Climate Change: “An APPALLING Scam!” w/ Jordan Peterson
By Pints With Aquinas
Jordan Peterson and Matt Fradd discuss global warming and climate change and dig into how more CO2 in the environment is actually making the planet greener, not more arid.
Here’s what others had to say:
@tyler9281
You know it’s a good video when YouTube tries to save us with the “Context” box.
@Richard-oo6pc
I don’t know why YT feels the need to use the United Nations as a source for a science topic. It’s a POLITICAL organization.
@valuedCustomer2929
This has been a difficult topic to tackle with fellow parishioners. It feels like I’m a bad Cath for not just going along with it but when I’m so familiar with the holes in the argument it I struggle with confusion
@MathAdam
“Green tax” won’t sell as well as “carbon tax”
@DeGave123
One “Context Box” is worth 100,000 upvotes in my world. Watching right now.
@niceworkabc
If you’re picking the time frame that suits your hypothesis – that isn’t science.
@ochem123
1:10 Matt Fradd — Humility without confidence is false humility. Be simultaneously humble and confident. I learned that from Our Lady, the Queen of Heaven; she is both humble and confident.
@jerryczarski5991
Freedom of speech and content is limited by the all-seeing ‘Blue Box”. I believe this is a crime. The platform is not a publisher, not the content creator, and not the actual customer.
@shaulkramer7425
Excellent episode.
Every Christian, Jew, and Muslim, as well as Hindus who believe in God, should watch the full episode, and pay attention when JBP says that to believe in God, is to act like it, ALL THE TIME. We will fail to, but the goal is in front of us.
@francismcglynn4169
Birds singing at 4:00 A.M. help the stromata of plants open and so does some classical music. Some farmers have increased their yields by playing it.
@RonaldSteinEnergyLiteracy
There is a lost reality that the primary usage of crude oil is NOT for the generation of electricity, but to manufacture derivatives and fuels which are the ingredients of everything needed by economies and lifestyles to exist and prosper, i.e., all products that did not exist pre-1800’s.
“Big oil” only exists because of the wealthier countries being addicted to the products and fuels that are manufactured from fossil fuels that makes OUR life more comfortable?” OUR needs for smaller and faster electronics, and for bigger and faster planes, ships, and launches into outer space are the only reasons that crude oil is needed.
Thus, before we chastise “big oil” for impacting climate change, we need to ask ourselves “How dare ME to continuously demand the products and fuels made from oil that makes MY life more comfortable”?
• “Big oil” represents the SUPPLY side of the equation.
• Our needs for products from oil represent the DEMAND side of the equation.
If you don’t like “Big oil”, stop using the products made from oil !
@Snowdog070
Jordan is right in my opinion but he was off by 100ppm CO2 when he quoted a couple numbers. Plants die at 150ppm CO2 not 250ppm as he said. We’re at about 420ppm now and rising having been as high as 5000-7000ppm historically. There is science out there that questions the 280ppm minimum we hit during the last northern hemisphere glaciation and presumably all previous glaciations too. Since those numbers are largely derived from the analysis of trapped air held within bubbles frozen within ice in Antarctica and Greenland the new science questions those numbers based upon the mechanics and time taken to freeze that air within the bubbles consequently making the 280ppm value somewhat low with suggestions around 380-400 being more probable with fluctuations as the earth goes through warming and cooling cycles. Remember that temperature drives CO2 not the other way around. If 380-400 is more likely, our current measured values as set out in graphs like the Keeling Curve are not all that unusual. Also, very recent science has adjusted the percentage of the CO2 in the atmosphere due to human activities from about 3% to 2% so it is possible that humans are not greening the planet as much as Patrick Moore suggests. Bottom line is that the science is not settled and very rarely should be as Jordan alluded to and any real scientist knows. As Jordan has said in another video, it is difficult to separate the politics from the science when it comes to the “climate change” narrative we are inundated by.
@canadaclub8920
the positive effects on vegetation may not persist indefinitely if temperatures continue to rise unchecked. The 3 main crops, wheat maize and rice can’t grow in excessively hot temperatures.
———————-
Original source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=afYRZUhE1-o
