First, it's global warming causing the decline of Ice and now it's a threat of too much ice.  The one thing that these "so-called" experts are sure of is that mankind and specifically America is responsible for the ills of the earth and causing whatever they theorize will kill all of us next.  First, it was Global Warming that was going to cause all the ice to melt whereby the lands would be flooded and worldwide temperatures would rise.  Now, and since the warming predictions didn't pan out, we are going to all freeze to death and mankind is going to die account of too much ice and causing a new ice age.  

Never mind that the disaster that is going to wipe out civilization 10, no 11, no 12 (or so) years from now (as per AOC and the Squad and Democrats) varies 180 degrees from what reality proves whatever happens, whenever it's going to be man's, and America's, fault and even more important ONLY GOVERNMENT (AKA The Democrats) can save us.

 

Be as the Bereans ( Acts 17:11 )

Original Post

Careful GB...you'll be attacked and called a liar...maybe even a junkie and all sorts of other names by some....if you dare have an opinion other than their gloom and doom scenario. There are all sorts of papers...articles...opinions and such by scientists that put forth their belief...and the reasoning behind it...that climate change can be a good thing. Will you ever see that covered in MSM? Of course not. NO opposing thoughts or ideas will be tolerated. Their new darling...the 16 year old girl from Sweden is a rude little brat that they have pampered and groomed...and now have thinking she is somehow relevant because she parrots the same mess they have shoveled out to the public. So I'll end like I always do....IF climate change was really a threat...which I don't believe it is...why in the world would I be interested in saving the planet for the likes of these people??

Jutu posted:

Careful GB...you'll be attacked and called a liar...maybe even a junkie and all sorts of other names by some....if you dare have an opinion other than their gloom and doom scenario. There are all sorts of papers...articles...opinions and such by scientists that put forth their belief...and the reasoning behind it...that climate change can be a good thing. Will you ever see that covered in MSM? Of course not. NO opposing thoughts or ideas will be tolerated. Their new darling...the 16 year old girl from Sweden is a rude little brat that they have pampered and groomed...and now have thinking she is somehow relevant because she parrots the same mess they have shoveled out to the public. So I'll end like I always do....IF climate change was really a threat...which I don't believe it is...why in the world would I be interested in saving the planet for the likes of these people??

Do you mean the little girl that came over to the US in a way that wouldn't contribute Carbon abuse?  Don't know that it's true but I've heard and I don't doubt it, that there was lots of carbon used to fly back all that crew of the boat that brought her over here from Europe.  So true she didn't contribute to the problem they say exist by her method of coming to the US but to return the crew that assisted her getting here back to their homes took far more carbon and fuel than if she had just flown herself in the first place.

gbrk posted:
Jutu posted:

Careful GB...you'll be attacked and called a liar...maybe even a junkie and all sorts of other names by some....if you dare have an opinion other than their gloom and doom scenario. There are all sorts of papers...articles...opinions and such by scientists that put forth their belief...and the reasoning behind it...that climate change can be a good thing. Will you ever see that covered in MSM? Of course not. NO opposing thoughts or ideas will be tolerated. Their new darling...the 16 year old girl from Sweden is a rude little brat that they have pampered and groomed...and now have thinking she is somehow relevant because she parrots the same mess they have shoveled out to the public. So I'll end like I always do....IF climate change was really a threat...which I don't believe it is...why in the world would I be interested in saving the planet for the likes of these people??

Do you mean the little girl that came over to the US in a way that wouldn't contribute Carbon abuse?  Don't know that it's true but I've heard and I don't doubt it, that there was lots of carbon used to fly back all that crew of the boat that brought her over here from Europe.  So true she didn't contribute to the problem they say exist by her method of coming to the US but to return the crew that assisted her getting here back to their homes took far more carbon and fuel than if she had just flown herself in the first place.

Yes...that's her.

JH1961 posted:

My high school students are currently debating this topic. Their discussions have been interesting. Even more interesting is the realization, among some, that many of the 'facts' presented have never been verified. 

From my understanding, even the so-called "experts", who seem to be controlling the narrative, are only basing their beliefs, opinions, and decisions upon computer projections and not actual events and historical data.  Granted the computer projections may incorporate historical data but, I believe, the injection of mankind, and specifically Americans and the capitalist system, as main contributors and culprits, is not computer projection but rather is political, agenda-driven, scheming.  

No one, students, authorities, "experts", whoever can deny that climate changes and will continue to change but the debate regarding the issue of "man-made" I believe is entirely politically driven and unfortunately dogmatic statements are being made based solely in opinion and any opposition (to those opinions) is summarily dismissed and the source is considered as an outcast and justification for banishment from the conversation.  The whole issue is no longer a discussion or debate but rather is being steered by agenda-driven individuals who often are vested, financially, in having the desired, and pre-determined, outcome. 

The 'original' data that the global warming argument is based on was never verified. The argument is technically still a hypothesis... not even theoretical. Certainly NOT factual.

Long-term (30+ yrs) climate change is determined by Earth's tilt on its axis, its relationship/distance to/from the Sun, and solar activity. Man is incapable of affecting either. Short-term climate change (less than 30 yrs) CAN be affected by asteroid strikes, volcanic events, and nuclear war. Of those, man can only affect one: nuclear war. 

It doesn't matter. Judgement day is very near. The world will come to an end soon. That is why Trump called  Paula White to the White House. She knows when the end of time comes. Other baptists also know. Pat Roberson knows.

Kenneth Copeland  has already flown into heaven and asked Baker.

JH1961 posted:

My high school students are currently debating this topic. Their discussions have been interesting. Even more interesting is the realization, among some, that many of the 'facts' presented have never been verified. 

Holy Trump! No wonder kids are so dumb. A fact is something that has already been proven to be true. 

fact
/fakt/
 
noun
 
  1. a thing that is known or proved to be true.

Cite your sources, please. NASA has ADMITTED that the polar i e caps AREN'T melting, and that Earth ISN'T getting warmer. BTW; do you know WHEN the highest recorded temperature in Earth...ever.. was recorded? 134°F (Death Valley)... in 1913.

Add Reply

Likes (0)
Post

×
×
×
×