Global forces could result in another ice age as you mention. Happened before

"I would estimate that no matter what the people living today do, there will still be global warming to some degree"
Yes. My understanding is a significant portion of it is not related to humans. Also, we may head back toward a period of glaciation. I don't know much about that, but I know you're right that global warming is not 100% caused by human activities.

I would estimate that no matter what the people living today do, there will still be global warming to some degree. Also, if its CO2, it probably will be due more to china in the future than the USA.

I dont like the fact its politicized and made into a collectivist tool which will impact ME right now, rather than some etherial warming of the planet that might happen in 50 years.

"are also demanding that nuclear power plants be shut down"
I know. Nuclear scary if you don't have the facts. Burning things causes slow, costly changes to the environment; which isn't scary on a visceral way. It's irrational behavior. If people were left alone to use whatever power they wanted so long as the cleaned up the costs to others' property, nuclear would be a clear winner. Just burning stuff with no attempt to put the carbon back in the earth or to mitigate global warming in some other way would be expensive.

"You can't draw a direct causal line between global warming and the flooding because global warming is a prediction for the FUTURE."
No, because of the nature of stochastic systems. The same thing is true for explaining an individual set of ADC values in a communications receiver.

That's close. I'm accepting it's due to human activities, which include deforestation. This is way outside my area, but my understanding is most of that is from releasing greenhouse gases. There's also the cycle of glaciation maxima and minima, but my understanding is human activities, mostly from CO2, predominate.

"The U.S. is in fact alone among the large developed nations in reducing its carbon profile. "
US is great.

The U.S. is in fact alone among the large developed nations in reducing its carbon profile. While we've consistently closed down coal fired powerplants and replaced them with cleaner gas fired systems, Germany built more to make up for the nuclear plants they closed after Fukushima. China promises to stop increasing its carbon production by 2030, while India says it will "investigate" when they can do the same. Across the board we seem to be the only nation taking carbon reduction seriously, and not just making noise. Ironically, the U.S. is the biggest buyer of European and Chinese wind turbines, with wind farms expanding faster in the U.S. than in any other country.

The same can be said for plastic debris polluting the oceans. The U.S. contributes less than 10%, even though we're the biggest plastic consumer. Part of it is better waste management, and part is serious recycling efforts.

Actually, the envirowacko element has been very active here in OK, screeching about how the wind turbines are killing eagles, and how they're scaring off the prairie chickens from their natural breeding grounds. They always target the "flyover" states. California gets a pass because of its deep blue political color.

California, shoreline, tidal power.
Tidal power is established technology but requires a large sea-level range to be economic / to get significant power even with the usual subsides. Does the Cal coast have that range?
More likely, there would be lobbying from the industry. Wind generation can work with off-the-shelf units and is big business.
Protecting flora and fauna- such arguments are used by the enviro lobby only to stop fossil and nuclear power generation.

Yep, Texas is number one, and Iowa is second, but Oklahoma is number three, ahead of California. There are several multimegawatt wind projects out in the OK panhandle that might push us to number two before long. Solar is picking up as well. Somebody finally figured out that when it's hot, the wind dies, but when it's dark, the wind picks up, making solar and wind kind of symbiotic. If somebody can develop inexpensive energy storage, reusable energy will be competitive and reliable. I still think the best form of storage is Edison batteries, since they're cheap to make, and last forever.

I don't understand why California, with 700 miles of shoreline, hasn't invested in tidal power. The technology is proven, but then the environmentalists probably have some kind of marine fauna that needs protecting.

I am thinking that you are partially right about the lazy part. But I would add that collectivism seems to offer laziness in dealing with ones own feelings. PC is an offshoot of this, in that everyone should be sure not to "offend" anyone, rather than let them deal with their own feelings of disapproval.

Calif. leaders are ignorant or worse. There is no way thye have the electritycy available to plug in millions of cars. As it stands, pre open borders, they were importing electicity from AZ. hydro plants. With the droughts, that is in peril. Further, all those electric battereis, overall, have a larger carbon footprint, from production to disposal, than conventional cars.This in attion to Gov. Moonbeam's threat to sent up a satellite? True insanity, go ahead, leave the US and save us all.

I think it's because people are greedy and lazy and I don't mean that in a derogatory way. Who doesn't want more for less work? Collectivism looks great unless you realize that no one will work to create the "free" goods that you want. Greedy and lazy have prompted the creation of a vast number of inventions to make human life easier. We no longer spend hours beating our clothes against rocks to get them clean, rather we drop them in the washing machine and read a book while the machine does the work. We get to be "lazy" and someone else got to be "greedy" by charging us for the machine, detergent, electricity, a perfect win-win!

That is profound. In general , people dont do things for no reason at all. Best always to look around for why they do those things first, and THEN improve on it if you can.

We could start with first asking why people gravitate so strongly to collectivism, before we try to convince them to give it up in favor of individualism. Flat out appeals to reason havent seemed to work very well.

Reminds me of the commencement speaker who said "Before you go out to change the world, you need to understand why things are done the way they are."

Just wait till the batteries leak, explode, catch fire, or spew dangerous lithium chemicals. There are practical reasons for what we do. And when we try to just mandate whats done, there are unintended consequences that are usually ignored by the powers that be

Perhaps big yellow thing in sky is involved? How many people realize that a mere 17000 years ago much of NA was covered in glaciers? The last I read is that perhaps a "wobble" (no idea what might have caused that) in the Earth's rotation may have triggered the melt.

I think TX is the leader in wind generated electricity but then TX is a large state. More interesting would be wind generated electricity/sq mile.

I wonder where he plans to store all of these battery packs? There are other alternatives but these also take up lots of space. Pump water uphill to a reservoir when you have excess wind/solar electricity then let it down at night (need lots of large reservoirs and water and massive pumps and no protesting enviros), melt sodium and use the retained heat to generate power at night (liquid sodium and water make large noise...oops), giant flywheels. Nuclear has always seemed the best solution for baseline power, perhaps more smaller distributed plants to avoid massive cost overruns.

But the liberals dont care who has to pay. Its all about their power, and of course their legacy.

Maybe Maduro should consider what HIS legacy is going to be for handling the end game of socialism in his country.

You've got it!

Global warming (and the earlier global cooling) and the various infeasible projects are touchstones. They serve to separate the heretics and the faithful.

"Climate science" can only be approached by climate scientists. If the skeptical dare touch the shrine they had better bow deeply.

Moonbeam has signaled that he is a believer.

Why am I even saying these things? Some novelist covered it all in 1957.

Exactly right. To heat the earth is a massive process, and I sincerely doubt its caused even a litlte bit by human activities.