Infowars.com
March 1, 2011
Taxing the air we exhale, rationing human necessities, a global one-child policy, geoengineering (high-altitude chemical spraying), and now nuclear war have all been proposed to combat global warming. Have climate theorists lost their marbles, or just their humanity?
There has not been much middle ground found between global warming believers and the “it’s a hoax” crowd. I started as a believer after watching An Inconvenient Truth. I struggled to even look into the alternative view because the establishment had so successfully made the deniers seem insane.
However, having now done extensive research, I can attest that the “hoax” crowd has just as much, if not more, compelling evidence on their side as believers do. Furthermore, most global warming deniers won’t disagree that the climate is changing or shifting in some noticeable way, only that man-made CO2 is not the primary cause.
This article is not intended to debate the questions surrounding the man-made global warming theory, but rather the proposed “solutions.” Most believers genuinely care about the environment and view deniers as selfish “takers” who care not for mother nature. This is not the case at all. In fact, I would argue that most deniers feel just as passionately about environmental issues as believers. The difference seems to be that deniers focus their energy on tangible and measurable problems in the environment like water, air and soil pollution, GMO food, excessive pharmaceuticals, chemical spraying, and results from oil spills and gas fracking to name a few.
None of these very real threats to human and environmental health are addressed by the global warming crowd, save for possibly air pollution. When one dissects the proposals to combat global warming, it seems clear that the environmental movement has been hijacked by CO2 propagandists for an ulterior motive. Even though hardcore believers seem to have a healthy distrust for bankers, corporations, and their puppet politicians, they have a very difficult time challenging the establishment’s science or solutions pertaining to global warming. They seem too busy defending the theory to make the connection to what they’re actually supporting — which is a cabal of big banks, big oil, and big brother seeking further control of society by hyping unprovable environmental threats that they never actually intend to fix in the first place.
Full Article at infowars.com
1. Taxes to International Bankers
2. One-Child Policies
3. Geoengineering (Chemtrails)
4. Rationing
5. Nuclear War:
Last, but certainly not least, the idea has been floated that a small nuclear war may save us from the global warming bogeyman. Yes, for the good of humanity and the environment, let’s blow a couple of million people to smithereens and radiate thousands of square miles to force the cooling of the earth. This is not some fringe group proposing this, but instead NASA, the National Geographic and Ted Turner-owned Time magazines floating the idea.
5 comments:
I can attest that the “hoax” crowd has just as much, if not more, compelling evidence on their side as believers do.
What deniers don't have "on their side" is the scientific community which has found consensus that climate change is real and CO2 is a major contributor. That fact is conspicuously absent from Eric Blair's piece. Yeah, anyone can claim to be right about the near future since it hasn't actually happened yet, but do you throw in with 97% of the climate science community or do you stand with the 3%ers who just happen to agree with the corporate polluters (wink, wink). Yes, such a hard choice.
It was odd that the writer didn't bother to cite any of the deniers "compelling evidence". Though, to make it even Steven, Blair didn't bother to include any science from the believers side either. I guess we save compelling evidence for another day. Today we make unsubstantiated claims that everyone's right.
"This article is not intended to debate the questions surrounding the man-made global warming theory, but rather the proposed “solutions.”
Yeah, yeah but who needs solutions to problems that don't exist. Hard to sell a gas tax or anything (Nukes... lol) when there is denial. Why would a denier go along with paying for any of Blair's ideas.
Dion - I think the sun is the major player in Earth's climate.
I think those rich boys just want a way to get more of our money, they'll even tell lies to get it, big ones and they'll stick with them. Even after overwhelming evidence that they are lying and manipulation data in the form of e-mails.
It's been my experience that if you're trying to decide who's telling the truth about something, and one guy want's your money and the other one doesn't, it's probably the guy that doesn't want any money.
"I think the sun is the major player in Earth's climate."
Nice opening line, texlahoma. I doubt there's a sane person or scientist that would dispute that statement. Okay, now that a fact has been put out there to flap freely in the breeze it's followed up with smears leading to denier talking points about emails and data manipulation smears that only carry water in the deniers world (see the Handy Dandy Denier Handbook I linked to below)... Sure, you can conjure up the image that 97% of the scientific community has been paid off by 'the rich' to falsify climate data. Yeah, 'the rich' as opposed to the Koch brothers and other fossil fuel corporate types that tell us burning their spice is not a killer for the climate.
Handy Dandy Denier Handbook has the answers to many of your questions.
I can get a little belligerent about this subject and as a layman maybe I should just shut up, but what interaction would we have if I did that?
Dion - We would have had some real fun debating these things a couple of years ago, but I've moved on.
You believe what you like, you can't change my mind and I'm sure I can't change yours, it's all good. Maybe there will be other issues that we can agree on or disagree on.
I'm good with that.
Post a Comment