you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Tarsius 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

As you said, this seems so disingenuous. I will add a few of my thoughts. He doesn't actually disprove many of the problems with climate change (ocean acidification, rising sea levels, desertification etc.).

Humans are causing a sixth mass extinctions but the reasons are mostly not climate change (yet) but habitat loss, pollution and the industrial agriculture he seems to hold in high regard.

The Amazon is not the lung of the world (probably algae have more impact) but it is very diverse and stores a lot of CO2, cutting it down will greatly increase habitat loss and extinctions.

Preventing future pandemics requires more not less “industrial” agriculture

Industrial meat production does reduce the risk of diseases spreading from wild to farm animals and from there to us, but it is a breeding ground for antibiotic resistant bacteria, which is poised to become a big problem.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3234384/

Most of the arguments aren't even related to climate change. For example that environmentalism was done wrong in the past sometimes doesn't disprove anything about environmental problems.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Indeed. He seems to just be criticising popular environmental talking points, but tries to connect them all under the banner of climate change to make it seem like a wider refutation.