NationStates

Ever since oil became popular in the 1900s, we've seen tons of uses for the friction reducer, such as to power cars, homes, and many more necessities. However, following the discovery of oil was the theory of climate change, a theory made that oil and many more substances can actually "harm" the environment.

That theory is true. Land is becoming more polluted, floating on top of oceans is litter, and icebergs are melting. Once, a river caught on fire. But we shouldn't be worrying about climate change now. Not as a world issue, definitely. If you go out to your town's local park, do you see pollution everywhere? No, but you hear of it in other parks, where you don't live in. If you go to the shore of the ocean, do you see litter floating? No, but you hear of it in the center of the ocean, where all things go but no one lives in. If you spend a day near an iceberg, can you record it melting? No, but you hear of icebergs melting drastically in a short time period. And, about that river, it was a coincidence. Nothing else.

So, why do we naturally believe climate change is a world issue? It's because of the corrupt leftist media oligarchy. They want you to find something to worry about as they earn money from your viewership and then go on to build mansions with it, using substances that they say cause climate change to build their castles along the way. In light of this, I advise you to actually use your brain. You have one, but its switch is just in the off position. Turn it back on, and think before you believe.

And that is why I believe climate change isn't an issue our generation should worry about. Let's focus on combating inflation and solving political crises that our countries are facing as of this moment instead.

this is why we wont last to 2077.

If it isn't an issue our generation should worry about, it will be for your kids or grandkids, assuming you have them.

Of course, blame leftists. This is wrong on so many levels. I’ve seen litter every where when I go out for walks in forest areas etc, I doubt most people have gone out on a boat so they wouldn’t be able to see the litter, unless it’s washed up. The reason you don’t see it is because in all the nice tourist beaches, like in Florida, are kept nice and clean, and all the ones nobody visits are full of litter washed ashore. Icebergs are drastically melting, there is plenty of evidence, you just refuse to believe it.

Also, this is a horrible mindset to have. You should not put the task on the next generation because you are, and I mean no offence, lazy. Inflation is a minuscule problem compared to climate change, and you can already see the effects in certain areas, near coastal regions, and in places in Africa, droughts are more common and last months longer.

Man... I don’t have any words... but snaps hands LETS DO THIS!
WHERE to Begin? First: One Global warming is a thing! Secondly: It effects EVERYONE! (Especially our food supply and shipping / transportation)

Le Enclave Reformas wrote:this is why we wont last to 2077.

Agreed. If we put the task on the next generation, that mindset will be transferred to them, and the cycle will continue until by 2050 half the world is a wasteland due to people being ignorant.

*sigh*

Slight nit-pick. Climate change isn't exactly pollution; not directly at least.

Climate change is the notion that the global climate (environment/temperature/weather patterns/etc) as a whole changes or shifts over time. This is actually a bit of a no-brainer.

What the media refers to as climate change in a broad sense the notion that the actions of mankind directly influences and impacts the global climate (for the worse. In a more specific sense, they are typically referring to the notion that the burning of fossil fuels can put excess greenhouse gasses (which results in CO2 being emitted) into the atmosphere, trapping additional heat in the planet, which in turn adds additional energy to the world weather system.

Le Enclave Reformas wrote:this is why we wont last to 2077.

We will, if we don't die of a heart attack upon hearing that there's soon going to be an "oil river"...

Diarcesia wrote:If it isn't an issue our generation should worry about, it will be for your kids or grandkids, assuming you have them.

Maybe we'll solve the inflation and political drama soon, allowing us to combat overrated climate change...

Astarter wrote:Of course, blame leftists. This is wrong on so many levels. I’ve seen litter every where when I go out for walks in forest areas etc, I doubt most people have gone out on a boat so they wouldn’t be able to see the litter, unless it’s washed up. The reason you don’t see it is because in all the nice tourist beaches, like in Florida, are kept nice and clean, and all the ones nobody visits are full of litter washed ashore. Icebergs are drastically melting, there is plenty of evidence, you just refuse to believe it.

Also, this is a horrible mindset to have. You should not put the task on the next generation because you are, and I mean no offence, lazy. Inflation is a minuscule problem compared to climate change, and you can already see the effects in certain areas, near coastal regions, and in places in Africa, droughts are more common and last months longer.

First of all, my news sources differ from yours.

Second of all, I'm not lazy. If I was lazy, then the entire world would be too...

Third of all, isn't Africa a hot desert with varying landscape and dangerous animals?

Mountains and Volcanoes wrote:Man... I don’t have any words... but snaps hands LETS DO THIS!
WHERE to Begin? First: One Global warming is a thing! Secondly: It effects EVERYONE! (Especially our food supply and shipping / transportation)

When Russian invaded Ukraine, we Americans actually got hurt because we got less, cheap oil from them. So, I'm curious about your second point.

So what I got from your post is you do not know what climate change is, nor have you looked into the scientific papers about it. You have not even looked into the financial cost of it, have you?

Barbaria wrote:

Le Enclave Reformas wrote:this is why we wont last to 2077.

We will, if we don't die of a heart attack upon hearing that there's soon going to be an "oil river"...

Diarcesia wrote:If it isn't an issue our generation should worry about, it will be for your kids or grandkids, assuming you have them.

Maybe we'll solve the inflation and political drama soon, allowing us to combat overrated climate change...

Astarter wrote:Of course, blame leftists. This is wrong on so many levels. I’ve seen litter every where when I go out for walks in forest areas etc, I doubt most people have gone out on a boat so they wouldn’t be able to see the litter, unless it’s washed up. The reason you don’t see it is because in all the nice tourist beaches, like in Florida, are kept nice and clean, and all the ones nobody visits are full of litter washed ashore. Icebergs are drastically melting, there is plenty of evidence, you just refuse to believe it.

Also, this is a horrible mindset to have. You should not put the task on the next generation because you are, and I mean no offence, lazy. Inflation is a minuscule problem compared to climate change, and you can already see the effects in certain areas, near coastal regions, and in places in Africa, droughts are more common and last months longer.

First of all, my news sources differ from yours.

Second of all, I'm not lazy. If I was lazy, then the entire world would be too...

Third of all, isn't Africa a hot desert with varying landscape and dangerous animals?

Mountains and Volcanoes wrote:Man... I don’t have any words... but snaps hands LETS DO THIS!
WHERE to Begin? First: One Global warming is a thing! Secondly: It effects EVERYONE! (Especially our food supply and shipping / transportation)

When Russian invaded Ukraine, we Americans actually got hurt because we got less, cheap oil from them. So, I'm curious about your second point.

That doesn’t make sense. How would the whole world be lazy if you are?

Yes mate, but if you knew how it works, you’d know that around the same time every year, the rain comes in the deserts and makes the plants grow, then as it gets hotter the plants die off, the animals then start to get hungry and it’s harder to find food, but then the rain comes again just in time. The cycle then repeats, but Global Warming causes the droughts to last longer due to evaporation.

Also, different new sources doesn’t excuse false information. You could just google and look up to see if you are correct?

Edit: To add, not all of Africa is a desert, mate.

Barbaria wrote:

Le Enclave Reformas wrote:this is why we wont last to 2077.

We will, if we don't die of a heart attack upon hearing that there's soon going to be an "oil river"...

Diarcesia wrote:If it isn't an issue our generation should worry about, it will be for your kids or grandkids, assuming you have them.

Maybe we'll solve the inflation and political drama soon, allowing us to combat overrated climate change...

Astarter wrote:Of course, blame leftists. This is wrong on so many levels. I’ve seen litter every where when I go out for walks in forest areas etc, I doubt most people have gone out on a boat so they wouldn’t be able to see the litter, unless it’s washed up. The reason you don’t see it is because in all the nice tourist beaches, like in Florida, are kept nice and clean, and all the ones nobody visits are full of litter washed ashore. Icebergs are drastically melting, there is plenty of evidence, you just refuse to believe it.

Also, this is a horrible mindset to have. You should not put the task on the next generation because you are, and I mean no offence, lazy. Inflation is a minuscule problem compared to climate change, and you can already see the effects in certain areas, near coastal regions, and in places in Africa, droughts are more common and last months longer.

First of all, my news sources differ from yours.

Second of all, I'm not lazy. If I was lazy, then the entire world would be too...

Third of all, isn't Africa a hot desert with varying landscape and dangerous animals?

Mountains and Volcanoes wrote:Man... I don’t have any words... but snaps hands LETS DO THIS!
WHERE to Begin? First: One Global warming is a thing! Secondly: It effects EVERYONE! (Especially our food supply and shipping / transportation)

When Russian invaded Ukraine, we Americans actually got hurt because we got less, cheap oil from them. So, I'm curious about your second point.

this is so wrong on so many f____ng levels.
HOW THE H_LL WOULD EVERYONE BE LAZY IF ONE GUY WAS.
AND WHY THE H_LL DOES DIFFERENT NEWS SOURCES MEAN FACTS ARE NOT F A C T U A L.
you see little timmy, when temperatures rise, plants die. with no plants, no food. with no food, no food supply. with no food supply, we d i e.
climate change? overrated? its honestly UNDERRATED.

Barbaria wrote:Maybe we'll solve the inflation and political drama soon, allowing us to combat overrated climate change...

1. You said climate change is overrated... even if inflation and political drama is solved, you will not take it seriously.
2. It sounds like a "screw others, I got mine" mindset to me. I guess you'll believe climate change is real if you find a way to profit from it, which is ironically similar to the mindset of the "leftist media" or their backers who you criticize.

I lost you at “corrupt leftist media oligarchy.”

Barbaria wrote:Third of all, isn't Africa a hot desert with varying landscape and dangerous animals?

Yeah ok I’m done here.

Barbaria wrote:That theory is true. Land is becoming more polluted, floating on top of oceans is litter, and icebergs are melting. Once, a river caught on fire. But we shouldn't be worrying about climate change now. Not as a world issue, definitely. If you go out to your town's local park, do you see pollution everywhere? No, but you hear of it in other parks, where you don't live in. If you go to the shore of the ocean, do you see litter floating? No, but you hear of it in the center of the ocean, where all things go but no one lives in. If you spend a day near an iceberg, can you record it melting? No, but you hear of icebergs melting drastically in a short time period. And, about that river, it was a coincidence. Nothing else.

You mean when I walk down to the shoreline and see an intertidal ecosystem without any marine creatures because they were all killed off in a record smashing heatwave, or drive to my hometown past the town that that burned down in a 40 degree drought fuelled firestorm, past another town flooded in a positively unnatural parade of storms and which is now contaminated by chemical runoff.

you can do better than this Mr. 'I was just founded yesterday'.

BEEstreetz wrote:

Instead of just ignoring OP I will entertain the thought, albeit lazily.

Barbaria wrote:Let's focus on combating inflation and solving political crises that our countries are facing as of this moment instead.

Yes, focusing on solving local political issues would inevitably also lead to global climate change issues being mitigated. There's no need to prove you wrong since you are advocating for the same policy methodology. Outcome is the same → don't care what the reasoning is.

I would like to see your 50 tests on the situation described and how they support your hypothesis, then.

Le Enclave Reformas wrote:

Barbaria wrote:
We will, if we don't die of a heart attack upon hearing that there's soon going to be an "oil river"...



Maybe we'll solve the inflation and political drama soon, allowing us to combat overrated climate change...



First of all, my news sources differ from yours.

Second of all, I'm not lazy. If I was lazy, then the entire world would be too...

Third of all, isn't Africa a hot desert with varying landscape and dangerous animals?



When Russian invaded Ukraine, we Americans actually got hurt because we got less, cheap oil from them. So, I'm curious about your second point.

this is so wrong on so many f____ng levels.
HOW THE H_LL WOULD EVERYONE BE LAZY IF ONE GUY WAS.
AND WHY THE H_LL DOES DIFFERENT NEWS SOURCES MEAN FACTS ARE NOT F A C T U A L.
you see little timmy, when temperatures rise, plants die. with no plants, no food. with no food, no food supply. with no food supply, we d i e.
climate change? overrated? its honestly UNDERRATED.

I was just saying that it would be unfair to call me lazy when there's the entire world to evaluate. Also, there isn't legislation that forces news sources to actually display facts, which allows them to call oranges "apples". So be careful the next time you watch a leftist news source, alright?

Why do we even bother trying to convince this chap? When someone says 'Prove me wrong', they're going to resolutely stand by their view of things, damn the facts.

Barbaria wrote:

BEEstreetz wrote:

Instead of just ignoring OP I will entertain the thought, albeit lazily.

Yes, focusing on solving local political issues would inevitably also lead to global climate change issues being mitigated. There's no need to prove you wrong since you are advocating for the same policy methodology. Outcome is the same → don't care what the reasoning is.

I would like to see your 50 tests on the situation described and how they support your hypothesis, then.

Le Enclave Reformas wrote:this is so wrong on so many f____ng levels.
HOW THE H_LL WOULD EVERYONE BE LAZY IF ONE GUY WAS.
AND WHY THE H_LL DOES DIFFERENT NEWS SOURCES MEAN FACTS ARE NOT F A C T U A L.
you see little timmy, when temperatures rise, plants die. with no plants, no food. with no food, no food supply. with no food supply, we d i e.
climate change? overrated? its honestly UNDERRATED.

I was just saying that it would be unfair to call me lazy when there's the entire world to evaluate. Also, there isn't legislation that forces news sources to actually display facts, which allows them to call oranges "apples". So be careful the next time you watch a leftist news source, alright?

What about a rightist news source? Are you the kind of person who will defend right wing views to the death? You seem like one.

Yes, but you are the one saying we should not bother about climate change.

Barbaria wrote:

BEEstreetz wrote:

Instead of just ignoring OP I will entertain the thought, albeit lazily.

Yes, focusing on solving local political issues would inevitably also lead to global climate change issues being mitigated. There's no need to prove you wrong since you are advocating for the same policy methodology. Outcome is the same → don't care what the reasoning is.

I would like to see your 50 tests on the situation described and how they support your hypothesis, then.

Le Enclave Reformas wrote:this is so wrong on so many f____ng levels.
HOW THE H_LL WOULD EVERYONE BE LAZY IF ONE GUY WAS.
AND WHY THE H_LL DOES DIFFERENT NEWS SOURCES MEAN FACTS ARE NOT F A C T U A L.
you see little timmy, when temperatures rise, plants die. with no plants, no food. with no food, no food supply. with no food supply, we d i e.
climate change? overrated? its honestly UNDERRATED.

I was just saying that it would be unfair to call me lazy when there's the entire world to evaluate. Also, there isn't legislation that forces news sources to actually display facts, which allows them to call oranges "apples". So be careful the next time you watch a leftist news source, alright?

or you could read the actual scientific papers about it. Climate change is about the global change in temperature. In this case the warming of the globe.

Neutraligon wrote:So what I got from your post is you do not know what climate change is, nor have you looked into the scientific papers about it. You have not even looked into the financial cost of it, have you?

Climate change, according to the United Nations, "refers to long-term shifts in temperatures and weather patterns". But the true definition of climate change is "an excuse by the leftist media to abuse the working class and allow their unused and polluting mansions and buildings to escape from the blueprints and become reality". I'll stop there.

Barbaria wrote:

Neutraligon wrote:So what I got from your post is you do not know what climate change is, nor have you looked into the scientific papers about it. You have not even looked into the financial cost of it, have you?

Climate change, according to the United Nations, "refers to long-term shifts in temperatures and weather patterns". But the true definition of climate change is "an excuse by the leftist media to abuse the working class and allow their unused and polluting mansions and buildings to escape from the blueprints and become reality". I'll stop there.

The true definition, or your definition?

Barbaria wrote:I was just saying that it would be unfair to call me lazy when there's the entire world to evaluate. Also, there isn't legislation that forces news sources to actually display facts, which allows them to call oranges "apples". So be careful the next time you watch a leftist news source, alright?

yes, because as we all know, only leftist news sources are untrustworthy. rightist news sources are glowing bastions of truth and reason.

Mestovakia wrote:Why do we even bother trying to convince this chap? When someone says 'Prove me wrong', they're going to resolutely stand by their view of things, damn the facts.

It's for the others' benefit, if not the OP's.

OP, if you are really serious on reevaluating your opinion, read this conversation: Cmv: Climate Change is not an imminent threat and is not going to cause extinction.

Barbaria wrote:

Neutraligon wrote:So what I got from your post is you do not know what climate change is, nor have you looked into the scientific papers about it. You have not even looked into the financial cost of it, have you?

Climate change, according to the United Nations, "refers to long-term shifts in temperatures and weather patterns". But the true definition of climate change is "an excuse by the leftist media to abuse the working class and allow their unused and polluting mansions and buildings to escape from the blueprints and become reality". I'll stop there.

Uhhh, bro, aren’t Left Ideologies mostly about equality? I could be wrong, but I don’t think that’s the definition. I, personally, think you are just trying to insult leftists or smth.

If you make another post, maybe next time show both sides than just yours.

Barbaria wrote:

Neutraligon wrote:So what I got from your post is you do not know what climate change is, nor have you looked into the scientific papers about it. You have not even looked into the financial cost of it, have you?

Climate change, according to the United Nations, "refers to long-term shifts in temperatures and weather patterns". But the true definition of climate change is "an excuse by the leftist media to abuse the working class and allow their unused and polluting mansions and buildings to escape from the blueprints and become reality". I'll stop there.

Climate change is the change in global temperature and the effect that has on weather patterns and the like. Media has nothing to do with it. Just read the scientific papers about it. Climate change is a thing. It has happened for billions of years. The question, one that scientists have answered, is if the most recent climate change is human caused. The answer is yes.