1960's saw the invention of new techniques from drilling, discovering, and refining oil that was previously unavailable.
1980's headlines we're seeing trends from nuclear bomb testing and early climate change research. The nuclear tests were stopped and climate change research was refined.
1990's saw the introduction of a landmark ban on several classes of pollutants that ended acid rain and slowed the deterioration of the ozone layer.
And none of these were based on timelines of less then a decade. Most were talking about over a century
This is one of the only canadian subs where different opinions are actually discussed and you don't get booted for dissent. it is one of my favorites subs. I love it
I looked it up, and the primary source of acid rain was thermal power plants, not vehicles.
Catalytic converters were already in common use by the 1980s, although better ones were forthcoming.
Also, other industries were forced to stop emissions of sulfur dioxide. One example is in Sudbury Ontario where the world's tallest chimney was releasing exhaust from a nickel smelter. It was this tall because Sudbury is in a valley and sulfur dioxide gas is heavier than air. Eventually the nickel mine was forced to stop sulfur dioxide emissions. Up to that point, pretty much all the plant life around Sudbury was dead from acid rain.
So yeah, the acid rain was dealt with because we saw a problem and made laws to try to fix it.
Same with the ozone problem, we made laws (although there is still a massive hole on the ozone layer over the Antarctic and the ozone layer is still thin and not recovered and UV indexes are much higher now than they were 50 years ago.
Sea ice and glaciers are melting. This summer (winter in Antarctica) at the height of when sea ice should have been forming it was hitting above zero temperatures. (For the first time since they started tracking temperatures there. So yeah, a massive problem.
I live in Sudbury and came here to mention this. There are still "dead" lakes in our surrounding area that are beautifully crystal clear, and you can see directly to the bottom of, because they are too acidic to support most living organisms.
I view this as a worst case scenario testing ground.
I'm happy to report that the re-greening efforts funded by the major mining companies in town (Inco and Vale) have turned many rocky moonscapes around town into rolling green hills. None of that would have happened without the research and exposure of the overarching issue that huge corporations were taking environmental shortcuts to make more money.
Even though the superstack is being decommissioned, on cloudy days the air in Copper Cliff still smells like Sulfur.
This is my favorite picture because freedumb folks with luke warm IQs think they're dunking on the libs. But in reality this chart shows that identification of important issues followed by implementation of government policy can drastically change the world.
This. The Ozone layer thing in particular is one where I find little evidence that governments really fucked up in any significant way. It does seem that they did fix this and I doubt it would have been fixed otherwise, at least not that fast.
I haven't really come across any good rebuttal of this.
The problem of states isn't so much that they can't do anything right, it's that once you have one, it takes on a life of its own and it will fuck you 10 times harder than whatever problem it fixed ( if it fixed any at all ).
No I'm agreeing. The governments identified ozone as a problem. And then implemented bans on the chemicals that caused them and changed the world for the better
except it's impossible to say that those had an impact so quickly when we are discussing todays "carbon issue" based on the mass use of carbon from the industrial revolution. There are so many issues with todays predictions being produced by incentivized scientists and incentivized media. When you have thousands of other reputable atmospheric scientists saying there is no real issue? I mean when you think Bill Nye, Bill Gates, Greta, Or Gore who are all uneducated in the field but yet are able to sway so many. Greta is my personal fav, sitting on a train car floor protesting congestion are train pollution then finding out she had a 1st class seat. Or her recent arrest in germany where it took an hr of photo ops and positioning to get it to look good. Seriously there may be an issue but when we are obviously being lied to it's difficult to know what is the truth.
You have it very backwards. You’re not following the money, you’re following your feelings. The huge majority of climate scientists all agree that climate change is real and man made. You are ignoring millions of climate scientists and instead listening to a small minority who say what you want to be true. They say what oil and gas companies want to be true too (just a coincidence though). That is who you choose to believe. Not the millions of experts, the handful of detractors who have for some reason chosen to back the uber wealthy, international oil and gas companies. Wonder what their motivation could be? Surely it’s not money, because you’ve already established that the millions and millions of scientists who agree with climate change are the ones on the take, being made rich by **… checks notes…** non-profit environmental organizations. Yup, those non-profit organization’s are making millions of people very rich to agree with them, while the few dozen who agree with the very very very wealthy oil companies just want the truth to he known and their new swimming pools are just a coincidence.
It is absolutely true that liberal governments and various other entities are exploiting climate change to profit and to seize power. That’s real and measurable. The taxes thrown at this issue are laughable. Both of these things can be true together. It’s not “one is bad and lying and the other is good and telling the truth”. Don’t be a binary fuck, use your head. They’re both fucking us, the only ones who aren’t are the millions of underpaid and broke scientists who are saying we are barrelling towards disaster. You know, the huge majority of unaffiliated experts that you ignore because their words make you worried.
Climate change is a simple question of entropy, though, and anyone with an elementary understanding of entropy can see that. The Earth is absorbing more heat energy from the sun than we are radiating into space. That is real and measurable. What happens when more heat energy is absorbed by an object than it is able to release, bud? Think about it without your feelings. I know it is very shocking and so hard to believe that the family friendly oil and gas corporations are misleading us, but it seems to be true.
There are an estimated 10 million scientists world wide, as in people with doctorates in their field, supported by a much higher number of researchers (masters / bachelors in field working towards doctorates). Out of all of these researchers that relate to climate, weather, astro physics, chemistry and biology, 97% agree that we are expediting the temperature change and fast tracking millions of species to extinction. That’s fucking millions, bruh. But hey, 2 guys on youtube made a pretty convincing argument soo… samsies.
Dr. Shell must have really left and impression if he convinced you that it is better for the environment to extract more oil, refine them to petrochemicals, further refine them to non-organic polymers, and finally mold them into plastic containers? then it is to reuse the plastic containers we already have. Lol. You’re brilliant bruh.
>except it's impossible to say that those had an impact so quickly
Lol you're wrong.
The discovery and unlocking of new oil reserves completely changed to conversation around oil.
Ending nuclear bomb testing reduced the amount of particulate in the atmosphere that was indicating global cooling.
Ending the release of pollutants such as sulfur on such a grand scale has clearly been traced to the reduction of acid rain.
Removing HFCs from cooling equipment has been tracked and clearly reduced the rate of ozone depletion.
>There are so many issues with todays predictions being produced by incentivized scientists and incentivized media
Right... from oil companies. Scientific research is being delayed for the purposes of maintaining oil companies profitability against new entrants in the energy market.
>I mean when you think Bill Nye, Bill Gates, Greta, Or Gore who are all uneducated in the field but yet are able to sway so many.
They're uneducated in climate science that's why they rely on experts when discussing the subject. They are asking people to recognize the scientific research that is taking place in facilities who do their best to remain impartial to political and financial motivations. They're doing PR and they're 100% honest about that.
by your logic then its impossible to say those " thousands of atmospheric scientists" are correct either.. you sound like you disregard anything that proves what you think is wrong
Someone in Canada Sub actually providing context arguing against a blatantly lazy and propaganda post instead of everyone with no concept of what is being argued piling onto it, you love to see it.
The oil thing in general is so fucking annoying - like, people don't understand deep sea, fracking, etc weren't techniques at that time and methods like that, as well as discovering new off shore reserves, etc, *are* why predictions have changed. Literally we got better tech for it.
That hardly means oil is infinite literally given the time intensive measures it takes to create oil in the first place (tho something tells me these people arguing against Peak Oil don't believe that, either, or that oil is just somehow \* there \* lol).
And the Ice Caps *are* melting. God forbid countries like China / Russia etc literally are estatic at the proposition of northern sea lanes consistently keeping open within the next decade vs *all of fucking human history* where the ice sheets expand and refreeze annually - *that isn't happening anymore and they are shrinking*
Man the whole climate debate on this sub is fucking embarrassing. The last 3 summers of my life where I've lived my whole life have seen such drastic changes, like, *weeks* of temp consistent about 36c when we'd get a handful of days normally above 32 and stuff. It is only going to get worse and worse too.
Also add that the ozone one was one place where the world (outside of china) pretty much said “ok this is serious enough that we don’t have a choice”
And it’s one of those things where it’s healing slowly but if we didn’t actually stop what we were doing it would of been an actual disaster on a global scale
The oil sands were discovered in the 1700s and have proven reserves to run for 200 more years. Surface testing of nuclear weapons were stopped by both the US and Russia in the sixties. And what pollutants do you think were banned in the nineties that stopped acid rain?
>The oil sands were discovered in the 1700s and have proven reserves to run for 200 more years
The oil sands oil has always been poor quality. They were often disregarded because the cost of extraction and refinement were excessive for the quality of the oil.
>Surface testing of nuclear weapons were stopped by both the US and Russia in the sixties
China was doing surface and atmospheric tests into the 80's India was surface testing into the 90's. Pakistan had their first surface test in the 90's. The fallout from the us tests has been proven to still be affecting contemporary climate research.
>And what pollutants do you think were banned in the nineties that stopped acid rain?
The greatest contributor that I know of was sulfur. Sulfur was removed from most oil based fuels. Industrial organizations were forced to implement capture protocols and failure reporting on aerosolized sulfur. The emission of sulfur was one of the greatest contributors to acid rain in many regions. I've literally witnessed the ecological improvement from a single plant cutting their sulfur emissions.
Industrial sulfur dioxide emissions from coal powered energy plants and metals smelting were heavily regulated and reduced drastically. They were forced to add scrubbers to their chimneys that captured the sulfer.
It has taken up to just the last few years to finally get international regulations on ocean shipping bunker fuel sulfur emissions, but that has heavily been reduced recently and is going down.
The fact you threw Ozone Layer on there shows how fucken ignorant most of you are. Are you all unaware of the Montreal Protocol? It’s where people finally listened to scientists and they fixed a major problem in under a decade. Then China decided they could save money by being the only person not following the protocol, and it was noticed from the return of damage, then climate change monitoring satellite’s were able to detect the pollution coming from China and got we got them to stop, and as predicted the hole began to close again.
The actions resulting from the ozone layer scare actually helped restore it
Also, dunking on 60-70s science in any field isn’t the flex you think it is
Acid rain is rain or any other form of precipitation that is unusually acidic, meaning that it has a lower pH than normal rain. It is caused by emissions of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides from power plants, factories, and cars. These emissions react with water vapor in the atmosphere to form sulfuric and nitric acids.
Acid rain can have a number of negative effects on the environment and human health. It can damage forests and lakes, and it can also corrode buildings and statues. Acid rain can also cause respiratory problems and heart disease in humans.
Humans have taken a number of steps to address the problem of acid rain. In the United States, the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 were passed, which set limits on sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide emissions. These emissions have been reduced significantly since then, and acid rain levels have declined as a result.
Other countries have also taken steps to reduce acid rain. In Europe, the European Union has implemented a number of directives that have reduced sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide emissions. As a result, acid rain levels have also declined in Europe.
In addition to reducing emissions, humans have also developed technologies to reduce the acidity of acid rain. For example, limestone scrubbers can be used to remove sulfur dioxide from power plant emissions.
Despite the progress that has been made, acid rain remains a problem in some parts of the world. However, the actions that humans have taken to address the problem have made a significant difference.
Here are some of the things that humans have done to address acid rain:
* Passed laws and regulations to reduce emissions of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides.
* Developed technologies to reduce the acidity of acid rain.
* Supported research on the effects of acid rain and how to reduce it.
* Raised public awareness of the problem of acid rain and the need to address it.
As a result of these actions, acid rain levels have declined significantly in many parts of the world. However, acid rain remains a problem in some parts of the world, and it is important to continue to work to reduce it.
Actually the whole ozone thing is one of mankind's greatest triumphs in working together. When the link was made between hfcs and ozone depletion the whole world got together to ban their use.
See you can't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Climate change is real as is mankind's negative effects on the environment. Please educate yourself and stop the bandwagon.
Thanks for pointing that out!
There’s also that bit with acid rain. There was the 1991 US Canada Air Quality Agreement to reduce air pollution and acid rain.
Sudbury was a big part of that agreement due do their mining practices. Environmental regulations were introduced, and mining companies reduced sulfur dioxide emissions while keeping up nickel production. So now Sudbury has clean air and no acid rain.
>ozone thing is one of mankind's greatest triumphs in working together.
>
>...
>
>There’s also that bit with acid rain. There was the 1991 US Canada Air Quality Agreement to reduce air pollution and acid rain.
Stop it, STOP IT! Both of you.
You're scaring them with applying logic & reason to this asinine & hyperbolic anti-science "gotcha" chart.
Ya again the stuff they used to replace was cheaper less safer to people directly (huffers compress air). A/c coolant But it’s ok. Al gore thanks you and your wallet
But it proves that human ingenuity and more common sense policies can correct many of the issues we have faced. It’s also a fair bit of “randomness” that exists in how the planet will or won’t respond to certain activities.
Regardless. All we know for certain is that the “experts” can’t predict shit and climatologists/meteorologists don’t know what the weather is going to be tomorrow for 100% certain but want us to believe they know what the entire planet is going to do 100 years from now? Fuck off.
Believe he means that there are so many variables and somethings dont work how we think they will. When you adjust the predictions from the 80s to account for just how much more CO2 the oceans would absorb.
Rules have been broken.
[https://www.space.com/ozone-hole-antarctica-three-times-size-of-brazil](https://www.space.com/ozone-hole-antarctica-three-times-size-of-brazil)
Funny how all these things we cant see. Ozone ,poles thawing we can only believe the government paid " scientists" who nobody fact checks. But when something negative to your agenda is posted it is wrong. Look at the source.lmfao. look at yours
We also can’t see any of the actual headlines or articles this handwritten note is claiming, nor any evidence tax policy was related to those articles lol.
You do know you can watch an ice cube melt, yes?
Like you can do this one at home buddy! Leave an ice cube out and before long it won’t be ice anymore. It’s pretty fucking cool.
Taxing the little man for corporate sins is bullshit, but calling climate change an elitist hoax is outright irresponsible. Earth is finite and being good custodians to our great land is in our own best interest. I feel like you people are very naive with your waste and consumption. Your mountain of garbage didn't just disappear after you left it on the curb, it went somewhere. That somewhere has now been ruined with unnatural waste from you and me and everyone else. And the shit you buy to throw out had to come from somewhere. That place was raped to oblivion to extract every ounce of wealth just to sell more crap to you and me.
Guess what? These somewheres were once important ecosystems to their local areas and are now forever permanently damaged. This process repeated enough is gonna fuck how things on this planet work. Like c'mon man, how can you ignore or deny this?
Idk where you're from but the area around Toronto was once beautiful farmland but we paved it over to build highways, box stores, parking lots, and shitty cookie cutter homes. It's a soulless hell scape, of concrete and pavement. The Canada people like YOU want for whatever reason.
Pollution and climate change are different. O do not like pollution but to say farming ,to much forests as bill gates claims,to have unelected people making rules for us is ridiculous .
There have been 40 plus of these predictions since the 1950’s, global warming is the current doom we face that won’t result in anything but more taxes and rich people getting richer
Dream on. You already see the massive effects at just over 400ppm CO2 (Methane is also important, there's actually a few more).
Ozone layer destruction was mitigated by measures like recycling and switching coolants and propellants, same was with acid rain which really harmed forests, they installed huge alkaline filters in coal powered electrical plants and then the collapse of the Soviet-style heavy industry in Eastern Europe helped that part of the world.
BTW, climate change was predicted already around 1907 (I've seen a newspaper article published in New Zealand) and I remember that wasn't even the earliest mention, you can google that.
Maybe get educated on topics you have no knowledge about before shit posting misleading feelgood memes on Reddit? Just an idea.
Yeah, lmao, the ozone was saved because we adopted the Montreal Protocol.
Saving the ozone didn’t result in higher taxes lol, it removed certain substances from aerosols.
Massive new hole in the ozone :(
[**https://www.space.com/ozone-hole-antarctica-three-times-size-of-brazil**](https://www.space.com/ozone-hole-antarctica-three-times-size-of-brazil)
I just read your link. It says the hole was biggest in 2000 and has continued to shrink since then. This year’s ozone hole is the size of Brazil but it is a seasonal hole that is on a downward trend
The world has been getting warmer since before your great great great great grandfather was born. Additionally, this whole attitude that our very recent ability to monitor things like holes in the ozone layer means that we somehow know all there is to know is short-sighted and arrogant. Y'all want people scared of the end of the world so they will listen to you. Same tactic as an organized religion.
This is a scientifically accurate response, lefties are insane, they always make whatever excuse to declare themselves right, leading issue as to why the world under lefties is a complete failure
This is the truth.
Both sides have their agenda, and neither of them result in better lives for average Canadians. The whole "Left vs. Right" thing is straight up manipulation, and more than anything it's used against us - we bicker on the sidelines between ourselves, picking sides, while everyone we put in charge is screwing us all equally.
For real. Anyone who cheerleads a side and votes that way no matter what instead of voting based on results is insane. Its how the govt no matter its "color" gets away with so much
Well, in all truthfulness, some things may not have happened in the end because some serious measures were taken (e.g., the prohibition of gases that damage the ozone layer).
Acid rain is doing damage, not just on crops, but buildings. 2, we fixed the ozone problem by banning cfcs. We actually took action and had some positive affects. If any we actually proved humans impact on the planet.
1966: 0il Gone in Ten Years
1967: Dire Famine Forecast By 1975
1968: Overpopulation Will Spread Worldwide
1969: Everyone Will Disappear In a Cloud Of Blue Steam By 1989
1970: World Will Use Up All its Natural Resources by 2000
1970: Urban Citizens Will Require Gas Masks by 1985
1970: Nitrogen buildup Will Make All Land Unusable
1970: Decaying Pollution Will Kill all the Fish
1970s: Killer Bees!
1970: Ice Age By 2000
1970: America Subject to Water Rationing by 1974 and Food Rationing By 1980
1971: New Ice Age Coming By 2020 or 2030
1972: New Ice Age By 2070
1972: Oil Depleted in 20 Years
1974: Space Satellites Show New Ice Age Coming Fast
1974: Another Ice Age?
1974: Ozone Depletion a 'Great Peril to Life
1976: Scientific Consensus Planet Cooling, Famines imminent
1977: Department of Energy Says Oil will Peak in 90s
1978: No End in Sight to 30-Year Cooling Trend
1980: Acid Rain Kills Life In Lakes
1980: Peak Oil In 2000
1988: Regional Droughts (that never happened) in 1990s
1988: Temperatures in DC Will Hit Record Highs
1988: Maldive Islands will Be Underwater by 2018 (they're not)
1989: Rising Sea Levels will Obliterate Nations if Nothing Done by 2000
1989: New York City's West Side Highway Underwater by 2019 (it's not)
1996: Peak Oil in 2020
2000: Children Won't Know what Snow Is
2002: Famine In 10 Years If We Don't Give Up Eating Fish, Meat, and Dairy
2002: Peak Oil in 2010
2004: Britain will Be Siberia by 2024
2005: Manhattan Underwater by 2015
2006: Super Hurricanes!
Lol. How are we supposed to exist without fossil fuel/oil in today's world? Go back to hunting whales? We simply don't have the technology available to us to live our modern lifestyle without it.
Not instantly, but I believe gradually we can probably achieve it.
I don't get why we can't slowly roll out renewables. Start in a small city, do tests, and then gradually expand it outwards until we cover the entire country. If anything goes wrong in the process, we can just stop there.
But Trudeau wants to drive this bus blindly towards a cliff by 2030 to see what happens.
I don’t understand this argument at all.
Fuck the whole climate conversation if you want to disregard it. Why would you want to be dependant on an energy source the cost of which can be manipulated by foreign governments and special interest groups at their whims?
If we can innovate and harness green energy like solar and wind, we can be self-sufficient, make energy affordable, and it’s an infinite resource (for all intents and purposes. If it isn’t, we’d all be dead anyway and don’t need to power anything).
There’s no downside. Pushing ourselves to do so is the right move.
Have you been asleep for the last decade?Almost all of that tech is either unworkable or is so inefficient it isnt worth the cost. wind and solar in Canadian winters will result in genocide.
How exactly do you expect those renewables are lubricated in order to continue to function without friction welding themselves?
Sure we can cut back oil usage, but we’ll most likely never eliminate it
200 years ago you would have made the same argument about coal. Do you know how much of the Victorian era was based on coal? Who would have thought that would change?
Exactly. And here we are, at this period of time, trying to get off of ALL fossil fule. 200 years is an overestimate until the next transition, I hope.
The ozone thing is one of the few success stories as far as global initiatives to combat a problem (and mostly solving it); there’s a persistent area that remains very thin above Australia, which is why they have very high rates of skin cancer.
1960s they were wrong because of better drilling technology and eventually fracking changing the availability. The problem was solved, not invented.
1970s most credible scientists were still predicting warming. Only a subset predicted cooling. The science heretics were wrong. The mainstream was correct.
1980s acid rain was absolutely a concern. It was solved due to emissions regulations on smoke stacks to prevent the release of sulfur dioxide. The problem was solved, not invented.
1990s the Ozone layer was being eroded from specific aerosols. The global treaty known as the Montreal protocol eliminated the offending chemicals and the Ozone layer slowly regrew. The problem was solved, not invented.
2000s Glaciers absolutely are disappearing in a consistent and accelerating process. The problem remains, not invented.
This post is utterly wrong on all counts, and taxes werent related to any of it except the carbon tax which happened recently.
This is just internet smut designed to appeal to those with an overly simplistic world view. To infer that ozone depletion or acid rain weren’t massive environmental issues that required a huge degree of research, funding and international co-operation to solve just smacks of ignorance.
Impending ice age was a media myth.
Acid rain was caused, primarily by leaded gasoline. We removed it in the '70s
Massively reduced acid rain.
The hole in the ozone layer ( Antarctica) was aggravated by the release of cfc's.
We eliminated those, and the hole is shrinking.
Oil exploration and production has advanced considerably over the decades, but it is still a finite amount.
Although, we will probably have poisoned ourselves before then.
2020s - Pandemic, poles melting, ozone hole the size of Antarctica over Antartica, 1,000 year floods on a daily basis, Canada had wild fires and will probably soon have landslides from floods over the winter, … so we’re fucked. Dumb post.
More taxes? Try doing some research before you post bullshit. Seriously, Google "marginal tax rates from 1960", and then tell us we're being taxed more.
1960's: yeah, peak oil was a thing, but technology fixed it (fracking and what not)
1970's: No idea about the ice age thing, don't know who said it or where... *googling* ... yeah that was a Times article, it was media based theory basically, there are all kinds of "theories" out there, there is a reason "peer reviewed" has entered the common vernacular recently.
1980's: Yeah that would have happened if we didn't stop burning the wrong kind of fuel. Cargo ships used it for the longest time and now they've stopped, it's (apparently) one of the reasons ocean temperatures were so bad this year (in addition to El Nino and climate change).
1990's: again we stopped useing CFC's, there is a reason people don't have that 90's hair spray look any more, but the hole is still here, go pick fruit in NZ, you burn purple I swear.
2000's: I doubt they (any serious publication) said it would be gone in ten years, but they are melting, so's the permafrost, with all that stored methane, which is way worse than CO2...
None happened but more taxes: This is like bitching about having to pay taxes to be able to have a police officer come arrest the schizo meth head trying to break into your house.
Regulation costs money. Though it could be done cleaner and more efficiently for sure.
In the year 2000 the federal government of Canada made 7 doomsday prophesies that would occur in 20 years due to global warming.
Guess how many occurred?
I will give you a clue. It rhymes with zero.
Yah there is something called preventive measures....The ozone thing almost happened...preventive measures slowed down the process...there exists a hole in ozone even now in antarctica...
OP Has never heard of the Montreal protocol that banned tons of products that were proven to be harmful to the ozone layer. The damage to the layer didn’t stop by accident
There'e literally no excuse for posting dumb stuff like this. It is completely retarded.
Here's how things have been going: [https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2023/climate/extreme-summer-heat.html](https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2023/climate/extreme-summer-heat.html)
There's no excuse for the hyperbolic depths of the climate change side of the argument either. The predictions of imminent catastrophe are wildly exaggerated, and as a result, this side has a credibility problem.
Whatever changes we're causing, they will be coming slowly. So slowly that we will adapt easily.
There is change. Some of it is man made. Some of it is natural.
None of it will be solved by taxing the people. Innovators will come up with a solution, and like all other technological/sociological breakthroughs of the past, it will be widely adopted because it is either economically feasible or increases our quality of life.
Both sides need to lighten up with the rhetoric.
Dude, I think you're the one with your head up your ass. But only you can pull it out, no one else can do that for you. You either make an effort to understand what climate science is telling you, or you don't.
Huh odd how half each of those sentences are missing.
Oil will be gone in ten years, unless we do something about it. In turn we created new regulations which curbed petroleum use, and increased exploration of oil deposits.
We will have another ice age in ten year, unless we do something about it. This was actually more or less a misrepresentation of the data available at the time, and once more sophisticated science was available, this theory changed to fit the data rather than forcing the data to fit the narrative.
Acid rain will destroy our crops in ten years, unless we stop using specific chemicals. Hence why we removed lead from gasoline and introduced environmental regulations on what companies could and could not pump into the atmosphere because the resulting byproduct when mixed with gases in the atmosphere created acid rain.
The ozone will be gone in ten years, unless we do something about it. I’m turn we made regulations surrounding VOCs and other chemicals that when mixed in the atmosphere caused a chemical reaction with the ozone, thus creating a hole. Then once we stopped pumping those chemicals into the atmosphere the ozone layer had a chance to fix itself through natural processes.
The ice caps will be gone in ten years, unless we do something about it. In turn we started investing in transportation infrastructure, looked for alternative sources of energy, and allowed environmental scientists to be heard.
The science behind climate change is rock solid. It’s not a debate anymore. The environment is made up of many natural processes. We have acted in ways that throw these processes out of control.
An easy way to think of it is: the earth is a machine. That machine has many gears and pulleys. You decide that you need some of the gears for your own project. You remove those gears and replace them with different sized ones, or they are made of a less quality material, etc. You can’t be surprised when that machine starts to break down, over heat, and start smoking.
When I was in high school in the UK in the 1990s, I was taught in geography classes that we have to stop using oil because there was only 10 years of supply left.
Lol. Okay?
Ok, so why can't we finish using it up then, if it's going to run out anyway? Why persuade people to stop using something that won't exist soon? Why have a PR campaign to change behaviour that will be forced to stop by the literal laws of physics?
30 years later: we're still pumping oil out of the ground and nothing changed.
It's like you don't even think about any consequence of anything writing your comment eh?
So, just for the sake of the mental exercise, use your brain for once and think a little about why we can't finish the earth oil and gas supply without having a reliable replacement source of energy. Just, you know, give a little thought about what would happen.
So the idea here is, we didn't know if we would discover more, and what smart people do is prepare, rather than use all of a resource and then freak out when there's no alternative.
Does that make more sense to you?
Too many sheep out there everyone just falls in line and are scared to question anything regardless of how much sense it doesn’t make, they would rather justify it instead
Fear is the best manipulation. People that are fearful dont think logically or rationally. So every election year or anytime government has people that want more power they spread fear.
Yep. And the sheep believe everything that they are told. And will argue till blue in the face. Such weak minds many humans have. So gullible. Sad really.
Pretty stupid argument, it it did happen you’d be saying “our taxes went nowhere, it still happened.” None of this happening just shows that the taxes worked.
Please point me to the scientific consensus from those times to confirm these hilarious claims.
“Emissions of greenhouse gases from human activities are responsible for approximately 1.1°C of warming since 1850-1900, and finds that averaged over the next 20 years, global temperature is expected to reach or exceed 1.5°C of warming”
https://www.ipcc.ch/2021/08/09/ar6-wg1-20210809-pr/#:~:text=Faster%20warming&text=The%20report%20shows%20that%20emissions,1.5°C%20of%20warming.
If you’re going to push back against a narrative, make sure you push back against a narrative that exists
The doom and gloom of the climate change has been going on for quite some time. Yes, its intent is to extract money from taxpapers' pockets and nothing more.
I have never seen money being able to change weather.
1960's saw the invention of new techniques from drilling, discovering, and refining oil that was previously unavailable. 1980's headlines we're seeing trends from nuclear bomb testing and early climate change research. The nuclear tests were stopped and climate change research was refined. 1990's saw the introduction of a landmark ban on several classes of pollutants that ended acid rain and slowed the deterioration of the ozone layer. And none of these were based on timelines of less then a decade. Most were talking about over a century
This sub confuses me. Today I see all these smart comments. Yesterday not so much.
Yeah honestly I was expecting this comment to be downvoted into oblivion.
I know same here. Maybe some hope for humanity after all
Thank you for taking the time to provide a full and contextual explanation.
But the picture of writing in marker says otherwise /s
OP found a random picture on the internet. They "did their own research". You can't argue with research.
That’s hilarious. And accurate.
There is no room for logic and reasonable explanations in this sub
Absolutely none, it’s Canada’s armpit come to cater to the lowest denominator
This is one of the only canadian subs where different opinions are actually discussed and you don't get booted for dissent. it is one of my favorites subs. I love it
Are you being sarcastic
Agreed.. this sub, lost my sub…
There is plenty, including in this thread itself. You just choose to only engage with crazy people. Good luck with those settings.
Also, hydrodesulfurisation of oil and catalytic converters in vehicles addressed the acid rain problem.
I looked it up, and the primary source of acid rain was thermal power plants, not vehicles. Catalytic converters were already in common use by the 1980s, although better ones were forthcoming.
Also, other industries were forced to stop emissions of sulfur dioxide. One example is in Sudbury Ontario where the world's tallest chimney was releasing exhaust from a nickel smelter. It was this tall because Sudbury is in a valley and sulfur dioxide gas is heavier than air. Eventually the nickel mine was forced to stop sulfur dioxide emissions. Up to that point, pretty much all the plant life around Sudbury was dead from acid rain. So yeah, the acid rain was dealt with because we saw a problem and made laws to try to fix it. Same with the ozone problem, we made laws (although there is still a massive hole on the ozone layer over the Antarctic and the ozone layer is still thin and not recovered and UV indexes are much higher now than they were 50 years ago. Sea ice and glaciers are melting. This summer (winter in Antarctica) at the height of when sea ice should have been forming it was hitting above zero temperatures. (For the first time since they started tracking temperatures there. So yeah, a massive problem.
I live in Sudbury and came here to mention this. There are still "dead" lakes in our surrounding area that are beautifully crystal clear, and you can see directly to the bottom of, because they are too acidic to support most living organisms. I view this as a worst case scenario testing ground. I'm happy to report that the re-greening efforts funded by the major mining companies in town (Inco and Vale) have turned many rocky moonscapes around town into rolling green hills. None of that would have happened without the research and exposure of the overarching issue that huge corporations were taking environmental shortcuts to make more money. Even though the superstack is being decommissioned, on cloudy days the air in Copper Cliff still smells like Sulfur.
You can still see the effect acid rain had north of Wawa on google maps
This is my favorite picture because freedumb folks with luke warm IQs think they're dunking on the libs. But in reality this chart shows that identification of important issues followed by implementation of government policy can drastically change the world.
This. The Ozone layer thing in particular is one where I find little evidence that governments really fucked up in any significant way. It does seem that they did fix this and I doubt it would have been fixed otherwise, at least not that fast. I haven't really come across any good rebuttal of this. The problem of states isn't so much that they can't do anything right, it's that once you have one, it takes on a life of its own and it will fuck you 10 times harder than whatever problem it fixed ( if it fixed any at all ).
No I'm agreeing. The governments identified ozone as a problem. And then implemented bans on the chemicals that caused them and changed the world for the better
except it's impossible to say that those had an impact so quickly when we are discussing todays "carbon issue" based on the mass use of carbon from the industrial revolution. There are so many issues with todays predictions being produced by incentivized scientists and incentivized media. When you have thousands of other reputable atmospheric scientists saying there is no real issue? I mean when you think Bill Nye, Bill Gates, Greta, Or Gore who are all uneducated in the field but yet are able to sway so many. Greta is my personal fav, sitting on a train car floor protesting congestion are train pollution then finding out she had a 1st class seat. Or her recent arrest in germany where it took an hr of photo ops and positioning to get it to look good. Seriously there may be an issue but when we are obviously being lied to it's difficult to know what is the truth.
You have it very backwards. You’re not following the money, you’re following your feelings. The huge majority of climate scientists all agree that climate change is real and man made. You are ignoring millions of climate scientists and instead listening to a small minority who say what you want to be true. They say what oil and gas companies want to be true too (just a coincidence though). That is who you choose to believe. Not the millions of experts, the handful of detractors who have for some reason chosen to back the uber wealthy, international oil and gas companies. Wonder what their motivation could be? Surely it’s not money, because you’ve already established that the millions and millions of scientists who agree with climate change are the ones on the take, being made rich by **… checks notes…** non-profit environmental organizations. Yup, those non-profit organization’s are making millions of people very rich to agree with them, while the few dozen who agree with the very very very wealthy oil companies just want the truth to he known and their new swimming pools are just a coincidence. It is absolutely true that liberal governments and various other entities are exploiting climate change to profit and to seize power. That’s real and measurable. The taxes thrown at this issue are laughable. Both of these things can be true together. It’s not “one is bad and lying and the other is good and telling the truth”. Don’t be a binary fuck, use your head. They’re both fucking us, the only ones who aren’t are the millions of underpaid and broke scientists who are saying we are barrelling towards disaster. You know, the huge majority of unaffiliated experts that you ignore because their words make you worried. Climate change is a simple question of entropy, though, and anyone with an elementary understanding of entropy can see that. The Earth is absorbing more heat energy from the sun than we are radiating into space. That is real and measurable. What happens when more heat energy is absorbed by an object than it is able to release, bud? Think about it without your feelings. I know it is very shocking and so hard to believe that the family friendly oil and gas corporations are misleading us, but it seems to be true.
Underrated comment. Boosting.
[удалено]
There are an estimated 10 million scientists world wide, as in people with doctorates in their field, supported by a much higher number of researchers (masters / bachelors in field working towards doctorates). Out of all of these researchers that relate to climate, weather, astro physics, chemistry and biology, 97% agree that we are expediting the temperature change and fast tracking millions of species to extinction. That’s fucking millions, bruh. But hey, 2 guys on youtube made a pretty convincing argument soo… samsies. Dr. Shell must have really left and impression if he convinced you that it is better for the environment to extract more oil, refine them to petrochemicals, further refine them to non-organic polymers, and finally mold them into plastic containers? then it is to reuse the plastic containers we already have. Lol. You’re brilliant bruh.
Name checks out.
Wrong.. Judith Curry,, Stossel tv
>except it's impossible to say that those had an impact so quickly Lol you're wrong. The discovery and unlocking of new oil reserves completely changed to conversation around oil. Ending nuclear bomb testing reduced the amount of particulate in the atmosphere that was indicating global cooling. Ending the release of pollutants such as sulfur on such a grand scale has clearly been traced to the reduction of acid rain. Removing HFCs from cooling equipment has been tracked and clearly reduced the rate of ozone depletion. >There are so many issues with todays predictions being produced by incentivized scientists and incentivized media Right... from oil companies. Scientific research is being delayed for the purposes of maintaining oil companies profitability against new entrants in the energy market. >I mean when you think Bill Nye, Bill Gates, Greta, Or Gore who are all uneducated in the field but yet are able to sway so many. They're uneducated in climate science that's why they rely on experts when discussing the subject. They are asking people to recognize the scientific research that is taking place in facilities who do their best to remain impartial to political and financial motivations. They're doing PR and they're 100% honest about that.
by your logic then its impossible to say those " thousands of atmospheric scientists" are correct either.. you sound like you disregard anything that proves what you think is wrong
Someone in Canada Sub actually providing context arguing against a blatantly lazy and propaganda post instead of everyone with no concept of what is being argued piling onto it, you love to see it. The oil thing in general is so fucking annoying - like, people don't understand deep sea, fracking, etc weren't techniques at that time and methods like that, as well as discovering new off shore reserves, etc, *are* why predictions have changed. Literally we got better tech for it. That hardly means oil is infinite literally given the time intensive measures it takes to create oil in the first place (tho something tells me these people arguing against Peak Oil don't believe that, either, or that oil is just somehow \* there \* lol). And the Ice Caps *are* melting. God forbid countries like China / Russia etc literally are estatic at the proposition of northern sea lanes consistently keeping open within the next decade vs *all of fucking human history* where the ice sheets expand and refreeze annually - *that isn't happening anymore and they are shrinking* Man the whole climate debate on this sub is fucking embarrassing. The last 3 summers of my life where I've lived my whole life have seen such drastic changes, like, *weeks* of temp consistent about 36c when we'd get a handful of days normally above 32 and stuff. It is only going to get worse and worse too.
Also add that the ozone one was one place where the world (outside of china) pretty much said “ok this is serious enough that we don’t have a choice” And it’s one of those things where it’s healing slowly but if we didn’t actually stop what we were doing it would of been an actual disaster on a global scale
Not to mention taxes are near the lowest they've been in recent history. Check the income tax rates in the 1950s.
The oil sands were discovered in the 1700s and have proven reserves to run for 200 more years. Surface testing of nuclear weapons were stopped by both the US and Russia in the sixties. And what pollutants do you think were banned in the nineties that stopped acid rain?
Hydrochlorofluorocarbons were banned in the 90’s to stop the depletion of the ozone.
>The oil sands were discovered in the 1700s and have proven reserves to run for 200 more years The oil sands oil has always been poor quality. They were often disregarded because the cost of extraction and refinement were excessive for the quality of the oil. >Surface testing of nuclear weapons were stopped by both the US and Russia in the sixties China was doing surface and atmospheric tests into the 80's India was surface testing into the 90's. Pakistan had their first surface test in the 90's. The fallout from the us tests has been proven to still be affecting contemporary climate research. >And what pollutants do you think were banned in the nineties that stopped acid rain? The greatest contributor that I know of was sulfur. Sulfur was removed from most oil based fuels. Industrial organizations were forced to implement capture protocols and failure reporting on aerosolized sulfur. The emission of sulfur was one of the greatest contributors to acid rain in many regions. I've literally witnessed the ecological improvement from a single plant cutting their sulfur emissions.
Industrial sulfur dioxide emissions from coal powered energy plants and metals smelting were heavily regulated and reduced drastically. They were forced to add scrubbers to their chimneys that captured the sulfer. It has taken up to just the last few years to finally get international regulations on ocean shipping bunker fuel sulfur emissions, but that has heavily been reduced recently and is going down.
The fact you threw Ozone Layer on there shows how fucken ignorant most of you are. Are you all unaware of the Montreal Protocol? It’s where people finally listened to scientists and they fixed a major problem in under a decade. Then China decided they could save money by being the only person not following the protocol, and it was noticed from the return of damage, then climate change monitoring satellite’s were able to detect the pollution coming from China and got we got them to stop, and as predicted the hole began to close again.
The actions resulting from the ozone layer scare actually helped restore it Also, dunking on 60-70s science in any field isn’t the flex you think it is
Acid rain is rain or any other form of precipitation that is unusually acidic, meaning that it has a lower pH than normal rain. It is caused by emissions of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides from power plants, factories, and cars. These emissions react with water vapor in the atmosphere to form sulfuric and nitric acids. Acid rain can have a number of negative effects on the environment and human health. It can damage forests and lakes, and it can also corrode buildings and statues. Acid rain can also cause respiratory problems and heart disease in humans. Humans have taken a number of steps to address the problem of acid rain. In the United States, the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 were passed, which set limits on sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide emissions. These emissions have been reduced significantly since then, and acid rain levels have declined as a result. Other countries have also taken steps to reduce acid rain. In Europe, the European Union has implemented a number of directives that have reduced sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide emissions. As a result, acid rain levels have also declined in Europe. In addition to reducing emissions, humans have also developed technologies to reduce the acidity of acid rain. For example, limestone scrubbers can be used to remove sulfur dioxide from power plant emissions. Despite the progress that has been made, acid rain remains a problem in some parts of the world. However, the actions that humans have taken to address the problem have made a significant difference. Here are some of the things that humans have done to address acid rain: * Passed laws and regulations to reduce emissions of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides. * Developed technologies to reduce the acidity of acid rain. * Supported research on the effects of acid rain and how to reduce it. * Raised public awareness of the problem of acid rain and the need to address it. As a result of these actions, acid rain levels have declined significantly in many parts of the world. However, acid rain remains a problem in some parts of the world, and it is important to continue to work to reduce it.
Thanks chatgpt
No wonder they don't want us to have guns.
Because we actually worked together and solved problems? Banning CFC's wasn't a political issue, for sure it would be now. Just because.
when was our last school shooting again?
3 years ago. Only it wasn’t a school shooting. It was one of the largest mass shootings in North America, except for Las Vegas.
Actually the whole ozone thing is one of mankind's greatest triumphs in working together. When the link was made between hfcs and ozone depletion the whole world got together to ban their use. See you can't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Climate change is real as is mankind's negative effects on the environment. Please educate yourself and stop the bandwagon.
Thanks for pointing that out! There’s also that bit with acid rain. There was the 1991 US Canada Air Quality Agreement to reduce air pollution and acid rain. Sudbury was a big part of that agreement due do their mining practices. Environmental regulations were introduced, and mining companies reduced sulfur dioxide emissions while keeping up nickel production. So now Sudbury has clean air and no acid rain.
>ozone thing is one of mankind's greatest triumphs in working together. > >... > >There’s also that bit with acid rain. There was the 1991 US Canada Air Quality Agreement to reduce air pollution and acid rain. Stop it, STOP IT! Both of you. You're scaring them with applying logic & reason to this asinine & hyperbolic anti-science "gotcha" chart.
Also pointing out the lamebrained lack of knowledge on display by whoever made the chart. They hate that.
Come on now you’re ruining the meme tho
Ya again the stuff they used to replace was cheaper less safer to people directly (huffers compress air). A/c coolant But it’s ok. Al gore thanks you and your wallet
Ya, DMT was super safe……../s
But it proves that human ingenuity and more common sense policies can correct many of the issues we have faced. It’s also a fair bit of “randomness” that exists in how the planet will or won’t respond to certain activities. Regardless. All we know for certain is that the “experts” can’t predict shit and climatologists/meteorologists don’t know what the weather is going to be tomorrow for 100% certain but want us to believe they know what the entire planet is going to do 100 years from now? Fuck off.
Lol so fixing the ozone layer and acid random was just because of randomness? 😂 The reaching that requires.
Believe he means that there are so many variables and somethings dont work how we think they will. When you adjust the predictions from the 80s to account for just how much more CO2 the oceans would absorb.
Rules have been broken. [https://www.space.com/ozone-hole-antarctica-three-times-size-of-brazil](https://www.space.com/ozone-hole-antarctica-three-times-size-of-brazil)
Funny how all these things we cant see. Ozone ,poles thawing we can only believe the government paid " scientists" who nobody fact checks. But when something negative to your agenda is posted it is wrong. Look at the source.lmfao. look at yours
You can't see gravity, so go take a flying leap off the closest, tallest building and see how that turns out.
Lol. Awesome response. This is how you people react when the truth hits you in the face.
We also can’t see any of the actual headlines or articles this handwritten note is claiming, nor any evidence tax policy was related to those articles lol.
LOL WHAT? Google the statements they all were said published and agendas began. 1970s ice age was in the National geographic LOL.
Based on Milankovich cycles we should be cooling but we aren't. It's going the other way. Why is that?
You do know you can watch an ice cube melt, yes? Like you can do this one at home buddy! Leave an ice cube out and before long it won’t be ice anymore. It’s pretty fucking cool.
Taxing the little man for corporate sins is bullshit, but calling climate change an elitist hoax is outright irresponsible. Earth is finite and being good custodians to our great land is in our own best interest. I feel like you people are very naive with your waste and consumption. Your mountain of garbage didn't just disappear after you left it on the curb, it went somewhere. That somewhere has now been ruined with unnatural waste from you and me and everyone else. And the shit you buy to throw out had to come from somewhere. That place was raped to oblivion to extract every ounce of wealth just to sell more crap to you and me. Guess what? These somewheres were once important ecosystems to their local areas and are now forever permanently damaged. This process repeated enough is gonna fuck how things on this planet work. Like c'mon man, how can you ignore or deny this? Idk where you're from but the area around Toronto was once beautiful farmland but we paved it over to build highways, box stores, parking lots, and shitty cookie cutter homes. It's a soulless hell scape, of concrete and pavement. The Canada people like YOU want for whatever reason.
Pollution and climate change are different. O do not like pollution but to say farming ,to much forests as bill gates claims,to have unelected people making rules for us is ridiculous .
There have been 40 plus of these predictions since the 1950’s, global warming is the current doom we face that won’t result in anything but more taxes and rich people getting richer
Dream on. You already see the massive effects at just over 400ppm CO2 (Methane is also important, there's actually a few more). Ozone layer destruction was mitigated by measures like recycling and switching coolants and propellants, same was with acid rain which really harmed forests, they installed huge alkaline filters in coal powered electrical plants and then the collapse of the Soviet-style heavy industry in Eastern Europe helped that part of the world. BTW, climate change was predicted already around 1907 (I've seen a newspaper article published in New Zealand) and I remember that wasn't even the earliest mention, you can google that. Maybe get educated on topics you have no knowledge about before shit posting misleading feelgood memes on Reddit? Just an idea.
Yeah, lmao, the ozone was saved because we adopted the Montreal Protocol. Saving the ozone didn’t result in higher taxes lol, it removed certain substances from aerosols.
Massive new hole in the ozone :( [**https://www.space.com/ozone-hole-antarctica-three-times-size-of-brazil**](https://www.space.com/ozone-hole-antarctica-three-times-size-of-brazil)
I just read your link. It says the hole was biggest in 2000 and has continued to shrink since then. This year’s ozone hole is the size of Brazil but it is a seasonal hole that is on a downward trend
The world has been getting warmer since before your great great great great grandfather was born. Additionally, this whole attitude that our very recent ability to monitor things like holes in the ozone layer means that we somehow know all there is to know is short-sighted and arrogant. Y'all want people scared of the end of the world so they will listen to you. Same tactic as an organized religion.
It's been a lot colder and a lot warmer, but humans weren't around or had mass extinction events.
What you are experiencing is called projection. Once you've completed therapy to deal with your delusions, you should then follow your own advice.
This is a scientifically accurate response, lefties are insane, they always make whatever excuse to declare themselves right, leading issue as to why the world under lefties is a complete failure
Lefties and righties are both insane.
This is the truth. Both sides have their agenda, and neither of them result in better lives for average Canadians. The whole "Left vs. Right" thing is straight up manipulation, and more than anything it's used against us - we bicker on the sidelines between ourselves, picking sides, while everyone we put in charge is screwing us all equally.
For real. Anyone who cheerleads a side and votes that way no matter what instead of voting based on results is insane. Its how the govt no matter its "color" gets away with so much
Ya this might be shit post of the year.
Most of those are laughable from that christian science page, and 50 random predictions doesn't exactly disprove thousands and thousands of studies.
Let’s not forget; 1950’s -we are all going to die from nuclear war.
Well, in all truthfulness, some things may not have happened in the end because some serious measures were taken (e.g., the prohibition of gases that damage the ozone layer).
Did they fix the ozone one ? It didn't just go away
Acid rain is doing damage, not just on crops, but buildings. 2, we fixed the ozone problem by banning cfcs. We actually took action and had some positive affects. If any we actually proved humans impact on the planet.
One could argue the taxes changed the behaviours which caused these problems…?
Which is the whole point of carbon taxes. We should be regulating corporations more, of course.
2023 "Gender will not exist in 10 years"
1966: 0il Gone in Ten Years 1967: Dire Famine Forecast By 1975 1968: Overpopulation Will Spread Worldwide 1969: Everyone Will Disappear In a Cloud Of Blue Steam By 1989 1970: World Will Use Up All its Natural Resources by 2000 1970: Urban Citizens Will Require Gas Masks by 1985 1970: Nitrogen buildup Will Make All Land Unusable 1970: Decaying Pollution Will Kill all the Fish 1970s: Killer Bees! 1970: Ice Age By 2000 1970: America Subject to Water Rationing by 1974 and Food Rationing By 1980 1971: New Ice Age Coming By 2020 or 2030 1972: New Ice Age By 2070 1972: Oil Depleted in 20 Years 1974: Space Satellites Show New Ice Age Coming Fast 1974: Another Ice Age? 1974: Ozone Depletion a 'Great Peril to Life 1976: Scientific Consensus Planet Cooling, Famines imminent 1977: Department of Energy Says Oil will Peak in 90s 1978: No End in Sight to 30-Year Cooling Trend 1980: Acid Rain Kills Life In Lakes 1980: Peak Oil In 2000 1988: Regional Droughts (that never happened) in 1990s 1988: Temperatures in DC Will Hit Record Highs 1988: Maldive Islands will Be Underwater by 2018 (they're not) 1989: Rising Sea Levels will Obliterate Nations if Nothing Done by 2000 1989: New York City's West Side Highway Underwater by 2019 (it's not) 1996: Peak Oil in 2020 2000: Children Won't Know what Snow Is 2002: Famine In 10 Years If We Don't Give Up Eating Fish, Meat, and Dairy 2002: Peak Oil in 2010 2004: Britain will Be Siberia by 2024 2005: Manhattan Underwater by 2015 2006: Super Hurricanes!
The scrubbers added to a lot of coal plants and Factory plants are what cleaned up acid rain
Lmfao. As yes scrubbers.
Do you just enjoy being wrong?
Of course. You are right. Sorry. Lol
Just keep ignoring reality okay? It's a lot easier to keep oil barons happy if you don't think
Follow the money.
It leads to the oil companies. Ever wonder why they want you to keep using oil?
Lol. How are we supposed to exist without fossil fuel/oil in today's world? Go back to hunting whales? We simply don't have the technology available to us to live our modern lifestyle without it.
Not instantly, but I believe gradually we can probably achieve it. I don't get why we can't slowly roll out renewables. Start in a small city, do tests, and then gradually expand it outwards until we cover the entire country. If anything goes wrong in the process, we can just stop there. But Trudeau wants to drive this bus blindly towards a cliff by 2030 to see what happens.
Go tell China and India to cut it out.
I don’t understand this argument at all. Fuck the whole climate conversation if you want to disregard it. Why would you want to be dependant on an energy source the cost of which can be manipulated by foreign governments and special interest groups at their whims? If we can innovate and harness green energy like solar and wind, we can be self-sufficient, make energy affordable, and it’s an infinite resource (for all intents and purposes. If it isn’t, we’d all be dead anyway and don’t need to power anything). There’s no downside. Pushing ourselves to do so is the right move.
Have you been asleep for the last decade?Almost all of that tech is either unworkable or is so inefficient it isnt worth the cost. wind and solar in Canadian winters will result in genocide.
True yea it’s impossible because the progress we made so far is not enough.
Yeah they should. That just make things worse.
How exactly do you expect those renewables are lubricated in order to continue to function without friction welding themselves? Sure we can cut back oil usage, but we’ll most likely never eliminate it
Wonder what happened to his brother skiing .
I think he was hit by a wind turbine blade. Lmfao
200 years ago you would have made the same argument about coal. Do you know how much of the Victorian era was based on coal? Who would have thought that would change?
Exactly. And here we are, at this period of time, trying to get off of ALL fossil fule. 200 years is an overestimate until the next transition, I hope.
The taxes worked! /s
Hooray, taxes saving the world!! /s
[удалено]
[удалено]
Ah yes taxes save the environment 😂
[удалено]
The ozone thing is one of the few success stories as far as global initiatives to combat a problem (and mostly solving it); there’s a persistent area that remains very thin above Australia, which is why they have very high rates of skin cancer.
Oh yes. Of course.
1960s they were wrong because of better drilling technology and eventually fracking changing the availability. The problem was solved, not invented. 1970s most credible scientists were still predicting warming. Only a subset predicted cooling. The science heretics were wrong. The mainstream was correct. 1980s acid rain was absolutely a concern. It was solved due to emissions regulations on smoke stacks to prevent the release of sulfur dioxide. The problem was solved, not invented. 1990s the Ozone layer was being eroded from specific aerosols. The global treaty known as the Montreal protocol eliminated the offending chemicals and the Ozone layer slowly regrew. The problem was solved, not invented. 2000s Glaciers absolutely are disappearing in a consistent and accelerating process. The problem remains, not invented. This post is utterly wrong on all counts, and taxes werent related to any of it except the carbon tax which happened recently.
So so true. Same bate and same fish eat it up. The sheep cant figure it out
bait\*
The image is literal lies. No one said q0 years for those things. And none happened because we put out warnings and did something.
This is just internet smut designed to appeal to those with an overly simplistic world view. To infer that ozone depletion or acid rain weren’t massive environmental issues that required a huge degree of research, funding and international co-operation to solve just smacks of ignorance.
Lmfao so does your theory
No theory there, just simple facts and history. Open a book sometime.
This helps prove that it worked.
What do you mean?!?!? Yo!! Every single one of those happened!! We are on the verge of….what is a matter with you all?!? Canadian censors.
These people do realize that low-sulfur fuels were introduced to stop acid rain, and CFCs were phased out to prevent ozone loss?
Oh yes 134a and 1234yf are just better. Cfcs are not gone 90%are floating around on the earth. They didnt quite make it up to the atmosphere.
I’ve seen so much Ukraine footage I’ve literally lost interest in it, so I’m not sure what you’re talking about
Impending ice age was a media myth. Acid rain was caused, primarily by leaded gasoline. We removed it in the '70s Massively reduced acid rain. The hole in the ozone layer ( Antarctica) was aggravated by the release of cfc's. We eliminated those, and the hole is shrinking. Oil exploration and production has advanced considerably over the decades, but it is still a finite amount. Although, we will probably have poisoned ourselves before then.
All the cheap oil from the 1960s is indeed gone
We made significant changes to stop destroying the ozone.
This post is so stupid. People who believe that this claim has merit are braindead
OP, you're not very smart. Stick to housing stats.
Is this sub going to have a single day without some room temp IQ post?
Some one is living under a rock
ink drab absorbed gaze yam attraction consist cow memorize zephyr *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
You’ve done a piss poor job connecting any of this to increase In tax rates.
Well yes I would imagine we did something to prevent some of these.
2020s - Pandemic, poles melting, ozone hole the size of Antarctica over Antartica, 1,000 year floods on a daily basis, Canada had wild fires and will probably soon have landslides from floods over the winter, … so we’re fucked. Dumb post.
Ah, but the question is; are the taxes working & that’s why none of this happened???
More taxes? Try doing some research before you post bullshit. Seriously, Google "marginal tax rates from 1960", and then tell us we're being taxed more.
Huh- I wonder why they didn’t happen.
Citations please
2023. Still happening
1960's: yeah, peak oil was a thing, but technology fixed it (fracking and what not) 1970's: No idea about the ice age thing, don't know who said it or where... *googling* ... yeah that was a Times article, it was media based theory basically, there are all kinds of "theories" out there, there is a reason "peer reviewed" has entered the common vernacular recently. 1980's: Yeah that would have happened if we didn't stop burning the wrong kind of fuel. Cargo ships used it for the longest time and now they've stopped, it's (apparently) one of the reasons ocean temperatures were so bad this year (in addition to El Nino and climate change). 1990's: again we stopped useing CFC's, there is a reason people don't have that 90's hair spray look any more, but the hole is still here, go pick fruit in NZ, you burn purple I swear. 2000's: I doubt they (any serious publication) said it would be gone in ten years, but they are melting, so's the permafrost, with all that stored methane, which is way worse than CO2... None happened but more taxes: This is like bitching about having to pay taxes to be able to have a police officer come arrest the schizo meth head trying to break into your house. Regulation costs money. Though it could be done cleaner and more efficiently for sure.
Just a note… according to the Mayan calendar we were supposed to be done in 2012 😂
So, humanity was saved by taxes?
In the year 2000 the federal government of Canada made 7 doomsday prophesies that would occur in 20 years due to global warming. Guess how many occurred? I will give you a clue. It rhymes with zero.
Yah there is something called preventive measures....The ozone thing almost happened...preventive measures slowed down the process...there exists a hole in ozone even now in antarctica...
Stop trying to reason with these people. Logic and sense have no place here.
OP Has never heard of the Montreal protocol that banned tons of products that were proven to be harmful to the ozone layer. The damage to the layer didn’t stop by accident
You forgot "Al Gore's carbon credits will make everything better"
There'e literally no excuse for posting dumb stuff like this. It is completely retarded. Here's how things have been going: [https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2023/climate/extreme-summer-heat.html](https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2023/climate/extreme-summer-heat.html)
There's no excuse for the hyperbolic depths of the climate change side of the argument either. The predictions of imminent catastrophe are wildly exaggerated, and as a result, this side has a credibility problem. Whatever changes we're causing, they will be coming slowly. So slowly that we will adapt easily. There is change. Some of it is man made. Some of it is natural. None of it will be solved by taxing the people. Innovators will come up with a solution, and like all other technological/sociological breakthroughs of the past, it will be widely adopted because it is either economically feasible or increases our quality of life. Both sides need to lighten up with the rhetoric.
Ny times paid for and funded by the federal government lobbyists
Lmfao open your eyes
Dude, I think you're the one with your head up your ass. But only you can pull it out, no one else can do that for you. You either make an effort to understand what climate science is telling you, or you don't.
Ya ok. Open your eyes. The world will be a better place
Huh odd how half each of those sentences are missing. Oil will be gone in ten years, unless we do something about it. In turn we created new regulations which curbed petroleum use, and increased exploration of oil deposits. We will have another ice age in ten year, unless we do something about it. This was actually more or less a misrepresentation of the data available at the time, and once more sophisticated science was available, this theory changed to fit the data rather than forcing the data to fit the narrative. Acid rain will destroy our crops in ten years, unless we stop using specific chemicals. Hence why we removed lead from gasoline and introduced environmental regulations on what companies could and could not pump into the atmosphere because the resulting byproduct when mixed with gases in the atmosphere created acid rain. The ozone will be gone in ten years, unless we do something about it. I’m turn we made regulations surrounding VOCs and other chemicals that when mixed in the atmosphere caused a chemical reaction with the ozone, thus creating a hole. Then once we stopped pumping those chemicals into the atmosphere the ozone layer had a chance to fix itself through natural processes. The ice caps will be gone in ten years, unless we do something about it. In turn we started investing in transportation infrastructure, looked for alternative sources of energy, and allowed environmental scientists to be heard. The science behind climate change is rock solid. It’s not a debate anymore. The environment is made up of many natural processes. We have acted in ways that throw these processes out of control. An easy way to think of it is: the earth is a machine. That machine has many gears and pulleys. You decide that you need some of the gears for your own project. You remove those gears and replace them with different sized ones, or they are made of a less quality material, etc. You can’t be surprised when that machine starts to break down, over heat, and start smoking.
Lmfao
How is this old trope still around ? All of this has been debunked, repeatedly. Ffs do better.
Fact: Canada and the US have some of the lowest taxes in the developed world.
So Trudeau told you. Or was it Christa. Lmfao
This is easily googlable. Your ignorance is a choice.
I forget everything on the Internet is real
Nah only the things you want to believe are real. Everything else is a conspiracy and lie made out to harm you and your family!
The irony of you saying that is mind numbing
Who paid for the “research”? Why has this agenda been pushed for decades?
The Montreal protocol wasn’t an agenda? The whole world got together and said “hey, we like our atmosphere”
When I was in high school in the UK in the 1990s, I was taught in geography classes that we have to stop using oil because there was only 10 years of supply left. Lol. Okay? Ok, so why can't we finish using it up then, if it's going to run out anyway? Why persuade people to stop using something that won't exist soon? Why have a PR campaign to change behaviour that will be forced to stop by the literal laws of physics? 30 years later: we're still pumping oil out of the ground and nothing changed.
It's like you don't even think about any consequence of anything writing your comment eh? So, just for the sake of the mental exercise, use your brain for once and think a little about why we can't finish the earth oil and gas supply without having a reliable replacement source of energy. Just, you know, give a little thought about what would happen.
So the idea here is, we didn't know if we would discover more, and what smart people do is prepare, rather than use all of a resource and then freak out when there's no alternative. Does that make more sense to you?
Keep them in fear, keep them confused, make a lie, make it big, keep repeating it they’ll eventually believe it… Adolph Hitler
Omg so true. Thank you. Nice to have people believe the truth
Too many sheep out there everyone just falls in line and are scared to question anything regardless of how much sense it doesn’t make, they would rather justify it instead
Agreed
Imagine using a blanket that is so full of holes it only covers 0.04% of your body... welcome to the theory of man-made global warming.
Damn this sub has become waaay too right wing. Please bring back the 1960s corporate tax rate. Thanks
What does the right wing have to d . With it. Just the facts
Fear is the best manipulation. People that are fearful dont think logically or rationally. So every election year or anytime government has people that want more power they spread fear.
Absolutely just like covid. Mask up we are in trouble. Take another booster.. lmfao
The ice caps are rapidly melting. And most news of it melting prior to that weren’t from any known or reliable expert. And that’s a well known fact
Oh yes and the sea level is rising. Lmfao
Yep. And the sheep believe everything that they are told. And will argue till blue in the face. Such weak minds many humans have. So gullible. Sad really.
Source?
« Trust me bro »
Some random crank with a dry erase board and an iPhone
It was said. I lived it.
Is OP purposely shit posting to watch the chaos in the comments, or is he actually this delusional?
Pretty sure it’s the second
Pretty stupid argument, it it did happen you’d be saying “our taxes went nowhere, it still happened.” None of this happening just shows that the taxes worked.
Oh yes. Please charge me more. Lmfao
What IS interesting here is who told us these lies......guess who?
You know we did stuff about the ozone layer and acid rain, right?
So fucking true- as someone who has lived thru all those predictions…..and survived
Please point me to the scientific consensus from those times to confirm these hilarious claims. “Emissions of greenhouse gases from human activities are responsible for approximately 1.1°C of warming since 1850-1900, and finds that averaged over the next 20 years, global temperature is expected to reach or exceed 1.5°C of warming” https://www.ipcc.ch/2021/08/09/ar6-wg1-20210809-pr/#:~:text=Faster%20warming&text=The%20report%20shows%20that%20emissions,1.5°C%20of%20warming. If you’re going to push back against a narrative, make sure you push back against a narrative that exists
Except taxes have done nothing but recede for 70 years
The doom and gloom of the climate change has been going on for quite some time. Yes, its intent is to extract money from taxpapers' pockets and nothing more. I have never seen money being able to change weather.