Remember me
▼ Content

economic


economic02-06-2019 20:18
keepit
★★☆☆☆
(305)
A few complained when i suggested that the world's economic output shrink in order to shrink humanity's carbon footprint.
It's true that jobs would be lost, maybe as many as half the jobs could be lost, but with job sharing (France does it successfully) people would only have to work half as much. Of course they would have less money to spend but we don't need all those airplanes, SUV's and minivans, and oversized pickup trucks. We don't need all those electronic devices either. And maybe we don't need as much military. There could be treaties to shrink military size as we had to shrink nuclear capability. Maybe we could do it better this time.
Life could be much simpler and easier.
02-06-2019 21:12
James___
★★★★☆
(1465)
keepit wrote:
A few complained when i suggested that the world's economic output shrink in order to shrink humanity's carbon footprint.
It's true that jobs would be lost, maybe as many as half the jobs could be lost, but with job sharing (France does it successfully) people would only have to work half as much. Of course they would have less money to spend but we don't need all those airplanes, SUV's and minivans, and oversized pickup trucks. We don't need all those electronic devices either. And maybe we don't need as much military. There could be treaties to shrink military size as we had to shrink nuclear capability. Maybe we could do it better this time.
Life could be much simpler and easier.



Why not innovate? Why not understand the problem first and then consider solutions? It seems hardly anyone in here accepts the scientific opinion that our stratospheric ozone layer is preventing both crop failure and a break down of the marine ecosystem. That will create a problem much more quickly than CO2 will.
I am in the wrong though for having such an opinion based on scientific research. And in my very ignorant opinion, if we lowered CO2 emissions, then we would see problems that people don't care about like crop failure. It just isn't an issue. People eat today. They don't care if they will eat next year or the year after that.
Fortunately there are countries that will keep releasing CO2 into the atmosphere so the ozone layer will be able to recover. That's if people accept that's what scientists believe. Of course with me, I think I can do better. That's why I've been promoting an experiment that would demonstrate that atmospheric CO2 supports the natural occurrence of ozone in the stratosphere.
And if doctors will let me, I'll operate on myself as well. There's nothing to making an incision and removing a damaged organ that sits on top of all other organs. And to pop a hole in my abdominal wall for my small intestines to exit, local anaesthesia. I would love nothing more than to show all I need is a basic medical procedure that takes no great skill to accomplish. What might actually be the most dangerous part is the anaesthesia itself.
As with atmospheric chemistry, I stand by my opinion on that subject as well.

Please scroll down until you see this;
Importance of the Ozone Layer in the Earth's Atmosphere
The presence of Ozone in the Stratosphere is very essential to life on Earth. Without this protective layer, life on earth would not be feasible.
https://www.eartheclipse.com/environment/location-importance-ozone-layer.html

I'll try to avoid this forum in the future but if it's found out that CO2 directly supports the Chapman cycle, you know, the ozone layer, then that could be because I realized it and made it known to various PhD scientists, ie, doctors.
They don't work with people like me because I'm not smart like them. And with what NASA says about ozone recovery or it's expected recovery, it all ties into regions where CO2 emissions are generated.
I have posted in here about Dr. Guzman who is with the University of Kentucky. The Public Relations and Marketing person with the University of Kentucky presented himself to me as the President of the University of Kentucky.
And if I have the chance to do so, I will make known to Australia that
CO2 + H2O > CH2O, O2
2CH2O > CH4, O2, C.
And that C + 4Cl > CCl4.
This would be a concern to Australia but not to the US. CCl4 migrates to the stratosphere over Antarctica. And that can impact the weather in Australia. And the primary sources of Cl would be the US and the European Union.
That's how I could make friends in Australia. When Australia burns, it might be caused by America and the European Union.
Yet the chemicals we release into the atmosphere have no effect because industrialization doesn't generate toxic waste.
Edited on 02-06-2019 22:04
02-06-2019 23:54
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8592)
keepit wrote:
A few complained when i suggested that the world's economic output shrink in order to shrink humanity's carbon footprint.

Because what you are suggesting can only be implemented by force.
keepit wrote:
It's true that jobs would be lost, maybe as many as half the jobs could be lost, but with job sharing (France does it successfully) people would only have to work half as much.

I don't give a shit about France or any nation that restricts economic activity.
keepit wrote:
Of course they would have less money to spend but we don't need all those airplanes, SUV's and minivans, and oversized pickup trucks.

Who are YOU to decide what we need? You are not the Dictator of the World.
keepit wrote:
We don't need all those electronic devices either.

Who are YOU to decide what we need? You are not the Dictator of the World.
keepit wrote:
And maybe we don't need as much military.

Who are YOU to decide what military is needed? You are not the Dictator of the World.
keepit wrote:
There could be treaties to shrink military size as we had to shrink nuclear capability.

Trouble is, there are always those that refuse to sign such a treaty. It is also not possible to sign a treaty banning every conflict between people.
keepit wrote:
Maybe we could do it better this time.

When did the 'last time' end?
keepit wrote:
Life could be much simpler and easier.

You are speaking literally as a little child would. Life is filled with learning, with teaching, with work, with play, with conflicts, with shortages, with gluts, with war, with peace, with sadness, with happiness, with misery, with satisfaction, and eventually ends with death.

Life has a lot to offer. You are not a child anymore (at least I assume that, since you are writing posts here).


The Parrot Killer
03-06-2019 00:13
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8592)
James___ wrote:
keepit wrote:
A few complained when i suggested that the world's economic output shrink in order to shrink humanity's carbon footprint.
It's true that jobs would be lost, maybe as many as half the jobs could be lost, but with job sharing (France does it successfully) people would only have to work half as much. Of course they would have less money to spend but we don't need all those airplanes, SUV's and minivans, and oversized pickup trucks. We don't need all those electronic devices either. And maybe we don't need as much military. There could be treaties to shrink military size as we had to shrink nuclear capability. Maybe we could do it better this time.
Life could be much simpler and easier.



Why not innovate? Why not understand the problem first and then consider solutions?

You have to define the problem first.
James___ wrote:
It seems hardly anyone in here accepts the scientific opinion that our stratospheric ozone layer is preventing both crop failure and a break down of the marine ecosystem. That will create a problem much more quickly than CO2 will.

The ozone layer is important, true. Fortunately, all you need to create ozone is sunlight and oxygen.
James___ wrote:
I am in the wrong though for having such an opinion based on scientific research.

Science isn't 'research'. Science is a set of falsifiable theories.
James___ wrote:
Fortunately there are countries that will keep releasing CO2 into the atmosphere so the ozone layer will be able to recover.

Ozone and CO2 are unrelated.
James___ wrote:
That's if people accept that's what scientists believe.

Void argument. What 'scientists'? What 'belief'?
James___ wrote:
Of course with me, I think I can do better.

Then some unspecified scientists with some unspecified belief?
James___ wrote:
That's why I've been promoting an experiment that would demonstrate that atmospheric CO2 supports the natural occurrence of ozone in the stratosphere.

It doesn't. Go learn chemistry.
James___ wrote:
And if doctors will let me, I'll operate on myself as well.

Nice knowin' ya. BTW, no doctor can prevent you from operating on yourself, unless you're locked away in a padded cell.
James___ wrote:
There's nothing to making an incision and removing a damaged organ that sits on top of all other organs.

Except the pain, passing out during the operation, infections, unchecked blood loss, etc.
James___ wrote:
And to pop a hole in my abdominal wall for my small intestines to exit, local anaesthesia.

Like I said...nice knowin' ya.
James___ wrote:
As with atmospheric chemistry, I stand by my opinion on that subject as well.

Void argument fallacy. You have not made an opinion on that subject.
James___ wrote:
I'll try to avoid this forum in the future

Nice knowin' ya. Enjoy the kiddie pools.
James___ wrote:
but if it's found out that CO2 directly supports the Chapman cycle,

It doesn't. CO2 and ozone are completely unrelated.
James___ wrote:
you know, the ozone layer, then that could be because I realized it and made it known to various PhD scientists, ie, doctors.

I'll bet you already told them.
James___ wrote:
And with what NASA says about ozone recovery or it's expected recovery, it all ties into regions where CO2 emissions are generated.

NASA is just as crazy. CO2 and ozone have nothing to do with each other.
James___ wrote:
And if I have the chance to do so, I will make known to Australia that
CO2 + H2O > CH2O, O2
2CH2O > CH4, O2, C.
And that C + 4Cl > CCl4.

Bad chemistry. Go learn chemistry. This reaction does not happen.
James___ wrote:
This would be a concern to Australia but not to the US. CCl4 migrates to the stratosphere over Antarctica.

Carbon tetrachloride is heavier than air.
James___ wrote:
And that can impact the weather in Australia. And the primary sources of Cl would be the US and the European Union.

Leaping to conclusion fallacy.
James___ wrote:
That's how I could make friends in Australia. When Australia burns, it might be caused by America and the European Union.

Australia has brush fires every year, just as other nations have forest and brush fires every year.


The Parrot Killer
03-06-2019 01:00
IBdaMann
★★★★★
(4230)
keepit wrote: A few complained when i suggested that the world's economic output shrink in order to shrink humanity's carbon footprint.

In the same way one would expect to be mocked for suggesting people stop chewing gum to make a heat wave go away.

keepit wrote: It's true that jobs would be lost, maybe as many as half the jobs could be lost, ...

You are apparently completely cognitive of the repercussions of your suggestion, i.e. killing the economy, inflicting misery on many millions of people ... and you are perfectly fine with that.

keepit wrote: ... but with job sharing (France does it successfully) people would only have to work half as much.

Yes, people who are out of work would work a lot less. The problem is that productivity plummets, value to society plummets, the economy dies.

keepit wrote: Of course they would have less money to spend but we don't need all those airplanes, SUV's and minivans, and oversized pickup trucks. We don't need all those electronic devices either. And maybe we don't need as much military.

Oooops, you regressed to pretending to declare what others "don't need." Your argument is instantly ignored and summarily dismissed.

Oh, wait, that was the entire basis for your "justification" for destroying the global economy.

I'm sorry, but your Marxist argument is discarded. Do you have anything of substance?

keepit wrote: There could be treaties to shrink military size as we had to shrink nuclear capability.

Marxists hate militaries, they hate guns, and they generally hate any sort of self-defense capability. Rational, reasonable people, on the other hand, respect the ability of self defense.

keepit wrote: Maybe we could do it better this time.
Life could be much simpler and easier.

Exactly. The Marxist solution is always to kill off boat loads of other people, e.g. Hitler, Pol Pot, Stalin, Maduro, Shining Path, ... the list is long.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
03-06-2019 01:27
keepit
★★☆☆☆
(305)
Wow.
I remember the lyrics, "O Lord, please don't let me be misunderstood."

Is Marxism still going on?
Honestly, i'm kind of oblivious to Marxism.
Edited on 03-06-2019 01:31
03-06-2019 01:38
IBdaMann
★★★★★
(4230)
James___ wrote: It seems hardly anyone in here accepts the scientific opinion ...

Did you just use the words "scientific opinion"? Clearly you believe that science is based on subjective opinion. You really can't distinguish religion from science.

The judge has dismissed your case.

James___ wrote: ...that our stratospheric ozone layer is preventing both crop failure and a break down of the marine ecosystem.

What religious dogma is preaching this?

James___ wrote: That will create a problem much more quickly than CO2 will.

Great ... you're competing to see who can out-fear who. "I'll see your Climate catastrophe and raise you ozone mass extinctions!"

I'm dying to know who, exactly, you believe is gullible enough to fall for this crap.

James___ wrote: I am in the wrong though for having such an opinion based on scientific research.

I'll ask you what I ask of all Marxists ... though I have no expectations that I'll get any sort of coherent germane response because Marxists are intellectual cowards and thus I never get a response.

Let's suppose I have a table full of stacks of papers full of research. I bring in a second table so I can divide the research into two categories 1) scientific research and 2) ordinary research. On table A I will place all the scientific research. On table B I will place all the ordinary research that is not scientific research.

I pick up the first page of research and analyze it. How do I objectively determine if the research it contains is "scientific" research or whether it is ordinary research?

James___ wrote: And in my very ignorant opinion, if we lowered CO2 emissions, then we would see problems that people don't care about like crop failure.

Did we have wide-spread crop failures ten years ago when there was less CO2 in the atmosphere than there is today? ... or do you believe crop productivity is tied to the rate of man-made CO2 emission?

James___ wrote: Fortunately there are countries that will keep releasing CO2 into the atmosphere so the ozone layer will be able to recover.

Have you ever considered researching the standard chemistry involved?



James___ wrote: As with atmospheric chemistry, I stand by my opinion on that subject as well.

Let's discuss how your opinion differ from the standard chemistry that Into the Night has been trying (in vain) to teach you?

James___ wrote: That's how I could make friends in Australia. When Australia burns, it might be caused by America and the European Union.

Naaah, it just the US' fault. We should all panic and it's all the US' fault.

James___ wrote: Yet the chemicals we release into the atmosphere have no effect because industrialization doesn't generate toxic waste.

Aaaah, industrialization! The Industrial Revolution is when history started. It's when all bad things began to happen. But desperate times bring about our greatest leaders, like my buddy Karl.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
03-06-2019 02:26
James___
★★★★☆
(1465)
keepit wrote:
Wow.
I remember the lyrics, "O Lord, please don't let me be misunderstood."

Is Marxism still going on?
Honestly, i'm kind of oblivious to Marxism.


IBDaMann and Into The Night seem to promote Marxism while saying they are against it. Most in this forum support them. We like China, right?
03-06-2019 04:53
HarveyH55
★★★☆☆
(973)
I don't really have anything against China, but have never been there, and only know a few people that lived there. China has been there a very long time, long before we came over here, and stole this piece of land. They really aren't doing anything to us, that we haven't been done to them. We take manufacturing work over there, to increase our profits. China wants to increase their profits too. So we thought we were getting cheap labor, dodging regulations, and getting rich. China only found a way to get in on the wealth. It's an entirely different culture, different morals and values. Doesn't mean it's bad, just because they do things differently than we would do it. I do know that they are smart people, and creative. My guess is the past trade agreements left them a lot of wiggle room, and they took advantage. We do that a lot too.
03-06-2019 05:36
James___
★★★★☆
(1465)
HarveyH55 wrote:
I don't really have anything against China, but have never been there, and only know a few people that lived there. China has been there a very long time, long before we came over here, and stole this piece of land. They really aren't doing anything to us, that we haven't been done to them. We take manufacturing work over there, to increase our profits. China wants to increase their profits too. So we thought we were getting cheap labor, dodging regulations, and getting rich. China only found a way to get in on the wealth. It's an entirely different culture, different morals and values. Doesn't mean it's bad, just because they do things differently than we would do it. I do know that they are smart people, and creative. My guess is the past trade agreements left them a lot of wiggle room, and they took advantage. We do that a lot too.


Harvey, you're sick. Seek help. And say that the Chinese government is like ours. And then say that you are sane. See if they will listen to you.
During WW II, people said the same things about the Nazi party. Talk to someone who lived through it and then say that all governments are the same. Can you do that?
Edited on 03-06-2019 05:38
03-06-2019 08:50
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8592)
keepit wrote:
Wow.
I remember the lyrics, "O Lord, please don't let me be misunderstood."

Is Marxism still going on?
Honestly, i'm kind of oblivious to Marxism.


Yet you argue to support it. I think it's time for you to take a deep bit of naval gazing to understand the ramifications of what you are supporting.

You may not have read Marx, and you may not have even seen his Manifesto, but you are arguing his position all the same.


The Parrot Killer
03-06-2019 10:36
HarveyH55
★★★☆☆
(973)
James___ wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote:
I don't really have anything against China, but have never been there, and only know a few people that lived there. China has been there a very long time, long before we came over here, and stole this piece of land. They really aren't doing anything to us, that we haven't been done to them. We take manufacturing work over there, to increase our profits. China wants to increase their profits too. So we thought we were getting cheap labor, dodging regulations, and getting rich. China only found a way to get in on the wealth. It's an entirely different culture, different morals and values. Doesn't mean it's bad, just because they do things differently than we would do it. I do know that they are smart people, and creative. My guess is the past trade agreements left them a lot of wiggle room, and they took advantage. We do that a lot too.


Harvey, you're sick. Seek help. And say that the Chinese government is like ours. And then say that you are sane. See if they will listen to you.
During WW II, people said the same things about the Nazi party. Talk to someone who lived through it and then say that all governments are the same. Can you do that?


Yeah, you're sane, everyone else is crazy.. And you accuse me of illiteracy? China has similar goals, just different methods for achieving them, it's a different culture, different belief system.

Insane, is someone who thinks he can perform a risky abdominal surgery, which most doctors are reluctant to perform, unless there are no other alternatives, on himself, with local anesthetic, and no medical training. I'm not sure why you obsessed with getting a crap-sack install, no chance of go back, if it's not all you ever hoped for. You survived you previous surgery, and are apparently functional, physically anyway. No medical need for it, and I need help...

China isn't Nazi Germany, nor is it likely to ever to happen again, people learn from the past. Information travels very fast these days, and there are eyes watch everywhere.
03-06-2019 16:45
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8592)
HarveyH55 wrote:
James___ wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote:
I don't really have anything against China, but have never been there, and only know a few people that lived there. China has been there a very long time, long before we came over here, and stole this piece of land. They really aren't doing anything to us, that we haven't been done to them. We take manufacturing work over there, to increase our profits. China wants to increase their profits too. So we thought we were getting cheap labor, dodging regulations, and getting rich. China only found a way to get in on the wealth. It's an entirely different culture, different morals and values. Doesn't mean it's bad, just because they do things differently than we would do it. I do know that they are smart people, and creative. My guess is the past trade agreements left them a lot of wiggle room, and they took advantage. We do that a lot too.


Harvey, you're sick. Seek help. And say that the Chinese government is like ours. And then say that you are sane. See if they will listen to you.
During WW II, people said the same things about the Nazi party. Talk to someone who lived through it and then say that all governments are the same. Can you do that?


Yeah, you're sane, everyone else is crazy.. And you accuse me of illiteracy? China has similar goals, just different methods for achieving them, it's a different culture, different belief system.

Insane, is someone who thinks he can perform a risky abdominal surgery, which most doctors are reluctant to perform, unless there are no other alternatives, on himself, with local anesthetic, and no medical training. I'm not sure why you obsessed with getting a crap-sack install, no chance of go back, if it's not all you ever hoped for. You survived you previous surgery, and are apparently functional, physically anyway. No medical need for it, and I need help...

China isn't Nazi Germany, nor is it likely to ever to happen again, people learn from the past. Information travels very fast these days, and there are eyes watch everywhere.


No, China isn't Nazi Germany. China has murdered far more of their own citizens as dissidents than Nazi Germany ever did. China is also communism, while Germany only played around with the precursor of communism called fascism.

Like Germany, the only information that travels fast is that which is allowed by the government. All other information is suppressed, or at the least overwhelmed by government propaganda ministers.


The Parrot Killer
04-06-2019 03:07
HarveyH55
★★★☆☆
(973)
And our government doesn't produce propaganda, or suppress information? They were pretty quick to declare, that the Russian government hacked the 2016 election, but refused to explain how, or why they were certain it was government effort, and not some bored college kids. We've been misinformed many times, and they've gotten caught at it, truth eventually comes out.

Dissidents is sort of a complicated word here, several levels of meaning. Are they just complaining, or are they trying to take over the government? Seems like killing a rebellion, was taken quite literally, in many countries. A simple, long term solution, and sets an example to others who might try. What would they do, just set them free, to re-organize, and try again? We have dissidents in our country, many of them in congress, some running for president in 2020. They want to socialism, thinks it's better for the rest of us, we are just too stupid to understand the benefits of living poor, and dying before our turn to see a doctor, who would probably just determine we would be to expensive to save anyway.
04-06-2019 09:43
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8592)
HarveyH55 wrote:
And our government doesn't produce propaganda, or suppress information?

Never said it doesn't. It has nowhere near the control over information the Chinese government has though.
HarveyH55 wrote:
They were pretty quick to declare, that the Russian government hacked the 2016 election, but refused to explain how, or why they were certain it was government effort, and not some bored college kids. We've been misinformed many times, and they've gotten caught at it, truth eventually comes out.

Truth eventually comes out in China too, but usually at the cost of lives or torture.
HarveyH55 wrote:
Dissidents is sort of a complicated word here, several levels of meaning. Are they just complaining, or are they trying to take over the government? Seems like killing a rebellion, was taken quite literally, in many countries. A simple, long term solution, and sets an example to others who might try. What would they do, just set them free, to re-organize, and try again? We have dissidents in our country, many of them in congress, some running for president in 2020. They want to socialism, thinks it's better for the rest of us, we are just too stupid to understand the benefits of living poor, and dying before our turn to see a doctor, who would probably just determine we would be to expensive to save anyway.

Dissidents are in every nation. Here, dissidents are trying to destroy the Constitution. We call them Democrats. In China, they are trying to protect themselves from the threat of torture, capital punishment for saying the wrong thing to the wrong people, the own livelihoods, and each other. The difference in China is the lack of basic human rights.

Yes, we have fascist elements in our country too, but they are NOTHING like what the Chinese have to deal with, due to the outright communism.

Remember, socialism can only exist by stealing wealth. Only capitalism creates wealth.


The Parrot Killer
04-06-2019 16:55
IBdaMann
★★★★★
(4230)
Into the Night wrote: Dissidents are in every nation. Here, dissidents are trying to destroy the Constitution. We call them Democrats.

Sometimes I really wish you would just come out and say what's on your mind.

Into the Night wrote: In China, they are trying to protect themselves from the threat of torture, capital punishment for saying the wrong thing to the wrong people, the own livelihoods, and each other. The difference in China is the lack of basic human rights.

But Tai Hai Chen assures us that the Chinese government loves and cares for the people unlike the cold, heartless US government that has horrendously lowered income taxes and brutally facilitated record unemployment.

Into the Night wrote: Yes, we have fascist elements in our country too, but they are NOTHING like what the Chinese have to deal with, due to the outright communism.

ANTIFA & BLM vs. China's Secret Police. Hmmm, I wonder how they compare side by side.

Into the Night wrote:Remember, socialism can only exist by stealing wealth. Only capitalism creates wealth.

I submit that it is worse than that. Marxism destroys wealth, and it steals wealth in order to do so. You might not have noticed but Marxism and cancer have an awful lot in common.

Capitalism, on the other hand, adds value, mutually. People become wealthy by providing goods and services that are in demand by others. Win-win.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
04-06-2019 19:11
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8592)
IBdaMann wrote:
Into the Night wrote: Dissidents are in every nation. Here, dissidents are trying to destroy the Constitution. We call them Democrats.

Sometimes I really wish you would just come out and say what's on your mind.


Heh. Was I a bit too frank?



The Parrot Killer




Join the debate economic:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
economic9431-05-2019 21:12
A new Stanford study shows the economic cost of climate change is more global inequality024-04-2019 03:05
In California, Rising Seas Pose a Bigger Economic Threat Than Wildfires, Quakes027-03-2019 17:50
Articles
Appendix B - Calculating The Economic Costs of Extreme Weather Events
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2019 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact