Climate Change is Real(ly Not Such a Big Deal)
In the video below Dan Dicks of 'Press for Truth' interviews Lord Christopher Monckton (3rd Viscount Monckton of Brenchley) regarding the overhyped fraud that is anthropogenic global warming.
If you didn't already know this, the descriptor 'anthropogenic' means that no matter the subject, it is caused by people. As an example, people's presence on earth can influence the planet's climate.
This is common sense, yet we should not be speaking of this matter in terms of strict absolutes so as not to be confusing. If one were to say, cram a bunch of people into a small confined area, then the body heat of all these people will influence the temperature of the room.
So, in that regard anthropogenic global warming exists and will continue to persist to some small degree. However, there are certain interested powers who would love to levy a tax on all of us carbon-based life forms. They'd have you believe this is in the name of "saving the planet".
One reason that some are pushing this tax is that hustlers like Blood and Gore, as well as others, want to become even more wealthy than they already are. The problem is when they move to destroy industries by taxing carbon output these costs will get passed on down to the consumer.
You'd be the one paying extra to the elite class under the false pretense that these taxes would help to save the planet from global warming.
So the big question is why on earth would we cripple industry if doing so wouldn't meaningfully change the climate? The simple answer is we would not, which is why people resist the scam.
The only effective way to alter the temperature on this rock would be to control the sun and us mere earthlings, we've no control over the sun. We could lob a few nukes at it... but I reckon that'd only make it angry.
Curated for #informationwar (by @metalmag25)
Our purpose is to encourage posts discussing Information War, Propaganda, Disinformation and other false narratives. We currently have over 7,500 Steem Power and 20+ people following the curation trail to support our mission.
Join our discord and chat with 150+ fellow Informationwar Activists.
Connect with fellow Informationwar writers in our Roll Call! InformationWar - Contributing Writers/Supporters: Roll Call Pt 9
Ways you can help the @informationwar
Always about control, although I believe they have been setting up the end game for some time to get rid of most of us. They are a patient lot and know the cattle rarely looks past the moment.
"The real reason for the tax is that con artists like Blood, Gore and others want to become even more wealthy than they already are."
Actually my friend this would merely be an advantageous by product of the real reason. The real reason is to suppress and oppress the natural productivity. Hoping that by doing so we wont be economically able to resist.
Lord Christopher Monckton: "Man made climate change is a Hoax!"
What I've noticed, in opposing the mainstream viewpoint, the people they give us actually cement the central claim. In this instance, CLIMATE IS CHANGING, but not because of man.
Is it hotter for you now than when you were four?
Not for me, each year, similar temperatures. Sometimes a good summer, sometimes a bad summer, but it's no hotter. The main difference, the quality of light has changed to more blue, I suspect because of the trails they constantly pump into the sky via planes. While Russia admitted in the 1980s it modifies the weather by cloud seeding, our governments are oddly silent on the subject, yet villages get flooded out by extreme weather events...
This story was supposedly debunked, but the central fact is that researchers wanted to get rid of tree ring data because it didn't show change in temperatures. They now say tree ring data is inaccurate compared to weather stations and it's no longer used, the flip side, this data couldn't be manipulated to show false warming.
So, Lord Christopher Monckton, while looking to be on side of the climate change is unreal, doesn't appear to be calling out the actual fraud.
Did you watch the video? He's not on the side of climate change.
I didn't watch this video first time around, I've watched quite a few of his others, I don't dislike him, he makes good points and uses graph data very well. But it all seems set up like a never ending story... The article I referenced is from 2009, but nearly ten years later we're having the same argument. Forgive me for being cynical.
We should have moved on from this. Trees don't show signs of climate change in their rings, so if trees don't care, neither should we. I mean, plant life is really the only important thing because it's the bottom of the food chain. But instead, 'tree ring data is unreliable', so let's naval gaze at some forced statistics. And the craziness of demonising CO2 when this is the chief component in photosynthesis – we've got some sick bastards in government.
While arguing about a possible one degree celsius rise in temperature, let's not address the following questions: Why are governments allowing the spraying of our skies with chemicals that fall on plant life and change soil acidity? Do governments actively use cloud seeding to purposely flood areas of their own population?
I'm not attacking Lord Monckton per se, I'm just hoping to add another dimension to the discussion beyond his key points.
Regarding plane trails, I was sitting in the garden enjoying the sun and they started spraying. It's definitely coordinated, planes come over one after another to form a set of lines. One plane was throwing out so much stuff, it was like a flour bomb...
See the vertical streams, that's the stuff falling through the air like flour, the actual trail is the top white line.
It's scary stuff what they're doing.
I think that Monckton is actually on the same side of the argument that we are on. What he's trying to do is catch them in a lie so that he can take legal action against them. That may be why his focus is on the fact that their calculations do not take into account sun temperature data. I too am disappointed that this push wasn't stopped in it's tracks all the way back to the hacked emails from climategate when they were hiding the decline. I don't know if the tree ring data can be used to attack the mathematical equations that they've gotten wrong, but if it can you may want to suggests that to Monckton. He seems to be one of the key figures doing the most to discredit the hoax that antroprogenic global warming can in any way be significantly reduced by taxing industry.
Yes, he argues well. We'll just have to see where it goes, I suspect there'll be another round of 'debunking' from the opposition. As he says, academics get funded to prove climate change, it's a joke.
@practicalthought, and @commonlaw
You two make great points! I should have said: "The real reason for the promotion of the tax by some individuals is to become more wealthy." However, you're both probably correct that those who've commissioned the related treaties and laws most likely seek power, control, and for people of all nations to one day submit themselves to a world government that they've got controlling interests in. There's a big difference between the shot callers, gophers, and the supergophers.