Yes the climate, carbon and oxygen levels are always changing. The highest temperatures ever recorded happened in India and other places last year. It doesn't matter if it's human made, don't we need some kind of contingency plans for dealing with it rather than ignoring it or bickering about it?
I would say it's difficult to prove either way whether greenhouse gases cause changes in the weather. Digging up rocks and liquid and burning them can't possibly have no effect.
Do we think that loss of pollinators is a con?
Do we think that ocean dead zones, destruction of plankton which produce 50% of the oxygen, cutting down of rainforests which produce the other half are a con? That this is not actually happening?
Mammals can't live without oxygen, survive in high temperatures, nor eat without pollinators.
I agree I don't think whatever we do, and zero carbon will be even more destructive, we will be able to avert disaster.
I do think there has been deliberate vilification of environmentalists in the media targeting the medical freedom demographic. To cause division and to keep people using oil etc.
We have every right to want to protect the environment and the other species we are making extinct and using for food.
I really object to being told that I'm a dupe of the elites, the UN, WEF or whoever for feeling this way about our fellow earthlings and the planet we call home.
I have been told that my compassion is being used against me, and the elites are now referred to as 'Gaia worshipping environmentalists', I don't follow these people and frankly want nothing more to do with anyone who says these things to me. It's disrespectful, infuriating and illogical.
Hiya, no mass consensus on what please? Carbon? I have always known that zero carbon was a con. And yes the earth was really hot before, especially before plants evolved.
But no mass consensus on loss of pollinators or pollution? I didn't mean that they're caused by 'climate change' I meant are they an issue we should be thinking about, are they actually happening? If you think it's due to intensive farming then that's clearly human made isn't it. How do anti-environmentalists plan to address this issue, stop intensive farming, and still feed so many people?
How am I being controlled? What are they making me afraid of? What are they making me do differently?
Of course the earth will be fine. But it's unlikely 8 billion and counting humans on it will be able to carry on with our present life style much longer.
You say we exploit to destruction. Which we do. Many people around the world will be lucky to be fed as we adapt to the world getting hotter (which it is- whether it was our fault or not) though it may well be OK for us in the West. Many people make a living sorting our toxic junk and retrieving stuff from landfill. The fish in the ocean are full of mercury from industry and mining. Autism, Alzheimers and Parkinsons' , caused by pesticides and vaccines, will reach levels society can't sustain soon.
Yet many only seem to worry that the WEF are controlling me to make me pay penalties for driving a petrol car. My car is so old it's actually exempt.
Ah I see thank you. Yes I can see they would say they had consensus when they hadn't. But like you say, I think it is immaterial whether the majority of scientists agree that we are causing the climate to change or not because we are causing so much destruction anyway and our way of life is totally unsustainable. For me this means all the discussion of control of some by others into smart cities etc using a theory that may or may not have consensus is totally irrelevant and a waste of time cos it's unlikely many of us will be here.
The WEF get too much attention as it is. I'm not giving them any more of my energy.
Thank you Cornwall Marc, a lot of things have become clear to me.
Skin color can go only so far in separating people. After that it is religion, then where you live, then your work, then? The underlying error is the theory that claims that one group is "better" than another.
I'm reading Hate Inc by Matt Taibbi at the mo. It's about the media, now that there are many channels, each one picks out it's chosen demographic and continually writes what this audience wants to hear, disguised as news. All issues are binary and are always someone else's fault. Hatred of other demographics is specifically and deliberately instilled in their audience.
I hope that Harry reads this - he needs a project other than himself.
Yes the climate, carbon and oxygen levels are always changing. The highest temperatures ever recorded happened in India and other places last year. It doesn't matter if it's human made, don't we need some kind of contingency plans for dealing with it rather than ignoring it or bickering about it?
I would say it's difficult to prove either way whether greenhouse gases cause changes in the weather. Digging up rocks and liquid and burning them can't possibly have no effect.
Do we think that loss of pollinators is a con?
Do we think that ocean dead zones, destruction of plankton which produce 50% of the oxygen, cutting down of rainforests which produce the other half are a con? That this is not actually happening?
Mammals can't live without oxygen, survive in high temperatures, nor eat without pollinators.
I agree I don't think whatever we do, and zero carbon will be even more destructive, we will be able to avert disaster.
I do think there has been deliberate vilification of environmentalists in the media targeting the medical freedom demographic. To cause division and to keep people using oil etc.
We have every right to want to protect the environment and the other species we are making extinct and using for food.
I really object to being told that I'm a dupe of the elites, the UN, WEF or whoever for feeling this way about our fellow earthlings and the planet we call home.
🙏🏽
I have been told that my compassion is being used against me, and the elites are now referred to as 'Gaia worshipping environmentalists', I don't follow these people and frankly want nothing more to do with anyone who says these things to me. It's disrespectful, infuriating and illogical.
Hiya, no mass consensus on what please? Carbon? I have always known that zero carbon was a con. And yes the earth was really hot before, especially before plants evolved.
But no mass consensus on loss of pollinators or pollution? I didn't mean that they're caused by 'climate change' I meant are they an issue we should be thinking about, are they actually happening? If you think it's due to intensive farming then that's clearly human made isn't it. How do anti-environmentalists plan to address this issue, stop intensive farming, and still feed so many people?
How am I being controlled? What are they making me afraid of? What are they making me do differently?
Of course the earth will be fine. But it's unlikely 8 billion and counting humans on it will be able to carry on with our present life style much longer.
You say we exploit to destruction. Which we do. Many people around the world will be lucky to be fed as we adapt to the world getting hotter (which it is- whether it was our fault or not) though it may well be OK for us in the West. Many people make a living sorting our toxic junk and retrieving stuff from landfill. The fish in the ocean are full of mercury from industry and mining. Autism, Alzheimers and Parkinsons' , caused by pesticides and vaccines, will reach levels society can't sustain soon.
Yet many only seem to worry that the WEF are controlling me to make me pay penalties for driving a petrol car. My car is so old it's actually exempt.
Ah I see thank you. Yes I can see they would say they had consensus when they hadn't. But like you say, I think it is immaterial whether the majority of scientists agree that we are causing the climate to change or not because we are causing so much destruction anyway and our way of life is totally unsustainable. For me this means all the discussion of control of some by others into smart cities etc using a theory that may or may not have consensus is totally irrelevant and a waste of time cos it's unlikely many of us will be here.
The WEF get too much attention as it is. I'm not giving them any more of my energy.
Thank you Cornwall Marc, a lot of things have become clear to me.
🙏🏽
Skin color can go only so far in separating people. After that it is religion, then where you live, then your work, then? The underlying error is the theory that claims that one group is "better" than another.
I'm reading Hate Inc by Matt Taibbi at the mo. It's about the media, now that there are many channels, each one picks out it's chosen demographic and continually writes what this audience wants to hear, disguised as news. All issues are binary and are always someone else's fault. Hatred of other demographics is specifically and deliberately instilled in their audience.
Yes, 100%
🙏🏽