the climate change scam

Okay.. hypothetically: I’m an elite and all my machines which I use that further my economic growth, also cause carbon emissions. Therefore, the same machines also do cause pollution.
Me saying that it causes pollution. How will that benefit me?

Also, I been standing on top of a glacier with warm water for the past hour so the glacier melts quicker. I been doing it so people will listen to me and start demanding that I unplug the said machines that contribute to my economic growth.

——
I still don’t get how climate change is a scam. It’s just reality that is hard to come to terms with.:grimacing::disappointed:

Edit: ok sorry I didn’t really read everything you wrote. :/ heh I got a bit impulsive. Anyway, sorry! I incorrectly assumed that you were saying that climate change isn’t real and is just a man made concept to create profit (I came across that theory not so long ago).

However there is always going to be profit and honestly I don’t mind people profiting from saving the planet. At least they are profiting from something that matters to all of us.
 
Last edited:
The arguments usually put up against the notion of anthropogenic global warning is that there still is not enough data to support the hypothesis. Those that push that argument are by and large those who would have the most to loose if the world were to wean itself from fossil fuels. Fossil fuels are politically the biggest danger to the world right now. Just take a look at the leader in oil production and the shenanigans it has been up to for decades, all with nods and winks from our duly elected officials. the amount of money that has been transferred to the Saudi family is ridiculous and is clearly a detriment to the American political system as so much of that money has been poured (illegally) into influencing our economic policy. We could go on at length about how dangerous those bastards are and what kind of havoc they have wrecked but it is no ones fault but our own. I can't help but think that all this anti science smoke is coming out of cash from Mister Bone Saw's family.
But hey, what do I know?
 
Stu said:
I really want an electric car
https://cleantechnica.com/2018/01/04/plug-hybrid-electric-vehicles-available-purchase-usa/
Click to expand...
Yes they look really interesting don't they. Whichever of the big car makers comes up with a cheap reasonably practical electric car will clean up, so I think we'll get there. I just changed back to petrol from diesel because of the concerns about sulphur and nitogen pollution but it comes at a price - my car uses 30% more fuel per gallon than the diesel version did so it's chucking out more CO2, and it doesn't perform as well either. I don't fancy a hybrid - the number of ways things can go wrong goes up geometrically with complexity. I wouldn't trust a pure electric at the moment either because of the recharging problem - I don't fancy running out of power somewhere out of town, and I don't fancy charging times of hours when I can refill a petrol tank in 5 minutes. I do worry about where the electricity is going to come from - more gas power stations doesn't do it - and I worry about the potential pollution from all those car batteries when they are manufactured and again when they are scrapped. The performance from full blown electric engine vehicles sounds beautiful though, and I'm looking forward to when they become a realistic alternative to fossil fuel vehicles.
 
Puzzlenuzzle said:
Okay.. hypothetically: I’m an elite and all my machines which I use that further my economic growth, also cause carbon emissions. Therefore, the same machines also do cause pollution.
Me saying that it causes pollution. How will that benefit me?
Click to expand...

you will be able to impose carbon taxes on everyone

also you will be able to justify your technocracy

so for example they will put a SMART meter in your home that will measure all of your energy useage. However this SMART meter will not only be able to tell the technocrats what appliances you are using, when, how and how long for but they will also be able to regulate your energy useage

This is all going to be part of UN Agenda 2030 which they argue will be about creating a 'sustainable future' but really it is about instituting global technocratic communism

if you look at some of the celebs who preach all this stuff about 'carbon limits' like leonardo di caprio or al gore or david de rothschild they are all jetting around the world in private jets burning off jet fuel and using up huge amounts of carbon for their entourages and vehicles etc

Also we see the elites like richard branson working towards space tourism but why would that be permitted if burning fossil fuels is so harmful for the planet?

why would the elites want massive events like the olympics which see huge numbers of people travel around the world burning fossil fuels?

Also if they are indeed already carrying out geoengineering from aeroplanes then are those planes that are spraying not burning fossil fuels?

Puzzlenuzzle said:
I still don’t get how climate change is a scam. It’s just reality that is hard to come to terms with.:grimacing::disappointed:
Click to expand...

because the climate is affected by the sun

they are now using a new cutting edge technology that can see manmade structures through the jungle canopy. Its called 'ladar' or something like that and they are discovering that the mayan civilisation was actually VAST and there are ruins throughout the jungle. Clearly the jungle was not always there because the climate was different. Also you can find sea shells in the desert and you can find cave art in the desert that depicts animals that live on lush grasslands. This is because THE CLIMATE CHANGES

Lost Treasures of the Maya Snake King part 1

Puzzlenuzzle said:
Edit: ok sorry I didn’t really read everything you wrote. :/ heh I got a bit impulsive. Anyway, sorry! I incorrectly assumed that you were saying that climate change isn’t real and is just a man made concept to create profit (I came across that theory not so long ago).
Click to expand...

No i think climate does change over time

the issue is to what extent man drives climate change through the production of carbon

I'm saying that the alarmism by the elites over CARBON production is a scam that they are trying to use to drive LEGAL changes to global society in order to impose greater controls over humanity
 
Last edited:
Stu said:
the amount of money that has been transferred to the Saudi family is ridiculous and is clearly a detriment to the American political system as so much of that money has been poured (illegally) into influencing our economic policy.
Click to expand...

dude your government just gave $38 billion to israel!

you have a typhoid outbreak and a homelessness epidemic in LA but you give money away to israel instead of helping your poor people in the US!!!!!!!

israel meanwhile wants to exploit the oil and gas under the golan heights and off the shore of gaza (see genie energy)

the saudis despite being head chopping lunatics at least give you some return on your money because they buy your military hardware and they ensure that OPEC keeps oil prices down for you

what do the israelis do for you?
 
Last edited:
Stu said:
I really want an electric car
Click to expand...

electric cars are part of the technocracy

just because they are electric doesn't make them clean because the electricity still has to be produced by power stations and anyone who tries to tell you that nuclear power is clean obviously isn't following whats happening at fukishima where they are about to dump a massive volume of irradiated water into the ocean

whereas mechanical cars are controlled by you electric cars or cars with motors instead of mechanical parts can be hacked and controlled remotely

also the technocracy intends to make cars driverless thereby deskilling you even further. You may not even be able to own a car and may have to book one as and when you need it
 
Coffee said:
Give me the datas
Click to expand...

what datas are you looking for?

There's some info on piers corbyns website 'weatheraction.com' for example:

Why the CO2 'Theory' Fails

1. FACT. There is no evidence for the CO2 climate driver proposition in the real world using real data over hundreds of thousands of years. World temperatures do not follow CO2.
The world is not warming and has not been doing so for 18 years. Even under fraudulent UN-MetO-NOAA manipulated data the world is not warming. ALL the alarmist predictions of CO2 warmism have failed.
See http://www.weatheraction.com/docs/WANews14No11.pdf and links in Article about BBC-MetO charlatan John Hammond's Science Denialist claims, in WeatherAction blog http://bit.ly/1xKYPrJ (sec3)
FACT Changing CO2 has no effect EVEN the Models used by the Met Office and UN's Climate Committee (the IPCC) show CO2 levels have no effect on the Jet Stream or extremes which come from the Wild Jet stream changes which they fail to predict. It is meteorological fact that the recent very wild weather extremes and contrasts follow from wild Jet Stream behavior. THAT Wild Jet Stream (Mini-Ice-Age) behavior was and is regularly predicted by Piers Corbyn's Solar-Lunar approach and is nothing to do with CO2. See http://www.weatheraction.com/docs/WANews14No06.pdf & Piers' video http://bit.ly/QS0k34 The claim that these extremes are driven by CO2 / man made Climate Change is a lie for which there is no evidence or scientific paper which demonstrates a link in the real world.

2. FACT. Even if CO2 had an effect the idea that Man’s 4% of total CO2 flux rules the other natural 96% flux in and out of sea/land making it follow man’s activity is a ridiculous conspiracy theory of nature.
It follows War should be declared on termites which emit 10x Man's CO2 equivalent. Why has this not happened?

3. FACT. The reason why the CO2 atmosphere theory can never work is that the Ocean-atmosphere interface controls the amount of CO2 in air – a warmer ocean (which holds 50x more CO2 than the atmosphere) emits CO2 and vice versa. This is very basic physics*.
Just as when you warm a glass of fizzy drink more CO2 comes off and it absorbs more when it is cold. Putting more CO2 above the glass of fizzy drink does NOT however warm it up!
Ocean temperatures CONTROL atmospheric CO2 levels. It is an observed fact in millions of years of data that Ocean temperature changes LEAD atmospheric CO2 changes.
Irrespective of these facts there are 2 other reasons why CO2 warmist theory must fail: a) the surafce cooling effect of plants b) Non equilibrium thermodynamics in the atmosphere - ie the assumptions of the ‘theory’ are nonsense. *Henry's Law.
 
Lady Jolanda said:
Paris_Tuileries_Garden_Facepalm_statue.jpg
Click to expand...

foucault-hands.jpg
 
kinglear said:
dude your government just gave $38 billion to israel!

you have a typhoid outbreak and a homelessness epidemic in LA but you give money away to israel instead of helping your poor people in the US!!!!!!!

israel meanwhile wants to exploit the oil and gas under the golan heights and off the shore of gaza (see genie energy)

the saudis despite being head chopping lunatics at least give you some return on your money because they buy your military hardware and they ensure that OPEC keeps oil prices down for you

what do the israelis do for you?
Click to expand...
you are so obviously slanted, the amount of money that has been spent on Saudi Oil is staggering compared to what their defacto allies in Israel have taken in. while willing to discuss these issues I have a problem giving you a platform. My belief is we should be moving away from fossil fuels, period. (please more anti israel posts, that's what its all about!)
 
Last edited:
kinglear said:
The world is not warming and has not been doing so for 18 years.
Click to expand...
Well, you're probably right that the world isn't warming but, the earth is still warming.
 
Last edited:
kinglear said:
new globalised laws and regulations need to be imposed on every man, woman and child on the planet in order to cut down carbon emissions
Click to expand...

Sounds reasonable to me. We only got one planet right now, probably ought to take as good care of it as possible.

And also for the inevitable false jesus alien hoax world war to enslave humanity and turn them into robot batteries.
 
kinglear said:
i heard someone dismantle the idea that there was a scientific consensus by them digging into who those people on the list were. I'll try and find it for you



no it was the other way around as this documentary explains by charting the history of the push for technocracy. The very same people who controlled the big polluting oil companies are the very same people behind the climate change agenda now and its because they want to create their technocracy

Why Big Oil Conquered The World



i posted the study as well so don't worry too much about the article



no the issue with capitalism is that some people have been trying to control it and turn it into technocratic communism for a very long time



no what it is at its most simplest is the belief that you and me have a right to carry out a transaction between us. That's it

you don't have capitalism. if you had capitalism you would not have a central bank or income tax and the banks would not have been bailed out. What you have is the ten planks of communism
Click to expand...

Here's some of the research that shows the overwhelming consensus among experts.

J. Cook, et al, "Consensus on consensus: a synthesis of consensus estimates on human-caused global warming," Environmental Research Letters Vol. 11 No. 4, (13 April 2016); DOI:10.1088/1748-9326/11/4/048002


J. Cook, et al, "Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature," Environmental Research Letters Vol. 8 No. 2, (15 May 2013); DOI:10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024


W. R. L. Anderegg, “Expert Credibility in Climate Change,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Vol. 107 No. 27, 12107-12109 (21 June 2010); DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1003187107.

P. T. Doran & M. K. Zimmerman, "Examining the Scientific Consensus on Climate Change," Eos Transactions American Geophysical Union Vol. 90 Issue 3 (2009), 22; DOI: 10.1029/2009EO030002.

N. Oreskes, “Beyond the Ivory Tower: The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change,” Science Vol. 306 no. 5702, p. 1686 (3 December 2004); DOI: 10.1126/science.1103618.
 
Deleted member 16771 said:
No we don't have capitalism, it would be an absolute disaster. Everywhere it's been tried just falls into total chaos.

We use the mechanics of capitalism within highly regulated and stable nation-states, just as we have done for the last half-millennium or so.
Click to expand...

That's because true capitalism has never been achieved. Not that it would work. But let's be realistic: capitalism almost universally confused for corporatism, and sometimes even Communism. Corporatism is the system we live under today. And it's absolutely disastrous.
 
What makes this sort of issue so hard to assess for ordinary people is that the positions taken by the experts are based on evidence that is quite opaque to non-specialists. So we choose our gurus, rationalise as far as we can then subscribe to the collective views that appeal to us emotionally and go out fighting on that ground, supported by the feelings of honourable moral superiority that gives us. An example of the difficulty in understanding what’s going on - It’s perfectly true that there are analyses of world temperature v CO2 levels going back at least a couple of million years into the geological past that seem to show the temperature changes start to take place before CO2 levels change. I doubt whether this means the obvious though - systems that are mathematically non-linear don’t behave in intuitively obvious ways and I doubt whether we are looking at a simple linear system here with all the positive and negative feedbacks in operation in climate.

The most pure logic in our current situation is that there are too many of us, we are very focused on what we can get out of the world in the here and now and as a result we are busy trashing our environment. Mother Nature doesn’t give a toss about all that analysis about what's really going on. There’s no sentiment in nature - if we don’t sort it she'll bring about a massive and very, very unpleasant drop in our population completely out of our control. A lot of the emotions and the most obvious logic are for once lined up on the right direction - sort it before Dear Old Mum does it for us. If some sort of power hungry global conspiracy is pushing for this for their own reasons (which I doubt) then we’re all pushing in the same direction anyway so let them get on with it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top