to go all-electric by 2035 and carbon-neutral by 2040

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
21,915
Reaction score
4,860
Points
113
The earth has been much warmer than it is today. It has also been much colder. This was all before humans ever populated the planet. Therefore, nature will continue to make changes and neither you nor I can do anything about it.
But the changes to those temperatures happen much slower over time when they are naturally occurring. This proves that the rapid changes over the past 100-ish years are caused by humans. And so that disproves your assertion, and also proves that humans can slow down this increase by changing our behaviors.
 

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2015
Messages
9,189
Reaction score
989
Points
113
How ironic.
Farmers must change what they grow, but we can't change what we drive or how that vehicle is powered?
You even state that humans can't stop changing, yet you don't want to change from gas to something else?
No one says you can't change what you drive. Battery powered cars will do more damage to the environment and cause toxic waste.
If the market demands more electric cars, that's fine. Let the market decide. However, like ethanol, it's not the market that is driving the change, it's subsidies from socialist governments whereby friends of government power brokers get rich and others are legislated out of the market.

So, if the free market brings about the change, let the change happen.
 

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2015
Messages
9,189
Reaction score
989
Points
113
But the changes to those temperatures happen much slower over time when they are naturally occurring. This proves that the rapid changes over the past 100-ish years are caused by humans. And so that disproves your assertion, and also proves that humans can slow down this increase by changing our behaviors.
Well, since you weren't around 3 billion years ago, your assertion is simply an assertion.
It's notable that volcanic eruptions produce much, much more pollutants into the atmosphere than humans, yet somehow it's all human fault. The solar cycle is a fascinating study, yet somehow the sun can't have any responsibility for warming, it must be us tiny specks on the earth's surface that are responsible. Do you see the amazing arrogance of man in that argument? Do you see how elites wanting to exploit other humans could use that argument to make billions of dollars off from gullible humans who will drink the kool-aid of environmentalist group think?
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
21,915
Reaction score
4,860
Points
113
If the market demands more electric cars, that's fine.
That's largely what happened here. GM has seen the success of Tesla and decided that is the future, and are now trying to get out in front of that.
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
21,915
Reaction score
4,860
Points
113
Well, since you weren't around 3 billion years ago, your assertion is simply an assertion.
It's notable that volcanic eruptions produce much, much more pollutants into the atmosphere than humans, yet somehow it's all human fault. The solar cycle is a fascinating study, yet somehow the sun can't have any responsibility for warming, it must be us tiny specks on the earth's surface that are responsible. Do you see the amazing arrogance of man in that argument?
Again, the rate of change the last 100 years is what disproves your idea. There have been temperature swings, but nowhere near as fast as they've been in this very modern period.

Do you see how elites wanting to exploit other humans could use that argument to make billions of dollars off from gullible humans who will drink the kool-aid of environmentalist group think?
No. This sounds like a conspiracy idea, and I usually dismiss those since there is usually no evidence to support them.
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
46,978
Reaction score
2,725
Points
113
Then stop using the stupid right wing argument that anyone who supports the fight against climate change can only travel using commercial airplanes and not carbon-emitting private planes. Until there are safe, reliable and carbon neutral private airplanes available that's what people who can afford it are going to use. The don't have to apologize for it no matter who they are.
Socialism for thee but not for me.
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
6,209
Reaction score
3,029
Points
113
This was not about the cost of flight buts the carbon that was released from the flights. Private plans produce much more carbon on a per person basis than commercial flights do.

Which is why we need a refundable carbon dividend. Make them pay. If you use less carbon than the average person you get a nice refund each year.

This will allow the free market to find the cheapest, best ways to reduce our carbon footprint. Its the simplest plan.
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
6,209
Reaction score
3,029
Points
113
If the market demands more electric cars, that's fine. Let the market decide. However, like ethanol, it's not the market that is driving the change, it's subsidies from socialist governments whereby friends of government power brokers get rich and others are legislated out of the market.

So, if the free market brings about the change, let the change happen.
Another argument for the carbon dividend which is the climate plan the Young Republicans are pushing for.

Young Conservatives for Carbon Dividends
 

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2015
Messages
9,189
Reaction score
989
Points
113
That's largely what happened here. GM has seen the success of Tesla and decided that is the future, and are now trying to get out in front of that.
GM is a dinosaur that should be allowed to die.
 

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2015
Messages
9,189
Reaction score
989
Points
113
Again, the rate of change the last 100 years is what disproves your idea. There have been temperature swings, but nowhere near as fast as they've been in this very modern period.


No. This sounds like a conspiracy idea, and I usually dismiss those since there is usually no evidence to support them.
The rate doesn't prove anything except that the earth is heating up faster. You are attempting to make a correlation without actual causation. The cause is likely due to solar activity as well as geothermal activity. But, you can imagine us gnats are the cause of you wish. I only ask that your cronies don't legislate their sh!t on the rest of us while they fly the friendly skies.
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
6,209
Reaction score
3,029
Points
113
The rate doesn't prove anything except that the earth is heating up faster. You are attempting to make a correlation without actual causation. The cause is likely due to solar activity as well as geothermal activity. But, you can imagine us gnats are the cause of you wish. I only ask that your cronies don't legislate their sh!t on the rest of us while they fly the friendly skies.
The science behind climate change is very simple there is no dispute.

Its as simple as this. Say your camping in your tent tonight, you have a space heater that keeps your tent at 70 degrees. What will happen if I throw a thick insulated blanket over your tent and leave the heater on the same output? Do you know?

This is exactly what greenhouse gasses do to the planet!!!
 

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2015
Messages
9,189
Reaction score
989
Points
113
The science behind climate change is very simple there is no dispute.

Its as simple as this. Say your camping in your tent tonight, you have a space heater that keeps your tent at 70 degrees. What will happen if I throw a thick insulated blanket over your tent and leave the heater on the same output? Do you know?

This is exactly what greenhouse gasses do to the planet!!!
Well your hot air certainly isn't helping.
 

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2015
Messages
9,189
Reaction score
989
Points
113
The US has a much lower output than 50 years ago. Wally, move to China and protest.
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
6,209
Reaction score
3,029
Points
113
The US has a much lower output than 50 years ago. Wally, move to China and protest.
No that is false. And we are more responsible for whats in the atmosphere than any other country.
 

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2015
Messages
9,189
Reaction score
989
Points
113
No that is false. And we are more responsible for whats in the atmosphere than any other country.
Nope, you're drinking the commie kool-aid. Go to China and protest your comrades pollution of the planet and human rights violations. While you're there get your comrades to pay for the Paris accords and give the US some cash to help us reduce emissions.
 

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2015
Messages
9,189
Reaction score
989
Points
113
The sun monster is responsible 🌞
I don't consider the sun to be a monster, but it certainly has more capacity to effect the earth than humans.
How about you and Wally join a coalition of environmentalists and go protest at Tiananmen square. See how the environmentally friendly communist government of China responds.
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
6,209
Reaction score
3,029
Points
113
I don't consider the sun to be a monster, but it certainly has more capacity to effect the earth than humans.
How about you and Wally join a coalition of environmentalists and go protest at Tiananmen square. See how the environmentally friendly communist government of China responds.
Thats a red herring. If we stayed on the dump path we would be allowing China to dominate the high tech green future that is coming. That is more disturbing to me. I want to keep America on top, not in the 1950's.
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
21,915
Reaction score
4,860
Points
113
The cause is likely due to solar activity as well as geothermal activity. But, you can imagine us gnats are the cause of you wish.
I will entertain any peer reviewed scientific study you can cite that makes an argument for why the sudden, rapid increase in global temperatures over last 100 years is natural, when there is no evidence in observable temperature history of the planet of such rates in eras that sustained life (to my knowledge).

I only ask that your cronies don't legislate their sh!t on the rest of us while they fly the friendly skies.
What alternative exists? Teleconferencing is not an option. Taking a commercial flight is not an option.
 

BarnBurner

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 12, 2010
Messages
14,148
Reaction score
1,657
Points
113
I don't consider the sun to be a monster, but it certainly has more capacity to effect the earth than humans.
How about you and Wally join a coalition of environmentalists and go protest at Tiananmen square. See how the environmentally friendly communist government of China responds.
I will pay for the flight to China for WALLACE! :D
 

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2015
Messages
9,189
Reaction score
989
Points
113
Maybe.

So are you saying Tesla should be building vehicles with internal combustion engines?
I am saying they should not be subsidised and they should thrive or fail according to the market.
 

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2015
Messages
9,189
Reaction score
989
Points
113
I will entertain any peer reviewed scientific study you can cite that makes an argument for why the sudden, rapid increase in global temperatures over last 100 years is natural, when there is no evidence in observable temperature history of the planet of such rates in eras that sustained life (to my knowledge).


What alternative exists? Teleconferencing is not an option. Taking a commercial flight is not an option.
Sail to your destination, ride a horse, or walk.

 
Top Bottom