# 'Global leaders are to blame'...a(nother) discussion about climate change **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 23, 2019, 9:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-leaders-are-to-blame-a-nother-discussion-about-climate-change/840726 "2019-09-23T21:55:22Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Deeg](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/deeg/32/2955_2.png) [@Deeg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Deeg)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2019, 2:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-leaders-are-to-blame-a-nother-discussion-about-climate-change/840726/21 "2019-09-24T02:12:37Z")
XT, I hear where you’re coming from–it’s largely theater–but to me it’s a ploy that has to be used. Facts and science aren’t working on conservatives; liberals claim to be worried but they’re too afraid of radiation to do what needs to be done. Thunberg’s message is (I think) an attempt to reach people who have largely ignored rationality. If it lights a fire under a small but non-trivial number > [@enipla](#): > > We have been taking action since Nixon and the EPA. It is being turned back. Do you remember the 70’s? A hell of a lot of progress has been made in only 50 years. > > [And now Trump wants to turn the clock back](https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/400036-trump-submits-rule-to-weaken-iconic-obama-car-efficiency-standards) Meanwhile, Sanders and Warren both want to kill nuclear power. Egads. ---
**Author:** ![Wesley\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wesley_clark/32/20581_2.png) [@Wesley\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wesley_Clark)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2019, 2:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-leaders-are-to-blame-a-nother-discussion-about-climate-change/840726/22 "2019-09-24T02:23:46Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > No. She’s a rich girl, and now famous too. She’ll almost certainly live a fine life and have very little to complain about (which probably won’t keep her from complaining about every imagined slight / offense). Do you really not see a difference between complaining about pollution that’ll cause hundreds of trillions of dollars in property damage and lost economic growth, as well as million of refugees and complaining about whats on TV or whats for dinner? > [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > I agree. I’d call it ‘climate theater’. It was a bit of performance art, and I didn’t find it the least bit convincing. God forbid the party that screams about death panels, communism, the antichrist, etc. over everything they don’t like consider something hyperbolic. > [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > Wrong. It may not cut 40 years off his life expectancy. But it may become a serious problem that sets humanity back by decades. These kids are brave. They are standing up to wealthy interests and ideological fanatics to secure a better future for themselves since their parents generation is too selfish and radicalized to do it for them. ---
**Author:** ![BeepKillBeep](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/9e8a1a/32.png) [@BeepKillBeep](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BeepKillBeep)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2019, 2:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-leaders-are-to-blame-a-nother-discussion-about-climate-change/840726/23 "2019-09-24T02:47:31Z")
My favorite quote in this video that sums things up rather nicely is “Climate denialism isn’t just a bunch of people who are wrong. It is a bunch of people being paid to be wrong on purpose to deliberately spread doubt about the truth.” People like Crowder, Shapiro and Moore among many others. All paid to be wrong on purpose. Climate change shouldn’t be a political issue, but it has been made a political issue by people with a vested financial interest in ensuring that nothing gets done about it. It really ought to be something that is bipartisan for everybody who isn’t vested in the fossil fuel industry. If you’re vested heavily in the fossil fuel industry, then I understand why you don’t want anything done about it (although even then). For everybody else, you’ve been conned by your political masters. There’s very few knowledgeable people speaking out on climate change who frame it as an species ending event. However, that won’t keep people like Crowder, Shapiro, Moore, et al. from claiming that people speaking about climate change are just alarmists. Or finding that one person who claims it is the end of the world and using them as their example. Direct deaths from climate change are estimated to be about 250,000 per year. Indirect deaths on the other hand may be much higher but harder to quantify. For example, climate change is having considerable effect on food security (my area of research). A lack of food security leads to political instability, which leads to fighting and death. But it is difficult to say what percentage are due to climate change and what percentage is due to a growing population and continued unsustainable food production. I’ve seen estimates for death from issues surrounding food security to be from 500,000,000 to 1,500,000,000 from 2050 to 2075 (I might have the exact years wrong). Researchers who are looking into food security invariably are looking at climate change as a factor and how to account for it. One thing is certain, climate change is going to cause a lot of human misery. But don’t worry it won’t be most of us in the rich part of the world. So we can just ignore it. [![](https://img.youtube.com/vi/RLqXkYrdmjY/maxresdefault.jpg "Climate Denial: A Measured Response") ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLqXkYrdmjY) ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2019, 3:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-leaders-are-to-blame-a-nother-discussion-about-climate-change/840726/24 "2019-09-24T03:15:48Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > No. She’s a rich girl, and now famous too. She’ll almost certainly live a fine life and have very little to complain about This seems like a weirdly unimaginative dismissal. You appear to be taking it for granted that Thunberg can’t have any “dreams” that aren’t taken care of by her being a “rich girl” and “famous” and having a “fine life” in terms of material prosperity. On the contrary, if one of the things she dreamed of was a world in which intelligent grownups would act promptly and wisely to mitigate a serious environmental crisis, then I think we have to admit that our incompetent response **has** “stolen her dreams”. > [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > “Hysteria” is a good word for it. The thing is, though, that climate-change deniers have been asserting all along that pretty much **any** expression of concern about climate change is “hysteria”. And a lot of the people throwing around the word “hysteria” are specifically paid to do so, as **BeepKillBeep** notes (though I’d put [Marc Morano](https://newrepublic.com/article/154014/climate-deniers-hysterical-alarmists) at the head of their list). So personally, I’m suffering from a bit of hysteria-accusation fatigue. It’s certainly true that some voices in popular media, particularly non-scientists, use exaggeration and hyperbole in their interpretation of the dangers of climate change. But damn near **everybody** who fulminates about “hysteria” and “alarmism” and so forth in discussions of climate change is using exaggeration and hyperbole, when they’re not outright lying. The deniers’ pose of skeptical moderation has pretty much lost all credibility. ---
**Author:** ![sps49sd](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a9a28c/32.png) [@sps49sd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sps49sd)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2019, 4:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-leaders-are-to-blame-a-nother-discussion-about-climate-change/840726/25 "2019-09-24T04:08:06Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > The one that lunges to mind is building nuclear reactors. Like, all over the place. In your backyard! Then decommission coal power plants, followed by natural gas. > > Next, on the “get thrown out” side, take a long hard look at the beef industry, and see how well they could get along without things like “cows”. > > Tax the living hell out of gasoline, and put the money towards electric car research. It’s not like the concept of an electric car is new - the first one was built in the early 1800s. > > If you happen to be leading one of those countries where they’re burning down the rainforest for farmland, send out the army. > > Stuff like that. My gasoline has a $0.50/ gallon tax, and I have a plug-in electric, but they aren’t practical for everywhere yet. Batteries aren’t new; I don’t know how many more electrons they can stuff in there. ---
**Author:** ![HMS\_Irruncible](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hms_irruncible/32/7394_2.png) [@HMS\_Irruncible](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HMS_Irruncible)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2019, 4:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-leaders-are-to-blame-a-nother-discussion-about-climate-change/840726/26 "2019-09-24T04:24:49Z")
> [@XT](#): > > It’s especially galling, to me, that a privileged white girl from Sweden is the poster child and given such a platform. Because people would surely, definitely, listen to a black girl. Because you definitely wouldn’t be laying out this same argument “oh look, they’re cynically using this young black girl as a mouthpiece”. Because there is definitely some other way to frame climate change in a way you’ll listen, some perfect spokesperson, but doggone if the opposition always seems to pick one that isn’t quite to your taste. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2019, 4:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-leaders-are-to-blame-a-nother-discussion-about-climate-change/840726/27 "2019-09-24T04:44:09Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > This seems like a weirdly unimaginative dismissal. You appear to be taking it for granted that Thunberg can’t have any “dreams” that aren’t taken care of by her being a “rich girl” and “famous” and having a “fine life” in terms of material prosperity. … She didn’t say what her “stolen dreams” were, so I specifically avoided commenting about them. I can’t answer the OP’s question about whether her dreams were stolen or not if I don’t know what they are. Without knowing what her “stolen dreams” are, however, I can still make some general observations about the likelihood that she goes on to live a privileged life (it’s quite high). > [@Kimstu](#): > > … It’s certainly true that some voices in popular media, particularly non-scientists, use exaggeration and hyperbole in their interpretation of the dangers of climate change. … I’m glad we agree, notwithstanding your fatigue. ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2019, 4:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-leaders-are-to-blame-a-nother-discussion-about-climate-change/840726/28 "2019-09-24T04:55:40Z")
> [@BeepKillBeep](#): > > My favorite quote in this video that sums things up rather nicely is “Climate denialism isn’t just a bunch of people who are wrong. It is a bunch of people being paid to be wrong on purpose to deliberately spread doubt about the truth.” People like Crowder, Shapiro and Moore among many others. All paid to be wrong on purpose. “Millionaires funded by billionaires” is the phrase that comes to mind. ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2019, 4:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-leaders-are-to-blame-a-nother-discussion-about-climate-change/840726/29 "2019-09-24T04:56:45Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > She’s a rich girl Cite? :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![BeepKillBeep](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/9e8a1a/32.png) [@BeepKillBeep](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BeepKillBeep)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2019, 5:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-leaders-are-to-blame-a-nother-discussion-about-climate-change/840726/30 "2019-09-24T05:20:32Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > “Millionaires funded by billionaires” is the phrase that comes to mind. Yeah, it kind of does doesn’t it? I wonder if he practices his confused look in the mirror or if it just comes naturally? ---
**Author:** ![Try2B\_Comprehensive](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/try2b_comprehensive/32/65_2.png) [@Try2B\_Comprehensive](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Try2B_Comprehensive)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2019, 5:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-leaders-are-to-blame-a-nother-discussion-about-climate-change/840726/31 "2019-09-24T05:53:51Z")
> [@XT](#): > > But IMHO she hit the birth lottery. Born in a 1st world country, in the golden age of our species, she has benefited from fossil fuels in every aspect of her life. There is no aspect of her stolen life that hasn’t benefited hugely from humanities use of fossil fuels for the last 150 years. Were she a very poor person living in a 3rd world country threatened by rising sea levels and the ramping up impact due to human caused climate change, THEN she’d have a case for the outrage and tears. Of course, then she wouldn’t have access to all of the things that allowed her to step on the world stage in all her outrage. I don’t much like this argument, it is kind of ad hominem even though it isn’t especially insulting. And you Do discuss the content of her message, but hear me out. It may be she doesn’t perceive her identity the way others do. Heck, if she takes a non-dualist ‘perspective’, she literally IS the very poor people in 3rd world countries. It is said she has Asperger’s, so she very well may have a alternate sense of identity. Maybe everybody already does. I have someone I can ask about this later… Even if we don’t go into any odd philosophical territory, isn’t much of the point of climate activism concern for the welfare of other people? Isn’t that a veritable cornerstone of conventional morality itself, concern for others? Future generations 100-200+ years from now? For a person that truly believes men are created equal, it would be sickening and appalling to witness the wealthiest nations causing so much harm to the most vulnerable. [4% of South Asia will be uninhabitable by 2100](https://time.com/4884648/climate-change-india-temperatures/) if serious action isn’t taken. 4% of… 2 billion people? What are they supposed to do as their regions become literally uninhabitable? I don’t think it matters that she lives in a 1st world country and benefited from fossil fuels. It wasn’t her choice. Is she supposed to be grateful and just zip it? She had a shot and she took it. I mean, she’s just rando girl to me, probably not a superhero but who knows, but really try to imagine the \*literal real-world horror show \*she and any 16-ish year old person is likely to witness world-wide as they grow into adulthood and old age. Mass extinction? Droughts, wars, enormous suffering and millions of deaths? Because corrupt politicians got bought by oil companies &etc. to steer policy away from the public interest? But yeah, we could also cause a nightmare if we pull the rug out from everyone’s economic security if we sacrifice everything to this issue. I admit it is sticky. I think it is reasonable to cause wealthy-ish people to be a bit less wealthy for it though. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2019, 6:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-leaders-are-to-blame-a-nother-discussion-about-climate-change/840726/32 "2019-09-24T06:02:53Z")
> [@Try2B\_Comprehensive](#): > > … [4% of South Asia will be uninhabitable by 2100](https://time.com/4884648/climate-change-india-temperatures/) if serious action isn’t taken. 4% of… 2 billion people? What are they supposed to do as their regions become literally uninhabitable? … Here’s what the relevant sentence from your cite actually says: > [@](#): > > Researchers behind the study, published in the journal Science Advances, found that 4% percent of the South Asian population is expected to experience temperature and humidity conditions in which humans cannot survive without air conditioning by 2100. Do you feel like you left out an important detail in your paraphrasing? I do. ---
**Author:** ![Ale](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f19dbf/32.png) [@Ale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ale)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2019, 6:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-leaders-are-to-blame-a-nother-discussion-about-climate-change/840726/33 "2019-09-24T06:15:05Z")
> [@Deeg](#): > > XT, I hear where you’re coming from–it’s largely theater–but to me it’s a ploy that has to be used. Facts and science aren’t working on conservatives; liberals claim to be worried but they’re too afraid of radiation to do what needs to be done. Thunberg’s message is (I think) an attempt to reach people who have largely ignored rationality. If it lights a fire under a small but non-trivial number > Meanwhile, Sanders and Warren both want to kill nuclear power. Egads. Scared, angry child is not an appeal to rationality, it’s an emotional appeal. The single most damaging blow against the environment has been the emotion, not science based, opposition to nuclear power, we’ve had the technology to move past the use of fossil fuels for more than half a century but that next, absolutely necessary, step was thwarted by another set of scared, angry people armed with emotional appeals. I’d say is time to stop listening to angry, scared people, they’d screwed us all up enough already. ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2019, 7:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-leaders-are-to-blame-a-nother-discussion-about-climate-change/840726/34 "2019-09-24T07:27:07Z")
> [@Ale](#): > > The single most damaging blow against the environment has been the emotion, not science based, opposition to nuclear power, we’ve had the technology to move past the use of fossil fuels for more than half a century but that next, absolutely necessary, step was thwarted by another set of scared, angry people armed with emotional appeals. No we haven’t and no it wasn’t. > [@Ale](#): > > I’d say is time to stop listening to angry, scared people, they’d screwed us all up enough already. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2019, 8:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-leaders-are-to-blame-a-nother-discussion-about-climate-change/840726/35 "2019-09-24T08:01:20Z")
[Here is a recent poll](https://scottrasmussen.com/crosstabs-sep-11-12-19-2/) in which 51% of 18-34-year-olds respond “very likely” or “somewhat likely” to the question “Within the next 10-15 years, how likely is that the earth will become uninhabitable and humanity will be wiped out?” ~51% of Millenials are like Zach, the hysterical DNC staffer. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2019, 8:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-leaders-are-to-blame-a-nother-discussion-about-climate-change/840726/36 "2019-09-24T08:23:21Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > No. She’s a rich girl, and now famous too. She’ll almost certainly live a fine life … In a humorous (to me at least) incident, President Trump echoed some of my sentiments: > [@](#): > > [She seems like a very happy young girl looking forward to a bright and wonderful future. So nice to see!](https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1176339522113679360) ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2019, 9:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-leaders-are-to-blame-a-nother-discussion-about-climate-change/840726/37 "2019-09-24T09:42:11Z")
Always amusing to hear what admitted sexual abusers think about young women who are passionate about public policy, am I right? ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2019, 10:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-leaders-are-to-blame-a-nother-discussion-about-climate-change/840726/38 "2019-09-24T10:40:52Z")
Fighting climate change is difficult but not impossible. If success seems unlikely, does that mean we should give up? America has done great things in the past: extended civil rights to blacks, saved Europe from Naziism, put a man on the moon. It seems too pessimistic to assert that America will never be able to do great things again. I am tired of hearing that China is the problem, so the U.S. shouldn’t bother with its own emissions. China now spends 0.9% of its GDP on renewable energy technologies. Compare that with U.S.A. which spends 0.1%. And despite that China’s population is more than four times that of the U.S., the U.S. consumes far more petroleum than China. Even a paltry 50¢/gallon tax on gasoline might effect some change in America’s profligate habits, yet almost half a century after first proposed, such a tax remains anathema. Politically, who’s to blame? Elected officials kowtow to voters; voters are misinformed, often deliberately. Recently Europe has done a much better job than America at instituting pro-environment and pro-humanity policies. This is no accident: among the world’s advanced “democracies” it is the U.S.A. specifically where power has been turned over to kleptocrats and liars. But a big reduction in CO2 emissions would be difficult in any event. There is one solution the world desperately needs. [From a recent article](https://www.cjr.org/covering_climate_now/population-climate-crisis.php): > [@](#): > > In 2017, Seth Wynes of Lund University in Sweden and Kimberly Nicholas of the University of British Columbia estimated the carbon emissions that various individual lifestyle choices would have. **The foremost way to reduce climate change, their report said, would be to have one fewer child** (which would otherwise annually contribute an additional 58.6 tons of carbon dioxide, on average in developed countries, according to the researchers’ estimates). The runner-ups were living car free (2.4 tons of carbon dioxide per year), and not taking one transatlantic flight (1.6 tons of carbon dioxide per year). > > For that story, Quartz replicated a graph from the Wynes and Nicholas study, but failed to include the impact that not having another child would have. **When I asked the reporter, Natasha Frost, why Quartz decided to omit part of the data, she said the graphing software couldn’t fit the data properly on the graph.** I’ve emphasized an eye-catching quote from that article. The benefit of even modest population reduction would be so huge, that it was _omitted_ from a graph comparing benefits. :eek: _Ironic?_ The benefit of addressing population growth would be so huge that the graph would be “unbalanced” — all the other remedies would appear as faint lines down near zero! Therefore, so that line placement would seem to yield a more informative graph, the best remedy was … _omitted altogether!_ ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2019, 12:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-leaders-are-to-blame-a-nother-discussion-about-climate-change/840726/39 "2019-09-24T12:54:33Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > I am tired of hearing that China is the problem… I’m sorry you’re tired of it, but China is the problem. > [@](#): > > China now spends 0.9% of its GDP on renewable energy technologies. Compare that with U.S.A. which spends 0.1%. And despite that China’s population is more than four times that of the U.S., the U.S. consumes far more petroleum than China. And yet China emits more GHG than the US and the EU put together. Which is much of the problem with this rich teenager’s speech. She is saying that China (and India and the rest of the Third World) shouldn’t get to have what she has already. They should forgo economic development, not fly over the ocean (to, for example, address the UN), not drive cars, not have another child. And climate change is the West’s fault because we haven’t made the Third World forgo those things. :rolleyes: I am afraid this teenager is going to be disappointed. Neither the West, nor China, is going to cut their own economic throats. And the Right isn’t going to shut off economic growth, and the Left isn’t going to accept nuclear energy. If her dream is a world where the peasants in China accept living a stunted lifestyle and the West outsources its manufacturing to China who emits GHG anyway, her dream is dead. > [@Try2B Comprehensive](#): > > … 4% of South Asia will be uninhabitable by 2100 if serious action isn’t taken. 4% of… 2 billion people? What are they supposed to do as their regions become literally uninhabitable? … “Literally uninhabitable” means they need air conditioning? > [@AOC](#): > > The world is going to end in 12 years if we don’t address climate change… > [@Kimstu](#): > > So personally, I’m suffering from a bit of hysteria-accusation fatigue. I’m not. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![HMS\_Irruncible](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hms_irruncible/32/7394_2.png) [@HMS\_Irruncible](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HMS_Irruncible)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2019, 1:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-leaders-are-to-blame-a-nother-discussion-about-climate-change/840726/40 "2019-09-24T13:23:18Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > Do you feel like you left out an important detail in your paraphrasing? I do. You don’t need to travel to Southeast Asia to know that most people there are very poor and don’t have air conditioning. But I have, and I can report that it’s true. When their homes become unsurvivable without air conditioning, what’s going to happen to them? Are they supposed to sell their property and move elsewhere? Who will be the buyer of uninhabitable property? Are the richer countries that refused to spend money fighting climate change now going to come up with money to buy all these people air conditioners, putting even more demand on energy? I expect your response is something along the lines of “I don’t care”. I won’t bother persuading you, but if you accept that since we’re not installing air conditioning in that 4% of Southeast Asia (or elsewhere), then nobody’s going to live there when it gets too hot. OTOH if you surprise me and say "we should take up a collection and air-condition the affected area, my response is “why funding for the symptom but not the disease?” [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-leaders-are-to-blame-a-nother-discussion-about-climate-change/840726.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-leaders-are-to-blame-a-nother-discussion-about-climate-change/840726.md?page=3)