Why do people attempt to use scare tactics to make people believe in "climate change?"

Because people don't care if it's not immediately happening, so you need to instill the fear. Just look at the past decade of barely any action because people refuse to believe in it even though there's plenty of evidence and it's a straightforward concept.

...

cute maraca grill

>Why do people attempt to use scare tactics to make people believe in "climate change?"
Because it's the only way to get them to pay attention.
Climatologists have been writing reports and publishing their fears for decades, and nobody gave a shit. Hell; The IPCC AR1 came out in 1990, 27 years ago, and yet most people learned about climate change from a fucking movie in 2004. It's difficult to blame them when they've already tried and failed to do things the "right" way.

>Carbon sequestration is viable
This

Yes,not like the dutch killed thousands of people by not diverting resources to protect themselves climate change,and only learning after the damage was done.
Its literally one of the seven modern wonders of the world now

the two, cigarettes and CC denial, are more closely related than most realize

youtu.be/hqiCLuOtXts?t=8m10s

nuclear is viable as fuck, as long as it is properly secured

interesting thanks

Climate change is real, natural and not our fault. They just want to use it to shit some more on middle class and poor ppl with regulations, fines, and by increasing the cost of energy.

The people promoting it base it on the fact that nowadays people don't even know what the cycle of water or the photosynthesis are.

cries in chernobyl

Because useless carbon taxation is profitable for government parasites and scientists willing to bork their data for more government grant money. On top of that, the climate was changing before humans industrialized and took up mass agriculture and farming. If people realized that the spooky climate apocalypse will happen regardless of whether we sling around more carbon taxes and throw away money on welfare cases like wind and solar, they'd stop supporting the government's push for more taxation and regulatory power.

Why do people not care to look into it if it could be that dangerous? Why do they just plug their eyes and watch their shows while their world is being destroyed?

>Coming out of an ice age is the same as being destroyed.
Stop being hysterical.

The petro-dollar is the single largest obstacle against clean energy. Clean energy is against Americas best interests. The dollar holds its value as long as it's viable. Clean energy would render it inert. As long as America's in power (or seeking to hold power), it will prevent any and all attempts to seek another viable clean energy source. It seriously wouldn't surprise me if the CIA or whatever purposely prevents and actually hinders production within this area.

Something that would benefit the world immensely, and America is actively preventing it.

Lol, and they call themselves the "good guys."

How many people listen to 'scientific facts'? Politicians routinely ignore them in favour of just being retards, and to satiate their corporate overlords. When the fate of the world is in play, propagandising is needed.

>Coming out of an ice age is the same as being destroyed.
It is if you're evolved to live in the ice age.

Its the media and politicians; they fear monger for ratings and votes but do jack shit about it. Scientists tend to be more reasonable on the subject.

not having 1:21:00 to spare, an you give me an idea of what this is about?
pls don't tell me this is a "cigarettes don't cause cancer" thing...

- read the url timestamp
- watch a few minutes
- read the wikipedia page

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merchants_of_Doubt_(film)

1. CO2 and many other gases have "greenhouse" properties in that they allow visible light to pass through (hence invisible), but trap and re-emit infrared radiation. This is literally 19th century science, first proposed by Joseph Fourier in 1824, verified and quantified experimentally beyond reasonable doubt by Svante Arrhenius.
2. CO2 in the atmosphere has been rising, and this is a result of fossil fuel combustion (pic related). CO2 can be measured experimentally in the lab, and the stable isotopes of CO2 plunges into the negative values. Fossil fuel has distinct negative isotopic signature compared to natural CO2. This is also an undeniable fact from observation.
3. You add 1+2, you would expect the radiative energy budget of the earth to be out of equilibrium. This is exactly what we observe, based on satellites that measures total energy in vs. energy out by CERES satellite at NASA.earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/EnergyBalance/page6.phpOn average, only 71% of energy entering the Earth is leaving. 2nd law of thermodynamics and conservation of energy states that when a system had energy imbalance, T must go up.
In short, CO2 causes greenhouse effect. Humans put CO2 into the atmosphere through fossil fuel burning. The earth is now in energy imbalance due to additional CO2, and therefore warming. All basic, high school physics that should be easy to understand

Nuclear fission energy is a mature, viable, clean technology. It's only not used widely because the first plants came online too early, before proper reactor design and safety/reliability procedures could be developed.