I was not at all insulting everyone who posts. I was strongly insulting people who strongly believe that global warming is a fact but who strongly fail at delivering solid and realistic solutions to the problem. Trader do you believe global warming is a fact? If so than do you believe these industrial revolutions around the world will contribute massive Co2 emissions? If so than what solutions do you have when it comes to decreasing the productivity of these countries? If you said yes to the first two questions and have no realistic solutions to the last question than you can consider yourself one of the idealistic bubbles heads that are so good at visiting this forum and so bad at providing anything of value. I provided a solution myself if i actually believed in global warming. My solution was that you cannot talk people into decreasing productivity. You must force it with ideally military action. 80% of China is in poverty. An industrial revolution would be a huge positive factor in their life. You can't talk a person into staying in poverty. Afterall if global warming is indeed a fact than these massive Co2 emissions may in fact be the tipping point for the world. I would consider the solutions to this being absolutely urgent in all seriousness if global warming becomes a fact.
So basically you run into a guy that writes words and views so persuasive yet opposite of your own that the only actual thing you can tell him is too disapear to even the playing field. Maybe if you get on your knees and beg? It is stunningly easy to see that you have a problem with my views. You can't write anything of value to counter my views so your problem with my views turns into a problem with me. And you said I had the problems?
But it wouldnt matter if you did believe it, there arent any "solid and realistic" solutions. Therefore, you are flogging a dead horse. Although, reducing livestock emissions has been touted...so presumably flogging a dead horse would be quite environmentally friendly, not cruel to animals either. Well done! In order for a global solution to be solid, it has to be not just agreed on, globally, but adhered to globally-nearly seven billion people, in how many different countries? Lets assume, a minimum of 2% of those are involved in government, council, military or other locally enforceable decision making process; across the whole planet, 120 million people all agreeing on something? Not gonna happen!
I know but it's fun to see die hard global warming believers and liberals squirm around and utterly fail when it comes to dealing with reality.
If they are right, there would be much dieing hard and fruitless squirming i imagine. But forget co2, it may not be the bogeyman, not when man made desertification, man made ground water level changes, proven pollution, GM crops, overpopulation and basic stupidity conspire to currently cause most of the issues faced. "Die hard-fruitlessly squirming."
We could just wait it out. In 20 years China will be so crowded and polluted that it can no longer support life, with India not far behind. If GW comes to pass then Asia will be riven by mass famine, disease, and natural disasters of a magnitude that we cannot presently comprehend. All this will likely lead to regional warfare, perhaps even nuclear war. The population in regions so affected will decrease until equilibrium is reached. Meanwhile, Florida and Arizona will get even less comfortable than they are now - but that's not saying much. On the other hand, lots of former tundra and frozen wasteland in northern Canada will open up for cultivation and whatnot. Add in the eventual discovery of fusion and/or exploitation of all that oil shale in Colorado, and the USA will still be going strong in 300 years. Unless, of course, we let ourselves succumb to other threats.