It relies upon a belief that carbon emissions are the only force of climate change and those can be pushed down to zero through electric cars and solar power subsidies. And that's the whole plan.
The usual motte and bailey after that is "the electricity needed to make zero emissions(tm) treats can also be green energy, promise" without actually doing anything on a large enough scale to matter.
His audience is equally delusional liberal ghouls who think they're rich enough to survive what is to come. They don't even imagine being inconvenienced by it. And anyone destroyed by climate change must have had a moral failing, so we don't have to worry about them.
why do people think that this is an acceptable take?
It relies upon a belief that carbon emissions are the only force of climate change and those can be pushed down to zero through electric cars and solar power subsidies. And that's the whole plan.
The usual motte and bailey after that is "the electricity needed to make zero emissions(tm) treats can also be green energy, promise" without actually doing anything on a large enough scale to matter.
Don’t forget the solar shield!!!
I made a comment the last time the solar shield was brought up about how it would require more silicon than we currently have, lol.
His audience is equally delusional liberal ghouls who think they're rich enough to survive what is to come. They don't even imagine being inconvenienced by it. And anyone destroyed by climate change must have had a moral failing, so we don't have to worry about them.