You might as well wonder what the impact of agriculture would be if the nineteen-legged aliens from the planet Snoof teamed up with Archie and Jughead to turn all the worldās lipstick supplies into voles.
There is zero chance of the worldās temperature dropping by 1.5 degrees any time soon. None whatsoever. Zippo. Nada. Every climate change mitigation program - even the most wacky and desperate atmospheric engineering proposals - are about stopping the situation getting too much worse, not reversing damage already done, because reversing that damage is functionally impossible outside geological timescales.
Tasmanian salmon aquaculture operates at the edge of the temperature range for salmon.
Nice Atlantic salmon superior to NZ Pacific salmon, about the only raw import source fully free in cuts under our quarantine regulations.
Nah. It just gets repitive after a while.
I tried to engage it in Lebron v Jordan goat debate and it tries not to engage.
Montana v Brady though, it expands a bit.
Very interesting program.
that applies to both sides of the fence right ? cos that describes alot of people who try and actively force climate change on you at every turn and not an ounce of a thought that you could be wrong
Absolutely. All you need to do as someone in this thread who doubts the validity of science in certain areas is present your evidence here, read the responses and respond in kind with counter arguments and facts. Unfortunately the people here who are skeptical of climate change and its human origin fail at these simple tasks every time.
As for āforcing climate changeā on you, explain what you mean by that. Are you regularly being approached by strangers thrusting pamphlets at you and yelling facts in your face? Or are you reading a thread on climate change and disagreeing with the presentation of science by some, often extremely, informed people who donāt indulge in lazy, emotional thinking?
I could be wrong but it seems like youāre trying to say, people who agree with climate change merely present their POV, and then if someone disagrees they merely reply in kind with counter arguments and facts and are all civilised in their approach, is that what youāre saying ?
Just so i can be clear if thats what you actually mean ?
Because in here the most common thing that occurs is someone posts an article, a graph or an opinion that, when it is proven fallacious, misleading or outright unhinged, they generally get several responses, and most of them are civil enough and full of considered counters. Rarely does the OP respond with anything considered.
Did you want to explain what āforcing climate changeā on you looks like or feels like?