What is net zero?

@metal-brain said
I know, but my point is that certain life can survive. We cannot, but CO2 levels right now are very low. The Jurassic had 5 times the CO2 as we have right now. The dinosaurs did fine before the meteor strike.

The entire point of global climate policies is to keep our climate as is so we humans don't need painful and expensive adaptations to our lifestyles.

@metal-brain said
Too much of anything can be bad. Stop being so dramatic.

Too much CO2 is bad. Leave it to scientists to do experiments and tell us the bad number.

@wajoma said
Greta Thunberg recently deleted her doomsday post because the date came and went and nothing happened.

Greta Thunberg says: "A top climate scientist is warning that climate change will wipe out all of humanity unless we stop using fossil fuels over the next five years."

I do accept the stated risks associated with climate change, but she is irritating for sure. I just can’t put my finger on why.

Edit:
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/greta-thunberg-deleted-2018-tweet-on-humanity/

@wildgrass said
The entire point of global climate policies is to keep our climate as is so we humans don't need painful and expensive adaptations to our lifestyles.

0 CO2 does lead to painful adaptations to our lifestyles ask the few billion people currently living at or near 0 CO2.

Starving, thirsty, without transport, electricity or hospitals.

@wildgrass said
Too much CO2 is bad. Leave it to scientists to do experiments and tell us the bad number.

I don't think they have any such number.

@wildgrass said
The entire point of global climate policies is to keep our climate as is so we humans don't need painful and expensive adaptations to our lifestyles.

But that is based on a guess, not science.

Global warming theory is not even a theory. It is a mere hypothesis with no science to back it up.

@vivify said
Only a few hours ago you didn't even know what "net zero" meant. Yet you believe you're knowledgeable enough on climate change to make that assessment?

Are you honestly claiming you knew the answer before I did? You learned it here on this thread.

I know more about climate science than you do.
The Jurassic had 5 times the CO2 as we have right now. The dinosaurs did fine before the meteor strike. We will too.

@wajoma said
0 CO2 does lead to painful adaptations to our lifestyles ask the few billion people currently living at or near 0 CO2.

Starving, thirsty, without transport, electricity or hospitals.

Absurd suggestion that carbon emissions is the only thing holding back the 3rd world.

@metal-brain said
Are you honestly claiming you knew the answer before I did? You learned it here on this thread.

You clearly don't keep up with the news to say something like that.

For the last two years scientists have warned a 1 degree Celsius increase in earth's climate will have dire and possibly irreversible consequences. Net Zero carbon emissions is a frequent talking point regarding this that somehow only you were unaware of.

I know more about climate science than you do.

Yet you don't know why too much CO2 in earth's atmosphere is dangerous. Uh-huh.

@wildgrass said
Absurd suggestion that carbon emissions is the only thing holding back the 3rd world.

There are people living at or near 0 CO2 and you don't want to be one of them.

@vivify said
You clearly don't keep up with the news to say something like that.

For the last two years scientists have warned a 1 degree Celsius increase in earth's climate will have dire and possibly irreversible consequences. Net Zero carbon emissions is a frequent talking point regarding this that somehow only you were unaware of.

I know more about climate science than you do.

Yet you don't know why too much CO2 in earth's atmosphere is dangerous. Uh-huh.

What scientists?

A minority of scientists does not convince me.

@wajoma said
There are people living at or near 0 CO2 and you don't want to be one of them.

Still absurdly illogical to suggest a direct relationship.

@metal-brain said
But that is based on a guess, not science.

Global warming theory is not even a theory. It is a mere hypothesis with no science to back it up.

You need to stop reading your far-right comic books.

@wildgrass said
Still absurdly illogical to suggest a direct relationship.

The relationship between abundant energy versus starving, between abundant energy versus being without clean water, between abundant energy versus not having sanitation. between abundant energy versus walking miles with a sack on your back is stark.

@metal-brain said
I know. CO2 is essential to all life on earth though. Right?

So is water. You can still drown though.