
simple reasoning : if living with zero fossil fuels is that easy, why don't we do it ? And if it's not easy, you have to balance the consequences with those of having 1°C more, before concluding. Basic and normal logics.
simple reasoning : if living with zero fossil fuels is that easy, why don't we do it ? And if it's not easy, you have to balance the consequences with those of having 1°C more, before concluding. Basic and normal logics.
Also, the claim to "basic" "logics" is quite embarrassing on your part. I only replied to expose your tactics. I've done that - with your help - and am now muting you. Have a lovely Anthropocene.
You are beginning to bore me. I never said it was "easy". You are beginning to put words in my mouth, a clear sign of someone either incapable of discussing, or knows they are losing. There has been DECADES of resistance, by fossil fuel companies, to the rise of renewables. Or do you not know this?
Ok, so if it's not easy, you have to balance QUANTITATIVELY the drawbacks of giving up fossil fuels and those of living with 1°C more. That's what I said. Not only fossil fuels companies are interested in a long life expectancy ...