I liked that video. It takes him a while to get started with facts – the first 13 minutes, I thought he was just going to do rhetoric. :) But then the graphs he presents are striking.
Monckton has been on the front lines of this particular battle for quite some time. You could just research his work and come away with a pretty good understanding of just how f*cked the entire Green movement is.
He's solid and makes his points with appropriate flare.
At this point, I'm 75% convinced. The graphs of actual observations are compelling.
The main reason I believed in climate change is trust in authority, but now the credibility of authorities is questionable. For example, I used to trust The Economist, so when they said climate change is real and a global carbon tax is the solution, that made sense.
Now my trust in the IPCC is quite cracked by learning about Climategate, and seeing what WHO is doing with Covid. As for The Economist, their anti-Trump propaganda makes it obvious they're an appendage of the establishment. But what the establishment really wants appears to be reflected in the Paris Agreement, and the sole purpose of this appears to be to destroy manufacturing in the US and Europe and ensure everything is made in China. The politicians who agreed to this are either corrupt, or stupid. I would have said that BEFORE I doubted climate change – you can't fix climate change without China and India committing to anything.
Then there's Angela Merkel. She supposedly studied physics, then reacted to Fukushima by shutting off German nuclear power and betting everything on wind and solar. During the summer, that seemed to go great. We're so green! Now in winter, there's no wind, there's no sun, and they're struggling to heat the country while relying 100% on gas and coal, and having a power shortage.
It's hard for me not to conclude that Angela Merkel either hates her country, or is retarded. If she hates her country, I'm not sure why she'd run it for so long. So, I'm thinking stupidity and naive trust in compromised people must play a big role in the climate narrative.
Your doubts are based on real observations and you are reluctant to draw conclusions. This is the correct way to analyze ALL questions.
This subject is what led me to conclude that ALL government was corrupt. I think you're close to drawing similar conclusions.
I'll spell it out so there's no question: the connected people who run most of our corporations have colluded to bribe all of our elected officials for a long time. The mirage of having democratically elected officials represent the people has been hijacked by special interest groups who care more about power and wealth than any semblance of proper government.
I've got more to say but I'm buzzed tonight and don't want to waste more cyberspace unless/until you agree on the basic premise that the whole system is screwed?
I just re-watched the Monckton video. Start with that one as he hits on a bunch of the points.
I liked that video. It takes him a while to get started with facts – the first 13 minutes, I thought he was just going to do rhetoric. :) But then the graphs he presents are striking.
Monckton has been on the front lines of this particular battle for quite some time. You could just research his work and come away with a pretty good understanding of just how f*cked the entire Green movement is.
He's solid and makes his points with appropriate flare.
How's you journey into Climate Denialism going?
I've always thought this was the most important Red Pill.
At this point, I'm 75% convinced. The graphs of actual observations are compelling.
The main reason I believed in climate change is trust in authority, but now the credibility of authorities is questionable. For example, I used to trust The Economist, so when they said climate change is real and a global carbon tax is the solution, that made sense.
Now my trust in the IPCC is quite cracked by learning about Climategate, and seeing what WHO is doing with Covid. As for The Economist, their anti-Trump propaganda makes it obvious they're an appendage of the establishment. But what the establishment really wants appears to be reflected in the Paris Agreement, and the sole purpose of this appears to be to destroy manufacturing in the US and Europe and ensure everything is made in China. The politicians who agreed to this are either corrupt, or stupid. I would have said that BEFORE I doubted climate change – you can't fix climate change without China and India committing to anything.
Then there's Angela Merkel. She supposedly studied physics, then reacted to Fukushima by shutting off German nuclear power and betting everything on wind and solar. During the summer, that seemed to go great. We're so green! Now in winter, there's no wind, there's no sun, and they're struggling to heat the country while relying 100% on gas and coal, and having a power shortage.
It's hard for me not to conclude that Angela Merkel either hates her country, or is retarded. If she hates her country, I'm not sure why she'd run it for so long. So, I'm thinking stupidity and naive trust in compromised people must play a big role in the climate narrative.
I like how you're approaching this topic.
Your doubts are based on real observations and you are reluctant to draw conclusions. This is the correct way to analyze ALL questions.
This subject is what led me to conclude that ALL government was corrupt. I think you're close to drawing similar conclusions.
I'll spell it out so there's no question: the connected people who run most of our corporations have colluded to bribe all of our elected officials for a long time. The mirage of having democratically elected officials represent the people has been hijacked by special interest groups who care more about power and wealth than any semblance of proper government.
I've got more to say but I'm buzzed tonight and don't want to waste more cyberspace unless/until you agree on the basic premise that the whole system is screwed?