You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: The IPCC Prepares to Release More Hot Air
How did I get here again? I've been drinking and I can't quite follow you. This is a "Global warming is a hoax" post. Correct?
Who benefits from making this claim? It's pretty damn obvious who benefits from making the opposite claim. So you'll excuse me if I don't jump on the whole, "humans can't kill God's Earth," bandwagon.
"Who benefits from making this claim?" Who is demanding money to prevent Global Warming? Did you ever hear of "carbon tax"?
May I suggest you put down that drink and wake up.
So the argument here is that humans have no effect on the environment and 100% of the money generated to mitigate pollution is used to line the pockets of the rich? This is a pretty hard sell.
I can get on board with the idea that tax money is being funneled away from its intended purpose. That's just business as usual. I can get on board with the idea that the flow of money should be more transparent and accountable.
The problem is that every time I read a 'global climate change is a hoax' argument no such suggestions are made. The ultimate conclusion seems to be:
And that is exactly the kind of attitude I expect to hear from the corporate world so they can continue exploiting the planet for everything it's worth while leaving behind a wake of garbage that someone else is supposed to clean up.
You talk about a carbon tax like it's a doomsday event. Everything that creates carbon is unsustainable in the long run. If the military industrial complex wasn't owned by Big Oil we'd already be well on our way to having 100% sustainable zero pollution energy solutions. Instead inventors that threaten the dominance of the most violent organization in the world are straight up murdered in cold blood. We will be kept dependent on fossil fuel until they finally take their last dying breath and fade into obscurity.
Global climate change deniers never seem to acknowledge that any kind of pollution is a problem. A plastic island as big as a continent doesn't even seem big enough to get their attention. This is why it's hard to take this claim seriously.
Deniers, as you like to call them, are the people who haven't jumped on either politicized side of this contrived issue and know full well that pollution is a problem. No one is advocating pollution. However, pollution the desired symptom of a deeper agenda and your emotional reaction to the article demonstrates your arrogant presumptions and inability to see the manipulation in this topic. So - pardon us conspiracy theorists if having the government fix the situation they spearheaded seems suspicious.. the same government that has been harboring free energy, controlling/ weaponizing weather, and deliberately polluting worldwide while enacting more laws to police themselves.
What emotional reaction was that? I'm Mr. Robot over here. I believe in all kinds of conspiracy facts.
Well, when you wrote:
it seemed like a pretty emotional reaction, as you seem to believe that James and his audience are some kind of right-wing/creationist/conservative/[insert buzzword here] group.
If you'll take the time and check James' other work, you'll see that he actually cares about this planet and its environment, as he spent lots of time and energy talking about REAL threats like nuclear waste, EMP, the food industry poisoning everyone and everything, and, above all else, genetic manipulation of the biosphere. These are the actual things that could destroy the world. Climate change is a massive hoax not unlike the year 1000 scare or the usual "the Messiah is gonna come and destroy everything, guys! A-Anytime now!" tirade from the abrahimic religions.
Oh I actually have looked at his other stuff and upvoted it apparently. Seems pretty spot on with most topics. I'm having trouble with this one.
Here's a thought. Instead of just asking random people on a comment thread, why not first look at the article's source link videos. From there, you will find many other sources. This would also result in you gaining an educated opinion instead of just getting a quick opinion based off of someone else. Note that I did not say to LIMIT your OWN RESEARCH to this article, but merely use it as a starting point. Or just keep chugging those beers and claiming you are above the fray while being the problem in reality.
Why do you assume I haven't researched this topic? I wouldn't have jumped in here to run my mouth with zero information.
Just because IPCC overestimates the effect we have on climate and is trying to profit from it doesn't mean everything they say is outright bullshit.
That's not how the world works. In order to manipulate people you have to constantly be telling half-truths. This report doesn't identify any half-truth in the argument it's trying to debunk, so it's obviously not being objective.
"They" are hoping you'll buy the lie, wait for natural cycles to disrupt the climate, continue to blame, shame and tax you, (and maybe some of your loved ones must die to save humanity) so they continue to accumulate wealth & power, the serfs descend back into malnourished poverty and the elite ride out the climate cycle in style.
There is a problem. The Sun. Natural cycles. It's not you and me. Pollution, that's one thing. But not anthropogenic climate change. That's just normal cycles dressed up to make us think it's our fault.
Glacial cycles on Earth are the norm, lasting around 100,000 years... And inter-glacial periods last 10 - 15 thousand years. The Earth is cooling, despite the lies to the contrary. "Hottest Years Ever!" Look back at global temps in the 1930's.
Do a little more research.
👍 You are right Edicted