I meant in terms of the overall public, people don't want to reverse it at the moment, people want to limit it.

True, the problem is if Steem spikes up, SBD print rates go up, and when the Steem price then goes down again, the sbd price will stay at 1$ and will then pressure the Steem price. I got it wrong.

Yeah, I think there is also kinda a beauty behind it though. Without communities and without moderation we get kinda a peak out of our bubble and see how terrible and toxic mankind can be =P

I think the main problem was SBD spiking over 1$ which caused a lot of these issues. And not the steem price itself spiking.

If you follow Carlin more closely you'd get it. Actually he is not arguing against climate change at all. In a bunch of videos he talks about this topic and his man point usually is: Who is in the end

For short term thinkers, we should really not spend money on this and let the future generations solve this. I think we should've done this always during the history of mankind. Like, when we had acid

For parts this is happening a lot already. Numerous studies get revoked every year because results where either not repeatable or even found incorrect. Especially in nutrition this is happening very strongly

Besides that, there is plenty of money to earn from these investments until its too late to sell them. So on the short term its definitely worth it.

No one is talking about reversing climate change. Scientists are talking about limiting climate change to a certain degree to make it decently livable for our future offsprings on this planets.

Future predictions are based on models, the effect off co2 on climate is mostly based on empiric data about the ice sheets and co2 levels in the past. This coupled with models of the sun activity (also

I read parts of it, then I wondered where they published and noticed they created their own peer review journal to publish it. This means probably the scientific community rejected it. Thus, it probably

Btw, about the "study" of the two "scientists" which published this in their own journal, couldn't even get a conservative journal to accept it.

So, I'll ask you a little question. Who has more powerful interest in this, the fossil fuel lobby or everyone else? One of the most powerful lobbies in the history of mankind or everyone else? The man

Do you really think that these enormous quantities of fossil fuels we're burning which the earth incorporated for millions of years, the enormous quantities of forest we're cutting and burning down, also

That's why there is peer review of scientists of this particular area and not a quorum of random people deciding if they believe this study or not. While I think peer review is certainly not perfect. The

Please, there were no scientists which thought the earth was flat. Religion said the earth was flat, and who wouldn't believe it was killed....

The thing is that one of the poles is losing much much much more than what the other pole is gaining additionally.

Science is settled until proven otherwise, there are numerous attempts "proving" the current model wrong. Unfortunately, these either don't pass peer review or are not even submitted for peer

I think the fossil fuel lobby and countries depending on fossil fuel would have had enough money to invest into this research to prove the world otherwise. But, unfortunately, they couldn't.

Actually that's something which is also expected, climate change causes a warmer climate and not necessarily warmer weather (climate != weather). Warmer earth temperatures lead to a more unstable climate