Climate propaganda

by neat blue dog 39 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • GabeAthouse

    One large volcano eruption produces more CO2 than the total of man's contribution.

    While it's erupting it may match or exceed human output during the hours or days of the eruption. That does not mean it matches or exceeds human output over the entire year or century. That part always gets left out or possibly misunderstood when the volcano argument gets trotted out.

  • truth_b_known

    illustration of life in the Pliocene

    BLAST FROM THE PAST Three million years ago, Earth’s climate was so warm that the High Arctic supported forests (illustrated) in which camels and other animals roamed.

    A new study has revealed that hyenas once dwelled in a much different environment than the African and Asian ecosystems where they live today.

    Hyenas lived in the Arctic during the last ice age, study reveals

    Climate change is obviously real. I couldn't prove to someone that the combustible engine fueled by petroleum is or is not effecting the Earth's climate. It is pollution and therefor needs to cease. I prefer clean air, clear drinking water, and clean soil to grow food.

    Just because the Earth is warming up is no evidence that life is going to end. Just because icecaps are melting does not conclude that we are all doomed. At one time that ice was not there and life flourished there.

    Either way, the Watchtower will no miss an opportunity to quote any non-Watchtower source as an appeal to authority, but ONLY if it echoes their Watchtower beliefs.

  • GabeAthouse

    Just because the Earth is warming up is no evidence that life is going to end.

    I've never seen a claim that "life is going to end". Life bounced back from the Chicxulub Asteroid. Eventually.

    Life will carry on just fine. May cause serious misery for human beings, though.

  • Simon


    The climate always changes. Change is not evidence of anything.

    We've just emerged from one of the coldest periods in recent history.

    Most charts are propaganda, with selective starting points (and different ones for different factors).

    The planet has been hotter in the past, and hosted more life when it was.

    CO2 has been WAY higher in the past and the planet was more lush.

    The tree-line has risen and vegetation has increased as CO2 has gone up.

    CO2 is plant food. We're carbon based life.

    Below a certain level of CO2, life ceases. CO2 going down is more of a threat to life.

    No climate model matches reality, and all are way off in the same direction.

    You don't get funding if your "science" gives the "wrong" answers.

    Temperature increases precede CO2 rise (it's not "cause and effect")

    We're responsible for a tiny percentage of a small proportion of a gas, it's nothing compared to what really dictates the temperature of the planet which is the water + the sun.

    Hot water warms the air above it, a little warm air does nothing to a large body of water below it.

    None of the people telling you how you need to live actually do it themselves They buy beachfront properties and fly on private jets. Do they really believe it? No, so why should you ...

  • ThomasMore

    Truth_b_known - I really like the three million year old pictures. I need some pictures from a month ago when someone slammed into my car while it was parked in front of my home. Can you help?

  • Vidqun

    Why push the Climate Change agenda? First reason would be that climate alarmism is an attempt by the establishment to assist in restoring social control. In every attempt to push the climate change agenda is a call for people to unite.

    Second reason has to do with money. According to Bank of America and one of their “Thematic Research” tomes, to achieve Net Zero carbon emissions by 2050, will have a hefty price tag. It will be costing the nations in the vicinity of $150 trillion over thirty years. This amounts to about $5 trillion in annual investments which is two times the current world GDP. Simply put, it provides an endless stream of taxpayer and debt-funded "investments" which in turn need a just as constant degree of debt monetization by central banks.

    Third reason would be population control. If the nations do succeed in reaching Net Zero carbon emissions by 2050 many will have to be sacrificed on the altar of unsustainability. A Net Zero carbon environment will be unable to sustain 8000,000,000 people. Thus, war, pestilence, famine and vaccines, causing sterility and premature death, have to be introduced to cull the numbers to more manageable levels.

  • joey jojo
    joey jojo


    Most charts are propaganda, with selective starting points (and different ones for different factors).

    Some may be, but its hard to argue the evidence from ice core samples. They show a fairly stable level of co2 over the last 800 thousand years. During that time, co2 levels didnt exceed 300ppm. Around 1950, co2 levels broke out and are now at about 420ppm. It only took 60 years to break out of an 800 thousand year cycle.

    Temperature increases precede CO2 rise (it's not "cause and effect")

    I cant find anything that backs this up. Im not saying it isnt true, a link would be great.

  • Rivergang
  • Vidqun
  • Vidqun

Share this