http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...ticle27433002/

Socialist Queen Rachel saving our world

you can't really fight climate change since it's a natural part of the earth's cycles but okay waste that money honey

location: florida

The only way to "fight" climate change is to figure out how to control it. These silly carbon taxes and other nonsense are not the tea.

nah i'm not ignorant i'm just saying, our earth goes through natural cycles over the years of weather. This is nothing new tbh. However it is good that we have limits on the amt of smog and pollution since our world would get disgusting and become filth like some of China's cities where it's hard to breathe.

Luckily artificial super intelligence will be able to solve all of these problems.

Canadians once again slaying

that's how you control it, you force emitters to invest in techonology to decrease emission

The term 'Climate Change' describes the consequences of humanity's unnatural, harmful impact on the environment.

"Curbing emissions" in Canada when China alone is dumping more pollutants into the air than Canada EVER will.

Climate change will happen even with a net global carbon footprint of zero. Why waste money and time trying to reduce emissions when it won't stop the earth from shifting through cycles?

It seems much more prudent to figure out how to control it.

i don't get what you mean tbh

The earth has gone through cycles of warmer and cooler temperatures for millions of years, when human industrialization was nonexistent. Thus reducing our carbon footprint will only slow down this process, not stop it.

The question, then, is how do we control the cycle and keep the earth in a perpetual state of ideal conditions? Throwing a tax on fossil fuels doesn't really help our bottom line here.

the earth would be heading towards cooling if not for human intervention, thus it must be stopped for the earth to go back to her natural state

Her "natural state" may or may not be beneficial to mankind. We should be figuring out how to manipulate it for our own benefit.

Tossing around legislation to penalize people for using fossil fuels -- especially when this legislation isn't globalized and probably never will be -- is like throwing a Band-Aid on a flesh-eating sore and applauding ourselves for "slowing it's (inevitable!) progress."

Don't get me wrong, I'm all about weening ourselves off of fossil fuels, but I think the long-term implications should be more considered.

natural state is beneficial when ice melting would destroy much of earth

it's not band aid, these are all part of a worldwide climatechange strategy, there will be a global meeting next week

No offense, but who cares. The earth is our house and we should be renovating it to accomodate our needs first and foremost. I don't care about ecological loss in some remote part of the earth and neither should you.

ice melting would wipe off most cities like new york, los angeles, etc.