21 sats \ 3 replies \ @Coinsreporter 27 Jun \ parent \ on: Banning Fossil Fuels Will Make Heat Waves More Dangerous, Not Less econ
I don't believe in these type of bullshit propaganda. What I believe is what I can practically sense. And I don't know exactly but 'climate change' is real. Before 30 years and now a huge difference! This difference is visible in rising temperatures. So, anything that's causing it is a possible damage to climate.
The , there's a big thinking back in my mind. 'Man is not as big as Nature.' Nature can easily overturn any bad impact in so less time!
So, instead of stop complaining for chemistry, we must focus on reforestation.
More than anything, deforestation has caused this rise in temperatures. This is what I actually believe.
However, I've been running a little local community that does some awareness campaigns for 'the importance of trees', I read and consume a lot of media related to 'climate change'.
So, what could "1430x climate damage" reasonably mean? Note that it isn't just "climate change".
There are basically two methods used to create these numbers:
- Someone creates a score, that has no inherent meaning, based on a bunch of different properties. In that case, the precise values aren't meaningful, but higher and lower can be useful for categorizing different compounds.
- A climate model with very large known flaws and wide standard errors is used to create an estimate that is then fed into an economic model that is known to be severely flawed. The reported number in this case is the estimated economic damage, but the confidence intervals are so large that you can't rule out that there's no effect.
reply
Climate change models have too many variables that inflate correlation. The curse of multidimensional
I am more worried about asteroids and volcanoes
reply
Regarding deforestation, one problem with trees is excessive water consumption which hurts dry regions and areas affected by drought
reply