Toddsterpatriot
Diamond Member
- May 3, 2011
- 102,337
- 36,314
I know, you never said how much the $10s of trillions in spending would reduce temps.
Here's your chance.
The number of unanswered questions is a great deal longer on YOUR side than on mine. I'll resume answering some of your questions when you've answered some of mine.
Additionally, I'm really not all that enthusiastic about participating in your red herring. You reject human causation. You therefore don't want to see a penny spent. Thus, your 'inquiry' on the economics is a pointless waste of my time. You don't put much value on the lives of others, do you.
I do value the lives of others. That's why I'm reluctant to spend $10s of trillions, to reduce temps in 2080 by some unknown amount.
If you're really worried about CO2, you'd support a giant expansion of nuclear energy.
Most greens claim CO2 is the worst thing ever, except for nuclear.
Where do you stand?
Last edited: