It was always climate change. Hell, I remember when I was a kid and people called it that. Global warming just got popular in terms of common usage...Also the predictions for rate of change were fairly accurate if you're referring to published models. Keep in mind, I'm referencing the boring and not at all glamorous publications in journals. The kind that reference Milankovitch cycles and planetary albedo. You know, the ones no one actually reads but has really, really strong opinions on.
The thing most people reference is what they saw in over-inflated headlines. It was like the hackers on steroids thing back in the day. Yeah, it's referencing a real thing and it sort of resembles the thing in question, but it's deliberately overblown for the purpose of making an eye catching story. Clickbait existed back in the day too, it was just called fluff pieces.>>109690485
Yes, but those climate shifts were over a long period of time. We're also never going to turn into Venus or Mars. Greenhouse emissions don't produce an endlessly exponential increase in temperature. It has diminishing returns. It's why those previous periods of heating slowly "turned around". That, and the odds of getting hit by an asteroid or any celestial body is ludicrously low. The universe is bloody big, it's expanding, and it's mostly empty. Well, "empty" if you want to get pedantic, but you know what I mean. Besides, If anything is going to slap our shit in from outside our planet it's going to happen so fast we couldn't even react to it even if we somehow knew about it, like a gamma ray burst.>>109690615
I'd hardly call most of the measures moronic. A decrease in the amount of meat consumption, more investment into "clean" energy sources, and more public transportation all seem both sensible and fiscally reasonable.>>109690639
I really wish he'd lay off the tariffs...and why does Ben draw Trump as a svelte dude? He's tubby and old. It'd be like drawing Sanders with a six pack.