Posted on Nov 29, 2016
Trump’s climate change denial will lead to thousands—maybe millions—of deaths
5.26K
60
44
3
3
0
Trump has called climate change "a Chinese hoax." It's not. Climate change is a well documented threat to the safety and stability of the world, and if nothing is done about it, it has the potential to lead to massive wars over resources, living space, and clean air. It will also lead to increased floods, hurricanes, and other natural disasters.
Trump's plan to do nothing to stop climate change and continue to allow big business to pollute like there is not tommorrow will have consequences. Millions could die when their homes get flooded, from drought, and from wars over resources. Ironically, the states which voted for Trump will be hardest hit, because the southern states like Texas, Florida, Louisiana, South Carolina, etc. will be most at risk for increased flooding and hurricanes.
Trump's plan to do nothing to stop climate change and continue to allow big business to pollute like there is not tommorrow will have consequences. Millions could die when their homes get flooded, from drought, and from wars over resources. Ironically, the states which voted for Trump will be hardest hit, because the southern states like Texas, Florida, Louisiana, South Carolina, etc. will be most at risk for increased flooding and hurricanes.
Trump’s climate change denial will lead to thousands—maybe millions—of deaths
Posted from qz.com
Donald Trump
Office of the President (POTUS)
Climate Change
Posted 8 y ago
Responses: 22
7
7
0
All that in eight years? If he can do that imagine where we would be if only Gore hadn't lost. BTW, how many of his predictions have transpired?
(7)
(0)
6
6
0
I personally think it's part of the natural cycle of the planet.
The cretaceous and Jurassic periods were supposedly pretty warm and the Ice Age pretty cold. What melted all that ICE? there weren't that many animals running around and certainly not that much plant life creating green house effects.
How about the inland seas and all the fossils out in Nevada, New Mexico and Montana. Water must have been pretty damn deep at one time.
So while I believe the planet is in a warming cycle I don't buy the horrors of industry mantra.
The cretaceous and Jurassic periods were supposedly pretty warm and the Ice Age pretty cold. What melted all that ICE? there weren't that many animals running around and certainly not that much plant life creating green house effects.
How about the inland seas and all the fossils out in Nevada, New Mexico and Montana. Water must have been pretty damn deep at one time.
So while I believe the planet is in a warming cycle I don't buy the horrors of industry mantra.
(6)
(0)
5
5
0
LOL, alarmism at it's best. Why didn't they go all the way and say "maybe BILLIONS?" Warmer periods on earth have been associated with the best times for human development & crop production, while the coldest periods have been those of starvation and disease, where thousands--maybe millions, have died. Hurricanes and tornadoes have been at or near record LOWS for 11 years now. The poorest people on earth can afford electricity today because it is cheap, due to fossil fuels. Thousands, maybe millions, of them, may die if the alarmists win the day and outlaw fossil fuel use. Pollution is another matter. The alarmists claim CO2 is the reason for global warming...the same CO2 you breathe out and plants breathe in. It is not pollution, but ACTUAL pollution policy in America has been very effective. Los Angeles is almost livable again.
(5)
(0)
Col Joseph Lenertz
SGT Edward Wilcox - I think Germany is the world leader in solar power, effectively producing about 6% of the nation's needs, while subsidizing the costs of renewable energy in order to reach that level. Unfortunately, in 2014 the retail price for residential consumption in Germany was about 35 cents/kWh, while the average residential retail price in the United States was about 13 cents/kWh. I don't think the poorest Americans (who are rich by world standards) could easily afford a 260% increase in their electricity bills.
(2)
(0)
SN Greg Wright
SGT Edward Wilcox - I'll let the Colonel's response stand for me, Sargent, since I agree with him, and he really sort of shut you down. So as to avoid engaging your insults. And I stand by my statement: it'll never happen on the scale it needs to.
(2)
(0)
SGT Edward Wilcox
Col Joseph Lenertz - Power generation by coal and gas are heavily subsidized in this country, as opposed to being taxed in European countries. Ending those subsidies would increase the cost of electricity. Regardless of relative cost, power generation is cheaper and cleaner using wind and solar. The more they are used, the cheaper they become. It is only a matter of time.
(0)
(0)
SGT Edward Wilcox
SN Greg Wright - The Colonel did not "shut me down". He simply presented facts with no context. Proved nothing.
If you feel that my pointing out how little you know about the subject was insulting, then I suggest you look in the mirror and ask yourself why. I stand by my assertion that you know very little about this subject, as evidenced by your 'space mirror' comment.
By the way, China is producing as much power from wind as they are from nuclear. Alternative power sources are viable and cleaner.
If you feel that my pointing out how little you know about the subject was insulting, then I suggest you look in the mirror and ask yourself why. I stand by my assertion that you know very little about this subject, as evidenced by your 'space mirror' comment.
By the way, China is producing as much power from wind as they are from nuclear. Alternative power sources are viable and cleaner.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google