But the public at large, politicians, and most business interest desire the comfort of facts, so people have a tendency to want to believe things are more settled and concrete than they may actually be.
I am grateful, by contrast, that my med school professors frequently declared “ten years from now, perhaps half of what we’re teaching you today will have been proven incorrect”. While half is an exaggeration, I’ve certainly been astonished at how much has changed so dramatically in such a short time.
Of course we just have to do the best we can with what we know at any particular time. So if the climate consensus is pointing one way, by all means let’s follow the bread crumbs. But overconfidence can be a dangerous comfort.
The real question is, are these really the people you want in control?
They introduced loan securitization a few years ago, and their system does not have anywhere close to the flexibility or tolerance for dissent they are going to need to deal with the issues that is creating for them.
And human beings, in my experience, can be lazy, venal, honourable or hardworking, in both the private and the government sector. But the last time I checked, the private sector only cared about the people with money, whereas the government is required to care about everybody.
Cost a few thousand dollars, and a few hundred every few years to have them come and pump the tank.
I pay Amazon ~$10 a month for access to more reading, listening and video content than most major university libraries have access too.
No late fees either.
Of course sewage is better handled at the municipality level in dense areas, and I'm not okay with private firms having control over access to information, but Federal level governments are highly inefficient.
If one has 12-48k to pay rent this year a few hundred for a machine, about 1k for internet access then one can pay 10 a month to access a worse collection a homeless man could check out at the library.
Access to the rest of human knowledge is available for 10 to 100 a pop.
Or ~$1.50 a day. And you get the rest of the internets knowledge included.
No hours of operation, no librarians giving you dirty looks
In Germany energy taxes + VAT make up more than 50% of the price of gasoline and this has been the case for decades. If we switch to 100% electric cars then the government will lose 10% of its tax income. This is a strong motivation to avoid transportation policies that are good for the environment.
The government can tax whatever it wants, there is no reason why electric cars couldn’t generate the same tax receipts.
No the facts appear to be that you don't know how climate works.
Why are you so passionate about this issue, what's in it for you anyway?
Do you stand to make millions off of oil and gas? If not, why are you arguing for the side that wants to let the world burn?
(Ps calling her mentally ill when she is clearly not does nothing for your position)
The fact that we do not have much historical data and good verifiable models to understand how the planet climate behaves under large changes in parameters (CO2 emission, etc.) makes it even more important and urgent to act. We never know at what moment the system will cross the threshold, and damage becomes irreversible, and planet destruction accelerates.
https://www.mi.uni-hamburg.de/en/arbeitsgruppen/theoretische...
(Expect a stationary state to take at least 50 years to run after starting or disturbance (such as changing incoming radiation or CO2) since the ocean model is a mixed layer and takes a while to equilibrate. In the real world the ocean mixing time is ~1000 years though.)
Meanwhile, this has nothing to do with "saving the world", only with the sovereign debt crisis. United States, EU and Japan are dead broke, they will try every ploy to raise taxes and steal from the "evil rich people", even if it means ending the Western Civilization.