@vtanger 1/9γ Victor Tangermann @vtanger, this @futurism article of yours is full of misinformation:
futurism.com
Do you care whether what you write is accurate?
@shannonosaka
futurism.com
Do you care whether what you write is accurate?
@shannonosaka
@vtanger @futurism @shannonosaka 2/9γ You wrote, "Even with an almost complete halt on the use of fossil fuels, humanity is headed towards a catastrophe."
The best scientific evidence shows the opposite: manmade #ClimateChange is modest & benign, and CO2 emissions are very beneficial.
sealevel.info
The best scientific evidence shows the opposite: manmade #ClimateChange is modest & benign, and CO2 emissions are very beneficial.
sealevel.info
@vtanger @futurism @shannonosaka 3/9γ The Climate Industry calls warming a "crisis" or even an "emergency." They're lying. It's not even a problem. Real scientists call the warmest climate periods "climate optimums," because, by all objective measures, they're preferable to cold periods.
scholar.google.com
scholar.google.com
@vtanger @futurism @shannonosaka 4/9γ By objective standards, the Earth is too cold, not too warm. Even if there were no secondary costs, successfully "fighting climate change" to cool the Earth would mean killing many people.
twitter-thread.com
rattibha.com
twitter-thread.com
rattibha.com
@vtanger @futurism @shannonosaka 5/9γ Plus, reduced atmospheric CO2 levels would kill many more. One of the major reasons Earth can support eight billion people without the mass famines which used to plague mankind is that CO2 emissions boosted crop yields and mitigated drought impacts.
#famine" target="_blank" rel="noopener" onclick="event.stopPropagation()">sealevel.info
#famine" target="_blank" rel="noopener" onclick="event.stopPropagation()">sealevel.info
@vtanger @futurism @shannonosaka 6/9γ What's more, even if mankind's CO2 emissions merely plateau at the current rate, and never decline at all, the average atmospheric CO2 concentration will top out at only about 510 ppmv, causing a negligible approximately Β½Β°C of additional warming.
@vtanger @futurism @shannonosaka 7/9γ Climate change is highly politicized, so, as for any politicized issue, if you want to understand it you must find balanced information. Here's a list of resources to learn about the science of climate change, instead of the political spin:
@vtanger @futurism @shannonosaka 8/9γ Victor, you also wrote, "The Paris Agreement, a legally binding international treaty on climate change, was adopted by 196 countriesβ¦"
That's also wrong. It's legally binding in some nations, but not in the USA, where treaties don't become law without Senate ratification.
That's also wrong. It's legally binding in some nations, but not in the USA, where treaties don't become law without Senate ratification.
@vtanger @futurism @shannonosaka 9/9γ It wasn't ratified because President Obama never submitted it to the Senate, because it would've been rejected, because (like Obama, apparently!) most Republicans weren't duped by Climate Industry marketing.
sealevel.info
@ThreadReaderApp @Rattibha unroll
sealevel.info
@ThreadReaderApp @Rattibha unroll
Loading suggestions...