Donald Trump running for president

[rob112]

Putin Says U.S. Must Stop Illegally Looting Syria's Oil and Withdraw Troops

The US needs to stop “stealing” the oil from the Syrian people and state, Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Tuesday (July 19), after meeting with his Iranian and Turkish counterparts in Tehran. The three guarantors of the “Astana process” also agreed that the US should leave the trans-Euphrates, and stop making the humanitarian crisis in Syria worse with their unilateral sanctions.

American troops must leave the territory east of the Euphrates river and “stop robbing the Syrian state, the Syrian people, exporting oil illegally,” Putin told reporters on Tuesday evening. He said this was a “common position” of Russia, Iran and Turkey.

Several hundred US troops are illegally present in Syria, mainly controlling the oil wells and wheatfields in the country’s northeast, controlled by the Syrian Democratic Forces.

Source: RT

Follow:
@G3News

 

[Power-Lift]

Invalid Link Removed
·
Invalid Link Removed

65% of Americans are spending more to go out with their family.
61% are driving less.
50% are traveling less.
40% are using savings to pay for day-to-day expenses.
Joe Biden’s America is failing.

Pant-Shitter is an epic failure, like all brainless libtards...

 

[rob112]

Little Evidence That Chemical Imbalance Causes Depression, Scientists Find

Scientists have called into question the widespread use of antidepressants after a major review found “no clear evidence” that low serotonin levels are responsible for depression.

Prescriptions for antidepressants have risen dramatically since the 1990s, with one in six adults and 2% of teenagers in England now being prescribed them. Millions more people around the world regularly use antidepressants.

“Many people take antidepressants because they have been led to believe their depression has a biochemical cause, but this new research suggests this belief is not grounded in evidence,” said the study’s lead author, Joanna Moncrieff, a professor of psychiatry at University College London and consultant psychiatrist at North East London NHS foundation trust.

Source: The Guardian

Follow:
@G3News

I didn’t actually see the study but I am definitely interested

 

[ax1]

Little Evidence That Chemical Imbalance Causes Depression, Scientists Find

Scientists have called into question the widespread use of antidepressants after a major review found “no clear evidence” that low serotonin levels are responsible for depression.

Prescriptions for antidepressants have risen dramatically since the 1990s, with one in six adults and 2% of teenagers in England now being prescribed them. Millions more people around the world regularly use antidepressants.

“Many people take antidepressants because they have been led to believe their depression has a biochemical cause, but this new research suggests this belief is not grounded in evidence,” said the study’s lead author, Joanna Moncrieff, a professor of psychiatry at University College London and consultant psychiatrist at North East London NHS foundation trust.

Source: The Guardian

Follow:
@G3News

I didn’t actually see the study but I am definitely interested

Its all about big bucks and taking focus away from the real issue of deteriorating culture.

Anti-depressents do help some people, but Ive been saying this for an eternity from seeing people around me, most people simply have issues that need to be dealt with from its root cause and its workable if the help is there, but nothing is easier than popping pills numbing emotion away from the brain. Its only going to get worse, pharma has no intention of letting their share value decrease.

 

[ax1]

The pedophile might be announcing or is at least considering the first ever "national climate emergency."

Be prepared for shyt to get worse as abuse of the executive office is allowed to further increase.

 

[ax1]

Invalid Link Removed

 

[ax1]

Invalid Link Removed

 

[ax1]

Dum duh dum dum.......give up your rights, hand over your tax money and give it to the trillionaires, only they and their paid off bureaucrats can save humanity!!!!
---------------------

The 1540 drought in Europe was a climatic Invalid Link Removed in Europe. In various Invalid Link Removed analyses the temperature and precipitation regimes were reconstructed and compared to present-day conditions.

On the basis of historical records Wetter et al. (2014)Invalid Link Removed derived that during an eleven-month period there was little rain in Invalid Link Removed, possibly qualifying as a Invalid Link Removed.Invalid Link Removed These conclusions however were questioned by Büntgen et al. (2015)Invalid Link Removed on the basis of additional data (Invalid Link Removed).

Orth et al. (2016)Invalid Link Removed concluded that in summer 1540 the mean temperature was above the 1966-2015 mean and with a probability of 20% exceeded that of the Invalid Link Removed.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
The Swiss historian Invalid Link Removed described the events of 1540 in a newspaper interview:Invalid Link Removed

For eleven months, there was practically no rain, „temperatures were 5–7 °C (9.0–12.6 °F) above the normal values for the 20th century, in many places summer temperatures would have exceeded 40 °C (104 °F). Many forests in Europe went up in flames, choking smoke darkened the sun, not a single Invalid Link Removed was reported in summer 1540. Water was already scarce in May, wells and springs dried up, Invalid Link Removed stood still, people starved, animals were slaughtered.“Invalid Link Removed Estimates are that in 1540 half a million people died, mostly due to Invalid Link Removed. „Everything began in northern Invalid Link Removed, with a winter that felt like a July. Not a single drop fell from October 1539 to early April 1540. Then the drought advanced north.“Invalid Link Removed July brought such an „ember-like heat that churches made prayers while the Invalid Link Removed, Invalid Link Removed and Invalid Link Removed could be crossed on a dry foot. Where there was still water, the warm broth acquired a green colour,“ Dead fish floated belly-up. „Water levels in Invalid Link Removed sunk to record low levels, Invalid Link Removed actually became connected to the mainland. Soon the surface water had completely evaporated, soils broke up, some dry cracks were so wide that a foot would fit into them.“ „In Invalid Link Removed fruit trees bloomed twice, in Lindau it was actually enough for a second cherry harvest. At Lake Constance Invalid Link Removed soon became cheaper than water, and in Invalid Link Removed winemakers were harvesting roasted Invalid Link Removed, from which they obtained Invalid Link Removed-like wine, which...made one quickly drunk.“Invalid Link Removed

 

[BamBam54]

Also hot in the European summer heatwave of 2003 that caused 72,000 deaths.

Invalid Link Removed

Note - summer is hot. But I predict a general cooling trend as we move through fall and into winter....

 

[ax1]

Funny how they come to conclusions on how UK had its highest ever single day in recorded history (which is limited) as if record high temperatures havent happened since the downfall the the ice ages 10s of thousands of years ago.

The highest temperature ever observed in Central Park is 106 °F (41 °C) on July 9, 1936 and the lowest is −15 °F (−26 °C) on February 9, 1934. The lowest daily maximum is 2 °F (−17 °C) on December 30, 1917. The highest daily minimum at Central Park is 87 °F (31 °C) on July 2, 1903.

 

[rob112]

I still want a climate activist to explain what happens to the petro dollar if we stop using oil. Have never seen it mentioned.

 

[ax1]

Tanks rollings out in a part of China where many people had been protesting over money frozen on them by banks since around March.

Invalid Link Removed

 

[Jiigzz]

Funny how they come to conclusions on how UK had its highest ever single day in recorded history (which is limited) as if record high temperatures havent happened since the downfall the the ice ages 10s of thousands of years ago.

The highest temperature ever observed in Central Park is 106 °F (41 °C) on July 9, 1936 and the lowest is −15 °F (−26 °C) on February 9, 1934. The lowest daily maximum is 2 °F (−17 °C) on December 30, 1917. The highest daily minimum at Central Park is 87 °F (31 °C) on July 2, 1903.

You do realise that global warming isn't just about heat, right?

Like, you do actually understand that heat is ONE aspect of global warming?

It's about rising waters (happening around the globe), more intense and frequent storms (happening around the globe) and more extreme weather events.

You mention the ice age, but ice ages take THOUSANDS of years to occur. It's very gradual. What we are experiencing is year on year increases in extreme events, reported around the globe.

Literally NO climate scientist has said the earth doesn't go through heat/cool cycles. Literally none. The difference is the rate of change.

We KNOW carbon dioxide (one of the aspects of the atmosphere that traps heat) in the atmosphere warms the earth, we have observed this with other plants. The earth on its own is able to generate copious amounts of excess CO2 through volcanic activity and many millions of viruses in the oceans play a crucial role in maintaining CO2 levels, but when we pull up more carbon artificially and burn it, it overpowers the systems that absorb it.

Carbon dioxide, as well as other greenhouse gases, warms the earth. Period.

 

[ax1]

You do realise that global warming isn't just about heat, right?

Like, you do actually understand that heat is ONE aspect of global warming?

Well, it went from global cooling, to warming, and then it went back to cooling before warming again so they started calling it "climate change" because climate changes and you cant convince people to pay more taxes to pay for multi-trillion dollar projects, give up their rights and not mind having rolling blackouts all the time if they dont convince them the climate changes.

Anyways, nobody is ever going to stop the climate change, its impossible unless government black op projects go public then they can do whatever they want with the climate. All resources need be on adapting to the future or else we are all going to pay for it. And we need governments to be honest with the data, but data is biased when it goes against their multi-trillion dollar agendas and their persuasive powers to convince people only they can save them, and so on and so on.

 

[Jiigzz]

Well, it went from global cooling, to warming, and then it went back to cooling before warming again so they started calling it "climate change" because climate changes and you cant convince people to pay more taxes to pay for multi-trillion dollar projects, give up their rights and not mind having rolling blackouts all the time if they dont convince them the climate changes.

Anyways, nobody is ever going to stop the climate change, its impossible unless government black op projects go public then they can do whatever they want with the climate. All resources need be on adapting to the future or else we are all going to pay for it. And we need governments to be honest with the data, but data is biased when it goes against their multi-trillion dollar agendas and their persuasive powers to convince people only they can save them, and so on and so on.

Govts aren't conducting the research, climate scientists are. Globally. It's not one single country, it is multiple. Govts may fund research, but they don't dictate the results nor are they funding all research. Regardless of what you believe, I've worked in the same University as researchers of all types (including of the climate) and they are so far removed from the funding that they just record what they observe. Govt funds private orgs all the time for projects and only expect updates about progress, but there is no govt agency man standing in the corner with a gun to people's heads telling researchers what to write down.

At one point you thought journals wrote articles, so remember to be very careful about stuff you literally do not understand.

 

[Jiigzz]

Well, it went from global cooling, to warming, and then it went back to cooling before warming again so they started calling it "climate change" because climate changes and you cant convince people to pay more taxes to pay for multi-trillion dollar projects, give up their rights and not mind having rolling blackouts all the time if they dont convince them the climate changes.

Anyways, nobody is ever going to stop the climate change, its impossible unless government black op projects go public then they can do whatever they want with the climate. All resources need be on adapting to the future or else we are all going to pay for it. And we need governments to be honest with the data, but data is biased when it goes against their multi-trillion dollar agendas and their persuasive powers to convince people only they can save them, and so on and so on.

The cooling happened over thousands of years. Enough time for entire species like the wooly mammoth to evolve to adapt to the ice environment.

All climate scientists agree the earth goes through warm and cool cycles (glacial and interglacial periods) whereby typically the ice ages last longer than the warm interglacial periods. But an ice age won't trigger until global CO2 drops enough to allow warmth to escape the atmosphere. The more CO2, the more heat gets trapped and so on

 

[ax1]

Govts aren't conducting the research, climate scientists are. Globally. It's not one single country, it is multiple. Govts may fund research, but they don't dictate the results nor are they funding all research. Regardless of what you believe, I've worked in the same University as researchers of all types (including of the climate) and they are so far removed from the funding that they just record what they observe. Govt funds private orgs all the time for projects and only expect updates about progress, but there is no govt agency man standing in the corner with a gun to people's heads telling researchers what to write down.

At one point you thought journals wrote articles, so remember to be very careful about stuff you literally do not understand.

Governments have corrupted scientists, this is a fact and they feed other scientists wrong data thats and they get unintentionally screwed up, well, because they are normal people who are naive and trust government not to corrupt scientists...and then there is selecting and choosing which scientists may have data that fits the agenda and then they heavily censor and run discredit campaign for any scientist that gets in the way of the agenda$.

"I've worked in the same University as researchers of all types (including of the climate) and they are so far removed from the funding that they just record what they observe."

So what independent verifiable conclusive proof do these people have that climate-change is primarily driven by "man made carbon?" Or they just observing the climate changing?

 

[Jiigzz]

Governments have corrupted scientists, this is a fact and they feed other scientists wrong data thats and they get unintentionally screwed up, well, because they are normal people who are naive and trust government not to corrupt scientists...and then there is selecting and choosing which scientists may have data that fits the agenda and then they heavily censor and run discredit campaign for any scientist that gets in the way of the agenda$.

"I've worked in the same University as researchers of all types (including of the climate) and they are so far removed from the funding that they just record what they observe."

So what independent verifiable conclusive proof do these people have that climate-change is primarily driven by "man made carbon?" Or they just observing the climate changing?

Like I said, you have no idea what you are talking about lol. What "govt scientists" are the drivers of falae climate science? You literally make stuff up. A lot of research is done independently by Universities, by people on a moderate wage. They're not govt stooges. Yes, govts do have research departments, but why is that information corroborated by independent researchers and analysts? Because the data is consistent.

Govts then use that data to drive policy, but just being a govt department doesn't involve you in driving legal policy.

Alot of the data is independent research - you can literally look it up yourself. People can measure components of the atmosphere. How do you not know this when you try argue against it?

Invalid Link Removed

 

[Jiigzz]

Governments have corrupted scientists, this is a fact and they feed other scientists wrong data thats and they get unintentionally screwed up, well, because they are normal people who are naive and trust government not to corrupt scientists...and then there is selecting and choosing which scientists may have data that fits the agenda and then they heavily censor and run discredit campaign for any scientist that gets in the way of the agenda$.

"I've worked in the same University as researchers of all types (including of the climate) and they are so far removed from the funding that they just record what they observe."

So what independent verifiable conclusive proof do these people have that climate-change is primarily driven by "man made carbon?" Or they just observing the climate changing?

Like I said, you have no idea what you are talking about lol. What "govt scientists" are the drivers of climate science? You literally make stuff up. A lot of research is done independently by Universities, by people on a moderate wage. They're not govt stooges.

Govts then use that data to drive policy. Most of the boots on the ground work is done via researchers and analysts

Most of the data is independent research - you can literally look it up yourself. People can measure components of the atmosphere. How do you not know this when you try argue against it?

Invalid Link Removed

 

[Jiigzz]

Governments have corrupted scientists, this is a fact and they feed other scientists wrong data thats and they get unintentionally screwed up, well, because they are normal people who are naive and trust government not to corrupt scientists...and then there is selecting and choosing which scientists may have data that fits the agenda and then they heavily censor and run discredit campaign for any scientist that gets in the way of the agenda$.

"I've worked in the same University as researchers of all types (including of the climate) and they are so far removed from the funding that they just record what they observe."

So what independent verifiable conclusive proof do these people have that climate-change is primarily driven by "man made carbon?" Or they just observing the climate changing?

Even the intergovernmental panel on climate change states "The IPCC does not conduct original research"

 

[ax1]

Govts then use that data to drive policy but no person is paid directly from the govt.

I never said on the books.

 

[ax1]

"The IPCC does not conduct original research"

Well thats not a surprise, lol

 

[ax1]

Most of the data is independent research - you can literally look it up yourself. People can measure components of the atmosphere. How do you not know this when you try argue against it?

Measuring components of the atmophere is one thing, figuring out why and how the climate changes is a whole 'nother ball game and it also needs to includes interstellar research as well as government black op projects they dont even know what to look for.

 

[Jiigzz]

I never said on the books.

Lolol look at the research yourself. It's right there

 

[Jiigzz]

Measuring components of the atmophere is one thing, figuring out why and how the climate changes is a whole 'nother ball game and it also needs to includes interstellar research as well as government black op projects they dont even know what to look for.

Just because you don't understand it or how involved the research is doesn't make it false.

I literally cited an article which discusses this In depth.

The reality is that you don't understand it. You devolve the argument back to "the govt can't be trusted" and literally provide zero counter evidence.

Most of the people who argue against climate change are oil billionaires and people who have never read a research article in their lives.

 

[Jiigzz]

Well thats not a surprise, lol

If NASA said they dont make stop signs, you'd have a new conspiracy tomorrow about how they do

 

[rob112]

I think the only public figure with a nuanced take on this I’ve seen is Michael Shellenberg.

He is the only one that didn’t seem like he was making up rules for plebs that elites don’t have to follow and he actually offered actual solutions…except to the petro dollar. I think people do not realize how serious that is to the US and the economies intertwined with us.

 

[rob112]

And it was called specifically global warming back when Al Gore was making it seem like the world was gonna end until we had some really cold winters and the rhetoric turned to climate change.

Final thing that is just kinda silly but like when ice melts in a glass doesn’t the water lower because ice expands?

 

[rob112]

Really fun fact the US military leaves a larger carbon footprint than most countries. We just renewed massive funding for it and are trying to start WWIII and somehow the issue is your neighbor has a truck if you talk to leftist in the states.

Clown world

 

[Jiigzz]

And it was called specifically global warming back when Al Gore was making it seem like the world was gonna end until we had some really cold winters and the rhetoric turned to climate change.

Final thing that is just kinda silly but like when ice melts in a glass doesn’t the water lower because ice expands?

It's still warming, but people with no idea what that meant kept saying "but why is it so cold then?!?! Checkmate, libtards", so they made the term more idiot proof. It's literally called a warm interglacial period.

Uhh it's not melting sea ice that's the problem. You know that right? It's land ice

 

[rob112]

It's still warming, but people with no idea what that meant kept saying "but why is it so cold then?!?! Checkmate, libtards", so they made the term more idiot proof. It's literally called a warm interglacial period.

Uhh it's not melting sea ice that's the problem. You know that right? It's land ice

Well I don’t feel too bad bc as I said that part was silly. What do you think about the military carbon footprint?

 

[Jiigzz]

And it was called specifically global warming back when Al Gore was making it seem like the world was gonna end until we had some really cold winters and the rhetoric turned to climate change.

Final thing that is just kinda silly but like when ice melts in a glass doesn’t the water lower because ice expands?

What was the water level in the glass before the ice was in it?

What was it after ice melted?

Did the actual water level rise?

Yes. Yes it did

 

[rob112]

What was the water level in the glass before the ice was in it?

What was it after ice melted?

Did the actual water level rise?

Yes. Yes it did

Your totally focused only on the part I called silly and not the actual important ones. I would love your thoughts on the ones I didn’t label silly.

 

[Jiigzz]

Well I don’t feel too bad bc as I said that part was silly. What do you think about the military carbon footprint?

I think the reality is that the world functions on carbon - we made our bed and now we have to lie in it.

Policies that target me, a very small contributor to CO2 make no sense.

We're kinda f**ked.

 

[Jiigzz]

Your totally focused only on the part I called silly and not the actual important ones. I would love your thoughts on the ones I didn’t label silly.

I actually missed that and 100% agree. You and I aren't the problem at all.

And yes, making policies that make my life difficult (like increasing tax on petrol or diesel vehicles) isn't going to solve the issue.

We, the small people, are not the problem.

I guess this is where I actually agree with Ax1 - the govt is making US the enemy (i.e. demonising hard working people for the vehicles we drive) instead of making themselves the enemy.

 

[Tunaking14]

Just because you don't understand it or how involved the research is doesn't make it false.

I literally cited an article which discusses this In depth.

The reality is that you don't understand it. You devolve the argument back to "the govt can't be trusted" and literally provide zero counter evidence.

Most of the people who argue against climate change are oil billionaires and people who have never read a research article in their lives.

Climate change is real but it isn't man made....nothing we can do will stop the change in the climate.....it's always been changing and always will........funny how they never the increases in solar activity causing some of what we are seeing now.....they use scare tactics and create the "boogie" monster to get you to obey their silly laws.......yet people like you always say you don't trust the gov't but everything you parrot on these forums shows the opposite..............(the jab is safe, climate change is man made, etc. etc.)

 

[Jiigzz]

Climate change is real but it isn't man made....nothing we can do will stop the change in the climate.....it's always been changing and always will........funny how they never the increases in solar activity causing some of what we are seeing now.....they use scare tactics and create the "boogie" monster to get you to obey their silly laws.......yet people like you always say you don't trust the gov't but everything you parrot on these forums shows the opposite..............(the jab is safe, climate change is man made, etc. etc.)

Religion created the God boogie man to keep people in line, and a lot of people here sure are scared of going to hell. Religion just uses scare tactics to make you obey it's silly rules.

Not to mention that trusting the scientific process isn't trusting the govt. The govt isn't the scientific process. Govts followed the research on climate change and made laws based on data already collected - the govt didn't "make up" climate change then make climate scientists prove it's real.

Reality doesn't care what you believe. It will do what it does whether you believe it or not.

 

[ax1]

It's still warming, but people with no idea what that meant kept saying "but why is it so cold then?!?! Checkmate, libtards", so they made the term more idiot proof. It's literally called a warm interglacial period.

Uhh it's not melting sea ice that's the problem. You know that right? It's land ice

We havent seen a record high in Central Park since 1932 and record minimum since 1903.

Many here ago my State of New York was totally covered in ice, we have smooth and rounded mountain tops, but I guess alligators and chupacabras were more intelligent back then, encountered UFO's and aliens who gave them their old carbon emitting tech in a plot to destroy the earth, and it worked. Now I live here in NY and I regret all our ice going away making our State hibital for libtards because our corrupt climate extremists have made life more expensive without any actual solutions to the problems they pretend to care about and people are more poor than ever.

Or maybe we should just do what we can to make the planet warmer because cold kills way more people than heat, and Im tired of spending $45 every time I need my driveway plowed.

 

[ax1]

If NASA said they dont make stop signs, you'd have a new conspiracy tomorrow about how they do

In all seriousness, lets say its carbon emitting humans causing the climate to change, do you really think there is anything responsible (without causing more poverty and potential famines as well as have reliable energy) we can do to stop this? Without creating other environment and humanitarian disasters such as children mining cobalt and many africans dying young to make rich people cars?

Im all for less pollution, but really I think more and more Americans are seeing all these changes that is sucking the joy out of life and all these policies they are pulling off here with global climate deals and agreements and its doing absolutely nothing to reduce carbon emissions. One day they cut off pipelines and regulate oil companies away from here, the next minute our king is blowing the Saudi Princess and that does more harm to the environment shipping everything over here than if we just kept making our own and using Canada's via pipeline which truckers have to keep bringing oil down here from up north. Its all retarded and people here are suffering because of it doing far more harm than good.

 

[Jiigzz]

We havent seen a record high in Central Park since 1932 and record minimum since 1903.

Many here ago my State of New York was totally covered in ice, we have smooth and rounded mountain tops, but I guess alligators and chupacabras were more intelligent back then, encountered UFO's and aliens who gave them their old carbon emitting tech in a plot to destroy the earth, and it worked. Now I live here in NY and I regret all our ice going away making our State hibital for libtards because our corrupt climate extremists have made life more expensive without any actual solutions to the problems they pretend to care about and people are more poor than ever.

Or maybe we should just do what we can to make the planet warmer because cold kills way more people than heat, and Im tired of spending $45 every time I need my driveway plowed.

Literally had a stroke reading this.

The fact people are poor is because they don't work hard enough to make more money.

 

[Jiigzz]

In all seriousness, lets say its carbon emitting humans causing the climate to change, do you really think there is anything responsible (without causing more poverty and potential famines as well as have reliable energy) we can do to stop this? Without creating other environment and humanitarian disasters such as children mining cobalt and many africans dying young to make rich people cars?

Im all for less pollution, but really I think more and more Americans are seeing all these changes that is sucking the joy out of life and all these policies they are pulling off here with global climate deals and agreements and its doing absolutely nothing to reduce carbon emissions. One day they cut off pipelines and regulate oil companies away from here, the next minute our king is blowing the Saudi Princess and that does more harm to the environment shipping everything over here than if we just kept making our own and using Canada's via pipeline which truckers have to keep bringing oil down here from up north. Its all retarded and people here are suffering because of it doing far more harm than good.

The whole point is that doing nothing is literally worse than doing something.

Places around the world are already losing crops and land to severe weather events. The problems you predict will happen if we do something are literally already happening lol.

Based on current cycles we should actually be heading for an ice age right about now, but instead we still getting warmer. And the rate of warmth change is happening over decades rather than over a millenia

 

[ax1]

Just because you don't understand it or how involved the research is doesn't make it false.

I literally cited an article which discusses this In depth.

The reality is that you don't understand it. You devolve the argument back to "the govt can't be trusted" and literally provide zero counter evidence.

Most of the people who argue against climate change are oil billionaires and people who have never read a research article in their lives.

Actually most of the people who argue climate change have billions of dollars at stake either from projects or campaign money funded by lobbyists provided by other billionares/millionaires. And not only that but they take all great extents to discredit and censor any opposing scientific views in the science community, or pick and choose what data to use to promote their agenda and conceal evidence when it gets in their way of trillion dollar legislation that will impoverish more people and give the elite more power and control over all of us.

All you need is a little common sense to figure out alot of bullshyt is going on, and not only with the science but with the solutions, the solutions will do absolutely nothing to solve what they claim the problems are, or will simply solve a crisis with another crisis.

 

[ax1]

The whole point is that doing nothing is literally worse than doing something.

Places around the world are already losing crops and land to severe weather events. The problems you predict will happen if we do something are literally already happening lol.

Based on current cycles we should actually be heading for an ice age right about now, but instead we still getting warmer. And the rate of warmth change is happening over decades rather than over a millenia

Its not like this is the first time this is happened, as for one example they had it worse in Europe during the 1500s, but I guess the rulers flew in too many Boeings back then, an McDonalds served bigger beef patties.

They make shyt up every decade, they cant make up their mind because they just cant, they go with whatever convinces people to make Chinese billionaires richer and scare them to the point of begging to have all their rights stripped away.

With the evolution of technology there is no reason we cant adapt and be just fine or much better, make that far more cost efficient and realistic but governments dont want that, mass murder is more profitable.

Enough with the hysteria, humans will be just fine, climate always changes and there is nothing anyone can do about it.

If anything, if climate change is faster Id be willing to bet its because governments shot up nuclear weapons in the ozone layer and made both a hole over the arctic and thinned it out, but its not profitable to tell people that. And if they want to change the climate, the US Government does have the technology to change it, but again thats not profitable or allow them to gain control.

 

[ax1]

You devolve the argument back to "the govt can't be trusted" and literally provide zero counter evidence.

In all honesty I started trying yesterday and due to mass corruption, propaganda and heavy government/silicon-valley censorship of opposing science/scientists its never been harder for me to find stuff I used to be able to find so I have to go by what I have learned over the last couple decades and go by that. Its really frustrating to tell you the truth. More than often I actually use the AM search engine to find my old work from the past 13 years on this forum which helps assuming my material hadnt been wiped off the internet, but really I wish I can do better but the liberals and elitests at the top (which also includes republicrats or rich people who's only political agenda is their own) are generally anti-free speech and thought so the powers to be are overpowering me.

 

[WesleyInman]

But wait, he wears a mask everywhere and hes Super Duper vaxxed and quadruple boosted.

Are you suggesting that those things did not work!!!!!! Trust the science

Invalid Link Removed


He also says he has Cancer

Invalid Link Removed

 

[ax1]

But wait, he wears a mask everywhere and hes Super Duper vaxxed and quadruple boosted.

Are you suggesting that those things did not work!!!!!! Trust the science

Invalid Link Removed


He also says he has Cancer

Invalid Link Removed

He actually told the same story a while back and said he had asthma, but give him a break, asthma and cancer sounds alike!!!

If anything its another sign of dementia.

 

[WesleyInman]

I'm thinking they are preparing to get rid of him using the 25th amendment

KamalaToe takes "temporary" Presidency. Steps down and they bring in Michael Obama or Hitlery.

Thoughts??

 

[ax1]

KamalaToe takes "temporary" Presidency. Steps down and they bring in Michael Obama or Hitlery.

Thoughts??

All of us probably wont even live to see the potential of that transition taking place. She will hit the history eraser button.

Invalid Link Removed

Invalid Link Removed

 

[WesleyInman]

Recall his fool of a Press Secretary said they have made history? LMAO. Well they did. Worst statistics in the History of the United States.


NEW:
Invalid Link Removed
Biden Job Approval

Approve 31%
Disapprove 60%

Independents
Approve 23%
Disapprove 67%

Hispanics
Approve 19%
Disapprove 70%

N=1,523 A / 07/14-18

 

[ax1]

Govts may fund research, but they don't dictate the results nor are they funding all research. Govt funds private orgs all the time

It’s a clear compromised bias and I’m sure you know that, when there are trillions of dollars at stake and political pressure demonizes opposing views, research labs will provide results to make sure the funds keep rolling in and on an individual basis people don’t want to lose their jobs either. That’s why the whole thing is corrupted.

It’s just like old Soviet Union funded research, “yes sir, it’s true!”