3 ms·

At this point I think we just need to accept, that every issue of every severity is widely used by parties, who know how to benefit from it. It doesn't actually

by hkpack 4y ago

At this point I think we just need to accept, that every issue of every severity is widely used by parties, who know how to benefit from it. It doesn't actually prove or disprove the issue (and its severity itself). For example: climate change is heavily used by people who know how to gain power by fighting it. It doesn't disprove the issue itself. All effective strategies includes natural forces, because it is very difficult to fight against them. So no wonder why climate change (as being a massive natural force) is used by people in power for their benefit.

rglover 4y ago
> It doesn't actually prove or disprove the issue (and its severity itself). It does when you consider that the very people who are promoting that severity are doing what I linked above behind the scenes and their own behavior hasn't changed at all (e.g., all of them flying private jets to Egypt for COP, having multiple pieces of real estate, etc). The harsh truth is that the very people who are responsible for telling people to panic are, in fact, not panicked at all and are using fear as a smokescreen to take absolute control over the entire world (zero hyperbole in that statement). It's classic sleight of hand, just on a global scale. Because many people in the West lack any spiritual grounding, they've latched on to climate change (think about the term alone; of course the climate changes—it always has) as a pseudo-religion and defend it to absolutely irrational ends. This is why anyone who even remotely questons it gets labeled as a heretic ("climate change denier"). You may as well be saying "you're denying my god" which explains the often-hysterical backlash you get.
- AnimalMuppet 4y ago
  > The harsh truth is that the very people who are responsible for telling people to panic are, in fact, not panicked at all... True. Or, at a minimum, they aren't doing anything concrete that you would expect if they actually believed what they're saying. > ... and are using fear as a smokescreen to take absolute control over the entire world (zero hyperbole in that statement). Zero? Really? I'm calling baloney on your claim here.
  - rglover 4y ago
    > Zero? Really? I'm calling baloney on your claim here. Yes. They're surprisingly overt about their end goals. I think the gullibility of "the masses" even surprises them. They want to flip the world economic system to be "stakeholder" based, meaning, they own everything (literally, down to the land itself) and you own nothing. It's neo-feudalism. The whole climate change brew-ha-ha is simple psychological manipulation, i.e., "we'll tell you the sky is falling with our models, reinforce it via the media co's we control, and repeat it until you accept it as truth." People who are terrified will listen to anyone who appears to have an answer or is operating from a position of authority (the last 2-3 years being a beta test that was successful). It's just the Milgram Experiment/Agentic State thing on a massive scale. These people believe they're the rightful rulers of this world and all other people are, for all intents and purposes: assets on Earth's balance sheet.
- tasty_freeze 4y ago
  Your inference that rich people using private planes means climate change is overblown is a non-sequitur. If your doctor was obese and told you that you should lose weight and exercise more, does that mean that their advice is wrong? In my own life I know I consume way too much sugar. No doubt it is bad for my health, yet I do it. Does that have any bearing on the notion that consuming 1000+ calories a day of refined sugar is bad for me? Secondly, you are creating a strawman argument. Show me the scientist who is saying what we need to do is to panic? What they are saying is we need to take corrective actions ASAP. Those two things aren't remotely the same. Third, you make claims about people's motivations being tied to lacking spiritual grounding. That seems like a testable claim: I would bet there are tens of millions of self-described religious people who believe in AGW and that it is an urgent problem. In my own, US-centric experience, the main correlating factor is political identity, not religious identity.
  - rglover 4y ago
    > Your inference that rich people using private planes means climate change is overblown is a non-sequitur. Not "rich people," people who are going to climate conferences whose primary purpose is to figure out how to lower carbon emissions and meet C02 goals. It's a perfectly logical conclusion. > Secondly, you are creating a strawman argument. Show me the scientist who is saying what we need to do is to panic? Scientists do not (precisely how I know the fervor is a lie), but there's plenty of "crisis" and "red alert" language which lead to people panicking (see: idiots blocking traffic or gluing their hands to art) [1]. > Third, you make claims about people's motivations being tied to lacking spiritual grounding. Yes. [1] https://phys.org/news/2022-04-page-red-climate.html https://phys.org/news/2022-04-page-red-climate.html
    - tasty_freeze 4y ago
      I read the linked article. There is nothing, zero, nada about religion or spirituality or whatever you want to call it. Did you paste the wrong link?
- agar 4y ago
  I can't help but think of two webcomics when I read your comments: "they want to flip the economic system..." https://www.butajape.com/comic/conspiracies/ https://www.butajape.com/comic/conspiracies/ And "of course the climate changes--it always has" https://m.xkcd.com/1732/ https://m.xkcd.com/1732/ What you fail to recognize, or refuse to recognize, is that global conspiracies to take over the world are completely unnecessary to explain everything you mention. Just pretend for a moment that human behavior really is warming the planet and, if continued, will have devastating effect. Some people would freak out. Some would not care because they'll be dead before they feel the impact. And some people would tell others what to do but hypocritically continue to act in their own self-interest. The harsh truth is that conspiracies rarely pass Occam's Razor.
  - rglover 4y ago
    Flipping the economic system isn't a conspiracy theory, it's a stated, documented plan [1]. On the CO2 side, even your comic is incorrect (it has to draw dotted lines to force its "joke") as CO2 has been decreasing: https://www.statista.com/statistics/183943/us-carbon-dioxide-emissions-from-1999/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/183943/us-carbon-dioxide... and with proper application of regulation, carbon capture [2], and nuclear energy, will continue to decline. > Just pretend for a moment that human behavior really is warming the planet and, if continued, will have devastating effect. I have. For a long time. The effects it's having (per scientists, not news outlets) are immediately manageable and if people quit being ignorant about energy policy (wasting money on windmills, solar panels, and batteries and instead invest in nuclear safety and redesigning regulation), can be outright solved and made a non-issue long before grandma melts in the backyard. --- What you fail to recognize is that you've been programmed, intentionally, to dismiss anything you disagree with as a "conspiracy theory." A term that was coined by the CIA to discourage people from questioning the JFK assassination. [3] [1] https://unlimitedhangout.com/2021/11/investigative-reports/un-backed-banker-alliance-announces-green-plan-to-transform-the-global-financial-system/ https://unlimitedhangout.com/2021/11/investigative-reports/u.... [2] https://carbonengineering.com/ https://carbonengineering.com/ [3] https://archive.org/details/CIADOC1035960/page/n1/mode/2up https://archive.org/details/CIADOC1035960/page/n1/mode/2up

by hkpack 4y ago

rglover 4y ago

> It doesn't actually prove or disprove the issue (and its severity itself). It does when you consider that the very people who are promoting that severity are doing what I linked above behind the scenes and their own behavior hasn't changed at all (e.g., all of them flying private jets to Egypt for COP, having multiple pieces of real estate, etc). The harsh truth is that the very people who are responsible for telling people to panic are, in fact, not panicked at all and are using fear as a smokescreen to take absolute control over the entire world (zero hyperbole in that statement). It's classic sleight of hand, just on a global scale. Because many people in the West lack any spiritual grounding, they've latched on to climate change (think about the term alone; of course the climate changes—it always has) as a pseudo-religion and defend it to absolutely irrational ends. This is why anyone who even remotely questons it gets labeled as a heretic ("climate change denier"). You may as well be saying "you're denying my god" which explains the often-hysterical backlash you get.

AnimalMuppet 4y ago
> The harsh truth is that the very people who are responsible for telling people to panic are, in fact, not panicked at all... True. Or, at a minimum, they aren't doing anything concrete that you would expect if they actually believed what they're saying. > ... and are using fear as a smokescreen to take absolute control over the entire world (zero hyperbole in that statement). Zero? Really? I'm calling baloney on your claim here.
- rglover 4y ago
  > Zero? Really? I'm calling baloney on your claim here. Yes. They're surprisingly overt about their end goals. I think the gullibility of "the masses" even surprises them. They want to flip the world economic system to be "stakeholder" based, meaning, they own everything (literally, down to the land itself) and you own nothing. It's neo-feudalism. The whole climate change brew-ha-ha is simple psychological manipulation, i.e., "we'll tell you the sky is falling with our models, reinforce it via the media co's we control, and repeat it until you accept it as truth." People who are terrified will listen to anyone who appears to have an answer or is operating from a position of authority (the last 2-3 years being a beta test that was successful). It's just the Milgram Experiment/Agentic State thing on a massive scale. These people believe they're the rightful rulers of this world and all other people are, for all intents and purposes: assets on Earth's balance sheet.
tasty_freeze 4y ago
Your inference that rich people using private planes means climate change is overblown is a non-sequitur. If your doctor was obese and told you that you should lose weight and exercise more, does that mean that their advice is wrong? In my own life I know I consume way too much sugar. No doubt it is bad for my health, yet I do it. Does that have any bearing on the notion that consuming 1000+ calories a day of refined sugar is bad for me? Secondly, you are creating a strawman argument. Show me the scientist who is saying what we need to do is to panic? What they are saying is we need to take corrective actions ASAP. Those two things aren't remotely the same. Third, you make claims about people's motivations being tied to lacking spiritual grounding. That seems like a testable claim: I would bet there are tens of millions of self-described religious people who believe in AGW and that it is an urgent problem. In my own, US-centric experience, the main correlating factor is political identity, not religious identity.
- rglover 4y ago
  > Your inference that rich people using private planes means climate change is overblown is a non-sequitur. Not "rich people," people who are going to climate conferences whose primary purpose is to figure out how to lower carbon emissions and meet C02 goals. It's a perfectly logical conclusion. > Secondly, you are creating a strawman argument. Show me the scientist who is saying what we need to do is to panic? Scientists do not (precisely how I know the fervor is a lie), but there's plenty of "crisis" and "red alert" language which lead to people panicking (see: idiots blocking traffic or gluing their hands to art) [1]. > Third, you make claims about people's motivations being tied to lacking spiritual grounding. Yes. [1] https://phys.org/news/2022-04-page-red-climate.html https://phys.org/news/2022-04-page-red-climate.html
  - tasty_freeze 4y ago
    I read the linked article. There is nothing, zero, nada about religion or spirituality or whatever you want to call it. Did you paste the wrong link?
agar 4y ago
I can't help but think of two webcomics when I read your comments: "they want to flip the economic system..." https://www.butajape.com/comic/conspiracies/ https://www.butajape.com/comic/conspiracies/ And "of course the climate changes--it always has" https://m.xkcd.com/1732/ https://m.xkcd.com/1732/ What you fail to recognize, or refuse to recognize, is that global conspiracies to take over the world are completely unnecessary to explain everything you mention. Just pretend for a moment that human behavior really is warming the planet and, if continued, will have devastating effect. Some people would freak out. Some would not care because they'll be dead before they feel the impact. And some people would tell others what to do but hypocritically continue to act in their own self-interest. The harsh truth is that conspiracies rarely pass Occam's Razor.
- rglover 4y ago
  Flipping the economic system isn't a conspiracy theory, it's a stated, documented plan [1]. On the CO2 side, even your comic is incorrect (it has to draw dotted lines to force its "joke") as CO2 has been decreasing: https://www.statista.com/statistics/183943/us-carbon-dioxide-emissions-from-1999/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/183943/us-carbon-dioxide... and with proper application of regulation, carbon capture [2], and nuclear energy, will continue to decline. > Just pretend for a moment that human behavior really is warming the planet and, if continued, will have devastating effect. I have. For a long time. The effects it's having (per scientists, not news outlets) are immediately manageable and if people quit being ignorant about energy policy (wasting money on windmills, solar panels, and batteries and instead invest in nuclear safety and redesigning regulation), can be outright solved and made a non-issue long before grandma melts in the backyard. --- What you fail to recognize is that you've been programmed, intentionally, to dismiss anything you disagree with as a "conspiracy theory." A term that was coined by the CIA to discourage people from questioning the JFK assassination. [3] [1] https://unlimitedhangout.com/2021/11/investigative-reports/un-backed-banker-alliance-announces-green-plan-to-transform-the-global-financial-system/ https://unlimitedhangout.com/2021/11/investigative-reports/u.... [2] https://carbonengineering.com/ https://carbonengineering.com/ [3] https://archive.org/details/CIADOC1035960/page/n1/mode/2up https://archive.org/details/CIADOC1035960/page/n1/mode/2up