Why is the World Economic Forum taking climate advice from a 16 year old climate campaigner instead of the world’s only Nobel climate economist?pic.twitter.com/44FQmDb1dd
Voit lisätä twiitteihisi sijainnin, esimerkiksi kaupungin tai tarkemman paikan, verkosta ja kolmannen osapuolen sovellusten kautta. Halutessasi voit poistaa twiittisi sijaintihistorian myöhemmin. Lue lisää
I couldn't agree more. Are you not arguing we should just ignore climate change? I had the impression that was your argument for some reason. If not, my mistake.
Great And no, not ignore: I've been arguing for 1) a carbon tax for more than a decade, and 2) strong proponent for dramatically increasing green R&D to innovate price down below fossil fuels (likely more effective and more likely to happen) See https://www.copenhagenconsensus.com/copenhagen-consensus-climate …pic.twitter.com/0vug39vGae
You're idea that 3.5C of average temperature rise is survivable, is so ecologically illiterate and naive, that it's almost impossible to know where to start. You have no idea of how systems work, let alone ecosystems if you really believe your own BS.
Dear Natasha,
If you read Nordhaus’s papers you see that he is open about the limitations of his model, particularly that its exclusion of the potential for tipping points. @BjornLomborg misuses the results of Nordhaus’s work to push his own agenda.
I’m confused by the agenda here. It was clear what Skeptical Environmentalist was about but what now?
All you are talking about is rich people in rich countries - under your scenario all nature will die and take the poorer countries along with them - is there no cost to that in your mind?https://twitter.com/ClimateHuman/status/1084906996967460864 …
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.