Climate change has never been in my Top 500 concerns. And it isn't #501. I worried about it for about five minutes in 1988, and never again. Global Cooling. The New Ice Age. Global Warming. Climate Change. Inadvertent Climate Modification. Global Weirding. The Climate Crisis. The Climate Emergency. 97% of scientists agree! Catastrophic Heating. Extreme Weather. Climate Change Extinction. Jesus Crisis.
The tip off was when the change was made to climate change from global warming. The climate has always changed and always will but this allowed the catastrophists to include all sorts of stuff that has nothing to do with carbon dioxide but makes for dramatic news. Global warming is about global climate but there is also local climate (city heat islands) , regional climate (long term drought in the SW) and just weather which is most of the news.
Global warming is real, that said I doubt it will have much of an affect on the lives of most Americans in the foreseeable future.
As with many things there are the reports of scientists who study the issue from a non political perspective, and then there are the activists who write with hyperbole. Like many issues, climate change was completely taken over by partisans.
Almost all of America lives in a climate controlled environment. We work and live inside. Few live without central AC or heat. Even our cars are heated and cooled.
Most of the ill effects of rising temperatures will be felt by others, and most of the carbon being released is by others. The major changes in the world will be made by others. That said I'm happy to have my government shift the direction of our energy usage. PCBs are not controversial, no one rails against 245D, no one nowadays has even heard of them, or chlordane. We have a good history of making changes in how we do things based on science. Just because crazed enviros blame any and every thing on climate is no reason to reflexively take an opposing stance.
While it's true that some climate activists have exaggerated the threat of climate change, it's still a problem that needs to be addressed if we want to avoid making life worse for the human race in the future. We can dispense with radical and unworkable ideas like degrowth and accept that fossil fuel consumption will be with us for the near to medium term and still avoid engaging in the destructive backsliding being imposed by the Trump Administration. We should be promoting clean energy, including nuclear. We should not be propping up the coal industry by forcing consumers to subsidize uneconomical coal power plants at a minimum.
Then should we be propping up the solar industry by forcing consumers to subsidize uneconomical solar farms? The subsidies for coal are trivial compared to the subsidies for solar.
Coal produced 12.2% of the energy in the United States in 2022 (the last year the EIA gives complete stats for) and renewables 8.4%. But coal got 0.3% of the subsidies, and renewables 54.8%. Is that fair?
To rub it in, fossil fuels got $12.453 billion while producing 75.5% of the energy, nuclear got $390 million dollars and produced 8.2% of the energy, and renewables got $15.589 billion and produced 8.4% of the energy.
Put another way, for one percent of the energy produced the taxpayer paid $47.56 million for nuclear, $164.9 million for fossil, and a stunning $1.8559 billion for renewables.
The article is totally correct on all this bullshit about climate change. But it is totally off base when it comes to bodily autonomy and the choice of one to choose medically assisted death. The greatest body autonomy is the ability to make your own choice about when your life becomes unbearable, whether it is physical or mental. The argument of autonomy For women concerning abortion, pails, in comparison to the absolute right to decide when it is, you wish to die for whatever reason. Stop with all the bullshit about euthanasia.
We have always had a choice about the end of life. Us Americans have our guns but all Canadians have to do is fall asleep outside in the winter. The problem is the government involvement. Given that the government also runs the retirement system and the health care system, the conflict of interest is obvious. I recall an incident where the Canadian government tried to encourage a disabled veteran who was complaining about delays in getting a wheelchair.
Climate change has never been in my Top 500 concerns. And it isn't #501. I worried about it for about five minutes in 1988, and never again. Global Cooling. The New Ice Age. Global Warming. Climate Change. Inadvertent Climate Modification. Global Weirding. The Climate Crisis. The Climate Emergency. 97% of scientists agree! Catastrophic Heating. Extreme Weather. Climate Change Extinction. Jesus Crisis.
The tip off was when the change was made to climate change from global warming. The climate has always changed and always will but this allowed the catastrophists to include all sorts of stuff that has nothing to do with carbon dioxide but makes for dramatic news. Global warming is about global climate but there is also local climate (city heat islands) , regional climate (long term drought in the SW) and just weather which is most of the news.
Global warming is real, that said I doubt it will have much of an affect on the lives of most Americans in the foreseeable future.
As with many things there are the reports of scientists who study the issue from a non political perspective, and then there are the activists who write with hyperbole. Like many issues, climate change was completely taken over by partisans.
Almost all of America lives in a climate controlled environment. We work and live inside. Few live without central AC or heat. Even our cars are heated and cooled.
Most of the ill effects of rising temperatures will be felt by others, and most of the carbon being released is by others. The major changes in the world will be made by others. That said I'm happy to have my government shift the direction of our energy usage. PCBs are not controversial, no one rails against 245D, no one nowadays has even heard of them, or chlordane. We have a good history of making changes in how we do things based on science. Just because crazed enviros blame any and every thing on climate is no reason to reflexively take an opposing stance.
While it's true that some climate activists have exaggerated the threat of climate change, it's still a problem that needs to be addressed if we want to avoid making life worse for the human race in the future. We can dispense with radical and unworkable ideas like degrowth and accept that fossil fuel consumption will be with us for the near to medium term and still avoid engaging in the destructive backsliding being imposed by the Trump Administration. We should be promoting clean energy, including nuclear. We should not be propping up the coal industry by forcing consumers to subsidize uneconomical coal power plants at a minimum.
Then should we be propping up the solar industry by forcing consumers to subsidize uneconomical solar farms? The subsidies for coal are trivial compared to the subsidies for solar.
Coal produced 12.2% of the energy in the United States in 2022 (the last year the EIA gives complete stats for) and renewables 8.4%. But coal got 0.3% of the subsidies, and renewables 54.8%. Is that fair?
To rub it in, fossil fuels got $12.453 billion while producing 75.5% of the energy, nuclear got $390 million dollars and produced 8.2% of the energy, and renewables got $15.589 billion and produced 8.4% of the energy.
Put another way, for one percent of the energy produced the taxpayer paid $47.56 million for nuclear, $164.9 million for fossil, and a stunning $1.8559 billion for renewables.
Capisce?
The article is totally correct on all this bullshit about climate change. But it is totally off base when it comes to bodily autonomy and the choice of one to choose medically assisted death. The greatest body autonomy is the ability to make your own choice about when your life becomes unbearable, whether it is physical or mental. The argument of autonomy For women concerning abortion, pails, in comparison to the absolute right to decide when it is, you wish to die for whatever reason. Stop with all the bullshit about euthanasia.
We have always had a choice about the end of life. Us Americans have our guns but all Canadians have to do is fall asleep outside in the winter. The problem is the government involvement. Given that the government also runs the retirement system and the health care system, the conflict of interest is obvious. I recall an incident where the Canadian government tried to encourage a disabled veteran who was complaining about delays in getting a wheelchair.
An important distinction often overlooked....purposely.
If you haven't the guts to end your life, why should the state do it for you?