-
@ freemymind 🇨🇭
2025-05-21 12:13:42
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8HLtFv_KqoE&list=PLJicmE8fK0EiNXHZ2TeAhByFJywce31S-
Maby this youtube-playlist gives a lot of fallacies, used in many discussions. Since it is very clearly a fallacy to falsify climatechange, only because there was no thermometer during many million of years. Yes maby therefore other indicators for the climates are needed. But the proof of todays human-made climatchange only needs the records of the last 100 years to proof the fact, that it is happening. Together with the proof of co2 being a greenhouse gas and the rate of climatechange being fatal to many forms of life we have on our planet, should already rise concerns for most people who are able to think critically.
Since in the end we have two extreme actions:
Invest everything into decabonisation, in the efforts to lower the effects of climate change. When we find out, that we can survive very well without these actions, still we gained independence from fossil fules, which means more independence anyway.
or
We do not care how much possution we are emitting as we did the last70 years and in the worst case, the surface of the earth, where life is possible shrinks to a very small surface, what will undouptadly result in big refugee migration all over the earth, which would destabilized our societies anyway.
Defnitly we currently live somewhere inbetween these extremes. But towards which one the probability for a properous economy is bigger?