Apparently that’s what they think in California. Why the hell are they still using fossil fuels?
1 Like
Nope. As long as they don’t tag their customers with a huge rate increase, they should definitely do it. Most conservatives are not opposed to green energy. We are opposed to wealth redistribution, taxes and penalties that do nothing to reduce carbon output.
But. Won’t we all be dead by 2050 anyway? 
Judging by the rate that animals are going extinct, most of the planet will be dead anyway by 2050 even if we’re not.
I think that’s due mainly to human population and encroachment. Not climate. Just too many people.
Yet another gloom and doom prediction gone awry.
Latest of many.
You do know there is more wildlife now then 100 years ago…200 years ago, 300 years ago.
But nice try.
1 Like
More wildlife in total numbers maybe. But we are definitely facing the extinction of many species. Mainly due to having their habitat destroyed. That is not deniable. Example. The deer population in Florida is way up. The population of the Florida panther is way down.
Darwinism…species that don’t adopt goes extinct.
Right libs?
Yeah… but as sentient creatures with moral understanding, when the realization that the reason for extinction is our activity and if that extinction can be avoided by changing or adapting our activity then it is ethically reasonable to argue that we should take the path that preserves biodiversity.
Yes right here <———— The population. More people more carbon.
Perhaps you didn’t catch the sarcasm. 
No, you can breath in for free. They will only tax what you exhale.
2 Likes
Facetious hyperbole silly.
Are they replacing them with signs where the numbers can be changed like baseball stadium scoreboards? 
1 Like
Yeah, habitat loss, over harvesting and poaching are very hard on a great many species.
Hey it’s not my problem those species didn’t armed themselves.
