And you know that it doesn’t have half a chance in hell of happening, with the added bonus of absolving you personally from actually doing anything.
Way to go.
With bonus Yellow Peril content…
“Oh, no, you’re driving industry to China”. Yeah, well China’s per-capita emissions are half America’s so … good?
The evidence that climate is changing and has changed throughout history is pretty much undeniable.
Those that still say it isn’t in the face of such evidence are unlikely to change their minds no matter what you show them.
For me that’s not the important bone of contention though.
There seems to be a troubling perception in the minds of the public that cutting carbon emissions will be the route to preventing climate change.
Er…no. It is far too late for that. It has happened, will continue to happen and will likely get much worse before it gets better.
That’s even if it ever does, that is by no means guaranteed. Even if carbon emissions were halved tomorrow. The world has been hotter before and colder before, well before humans had any impact and no doubt the same will happen again.
So what to do? There is certainly no harm in reducing emissions and finding cleaner ways to live. It may stop things getting worse faster and perhaps stop the change in the future and buy more time to do the most important thing which is finding ways to live in the new climate reality that is coming anyway. That’s the “denial” that interests me, a seeming lack of interest in the societal changes that we will be forced to make sooner or later.
Nuclear baseload and renewable flexible energy production is the answer to the bulk of the emission problem and pretty much always has been. The harder questions come when looking at dealing with climate displacement, agricultural adaptation, climate resilient housing, flood/heat/weatherproofing etc. Many different areas that will require innovative thinking but we hear much less about that than we do about carbon neutrality.
And ironically, that’s because of the left; the anti nuclear power folks are predominately left-wing. So a valid argument can be made that it’s the left who are responsible for failing to “fix” climate change.
Getting back to the OP question, the actual hardcore deniers as described by NiceGuyJack (equivalent to Sam_Stone categories 1 and 2) are essentially immune to this sort of proof. They Just. Know. it’s all BS concocted by academics with a hard-on for destroying the established western business base. Article Of Faith.
The battle is over on Stone Categories 3 and 4 with those who when making the classic economics decision of pay some now vs. pay more later consistently choose (or default by inaction) to “pay more later”(*), some with the hope that before the bill comes due there will be a Genius Solution, some just not wanting to sacrifice today or caught up in paralysis by analysis. (**) And as he and others mention, that one is itself a huge lift.
(* and as mentioned by Novelty_Bobble fuels issues are going to be the least of the “pay more later” part)
(** what we really needed was a way that “do something about it now” would result in soaring quarterly stock trends – since apparently nobody can do anything that means foregoing profit or slowing down the holy “growth” today, or OMG shareholders will sue and voters will vote for the other guys…)
Even this old chestnut is not quite as the propaganda has made it to be as there has been a change where it counts. For starters, the Democratic senators in Arizona and Georgia won in part by approving the use of nuclear energy in their states, in the context of dealing with climate change. The current Republican leadership constantly defeats bills that do include the use of Nuclear power in concert with other renewable sources of power when the bills are geared to deal with climate change.
This is because the Republican idiot ball carriers in congress do not see a global warming problem. so they usually do toss the nuclear baby with the bath water.
However, that is for the US, in Europe the increase in the use of fossil fuels and the weariness of using nuclear power is coming from the same asshole: Putin. Thanks to the ongoing war, Europe had to increase the use of fossil fuels in the meantime, and Putin also showed that taking Nuclear power plants hostage or keeping them in constant danger is not a good way to tell others to increase the use of Nuclear energy, at least in Europe.
One more thing, since this is the pit:
Speaking of the usual suspects that push for no change on dealing with emissions… It is really pissing that a lot of the MAGA Republican lot are also in favor of Putin.
In light of how the actions from Putin have increased the use of fossil fuels in Europe, and continues to discredit the use of Nuclear power, it is really asinine to see how the same climate change deniers in the US are also in favor of the climate change accelerators.
Very, very useful idiots.
Oh, goody. Another “Republicans are awful” thread. Because there just aren’t enough of those already.
Definition of a fanatic: Someone who won’t change his mind, and won’t change the subject.
Sorry, but hundreds of discussions later, it is really dumb to ignore how solutions have been delayed thanks to the endemic denial from many of the “leaders” that we get from the conservatives.
It is also dumb to play the disingenuous card, a lot of what can be done is delayed thanks to the current Republican leadership.
This so needs a mention of Hunter Biden’s laptop with soupçon of the China virus was man made a lab leak.
It has to be noticed that, as usual, there is nothing from Sam about dealing with the issue of the stupid denial coming from the Republican party, it is really another form of being a denier, that of willfully ignoring the elephant in the room about why we are in the spot we are now.
Someone has to carry the water maple syrup for the Republicans on this board and Sam is uniquely positioned to do it.
It is twice as dumb when one considers that Politics is what is involved in the 4th point of his. He is like someone that ignores were the poison that drives many politicians to not do anything (or very little) is coming from. (and guys like Manchin are in the dumb camp too)
Will somebody please send this clueless idiot a mirror?
When I’m done I’ll give it to you, because that hair… damn.
See? Now I’m talking about hair. I can change the subject whenever I want.
I actually came in here with an on-point message about evaluating climate change arguments, and a couple of posters engaged with it before the poo-flinging monkeys showed up to derail the thread with another blast of hatred.
Way to combat “hatred”, Sam. 
BTW, I am proud of that hair. I work at a school for severely challenged children and I let them pick my hair color every year to show them that they have agency. This year it is a bit longer, and bright teal.
Ah, your hair is fine. It was just a joke. And I have no cause to criticise anyone else’s hair. Mine’s always been a mess.
But we really should talk about climate change.
So said the one talking about the pollution from politics in discussions like this one, it is crucial after all to say whatever so as to distract about the ones that did the poisoning in the first place.
We should talk about options that are more likely to happen than winning the Powerball and the Mega Millions in the same week.
As always with conservatives, every accusation is a confession.