A clarification and a request
(… one of many made over the decades …)
(… in the shade …)
It's not because others propose absurd solutions (for ideological reasons, for intellectual deficit, for corruption, it doesn't matter), that we have to say that the problem doesn't exist.
I think there is a problem.
I remind everyone, before the debate opens, that the best way to evaluate a solution is to see if it is consistent with the narrative of the problem, that the years are lived one at a time, and therefore three or four "exceptions" in a row would become however difficult to manage, from every point of view, considering that our times are not geological ones, but those of our ephemeral biology.
What has been said is valid for both sides: for those who are sure that emissions have nothing to do with it, and for those who are so sure that they have something to do with it that to fight them they are even willing… to do more !
(… at the #midterm we will also talk about this, and in this regard I have a request to ask you: what are, in your opinion, the most iconic, most used, or most abused graphics, to support the merits of one or the other part, so to speak, of electricians and gassers? In your daily use of the social slurry, which topics – possibly summarized in graphs – do you see being used? I can't even see anymore, my filter only lets the weak signal band through, but I suppose there are graphs that prove we are boiling, graphs that prove that nothing is happening, graphs that weigh carbon dioxide, graphs that weigh ice in the oceans, etc. Probably Climate Criticism is a good source of garbage – too bad who in turn does not cite the source, unfortunately making himself of little use – and there must be a reason! If you had any and could suggest them you would make my job much easier and we would both be grateful to you… )
Post scriptum of 3/31/2024, 11 am: dear friends, I see that I can't make myself understood. I'm not interested in opening a debate on the causes of global warming! I am interested in opening a debate on the proposed solutions. You will say: but if you don't find the cause, how can you find a solution? Right! But the dynamics of the debate that has opened on this topic clearly show us that here we are at an identity and religious level. The left has made this theme the new class struggle ( unfortunately it's the other way around ) and to convince its followers of their moral superiority it has abused, in its usual forms, the principle of authoritarianism. There is no point in challenging dogmas, in my opinion, especially when they are supported by a shower of billions (ours) spent on propaganda. The operation that interests me is different: not to reflect on the Milankovic cycles (I still thank Fabio for his always useful contributions), but to think about how much energy would be needed if everything were electrified, how much copper would be needed to put on all the charging stations, how to solve the problem of intermittency, how the development of renewable supply intersects with that of "digital end grin" demand, etc. I believe in everything , therefore I also believe in the cioddue, in the austerity that leads to growth, etc. But if I look at the data in the second case, I would like to look at them, and have them discussed, also in the first. Clear?
This is a machine translation of a post (in Italian) written by Alberto Bagnai and published on Goofynomics at the URL https://goofynomics.blogspot.com/2024/03/una-precisazione-e-una-richiesta.html on Sat, 30 Mar 2024 21:58:00 +0000. Some rights reserved under CC BY-NC-ND 3.0 license.