People's Climate March

[The Liberated Territories]

No true Scotsman? Yawn.

If fucking Mitt Romney claimed to be a communist and came up with some bullshit about how his policies ultimately were derived from Marxism would Communists decrying him as not a communist be committing a no true Scotsman?

Yes.

"No communist supports neoliberal policies."

"I am a communist, and I support neoliberal policies."

"Well, no true communist supports neoliberal policies."

[The Orson Empire]

Climate denial is just silly.

Even if we all turned out to be wrong, and the environment was doing perfectly fine, is a car-dependent culture that is dependent foreign oil that's going to run out eventually, polluted cities, oil spills, water pollution, etc, really worth it?

Unfortunately, Humans are notorious for not learning from their past mistakes, so we will probably wait until the last minute, when we completely exhaust the Earth's supply of oil, to do something about it.

[Threlizdun]

If fucking Mitt Romney claimed to be a communist and came up with some bullshit about how his policies ultimately were derived from Marxism would Communists decrying him as not a communist be committing a no true Scotsman?

Yes.

"No communist supports neoliberal policies."

"I am a communist, and I support neoliberal policies."

"Well, no true communist supports neoliberal policies."

The fact that you pretend the word doesn't have a meaning doesn't make it true no matter how desperately you try.

[Corrian]

Unfortunately, Humans are notorious for not learning from their past mistakes, so we will probably wait until the last minute, when we completely exhaust the Earth's supply of oil, to do something about it.

Which by then I expect it would probably be too late to do anything, anyway...If we haven't destroyed our livable world by then already. Especially since getting more oil requires destroying more land which helps lead to more climate change...

[Nervium]

We're gonna need a bigger boat.

[The Liberated Territories]

Yes.

"No communist supports neoliberal policies."

"I am a communist, and I support neoliberal policies."

"Well, no true communist supports neoliberal policies."

The fact that you pretend the word doesn't have a meaning doesn't make it true no matter how desperately you try.

No words have inherit meaning.

If all the communists in the world were to adopt neoliberal policies, would they still be communists? What if it becomes accepted?

The meaning to collectively held ideas are not static.

[Tubbsalot]

the ozone layer also has nothing to do with climate change

oh

yeah, the issue with ozone is that the O₃ molecule is broken down in the atmosphere by halogenated molecules like CFCs, causing an ozone hole which allows large quantities of UV through. this is a concern because of cancer.

it also results in a very, very slight increase in solar energy reaching the surface, but that energy is minor and able to escape readily from the atmosphere either way, so there's no long-term effect of that heating.

climate change is just due to the greenhouse effect and changes in albedo.

[Olivaero]

The fact that you pretend the word doesn't have a meaning doesn't make it true no matter how desperately you try.

No words have inherit meaning.

If all the communists in the world were to adopt neoliberal policies, would they still be communists? What if it becomes accepted?

The meaning to collectively held ideas are not static.

We need words to have meaning though to communicate effectively. They don't have inherent meaning but an agreement of definitions is essential to hold a conversation.

[Grenartia]

If fucking Mitt Romney claimed to be a communist and came up with some bullshit about how his policies ultimately were derived from Marxism would Communists decrying him as not a communist be committing a no true Scotsman?

Yes.

"No communist supports neoliberal policies."

"I am a communist, and I support neoliberal policies."

"Well, no true communist supports neoliberal policies."

Words have meaning. When X and Y are mutually exclusive, you can't be X AND Y.

[Threlizdun]

The fact that you pretend the word doesn't have a meaning doesn't make it true no matter how desperately you try.

No words have inherit meaning.

If all the communists in the world were to adopt neoliberal policies, would they still be communists? What if it becomes accepted?

The meaning to collectively held ideas are not static.

Words have definitions that are given to them and effectively set. If everyone were to start insisting that the world was flat then they would be wrong; it would not mean that the definition of flat had changed. Communism is defined as a classless, stateless, moneyless, socialist society. Arguing that it is anything different is asinine.

[Grenartia]

No words have inherit meaning.

If all the communists in the world were to adopt neoliberal policies, would they still be communists? What if it becomes accepted?

The meaning to collectively held ideas are not static.

We need words to have meaning though to communicate effectively. They don't have inherent meaning but an agreement of definitions is essential to hold a conversation.

Exactly. To say otherwise defeats the entire purpose for the existence of language.

[The Liberated Territories]

Yes.

"No communist supports neoliberal policies."

"I am a communist, and I support neoliberal policies."

"Well, no true communist supports neoliberal policies."

Words have meaning. When X and Y are mutually exclusive, you can't be X AND Y.

Only through association.

One word can mean something totally different to another person in a different area, or different time period.

The word "liberal" for example, can mean something different to Americans than it does to Europeans.

So therefore, universally, liberal - or anything - can potentially be X and Y.

[The Orson Empire]

Unfortunately, Humans are notorious for not learning from their past mistakes, so we will probably wait until the last minute, when we completely exhaust the Earth's supply of oil, to do something about it.

Which by then I expect it would probably be too late to do anything, anyway...If we haven't destroyed our livable world by then already. Especially since getting more oil requires destroying more land which helps lead to more climate change...

Well, it has been predicted that Humans will have destroyed themselves within the next 100-1000 years. If we have managed to avoid an all-out nuclear war, then this is what will get us if we are not prepared. Seeing as oil is what allows us to have electricity, after we exhaust the supply of oil, governments around the world would not be able to sustain themselves, and thus they would collapse, sending Humans back into the Dark Ages.

[Senyosu]

And again, while capitalism is the culprit, it is also the current most effective remedy to the problem. That, and an educated public.

[Grenartia]

Words have meaning. When X and Y are mutually exclusive, you can't be X AND Y.

Only through association.

One word can mean something totally different to another person in a different area, or different time period.

The word "liberal" for example, can mean something different to Americans than it does to Europeans.

So therefore, universally, liberal - or anything - can potentially be X and Y.

While all the statements are technically true, your conclusion amounts to little more than saying language is useless. Its like saying "Because 2+2=4, goats are toasters".

I think we can safely dismiss your thoughts as being bullshit, now.

[Threlizdun]

Words have meaning. When X and Y are mutually exclusive, you can't be X AND Y.

Only through association.

One word can mean something totally different to another person in a different area, or different time period.

The word "liberal" for example, can mean something different to Americans than it does to Europeans.

So therefore, universally, liberal - or anything - can potentially be X and Y.

Except both American and European liberals are liberals, whereas a neoliberal calling themselves a communist is obviously not a communist. Americans calling people liberals aren't just pulling a term out of their ass; they're just using it a lot more narrowly than Europeans do.

[Solaray]

Which by then I expect it would probably be too late to do anything, anyway...If we haven't destroyed our livable world by then already. Especially since getting more oil requires destroying more land which helps lead to more climate change...

Well, it has been predicted that Humans will have destroyed themselves within the next 100-1000 years. If we have managed to avoid an all-out nuclear war, then this is what will get us if we are not prepared. Seeing as oil is what allows us to have electricity, after we exhaust the supply of oil, governments around the world would not be able to sustain themselves, and thus they would collapse, sending Humans back into the Dark Ages.

We just need to get our shit together and start investing into nuclear juice.

[Blackwing Coast]

I have read about it. By now even the governments are waking up and switching to renewables (China has reduced its coal imports!), so we will probably kick the dependency before we run out of oil. If that is fast enough to survive the climate change is, indeed, another question.

Our greatest hopes (short of either reducing incoming sunlight or getting massive amounts of carbon out of the atmosphere) are essentially massive relocation and international levee programs (the latter can only really be financed and coordinated by the states). The rich will probably prefer sea-steading because tax haven - then again they cannot outgun the navies and probably not even the better organized pirates so they will play nice or become expensive seafloor ornaments. That being said, massive state-funded sea-steading projects may have better long-term results than internal relocation - if we manage to get desalination effective enough.

Edit: Supreme Irony: The site advertisement is for Bioshock.

[Olivaero]

Only through association.

One word can mean something totally different to another person in a different area, or different time period.

The word "liberal" for example, can mean something different to Americans than it does to Europeans.

So therefore, universally, liberal - or anything - can potentially be X and Y.

While all the statements are technically true, your conclusion amounts to little more than saying language is useless. Its like saying "Because 2+2=4, goats are toasters".

I think we can safely dismiss your thoughts as being bullshit, now.

Length camber trends south upon the mild winter *nods*

[Nervium]

And again, while capitalism is the culprit, it is also the current most effective remedy to the problem. That, and an educated public.

Yes.
Wait... No. No, no, no, that would mean oil sheiks and barons will just say "oh you know what, this green energy stuff and electric cars, that's alright, go ahead, I don't need anymore money" something that never will happen in this climate. (Pun intended)

[Tubbsalot]

By now even the governments are waking up and switching to renewables (China has reduced its coal imports!)

Given that China is the world's largest producer of coal, I feel like you are probably attributing this to the wrong cause.

[Atlanticatia]

Just saying: A modest carbon tax would raise more than $1.2 trillion over a decade.

Why are we not taxing this stuff!?

I can't think of anything negative about a carbon tax.

http://www.motherjones.com/environment/ ... tax-sanity

British Columbia's carbon tax has been a huge economic success, reducing carbon, cutting taxes for people and businesses, etc.

It makes sense: tax something bad like carbon, not something good like labor. Revenues from carbon taxes can be used to reduce tax burdens on families and businesses, or to do things like fight child poverty.

[The Orson Empire]

Well, it has been predicted that Humans will have destroyed themselves within the next 100-1000 years. If we have managed to avoid an all-out nuclear war, then this is what will get us if we are not prepared. Seeing as oil is what allows us to have electricity, after we exhaust the supply of oil, governments around the world would not be able to sustain themselves, and thus they would collapse, sending Humans back into the Dark Ages.

We just need to get our shit together and start investing into nuclear juice.

Not gonna happen. For one, its too expensive, and the petroleum industry pretty much dominates this particular market, seeing as oil powers almost everything.

Those who run the petroleum industry do not care about global warming or the fact that we will run out of oil. They only care about making as much money as possible. It's all about greed.

[Senyosu]

And again, while capitalism is the culprit, it is also the current most effective remedy to the problem. That, and an educated public.

Yes.
Wait... No. No, no, no, that would mean oil sheiks and barons will just say "oh you know what, this green energy stuff and electric cars, that's alright, go ahead, I don't need anymore money" something that never will happen in this climate. (Pun intended)

Dude. I meant the educated public decides to say 'fuck you' to the oil lot (which may or may not happen) and urge the government to give incentive to the private sectors and R&D agencies to compete to create greener and more eco friendly products.

Besides, the Oil Sheiks don't have much time left on their hands before all the oil runs dry.

[Hyfling]

Capitalism to the rescue!