Some climate scientists call for immediate phase out of fossil fuels in virtually all forms

Shipping is trying to reach zero emission by 2050, but is it feasible, or even possible??
Here some thoughts from Lloyd Register:

the deserts will reforest and get rainfall once the earth warms up and we put all the carbon back into the air that is buried
thats not a joke, thats just the way the earth was before we turned up

What we need is an urgent policy implementation that will arrest human population growth, and over urbanization. Once that is done, we need to gradually reduce the size of the human population to about half of what it is now. Anything else is just willful negligence and the avoidance of hard choices.

1 Like

And who will decide who are the ones we don’t want? You?


disease, flood and famine

1 Like

What is the supposed problem this solution is looking for? Will this solution fix the problem? Why should we bother? These are basic questions to be resolved before implementing silly solutions.

We have solutions to all those right now if we want.

It should not be any harder for countries to agree on and implement a population control agreement than it is for them to agree on and implement emissions limits.

However, neither enforceable population control or emission limits will ever be agreed upon and implemented. Therefore, nature will have to do the population control job for us with climate change, droughts, floods, famine and disease.

When nature’s ecosystem balancing efforts eventually overwhelm human’s technological efforts, the result will be sudden and catastrophic. The Plague wiped out half the human population in a few decades. With air travel and extensive international trade, once it starts, it will happen much more quickly this time around.

1 Like

It seems you are hoping this happens and wish it would come sooner … that humans are a scourge and invaders into nature. This is a common enough view of those on the extremes to wish to impose draconian restrictions on human rights and freedoms. Chairman Mao starved to death 35 million of his fellow countrymen. Would that be a good start?

I have much more faith in the common sense of humans and in their ingenuity than you with those apocalyptic predictions/desires.

1 Like

Climate Change, Financial Stability and Monetary Policy


• The effects of climate change on financial stability are analysed using an ecological macro model.
• Climate change can increase defaults with adverse effects on bank leverage.
•Climate change can cause an asset price deflation process.
•Climate-induced financial instability reinforces the growth-reducing effects of climate change.
• A green QE programme can reduce climate-induced financial instability.

Tully may want to share some rainfall with the parched parts of Oz, but pumping it there would be costly:

Maybe Road trains like this could be used??:

But that would add to pollution and global warming, making for worse droughts in the south.

Oh. I certainly don’t desire it. I would much prefer to see humans exercise some foresight and long range planning, and practice self-restraint, to achieve a soft-landing for human society. However, I am skeptical that our political institutions will make hard choices and do anything effective before it’s too late.

As your comments demonstrate, population control is an emotional subject and it’s difficult to have an intelligent fact and science based conversation about it.

I’m not any sort of treehugger. I definitely prefer people to trees.

The fact is we are more than capable of feeding the world’s population and all it’s projected increases and improving the environment as we grow. That’s the sort of science based conversation I’m having.

I disagree with your presumption of what the facts are.

Perhaps in another 100 years, our decendants will discover who was right.

I forgot that you believe it will rain more in Oz as the earth warms.
I prefer facts to hopes, fantasies and “believes”.

I disagree with your proposals. Your solution has been tried and didn’t end well.

You could take four minutes and all change your minds … but I doubt you will let your minds be changed.


1 Like

The Heartland Institute that put out the above video also question the reality of second hand smoke health hazards.

A supposed independent “think tank” with ties to the Koch brothers and coal industry. I find their work to be suspect.


The life work of Tony Rinaudo has done wonders

The one I checked, Keen, is not a climate scientist as the caption says but a meteorologist.

Also, it’s called scientific method for a reason, it’s a method.

Strongly recommend The Structure of Scientific Revolutions by Thomas Kuhn.

1 Like