Then and now: How Republican climate change rhetoric has shifted

[@zoojudy5890]

This brief segment shows how unimportant science, research and facts are to Republicans. I will never understand how they look at their children and grandchildren with love and promote the destruction of the planet with their lack of action and even acceptance of climate change.. .

[@MakesSense]

I guess you aren't old enough to remember "Global Cooling" and the "new ice-age" in the 70's, "Global Warming" in the 90's, currently "Climate Change" and the new one, if you haven't heard it yet "Climate Disruption". The fact is, Republicans hate their children, and since they don't believe that the earth is going to end in twelve short years, they will continue to have them. Democrats on the other hand, who really love their children, and who have the foresight to see the end coming, will save them from certain disaster, by not having any, and will die out.

[@waynefriedman7728]

If the US CO2 emissions are 13% of global emissions, and have been in decline since the 50's. What would you have us do? Destroy the economy? If we cannot control 87% of global CO2 emissions, and cannot control legislation in other countries. What are we supposed to do? If the Democrats actually cared about this issue we would have massive tree planting bills in the house. ( Plants take in Carbon ) . They would be on board with Trump , but take it a step further and end immigration immediately due to the Carbon Footprint.

[@jojoboko6990]

@@waynefriedman7728 *"If the US CO2 emissions are 13% of global emissions, and have been in decline since the 50's."* They've been in decline because other countries have been going through their own industrial revolutions, not because we have gotten particularly better at lowering our emissions. *"What would you have us do? Destroy the economy?"* Not deregulate the EPA? Not appoint coal lobbyists as heads of science departments? That would be a good start. *"If we cannot control 87% of global CO2 emissions, and cannot control legislation in other countries. What are we supposed to do?"* That frame only works on a presupposition that the US is carrying it's weight and every other country is doing nothing. This is not the case. Many countries are actually doing something to cut down on their emissions. What is asked of the US is to also do something to cut down on their emissions. *"If the Democrats actually cared about this issue we would have massive tree planting bills in the house. ( Plants take in Carbon ) ."* Planting more trees won't significantly reduce carbon emissions. You actually have to switch to other energy sources.

[@waynefriedman7728]

@@jojoboko6990 You can find a graph as I did. You should be able to find many graphs that show the USA's CO2 emissions have been in decline since the 50's. To say we have not gotten better with CO2 emissions since the 50's is NOT true. The EPA is another big ugly bureaucracy, and has made horrible mistakes. The EPA and weather manipulation is part of the problem. How about Aug. 5, 2015, when its contractors released 3 million gallons of metals-laden water into Cement Creek, the Animas River, and the San Juan River and created an 80-mile plume of orange water. Jeeezz.. China and other countries like this will do NOTHING! We already do what's logical, and are getting better. We already do use alternative energy sources. Planting trees is just another way to reduce CO2. The carbon footprint due to immigration should be stopped as well, if we are being serious.

[@jojoboko6990]

@@waynefriedman7728 *"You can find a graph as I did. You should be able to find many graphs that show the USA's CO2 emissions have been in decline since the 50's. To say we have not gotten better with CO2 emissions since the 50's is NOT true. "* I don't know what kind of graphs you're looking at, but the graphs I'm looking at don't say what you are saying. Specifically this one. "Climate Change Indicators: U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions" *"China and other countries like this will do NOTHING! We already do what's logical, and are getting better."* China has been investing billions into renewable technology. Currently there are 90 countries which have a higher percentage of their energy output in renewables than the US does. One of those countries is China. *"We already do use alternative energy sources. Planting trees is just another way to reduce CO2. The carbon footprint due to immigration should be stopped as well, if we are being serious."* Yeah, we do but not in nearly high enough numbers. We're no where near the limits to how much we can use renewable technology over fossil fuels which is probably the best way to reduce CO2 emissions. Planting trees doesn't cut it long term especially if we keep up fossil fuel usage. And banning immigration is a non starter and a non solution. You can't solve a global problem with overzealous nationalism. Whether the immigrants have a carbon footprint here or somewhere else, banning them does nothing.

[@Aaron-yr3tn]

Thank you, Washington Post, for this video and the contrast it provides. Dissenting voices will fade away as the results of humanity's misuse and overuse of the world become manifest and undeniable - as droughts and floods become more severe and frequent, as crops fail and people starve, as biodiversity is lost, as tens and even hundreds of millions of people migrate due to loss of freshwater availability, rise of sea levels, unbearable heat, economic and political turmoil. It can all seem overwhelming; but these crises also provide the best chance for humanity to finally unite, cease our conflicts and work together to preserve and restore the world we depend on. There's a great book I read recently on this (available free as an e-book) called The Great Waves of Change, that speaks to what is coming and how to prepare. I highly recommend it.

[@mellanytravers6544]

Thanks, Aaron. Yes .. for those of us that can see this, we must respond ... time is of the essence!

[@gabibraun745]

As long as they have their oil companies running that cash yeah they aren’t going to change their minds

[@doesntmatter5232]

Ecosia is an Internet search engine based in Berlin, Germany, that plants trees by donating 80% or more of its surplus income to non-profit organizations that focus on reforestation and conservationism.

[@mormongirlnv]

Yes. Love it. Do more good!!!

[@enriquecastaneda8463]

I'm down

[@catcherzw]

They knew back then, the voters just didn’t

[@mormongirlnv]

I will sub to anyone who promises to do one or both of the following. Organize a local litter pickup. It can be just you. And/or Ride public transportation at least once in the new year.

[@PastelJackal]

Well I already ride public transportation all the time so there’s that. It’s not like the bus is that bad people make it seem like it’s awful.. it has free wifi there’s AC there’s usually seats if not it’s okay to stand you won’t be there too long, routes take you all over and if you get good at it you can even plan routes and get to places fast.. most importantly there’s other normal people like yourself riding.. they always make it seem like the homeless live on buses, theres garbage everywhere “you aren’t even allowed to drink or eat on the bus” that the seats are disgusting, but are actually well built and cleaned after each every couple stops.. if you’re lost the drivers will even help you there’s even a app.. but the coolest thing is and it’s amazing trust me.. ITS FREE RIGHT NOW due to the covid issues. So it’s catch 22 but still there free you don’t have to pay, and they have free masks and hand sanitizer onboard if you don’t have one

[@coryryder9070]

and mr. McKinley still will not know environmental sciences

[@coryryder9070]

Our Planet Peace People Matter or maybe noone will be missed 06 1 alternative powered farming resources 2 non social pro network and 3 Public Options bundle like net phone cable but nessesities help the rest of us get fair share out of the top 5% who cause the chaos

[@robincook4901]

Republicans started EPA.

[@jamesstiller7151]

Where the people go the politicians will follow,

[@Caitlin_TheGreat]

Not really. I mean, that's kind of how it's supposed to work, but the Repubs are the best example of the opposite of that. They will outright ignore their own constituents because rich people pay them to, and they will then try to sway the people they're supposedly representing rather than listen to them. Most centrist Dems do the same trick, but just less obvious and with better cover.

[@wayneycostigan5602]

As ll I have ta say about Republicans is, lobbiest pollution party.

[@dougcard5241]

From insane to nuts. Whatever.

[@jojoboko6990]

So many people to debunk in this comment section.

[@peter-andrepliassov4489]

And the worst part is that this is one of the better comment sections on a climate related video. It seems like on almost every other video, the comment section is filled with deniers trying to debunk the existence of man-made climate change and who are spreading doubt about what scientists are saying.

[@mino1999]

As a conservative, I believe we all need to come together and fight climate change...Tax breaks is the only thing that will make this happen. Money makes things happen

[@justaguy3665]

How do tax breaks fix climate change?...Why don't we listen to the scientists that spend their lives studying this? You believe in climate change, which means you believe in the science behind it, but not what the scientists that presented that information say about how we can start to fix it?

[@SMCwasTaken]

Nuclear Power "But it's sOoOoo expensive" And so what? If you can send money to Africa's patreoleum factories then you can build nuclear plants 😂😂😂

[@minnie2811]

Just saying, but these people are just talking s***

[@lordsnow8438]

DISGRACEFUL. CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY

[@patrickfarrell6353]

We all know the truth, no reason to even debate it now. We live in an age that science and technology move more rapidly that in any other time in history. God gave us this wonderful gift, even if it isn't real, DON'T TELL ME THIS GIFT ISNT WORTH THE TIME AND EFFORT TO MAINTAIN ITS UPKEEP. TOO EXPENSIVE?? COME ON Conserves....if your willing to blow money on Iraq, Kurds, Syria, Korea and Vietnam, with "0" reward and 0% success, you can invest in the earth the Lord created for you. Or keep debating the earth's flat and not round....see you back at Plymouth rock. Not. (Don't let rich people tell you, or convince you anything is too expensive when it is politicaly motivated. Money and American lives, combined is a hell of a price tag to pay. War is too expensive, way more than diplomacy ever was.

[@alanroberts7916]

When I was in college we had an extra credit assignment and we were asked to offer our opinion in a one-page essay on global warming. Well the weekend passed and when went back to the next class the instructor told us the assignment would be canceled because the American Academy of Sciences had come to the conclusion that global warming was real. Because when 9/11 happened, and all the commercial airlines and all of the airplanes on the planet were grounded, the average temperature went up one degree, which is a huge amount when you're talking about the global average temperature in just a matter of 2 days. And therefore there would be no reason for us to write papers. I was fine with that and I told a couple Republicans that story. All they could say was "that's not true, global warming isn't true!!!". This was the way they defended something that can only hurt all of us in the long run.

[@tomgoodwin534]

Do you mean the average temperature went DOWN 1 degree?

[@Nicolas-uu3jr]

(inside cry)

[@uppymcdowny58]

"God will decide when the world ends" 6 seconds later "this earth will not be destroyed by a flood" I guess that god loving christian lawmaker forgot about Noah.....

[@thenarutoiscool123]

Not that i’m taking sides, but you clearly don’t understand the bible. That was a reference to Noah, not a contradiction.

[@az956]

Aaaahahahahahaha!

[@harrybaulz666]

No wonder i hate them

[@jimr5855]

The climate models have never successfully predicted observed climate, and objective science simply does not support the predictions of the models... namely that CO2 is a primary forcing agent of temperature. The correlation is non-existent (except in the make believe mathematics of the models). It's well known that CO2's warming effect rapidly diminishes as more is added to the atmosphere, and water vapor by far is the most abundant greenhouse gas. CO2 is not a pollutant, it's essential for life. Plants need 3 things to grow: sunlight/water/CO2... aka photosynthesis. Most plants evolved during periods of significantly higher levels of CO2, as much as 5 times higher. Each human emits about 800 pounds of CO2 every year simply by breathing. After 150 years of all natural CO2 emissions (oceans/plants/animals/humans/volcanoes) plus CO2 from converting hydrocarbons to energy... of every ten thousand molecules of atmosphere, only 4 are CO2. Even the IPCC acknowledges the claim of "extreme weather" due to CO2 has no empirical support. The climate faithful understand so little of their own religion, yet cling with vigor to the belief their religion is somehow science. On the other hand, people who practice one of the other major religions never mistake their religion for science, or vice-versa... it's a phenomenon unique to the climate faithful.

[@yeepyorp]

[citation needed]

[@BlahBlooBlee4205]

@TheHealthPhysicist Hey man, I love borscht :-(

[@cjc6269]

I ask you sir. Are you a scientist? How did u come upon this data? How do you know this data is true and not bias? How do any of us know for certain what is true and what is not.. SO WOULDNT IT MAKE SENSE TO ERR ON THE SIDE OF CAUTION UNTIL WE KNOW FOR SURE ABOUT THIS ISSUE?..???

[@justaguy3665]

This is a personal echo chamber if I ever heard one. Just saying what you want to hear so you don't feel like you're wrong. Making up "beliefs" about science, which mean literally nothing. Even when you're a scientist lol