Climate change

GreetingsFromErf · 2020-01-14T15:09:56+00:00

Forest fires occur naturally. We artificially put them out for obvious reasons. However, when you combine that with policies based on tree huggers that prevent brush clearing... Well it's just not how it works. In the US for example, we have species of trees that require a forest fire for their seeds to properly open. In nature, you get occasional low intensity burns and all is good. Now however, we come in and put the fires out. Then we don't clear the brush that would have been removed by the low intensity fire. The fuel builds up until there is so much of it that fire is inevetable at some point. You end up with super fires that burn so hot they actually destroy the aforementioned seeds instead of just cracking them open. Fires this hot sterilize the soil and nothing grows again for a very long time.

Regarding the climate change hoax: It's not so much that the climate isn't changing. It's that it has always changed. The warming trend that has been happening since the last ice age has generally been considered a good thing right? I can't say if human impact is a factor or not. What I can say is the political solutions offered have nothing to do with correcting a problem if it exists. The proposed solutions are simply another scheme to collect more taxes and transfer more power to the parasitic governing class.

This is how it always works. With climate change, the just prevent the clearing of brush and then they wait for a super fire. They play it up in the media, get peoples emotions involved, and declare that something must be done.

It works this way with gun control. They force our young boys to sit still all day. They take away recess in schools. A certain percentage can't take it, so they are proscribed brain altering drugs. Possible symptoms listed on these drug inserts include possible suicidal and homicidal thoughts. Then they simply wait for one of these kids to crack and shoot up a school. It hits the same media cycle which always ends up in curtailing our freedoms and transferring more power to the governing class.

I wouldn't doubt it if we found out that these arsonists where funded in some way because somebody got tired of waiting for the fire to start itself.

redditI_D_010101010 · 2020-01-14T14:50:50+00:00

[deleted]

SylvestorTalone · 2020-01-14T15:07:39+00:00

[removed]

DavidLoPan13 · 2020-01-14T15:05:57+00:00

The climate is changing. The problem is leftist politicians are using this as an opportunity saying that communism will solve all the climate problems. Basically they are saying: give us all your money and you can no longer have planes, cars, meat or air conditioning and much more (the elite don’t have to change any of their behaviors btw). Their climate change policy is also an attempt to implement a world government. Which would be horrific. If we did everything they said they would not be able to do anything significant anyway. Shit, these lazy fucking leftist slobs can’t even pick up the trash in Baltimore. Don’t even get me started on the other cities they run.

corJoe · 2020-01-14T15:11:18+00:00

I don't know what comments you're talking about, but as a climate skeptic, I can take a guess. I don't disagree with climate change, but highly doubt the effect the western nations are contributing.

I've heard many doom and gloom scenarios such as the new ice age coming, global warming, man made climate change, etc... Lately the doom and gloom has been spread by millionaires and billionaires that consume much more than the common man. They claim we need to use less and pay to fix the problems, while being all set up to make billions off their fear mongering. Take Al Gore and his control of carbon trading companies as an example.

It seems they want us giving up cars and planes, giving up meat, and giving up a giant chunk of our fuels. It seems like a socialist's dream. A nation where every aspect of people's lives are controlled and monitored. Food, travel, medicine, property, energy usage, work, communications, etc... It makes many a bit wary when people living high on the hog are telling us they need more control and we should have less.

Then you have the Australian fires. The media is claiming they are caused by global warming, but how much do you trust the media anymore? It's all propaganda from one side or the other. They for sure aren't very vocal about the number of arsonists that have been arrested. If some shady group wanted to cause fear and gain control it's been proven in the past big fires can do the trick.

Many are distrustful, and rightly so. The world has gotten too big and many want to make it bigger. Globalism is an awful idea. Today the common man is so far removed from his leaders as to have no idea what is going on. Too many dealings done in secret. Too many power hungry people entrenched in government. Heck are you sure your vote has any meaning anymore? sorry crazy rant better end it before people start labeling me the crazy guy.

michaelklr · 2020-01-14T14:51:02+00:00

Sounds like a bunch of trans, LGBTQ’s, and SJWs are giving their input on things they don’t understand or like. Typical diarrhea from their mouths... I just ignore it, just educate yourself with facts.

Octoxo · 2020-01-14T15:01:35+00:00

/r/climateskeptics is a good sub for these types of discussions

Lorandel1cz · 2020-01-14T16:15:42+00:00

I got masters degree in nature sciences, so I know what I am talking about. Climate change is real, part of it is made by humans. BUT - everything about carbon dioxide danger is a lie. Biggest problem is deforestation and landscape changes. If you destroy large area of forest, it will disturb water cycles and that will cause troubles. Another big problem is pollution, but it seems to many people rather fight with imaginary threat of CO2.

jamocadyn · 2020-01-14T16:56:25+00:00

There are nearly 200 people who have been arrested for arson with respect to the Australian bush fires--vs climate change (TM)

OldRoad · 2020-01-15T06:56:18+00:00

I can remember reading information on climate change going as far back as the 1980's, when it was referred to as "global warming" or "the greenhouse effect" (not to be confused with the "ozone hole" back then). I totally bought into it back then, way before it was treated as a major political issue. One reason I believed in it is the atmosphere and temperature of Venus -- I think it was explained as a product of the greenhouse effect. Another reason was that I didn't see any reason not to trust mainstream scientists.

Now, I'm not so sure. I think that it could easily be exaggerated. Before, I didn't think there was a reason to misrepresent in environmentalism. I didn't see it as like how a big corporation might want to do propaganda if it increases their profits.

The thing is, I followed the 2016 Democratic primary. There were a lot of questions raised back then regarding if that primary was fair. I never heard of the Democratic Party ever completely addressing all of those concerns completely, when it fact they should have cared a whole lot about answering such concerns. It was like they seemed to talk about the details of those concerns as little as they could.

This made me question a whole lot about the left. If they didn't care about fairness concerns of their own supporters, then what about everything else they talked about. I started listening to more political opinions, and I began to understand the concerns of conservatives. I don't agree with everything labeled as "conservative," but I feel like the American political parties are shifting. I feel like the Republican Party is having to become a "working-class" party, while there seem to be so many rich Democrats.

I've also noticed how mainstream media pushes certain ideas, while leaving out important views to consider on the issues. This is not the kind of news or entertainment that I want to watch. It's like almost all mainstream news became the 2005 version of Fox News, but on the left.

So when I watch such mainstream news, I've noticed how often huge storms are featured on national news. I don't remember it being this way in the past. They don't necessarily always mention climate change in such stories, but it really seems like they are pushing that terrible storms are increasing, with the idea that the public will connect the dots and believe it to be climate change.

But is this the way to treat the issue? I rarely if ever see any sort of intellectual discussion on the news about climate change, the details like averages, how data is gathered, and so on. It's like they think that the average person is stupid, so quick "climate change is happening" segments, and acting wild about big storms, seem to be how they think that the average person should be informed. Well, I disagree with that. If they want to be believed, they need to respect the intelligence of the audience. It would not be that difficult to make their case in 60-minute special, without going over-the-top emotional, or acting like propaganda. Just present the reasoning. If they can't make their case that way, could it be that it's not as bad as they are saying?

Part of all that would also be answering the arguments of those who disagree. These days, so often, I see the arguments of the other side ignored. It's like they are speaking to their own audience, who already believes what they tell them, so they don't want them to hear that the other side even has any arguments, good or bad. This does not build confidence in what the mainstream news says. They need to intellectually address the arguments of the other side; if they can't prove those arguments incorrect, then maybe they need to rethink what they are saying.

Back to what I was saying above about why would someone misrepresent environmentalism. Well, watch what solutions are suggested. If they want money to solve the problem, who will pay that money? Where will the money be spent? And don't just go by their words, where will it actually go? Will the friends of the left be made wealthier? Are they actually trying to do something different than what they are saying?

If climate change is truly that big of an issue, then surely the top 1% will be fine with paying for all needed fixes. After all, one can argue that incorrect policies devalued labor in developed nations and led to unreasonable income/wealth inequality. Therefore, this would be a great way of undoing that -- just have the top 1% pay for any expensive fix. If it's truly that serious, I'm sure they wouldn't mind. What good would their wealth be if the world's environment were ruined. Why haven't all these wealthy Democrats started a billionaire's project to do this -- what is stopping them?

That does make one wonder. Or is it just that they want it to be something more to channel the money of working people? Are they using an environmental issue to do something else? Hmmmm.

As I said above, I'm open to the idea of climate change. But they have to make a case, not propaganda. And they have to act in ways that make people trust them, if they want people to easily accept their opinions. I wish they did a better job with that.

NotGrounded1 · 2020-01-14T16:57:53+00:00

Given it's such a highly politicized and polarized topic it's near impossible to know what it true and what is not but the one thing I've determined is that a solution to much of the world's problems including climate change is reversing overpopulation. There are simply way too many people on this planet and it's causing too much environmental damage. What I always find perplexing about environmentalists is they always push for more laws and regulations but they never push for population control which would do more to protect the environment than anything else. It also seems like the major religions of the world greatly contributed to this overpopulation problem with their strong stances against birth control and abortion. MGTOW's are on the right track by avoiding having children.

emjaytheomachy · 2020-01-14T16:52:29+00:00

Don't worry about it! Just like tobacco being bad for you was fake news. And the REAL science said it wasn't. It was just a way for the evil leftists to tax you more and to attack corporations. Same thing.

Title	Climate change
Author	bigschladong45
Upvotes	10
Comments	47
Date	January 14, 2020 2:46 PM UTC (6 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MGTOW
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MGTOW/comments/eom6hu/climate_change/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MGTOW/climate-change.376879 https://theredarchive.com/post/376879

Comments