moon
Satire for Sanity
This thread is not about hate towards Greta. It's about sympathy for her.
Well- that was your cover for Denier Choir ecocidal horseshit- but it's fallen on its ass. The kid is a global heroine.
This thread is not about hate towards Greta. It's about sympathy for her.
No, we are not. You are off the rails again. She is into environmental issues. This crazy shit you believe is not germane. Did you add that to show how wildly conspiratorial you are? If so, it worked.
Well- that was your cover for Denier Choir ecocidal horseshit- but it's fallen on its ass. The kid is a global heroine.
You happen to be a citizen of one the nations which is a part of the UN.
There is no 'they' about it.
Bullshit. This is about a handful of climate change denying morons like yourself bashing the shit out of a kid who has courageously spoken out for her generation, and managed to rally millions of her peer group to drop their iPhones and get engaged. If this same kid was roaming the world preaching against Islam and for the greatness of Trump and your guy Mump, you assholes wouldn't care a bit if she was in school, has "mental issues," is "brainwashed," being "used," etc. Not a single whit would you care.
Bravo.
....This is about a handful of climate change denying morons like yourself ........
Bravo to OwlCunt? LOL. What a moron
Shaddup you ignorant cunt. You're stupidity is fucking annoying as hell
I can't help thinking you have a few issues of your own. Much as might want to characterise it otherwise it's not just a few but many. I posted a list of highly eminent scientists that are sceptics, including Nobel Prize winners before, here it is again.
Prof. Richard Lindzen
Prof. Judith Curry
Prof. Ivar Giaever
Dr. Jasper Kirkby
Prof. Stephen E. Kooning
Prof. Joseph D'Aleo
Prof. Nils-Axel Mörner
Prof. Robert E. Davis
Dr. Harrison Schmidt
Prof. Hendrik Tennekes
Prof. Peter Stilbs
Prof. Anastasios Tsonis
Prof. William Happer
Prof. Anthony Lupo
Prof. Murray Salby
Prof. Nir Shaviv
Prof. Fred Singer
Prof. Henrik Svensmark
Prof. Ian Plimer
Dr. Sallie Baliunas
Dr. Rory Spencer
Dr. John Christy
Dr. Nic Lewis
Dr. Willy Soon
Prof. Freeman Dyson
Hello anonymoose,
What kind of wisdom says assume no danger, make no preparations?
That's dumb.
What are the odds that your home will be destroyed by fire?
Pretty low, right?
Almost nonexistent.
But still you buy insurance.
Preparing for climate change is like buying insurance for our home on Earth.
I have no knowledge of any "mental problems" she has, you have, or Toxic has -- other than going by what you idiots write here. I see no evidence that Ms. Thunberg is "a mental case." I'm sure that you and Doktor Toxic though -- while being blind to Trump's evident cognitive decline -- know all about the issues of a child you've never met and never will, thankfully.
Don't you have a spurious climate denial blog to read and some more fake science to distribute?
Aw look, more Concern Troll droppings. When will you start, rather than playing long-distance psych expert -- when your career consisted of mopping the cafeteria and emptying trash cans? lol
It's interesting that you never scolded your "friend" Rebekah about HER kids not being in school, especially the one she said had issues with learning. You also neglected to trash that Nick Sandmann kid who got in the old Indian guy's face. Shouldn't HE have been in school? Oh, that was okay because he was wearing a MAGA hat. You save your hate for kids like Greta, David, and any other kids you can find to personally attack because you don't agree with their politics. Funny how you never discuss the politics themselves, only the ppl you envy and loathe.
I will take this post as an acknowledgement that there is no published study with the conclusion that human activity has caused any degree of GW, but that's OK. We can still agree that renewable nrg is good.
Of course I realize the burning of benzin produces pollutants, e.g. carbon monoxide, that is poison. Molecules needed to sustain life are not pollutants.
This is my solution that should be acceptable to all truly concerned about the environment regardless of what they believe:
Provided funding for research into renewable nrg. much like we do for the NIH. Provide tax breaks for the development and use of renewables.
But do not penalize or criminalize the use of non-renewable nrg we've been using for decades which has greatly improved the quality of our lives. Over time capitalism will prevail and the extraction of non-renewables will become economically disadvantageous.
Of course I realize that communist globalists will continue the use of "climate" as a political tool but I don't see how true environmentalists could disagree with my solution .
So 'climate crisis' and 'climate emergency' is 'climate change' coupled with doomsday scenarios. Okay. Define 'climate change'.For your education: What is climate change? Evidence, Causes, Effects, Solutions https://climate.nasa.gov/
"Climate crisis" or "climate emergency" is a description of climate change and global warming used by a variety of scientists, governments and other organisations to describe how anthropogenic effects on the climate are proceeding so quickly that they believe the world is facing a global crisis. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_crisis
1. For your education: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/deforestation-and-global-warming/
Does not define 'pollution'. You cannot define a word with itself. Define 'pollution'.3. A primary for your education: https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/global-warming/pollution/
No, all you have done is make circular definitions. You cannot define a word with itself.All YOU have done is display either a genuine or willful gross ignorance of the subject matter.
Not a fact. A void argument fallacy. Learn what 'fact' means. 'Fact' does not mean 'Universal Truth'. Define ' climate change'.I hope you enlighten yourself so there can be a discussion based on facts.
Yes they do. Define 'climate change'.The questions still stand
A void argument is not logical. It is a fallacy. Define 'climate change'.waiting for a rational, logical response.
Typical of the liberals. They deny even what they said themselves.I notice poor to nearly zero documentation for the above screed.
Void argument fallacy. What predictions were right concerning anything to do with the Church of Global Warming and who made them?See, it's like this: for those whose predictions 50 years ago were wrong....the sad truth is that we are now seeing that there were those who were right.
When NASA starts talking about carbon dioxide destroying the ozone layer, you bet I treat it with skepticism. CO2 doesn't affect ozone. NASA is a government agency, not a God.Of course, right wing whores for the corporations will label any and everyone crazy or some other label for daring to point to reality....even NASA.
No, I'll keep the republic thanks. I support constitutional government. I will not allow anyone to just overthrow the Constitution and implement fascism by oligarchy.Well, Ms. Thunberg and all her young compatriots will be of voting age soon...so unless the right wing toadies and their masters are will to go complete totalitarian and/or fascist, they'd better get use to the idea of change for the better instead of profit.
She has severe mental problems and people who support her are ensuring that she'll end up with a mental breakdown or worse.
My point was NOT to produce "doomsday" predictions, but to point out the FACTS regarding climate change predictions of dire consequence that DID come to fruition amid the blunders previously listed.