throwxhxhx

4 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by throwxhxhx 3y ago

   Thanks! If I understood correctly, the second graph indicates that this is nothing but a local maximum. Therefore, the main argument is that the change has been abrupt? The problem I see is that it's only in the last 150 years that we&
2. 2.▲
   by throwxhxhx 3y ago

   I'm not paid at all, and I found the wording extremely weird. What the hell does "climate denier" even mean? I'm not denying the concept of climate. When it comes to climate change, define the change. The climate has cha
3. 3.▲
   by throwxhxhx 3y ago

   It is legitimate. As far as the other post goes, there's nothing conspiratory about it. Politicians and bureaucrats use excuses or disingenuous arguments to lobby their ideas all the time. Maybe some of them geniunely believe it.
4. 4.▲
   by throwxhxhx 3y ago

   I have a legitimate question here. Isn't 40 years quite literally nothing in terms of human life on Earth, let alone climate on Earth? Shouldn't we discussing a graph/timeline of at least 100k years? Is it because we don&#x27
5. 5.▲
   by throwxhxhx 3y ago

   This is the only valid answer. Unfortunately, the EU will use the "think of the climate", "think of the children" and "think of the terrorists" excuses for everything.