Global warming ‘isn’t the great threat we were told’

Joined
Nov 7, 2013
Messages
621
Even all the natural heating/cooling cycles that climate change deniers like to point at are exacerbated by the increase of CO2 in the atmosphere. Heating cycles are longer and stronger, and cooling cycles are shorter and weaker.
As the climate change fanatics are quick to point out. They neglect to state the obvious, that in recorded history CO2 levels have remained at an insignificant level. For thousands of years natural events have caused climate change in repeated cycles. Long before man and will continue long after man.
The only people who are suffering from this climate change rant by governments are the middle and lower class who can't afford the hype. We were all doing fine until the covid fiasco and while people were at their most vulnerable as millions died world wide, the money grubbers hit with another plague scare tactic. Global Warming/Climate Change.
Both the US and Canadian industries have made significant changes to reduce CO2 out put and it has changed little or nothing. Natural gas and oil sold in both countries have never been cleaner. Other countries are still producing and burning dirty fuel and since the US government has cut back on producing clean fossil fuel, they are asking others to produce more and share their dirty fossil fuel. Pres Biden is set to ask the Saudis to produce more.
So if CO2 is really the cause of climate change as they claim, why did he reduce/stop production of clean fossil fuel in the US to buy dirty fossil fuel?
 

Nev_Dull

Anachronism
Joined
Apr 27, 2010
Messages
2,439
They neglect to state the obvious, that in recorded history CO2 levels have remained at an insignificant level. For thousands of years natural events have caused climate change in repeated cycles.
It depends on how you describe "insignificant". Yes CO2 is still considered a "trace gas", compared to the primaries of Oxygen and Nitrogen. If it suddenly jumped up to several percent, we'd all likely choke to death. However, that small amount has a big effect on our environment. And that amount continues to rise. The science is very clear on this.

Natural gas and oil sold in both countries have never been cleaner.
Clearly you haven't been to the oil sands in Alberta. Even Americans don't want that "dirty oil". While Canada has made some small strides towards improving emissions, we're still a long way off our target. We seem more concerned with carbon taxes, which don't work in practice as they do in theory.

So if CO2 is really the cause of climate change as they claim, why did he reduce/stop production of clean fossil fuel in the US to buy dirty fossil fuel?
I can't speak for the US President. But as I said early on, governments always seem to choose economy over climate.
 

FTL

Adherent
Joined
Nov 4, 2021
Messages
280
I hope you're using better smart meters than we did. The first batch they tried a few years ago in my city had an unfortunate tendency to burst into flames. That's not great for the environment.
I've had a smart electricity meter for several years now and very convenient it is too. Then, a couple of years back, I was offered a smart gas meter instead of the old manual thing that the gas man needs to read every so often.

The gas company duly came round, but the install didn't happen. Why? Because, incredibly, the smart gas meter wasn't compatible with the smart electricity meter! Kinda dumb, innit?

What's the connection? Apparently, the gas meter piggybacks off the electricity meter to interface with the GSM phone network, but the firmware wasn't compatible. They said they'd contact me when this was sorted out, but so far nothing. Effing glorious.


Pretty much all the science agrees CO2 is behind it all. I think much of the confusion comes from how interwoven that CO2 is throughout the entire ecosystem. It doesn't just go into the air and cause more heat to stay trapped in the atmosphere.

Heat from excess CO2 causes more water vapour in the air, which increases temperatures.
The extra CO2 from human activity has overloaded the balance of the natural systems of the earth, ocean, and plants, so they can no longer process it all. Additionally, as the temperature increases and more rain forest is cut down, there is less rainfall, so the rain forest processes less CO2 for photosynthesis.

Increased heating from CO2 melts sea ice and polar ice, reducing the earth's reflectivity increased the temperature even more. Likewise, overall rising temperatures mean less snow cover in winter for northern areas, again leading to more heating.

Even all the natural heating/cooling cycles that climate change deniers like to point at are exacerbated by the increase of CO2 in the atmosphere. Heating cycles are longer and stronger, and cooling cycles are shorter and weaker.

Anyone can point to individual climate predictions and say "See, that wasn't as big a deal as they said". That's because all of those predictions are subject to so many variables. But looking at the bigger picture, the trend is clear. This is probably best seen in the now famous (or infamous, to some) hockey stick graph.
That made for such depressing reading. And to think people idiotically deny it, sticking their heads in the same is annoying.


co2.earth
I prefer graphs and charts.

I also prefer manners.
:group:
Yes, quite. This whole thread is one big troll by the OP.

Everyone: perhaps to help give people a better perspective on why his view is this way on climate change / global warming, I should link to his post on my forum where he said the reason was due to the moon's declining orbit. Yes, declining. The moon. The moment you read that, you know he's talking rubbish, right? Note how myself and others tried to educate him, but he just batted those replies away and then threw his toys out of the pram that I'd challenged him on it as being "insulted". Nah, the only one doing the insulting is him to our collective intelligence. Therefore, you can't trust a thing he says about climate change.

 
Joined
Nov 7, 2013
Messages
621
This whole thread is one big troll by the OP.
Since when is the OP of a thread a big troll? I have every right to post just like everyone else without rude comments from you just because I called you out on your forum for the same abusive comments and quite going there.
 

FTL

Adherent
Joined
Nov 4, 2021
Messages
280
Since when is the OP of a thread a big troll? I have every right to post just like everyone else without rude comments from you just because I called you out on your forum for the same abusive comments and quite going there.
I'm glad that you found my post funny, as there's nothing funny about making a fool of yourself, the village idiot.

You should be apologising profusely for making such a gaff for linking the moon in a factual lie about its orbit and climate change, not taking umbrage for being called out on something so idiotic.
 
Joined
Nov 7, 2013
Messages
621
I'm glad that you found my post funny, as there's nothing funny about making a fool of yourself, the village idiot.

You should be apologising profusely for making such a gaff for linking the moon in a factual lie about its orbit and climate change, not taking umbrage for being called out on something so idiotic.
Thanks for proving my point about your vindictive abuse and threats to people who you disagree with.
So whose the troll now when you follow me from your site to here and continue your abusiveness?
Anyway, since you no longer want to participate, I'll be disabling your account. This works both ways. What a snowflake, better off without you.


Jun 6, 2022
Hi BR, I hope you're doing ok.

I see you haven't be on NerdZone since you felt that I'd insulted you, but I know that you did at least see my reply.

As I said there, I'm not here to insult you, it's just a bit of frank talking like forums are for and I value your contribution whether I agree with it or not. Feel free to be just as frank with me if the situation arises! :)

So, would be great to see you back. I'd be particularly interested in your response regarding the moon's orbit which myself and Arantor explained.

Cheers

FTL / Retro




nerdzone.uk Win £100!
Community Showcase

Jun 6, 2022

I have no objection to open and honest discussions, with civil objections. What I object to was being insulted for my opinion and to add insult to injury you deny the insult with a lame ass excuse. Your above excuse about being a frank talking person does not negate the insult in the way you presented it. Quoting you, this is the insult "This one comment tells me that you have no clue about this subject" I expect further disagreements will be met with further putdowns.
I have better things to do than to be publicly insulted by someone who has no clue they are insulting someone. That statement is an insult to you in case you missed it.




International Star Riders Association

Jun 6, 2022

My forum has taken off nicely recently, so I simply wanted you to be a part of it.

But ok chuck your toys out of the pram. I most certainly was talking openly and honestly with you, which you don't like, unlike what you claim.

Fact is, you were talking nonsense, especially as you got the moon's orbit badly wrong. How could you misunderstand something basic like that? You should be apologising for that at least not having a go at me about it.

Anyway, since you no longer want to participate, I'll be disabling your account. This works both ways. What a snowflake, better off without you.

Regards




nerdzone.uk Win £100!
 

FTL

Adherent
Joined
Nov 4, 2021
Messages
280
Thanks for proving my point about your vindictive abuse and threats to people who you disagree with.
So whose the troll now when you follow me from your site to here and continue your abusiveness?



Jun 6, 2022
Hi BR, I hope you're doing ok.

I see you haven't be on NerdZone since you felt that I'd insulted you, but I know that you did at least see my reply.

As I said there, I'm not here to insult you, it's just a bit of frank talking like forums are for and I value your contribution whether I agree with it or not. Feel free to be just as frank with me if the situation arises! :)

So, would be great to see you back. I'd be particularly interested in your response regarding the moon's orbit which myself and Arantor explained.

Cheers

FTL / Retro




nerdzone.uk Win £100!
Community Showcase

Jun 6, 2022

I have no objection to open and honest discussions, with civil objections. What I object to was being insulted for my opinion and to add insult to injury you deny the insult with a lame ass excuse. Your above excuse about being a frank talking person does not negate the insult in the way you presented it. Quoting you, this is the insult "This one comment tells me that you have no clue about this subject" I expect further disagreements will be met with further putdowns.
I have better things to do than to be publicly insulted by someone who has no clue they are insulting someone. That statement is an insult to you in case you missed it.




International Star Riders Association

Jun 6, 2022

My forum has taken off nicely recently, so I simply wanted you to be a part of it.

But ok chuck your toys out of the pram. I most certainly was talking openly and honestly with you, which you don't like, unlike what you claim.

Fact is, you were talking nonsense, especially as you got the moon's orbit badly wrong. How could you misunderstand something basic like that? You should be apologising for that at least not having a go at me about it.

Anyway, since you no longer want to participate, I'll be disabling your account. This works both ways. What a snowflake, better off without you.

Regards




nerdzone.uk Win £100!
Oh dear, you really have lost the plot posting all this private conversation. How is that relevant to what I just posted to you? It isn't. You're the idiot who screwed up about the moon and climate, yet you continue to make a fool of yourself and everyone can see that. 🤣 And just how much of a weirdo you are, too.

How about the bit in your first pm reply where you told me you didn't wanna come back in response to my invite to start posting? You deleted that on the quiet, didn't you and pretended that you'd never said it? Before you'd deleted it, I responded to it, "Anyway, since you no longer want to participate, I'll be disabling your account. This works both ways. What a snowflake, better off without you". Your really didn't like that, bless.

In short, you're an embarrassment and quite the abusive member, too. It's you that's threatening and vindictive when called out on lies and errors. Typical projectionist behaviour from a wrongdoer. Yawn, I've seen it all before.

btw, it's interesting that you started this global warming thread and the moon thread after our first back and forth in that other thread since you chucked your toys out of the pram over these in the first place. Looks like I'm somehow really important to you in that creepy way since I show you up at every turn. I wonder what garbage you'll come up with next...
 

mysiteguy

Migration Expert
Joined
Feb 20, 2007
Messages
3,409
J
Well done, pretty much sums up what has already been said and documented that climate change due to mans polluting the earth with CO2 is fraudulent misrepresentation of science.

It pretty much sums up how you and the sock puppet don't vet sources, their data and their claims.

1. None of his credentials relate to a field relevant to the physics behind climate change. He even admitted he's not a scientist: "In truth, in the scientific realms in which I worked, and gained by now, some standing, I was an imposter. I am not a scientist. Apart from my brief survey of tree-hole communities when I successfully correlated insect larvae diversity with circumference and aspect of the hole to the sun, which, in any case, had been done many times before, I have never ‘done’ science. "

2. He has no scientifically peer-reviewed papers.

3. His book "Chill" is published by a book company specializing in "new age" books, not science.

4. He's pushed 2012 conspiracies/beliefs.

5. He claims the Free Masons sent a man from the past to kill him

6. He claims plutonium has healing power and can raise you to a higher level of consciousness.

7. He promotes shamanism.

8. He believes "correct" breathing can cure disease.

9. He never represented the UN's view on climate change and never was a "Climate Change Advisor" to the UN, nor an environmentalist for the UN.
a. He did write an article in 1993 for the Bulletin of Marine Pollution criticizing the UN's ocean protection system.
b. He did work for an actual UN advisor, Jackson Davis, but was not one himself.
c. If he was a UN Climate Change Advisor, isn't it telling how no one including the UN takes his advice?

Consider someone with credibility you can praise instead of easily exposed charlatans. The earth is not flat.
 

Pete

Flavours of Forums Forever
Joined
Sep 9, 2013
Messages
2,694
Since when is the OP of a thread a big troll? I have every right to post just like everyone else without rude comments from you just because I called you out on your forum for the same abusive comments and quite going there.
I’m going to call you a troll here too, but with a caveat.

There are three ways this whole thing plays out, none of which are a good look for you.

A) you had a conversation, there were misunderstandings and you then posted here (knowing that the other person in question would see it) to… prove you were right, I guess?

or B) it’s (mostly/completely) unrelated to that thread, and you’re posting here solely to bait people into not agreeing with you so you can get a reaction out of them.

or C) your comprehension and communication skills are sufficiently lacking that you don’t realise what you’re saying to people, and what they’re saying to you in return, so you’re always talking past each other. Certainly you have demonstrated posting links that you think say something, but in fact say something else, and get defensive when called on it.



C is a possibility, it’s certainly happened more than once that you‘ve done it, you definitely don’t like being called on it and then immediately deflect as though you *meant* to do that. Which sounds either like embarrassment or incitement to me.

Then there’s the fact that this did demonstrably start elsewhere, kick off (unnecessarily), and circle back here in a “look at me” kind of way. Almost as though you were trying to get some attention or sympathy or something.

The thing is, most people - even people like me who can hold a grudge for *years* - don’t go down this road unless they’re trying to start something.

tl:dr; if you’re not meaning to be a troll, and it is possible, don’t do things that so blatantly look like trolling to other people. And if you’re not meaning to be a troll in this situation, maybe take a step back and review as objectively as you can why your interactions make other people think you’re trolling.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: FTL
Joined
Nov 7, 2013
Messages
621
Or the alternative - For a long time I have had concerns with the world going to hell in a hand basket. I was offered a friendly request to a forum I thought would be a great open and honest arena to get others replies and opinions. I can take honest criticism but when replies turn to insults and abusive unproductive content, I left without a word.
Having been a member here since 2013 I've learned that there are many responsible constructive people here. With that in mind I thought I would share my concerns with people I trust here. Discussion, opinions whether I agree or don't agree with (pros and cons) is the foundation for constructive feedback. When the discussion goes from disagreement and alternative opinions to ridicule and abuse it tends to say that some people don't have a difference of opinion, so they show their disagreement with personal attacks, ridicule and abuse in an attempt to shut down open and honest communication and sharing ideas.
If I or anyone says something someone disagrees with, the first shutdown comeback is "YOU'RE A TROLL". Kinda like the race card eh? Some people prefer to contribute with "cancel culture" responses.
Such is the unexpected unproductive consequence of a discussion with heated opinions.
I'm not afraid to express my opinion because I'm interested in others thoughts and opinions, and for the most part this thread has accomplished open and honest contributions for and against the original post topic. So thanks to those who contributed (pros/cons)
The only thing I see I did wrong here was to react to the abusive personal attack comments.
Pete Obviously I don't agree with what you posted but I thank you for your opinion.
People being people, we agree to disagree, but for the health of any discussion, respond respectfully.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Nov 7, 2013
Messages
621
Back on topic, here's is a publication from the WWF
 

Oldsmoboi

Fan
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
706
As the climate change fanatics are quick to point out. They neglect to state the obvious, that in recorded history CO2 levels have remained at an insignificant level. For thousands of years natural events have caused climate change in repeated cycles. Long before man and will continue long after man.
The only people who are suffering from this climate change rant by governments are the middle and lower class who can't afford the hype. We were all doing fine until the covid fiasco and while people were at their most vulnerable as millions died world wide, the money grubbers hit with another plague scare tactic. Global Warming/Climate Change.
Both the US and Canadian industries have made significant changes to reduce CO2 out put and it has changed little or nothing. Natural gas and oil sold in both countries have never been cleaner. Other countries are still producing and burning dirty fuel and since the US government has cut back on producing clean fossil fuel, they are asking others to produce more and share their dirty fossil fuel. Pres Biden is set to ask the Saudis to produce more.
So if CO2 is really the cause of climate change as they claim, why did he reduce/stop production of clean fossil fuel in the US to buy dirty fossil fuel?

"Clean" just means we get more energy out of the fuel with regards to each unit burned or that the combustion process produces fewer "other" pollutants, but even at 100% efficiency, 1 gallon of gasoline produces 20 lbs of CO2. It might produce fewer other byproducts, but it will still produce 20 lbs of CO2. NASA Kids will help explain it to you.

And while smog-producing chemicals have been greatly reduced in new vehicles, the average economy of vehicles sold has largely flatlined over the last decade. Sure there are hybrids available, but it doesn't matter if the bulk of the sales are SUVs and Trucks.

as the climate change fanatics are quick to point out. They neglect to state the obvious, that in recorded history CO2 levels have remained at an insignificant level. For thousands of years natural events have caused climate change in repeated cycles. Long before man and will continue long after man.
This is an overly simplistic and childlike view. Something can exist in trace amounts and still be harmful. There was once a commonly used heart medication called Digitalis, derived from the leaves of the Digitalis flower, more commonly known as Foxglove. It was effective in the treatment of congestive heart failure. The problem with Digitalis is that the window between a therapeutic dosage and a lethal dosage was fairly small and it was quite easy to fatally overdose on. The point here is that both the helpful and harmful levels of digitalis were mere trace levels in the blood.

Lead in the water in Flint, Michigan was considered high enough to cause national outrage and that was a mere 20 parts per billion. Way lower than CO2 in the atmosphere which is measured in parts per million. If the lead levels in Flint were to double to 40 ppb, the National Guard would probably be deployed to distribute clean water, yet objectively, the lead levels would still be way below the measurement of "trace".

The only people who are suffering from this climate change rant by governments are the middle and lower class who can't afford the hype. We were all doing fine until the covid fiasco and while people were at their most vulnerable as millions died world wide, the money grubbers hit with another plague scare tactic. Global Warming/Climate Change.
That's just plain false even if just looking at the timeline. Climate change has been talked about for decades. Even Exxon had reports on it back in the 1970s that they buried of course. If you think clean energy is expensive, it is because you've never looked at the externalized costs of dirty energy. Sure, coal may be cheap to dig up and burn, but the cost of cleaning up the soot, ash, and poisons it spews was never baked into the cost until recently. What the administration did two Presidencies ago was to force coal burners to clean up their act. No longer could they just dump their waste into local waterways. They had to start scrubbing their exhaust of poisonous gas. Previously, those costs were borne by the innocent bystanders who lived near their operations. The whole movie Erin Brockovich (based on a true story) talks about this type of corporate irresponsibility.

Once coal burners were made to clean up their act and not pollute, suddenly renewable energy was much more financially attractive.

Both the US and Canadian industries have made significant changes to reduce CO2 out put and it has changed little or nothing.
That's because while efficiency and cleanliness per mile have increased since the 1970s, the number of miles driven has also increased. Yes, you can drive a hybrid many more miles producing less carbon per mile, but if at the end of the month you still burn 25 gallons of gasoline, it doesn't matter if you drove 300 miles or 1000... you still put the same amount of carbon in the air. Part of the Green New Deal tries to address this with increases in funding to public transit. Increases in efficiency only work if people drive the same amount or less. With the exception of 2020/2021, the average American's miles per year has been trending upward for the last few decades.


Natural gas and oil sold in both countries have never been cleaner.​
In terms of CO2, there has been no change to the amount emitted per unit of fuel. It's a chemical reaction, X amount of fuel in results in Y amount of carbon out. Period. The only thing you can do is reduce the amount used through efficiency measures.

Other countries are still producing and burning dirty fuel and since the US government has cut back on producing clean fossil fuel

FALSE - The prior President averaged 10,968 barrels per day during his term. The current President is at 11,185 barrels per day so far. Source: US Energy Information Administration.
FVBSMN0XEAA6KwM.jpg
Also Natural Gas production is also still growing, though at 8% rather than 14% as before, but the issue there is a lack of adequate transportation options. Natural gas is difficult to export, thus the vast majority of customers will be US domestic. There is only so much the companies can produce before demand is met domestically. We are building some transportation facilities to be able to ship it to Europe so that the EU is not reliant on Russia for natural gas, but it will be years before those facilities become operational at scale.

Pres Biden is set to ask the Saudis to produce more.​
This is after Trump asked the Saudis and OPEC to produce less. The deal was they would reduce production by 9.7 billion barrels a day.

So if CO2 is really the cause of climate change as they claim, why did he reduce/stop production of clean fossil fuel in the US to buy dirty fossil fuel?

The entire premise of this statement is false, oversimplified, and childlike in comprehension. 1. Biden didn't reduce anything in the US, as noted above. 2. Biden doesn't control where oil in the US is purchased from. 3. Biden isn't asking to buy Saudi oil, he is asking them to increase production to ease the global supply and lower prices. Saudi oil may or may not go to the US because it is a global commodity, but the overall availability of oil around the world will go up, thus lowering prices domestically.

For a long time I have had concerns with the world going to hell in a hand basket. I was offered a friendly request to a forum I thought would be a great open and honest arena to get others replies and opinions.
The problem is that you think that your opinions are facts and that all opinions are valid. You may be entitled to your own opinions, but you are not entitled to your own facts. Facts aren't up for debate. Everything I posted above is verifiable evidence contrary to your opinion.

When the discussion goes from disagreement and alternative opinions to ridicule and abuse it tends to say that some people don't have a difference of opinion, so they show their disagreement with personal attacks, ridicule and abuse in an attempt to shut down open and honest communication and sharing ideas.

Again, opinions are not facts. It doesn't matter if it is my opinion or your opinion. A fact is a fact is a fact. What people get tired of is trolls posting opinions as facts, particularly when they are so easily proven wrong. Stop making posts with statements that are false and you won't get so much pushback. But I doubt you can do that since you have some sort of agenda to push. That is the only explanation I can come up with for someone who has said so many false things, one after the other, consecutively, in a row.

Back on topic, here's is a publication from the WWF

That link basically lists every point you tried to make in this thread and refutes it..... so... I win?
 
Last edited:

FTL

Adherent
Joined
Nov 4, 2021
Messages
280
I can take honest criticism but when replies turn to insults and abusive unproductive content, I left without a word.
No you can't and you weren't. When you were called out for making a ridiculous comment as fact (moon's decaying orbit) and the record set straight by myself and several other members, you threw your toys out of the pram - the evidence is right there, in public - and by "leaving without a word" showed typical passive agressive behaviour for someone with no reply who can't take the truth reflected back at them.

When a short while later I sent you a friendly message as I hadn't seen you for a while, you just threw it back in my face and told me to f* off in so many words. As the forum owner, I only ask once, so when faced with such abuse, I told it to you right back and disabled your account. Funny how you then deleted your sentence telling me to f* off, isn't it? You still haven't owned up to it, funny that. Posting the whole PM thread with me here (sans your deleted sentence) showed you up for what you're really like and actually proved my point. I therefore upgraded you to a full permaban.

I've explained all this before anyway, with a bit more detail here, but a reminder is useful for others too to know what they're dealing with.

In short, I think you're unhinged, as do others, and I regret ever inviting you over to NerdZone.
 

Nev_Dull

Anachronism
Joined
Apr 27, 2010
Messages
2,439
Back on topic, here's is a publication from the WWF
Interesting. If we're going to have a discussion, however, I'd like to hear what you think about these ten myths.
 

we_are_borg

Administrator
Joined
Jan 25, 2011
Messages
5,768
This thread is about “Global warming ‘isn’t the great threat we were told’”

please keep other stuff out of this thread if you have issues take it to PM, don”t want to see of topic stuff here or anywhere else.
 

Paul M

Dr Pepper Addict
Joined
Jun 26, 2006
Messages
4,038
Interesting. If we're going to have a discussion, however, I'd like to hear what you think about these ten myths.
Well at least three of them are not even myths, as the article itself even says ... o_O


Myth 1. The Earth’s climate has always changed​

Over the course of the Earth’s 4.5-billion-year history, the climate has changed a lot.
So ... not a myth then. :tdown:


Myth 2. Plants need carbon dioxide​

Plants do need carbon dioxide (CO2) to live.
So ... also not a myth then. :tdown:


Myth 8. Animals will adapt to climate change​

This one isn't a myth.
Seriously, why even list it as a myth, then say its not. :rolleyes:
 

Oldsmoboi

Fan
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
706
Well at least three of them are not even myths, as the article itself even says ... o_O



So ... not a myth then. :tdown:



So ... also not a myth then. :tdown:



Seriously, why even list it as a myth, then say its not. :rolleyes:
They are myths without context.

The climate has always changed, but never at this speed without something like a comet or huge asteroid hitting the planet.

Plants need CO2, but the ecosystem needs the right amount, it also doesn't help that we're cutting down so much of the rainforests. Saying plants need CO2 to live is like shouting at victims of the Titanic sinking that "WATER IS GOOD FOR YOU!"

Some Animals will adapt, many will not. The fact that animals adapt isn't a myth, but that doesn't mean we should be accelerating their extinction with our actions. Additionally, the change is happening at a far greater rate than in the past, so they aren't getting the chance to adapt.

Just like our OP, ya gotta read past the first line man.
 
Top