the climate change scam

[Skarekrow]

its not just zionist christians its also jews who believe that the messiah will come when jews return to israel and that this will enable them to build the third temple

the messiah will then raise jewish people above all other people making all non jewish people into their slaves

I don't see why we can discuss the wacky ideas of christians and muslims but not the wacky ideas of jews. Why are you giving them special treatment? are you a racist?

Derp.
Already know what they believe...it doesn’t mean that it is happening.
I am very much against the ghettos that have been encapsulating the Palestinians - so, no, it doesn’t just apply to everyone else but the Jewish people.

OMG you called me a racist....boo-hoo-hoo...*crycrycry*
I’m a melting snowflake...how dare you...poor me...someone called me a racist!

So...you go apeshit when I infer you are saying racist and anti-semitic BS, but feel free to directly infer I am a racist back with your leading question.
Stick it pal.

 

[Stu]

It is not impossible for a banned member to assume a new forum identity. Where exactly is the harm as long as that "new member" does not engage in any of the activities they have been banned for?
(I just thought of like 5)

 

[Wyote]

It is not impossible for a banned member to assume a new forum identity. Where exactly is the harm as long as that "new member" does not engage in any of the activities they have been banned for?
(I just thought of like 5)

A-are you Colonel Kilgore?

 

[sprinkles]

It is not impossible for a banned member to assume a new forum identity. Where exactly is the harm as long as that "new member" does not engage in any of the activities they have been banned for?
(I just thought of like 5)

I think for every nutjob that gets reformed, two more are created.

 

[Wyote]

I think for every nutjob that gets reformed, two more are created.

Your math checks out

 

[kinglear]

climate change itself isn't a scam. It's part of the natural cycle of our world. The climate is always changing and it will continue to do so long after humanity as a species moves on or ceases to exist.

i agree that climate change is a naturally occurring thing.

I also agree that manmade pollution is a problem

But the scam isn't climate change itself. the scam is the claim by the corporate collectivist elites that the carbon dioxide that humans are creating is what is driving climate change

THATS the scam and it enables the elites to create new laws which they then claim are needed to 'combat climate change'. Those new laws are ideologically driven

In other words. If we want clean energy and lower our emission, we need to go nuclear.

i don't agree with that part! Just look at fukishima to see that nuclear is not safe or clean

 

[88chaz88]

But the scam isn't climate change itself. the scam is the claim by the corporate collectivist elites that the carbon dioxide that humans are creating is what is driving climate change

THATS the scam and it enables the elites to create new laws which they then claim are needed to 'combat climate change'. Those new laws are ideologically driven

And all the big oil companies and businessmen who have a vested interest in keeping the world going as is, bankrolling studies that downplay the effects of climate change are.... what? Just really concerned and looking out for us and the planet?

 

[sprinkles]

i agree that climate change is a naturally occurring thing.

I also agree that manmade pollution is a problem

But the scam isn't climate change itself. the scam is the claim by the corporate collectivist elites that the carbon dioxide that humans are creating is what is driving climate change

THATS the scam and it enables the elites to create new laws which they then claim are needed to 'combat climate change'. Those new laws are ideologically driven



i don't agree with that part! Just look at fukishima to see that nuclear is not safe or clean

Hah, this is what the actual elite wants you to believe.

 

[Stu]

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/when-used-cars-are-more-ecofriendly/

 

[Artisan]

i don't agree with that part! Just look at fukishima to see that nuclear is not safe or clean

Nuclear powerplants don't have any CO2 emissions.

It's safer than pretty much everything out there, even including solar and wind.
There are more deaths even by those than by nuclear power plants.

It's a cold hard statistics thing, if you saw the video I linked you'd know. It took one of the strongest EARTHQUAKES in human history AND a TSUNAMI to destabilize the FUKUSHIMA powerplant. An eartquake that moved the entirety of japan 2.5 meters to the est, and the earth's axis moved 10 centimeters. As a result, there is just 1 dude who got cancer that MIGHT have been caused by FUKUSHIMA. COAL claims 1000s each year.

Then there is the fact that FUKUSHIMA was a 50 year old powerplant.... 50 year old Nuclear tech that withstands one of THE biggest earthquakes (9 on scale of richter) in recent history AND a 14 meters high tsunami that killed 19 000 people and you argue Nuclear Energy is unsafe because 1 guy died of lung cancer that measured radiation values just after the fact.... Really ?

Chernobyl has an estimate of 62 deaths, and the increase of the chance of cancer has it up to a potential 4000 people over the next few years according to the World Health Organisation...

Those are the 2 DEADLIEST accidents in nuclear energy.

Lets compare those with others.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_accidents

Well shit. We're well and truly fucked. Hydro, Wind and Solar are deadlier than Nuclear based on my search results on google and wikipedia.
https://www.solarpowerportal.co.uk/...ikely_cause_of_fire_in_latest_safety_incident

Nuclear waste storage. Freaky right ? actually one big warehouse with the right safety specifications to satisfy the paranoid, can store the nuclear waste of 1 cubic meter a year for a single nuclear power plant. 1 cubic meter a year.... Oh gosh we cannot do this to our children, to the next generation! What would they think of us ;p? Absolutely fucking nothing.

Think about it? what's worse? Increased death rates, increasingly polluted air, deaths of flora and fauna OR 1 cubic meter a year.
I know what your thinking. "BUT NUCLEAR IS BAD FOR THE ENVIRONMENT!"

Heres Chernobyl now.
http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20160421-the-chernobyl-exclusion-zone-is-arguably-a-nature-reserve

Ofcourse, you're now worried that the BBC is a fake piece of news broadcasting agency owned by the corporate elite.
So lets check what National Geographic has to say about it:

Wait so shit, nuclear disaster worst in history, and wildlife thrives? Why? Because humans are gone....


I think it's absolutely ABSURD that an entire energy source got summarily dismissed because people don't understand it and therefore find it freaky.
I would like to see arguments that proof that Nuclear energy is not clean, or safe, especially compared to other energy sources YOU DO believe are safe.

Currently, windmill parks are a fad, 600 windmills the size of the eifel Tower with mils, produce the same energy as one nuclear powerplant.
Heres the thing, there are several ongoing investigations surrounding these offshore windmill parks for their effects on ocean life.
https://www.dw.com/en/how-do-offshore-wind-farms-affect-ocean-ecosystems/a-40969339

We'd all like the cleanest, safest energy to be used, the one most in tune with nature to meet our energy needs. Thing is, we cannot even hope to meet our energy needs without going nuclear, we simply cannot produce energy sources at the required rate without going nuclear and none of the ones we do have the technology for can currently match what we can achieve with nuclear energy, both in safety, production, energy, CO2 reduction, health and nature considerations.

So sure, its not safe or clean. But can you point out something safer or cleaner that can actually meet our energy needs ? Especially since Wind, Solar and Hydro each actually cause more deaths than nuclear energy ever did in its worst accidents? Once more. Fukushima build in 1960's (IT WAS AN OLD POWERPLANT!), Earthquake of 9 on the richter scale, 14 meter high tsunami = 1 death.... `

The IPPC, the climate experts of the UN, have an increase in nuclear energy in all its most effective models for reducing our CO2 emissions AND meeting our energy needs....

So here is the thing. Facts and numbers prove your fears regarding Nuclear energy are not founded...
I bet most people don't even realize just how much they crippled the biggest, safest energy source humanity has and thereby stunted our technological growth... Quite frankly, its do or die where Nuclear energy is concerned. We owe it to future generations to always choose the most feasible cleanest option. Nuclear is it. Solar, Wind and Hydro cannot meet the demand in even our wettest dreams when it comes to production and safety...yet.

 

[Stu]

could it be that global warming is a hoax perpetrated by the Nuclear industry?

 

[kinglear]

Nuclear powerplants don't have any CO2 emissions.

It's safer than pretty much everything out there, even including solar and wind.
There are more deaths even by those than by nuclear power plants.
So here is the thing. Facts and numbers prove your fears regarding Nuclear energy are not founded...

first of all the claim that CO2 is the cause of climate change is a load of bunk

secondly the FACTS are that fukishima is still pumping out radioactive water into the sea and we don't yet know the full devestating effects of that incident

 

[kinglear]

And all the big oil companies and businessmen who have a vested interest in keeping the world going as is, bankrolling studies that downplay the effects of climate change are.... what? Just really concerned and looking out for us and the planet?

no but the corporate elites pushing the carbon dioxide scam have an ideological agenda behind what they are doing and they most definately do not give a damn about looking out for you or the planet

 

[kinglear]

Hah, this is what the actual elite wants you to believe.

no the actual elite are the ones who are so powerful that they are getting governments across the world to bend to their will and impose UN agenda 2030 on their nation states

 

[Ren]

no the actual elite are the ones who are so powerful that they are getting governments across the world to bend to their will and impose UN agenda 2030 on their nation states

I work for an organisation that pushes UN Agenda 2030, actually. It's cool to hear that I am part of the elect.

I encourage everyone to look more into the SDG:

 

[sprinkles]

no the actual elite are the ones who are so powerful that they are getting governments across the world to bend to their will and impose UN agenda 2030 on their nation states

Sure, the UN is trying to take control of things. Because they don't already have it. Which means the actual elite has the control and is trying not to lose it.

The UN is a bit idealistic and heavy handed, but that doesn't mean we should stick with the current establishment either.

 

[88chaz88]

no but the corporate elites pushing the carbon dioxide scam have an ideological agenda behind what they are doing and they most definately do not give a damn about looking out for you or the planet

You're saying "ideological agenda" as if there's some negative moral or ethical value in ideology and goals alone. You posting this thread and most of your other posts are pushing your ideological agenda. Me responding like this is pushing my ideological agenda. Politics and economics is all ideology.

Also, you talk of corporate elites. 5 out of the 10 largest companies in the world by revenue are oil and gas companies, how are they not somehow the corporate elite?

 

[kinglear]

Sure, the UN is trying to take control of things. Because they don't already have it. Which means the actual elite has the control and is trying not to lose it.

The UN is a bit idealistic and heavy handed, but that doesn't mean we should stick with the current establishment either.

the UN is a de facto world government created by the current establishment

The rockefellers who made their start in oil but who have now divested from oil to push a new 'green' industry donated the land in new york for the UN offices to be built on

The rockefellers are descended from a guy who was literally a snake oil salesman. He literally sold snake oil

They are invested in the central bank which creates currency that is not pegged to anything real. In otherwords its an illusion

They told the world oil was created from plants broken down over millions of years thereby creating the term 'fossil fuels' so that people believe oil is finite but there are some people who believe oil is created through other processes

They also shifted the west into allopathic medicine

They also push the carbon fraud

They also funded the eugenics movement

So they are mixed up in a whole load of hokey shit

 

[sprinkles]

 

[kinglear]

You're saying "ideological agenda" as if there's some negative moral or ethical value in ideology and goals alone. You posting this thread and most of your other posts are pushing your ideological agenda. Me responding like this is pushing my ideological agenda. Politics and economics is all ideology.

Also, you talk of corporate elites. 5 out of the 10 largest companies in the world by revenue are oil and gas companies, how are they not somehow the corporate elite?

the oil and gas companies are owned by the elites

the same elites who want the world to turn to 'smart' cities in the name of 'sustainability'

they are the same elites who created the 'club of rome' and who funded the eugenics movement

they want to create a technocratic system which means that every single energy useage you make during your day from the turn of the pedal on your smart bike to the brushing of your teeth with your smart toothbrush will all be recorded and analysed

they want to create a lockdown system which would represent a technological gulag but in order to achieve it they must convince you that they are saving you from yourself