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?
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.
That's how it appears to me in broad terms, in the US, for the past several decades. Most likely, it was also like that for decades before. However, much uncertainty remains in terms of how deep the corruption is, and how universal across individuals and places.
For example: in 1995, in Sweden, Mona Sahlin resigned because it turned out she had used a government credit card to buy a bar of chocolate. Meanwhile, in the US, there's rumor that Pelosi and Feinstein have been funneling tens of millions of USD in federal government grants through their husbands' enterprises. There are similar stories involving others, including the lake house for Sanders.
Yet for all of these problems, there exists a dramatic difference in the standard of living between the countries of North America and Europe, and say, what Trump has described as "shithole countries". These countries do actually have dramatically reduced standards of living and quality of government service. For all American griping, the quality of most US public services is much superior to, for example, the same things in Central America. I'm not talking 20% better, but an order of magnitude more effective and dependable.
For all the corruption which is in some cases blatant, there is also a core which functions. It often functions in the wrong overall manner, for example bombing the Middle East, but it functions. It is not at the level of disarray as various Central American governments.
The American snake seems to be rotten at the head, but at the same time, the bulk of the economy AND government has characteristics of integrity. If it did not, we wouldn't have $50,000 GDP per capita, we would instead have $2,000 like Nicaragua.
So, I'm confident that the situation is not fundamental, and can be improved. However, whether it will be improved, is the matter...
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?
That's how it appears to me in broad terms, in the US, for the past several decades. Most likely, it was also like that for decades before. However, much uncertainty remains in terms of how deep the corruption is, and how universal across individuals and places.
For example: in 1995, in Sweden, Mona Sahlin resigned because it turned out she had used a government credit card to buy a bar of chocolate. Meanwhile, in the US, there's rumor that Pelosi and Feinstein have been funneling tens of millions of USD in federal government grants through their husbands' enterprises. There are similar stories involving others, including the lake house for Sanders.
Yet for all of these problems, there exists a dramatic difference in the standard of living between the countries of North America and Europe, and say, what Trump has described as "shithole countries". These countries do actually have dramatically reduced standards of living and quality of government service. For all American griping, the quality of most US public services is much superior to, for example, the same things in Central America. I'm not talking 20% better, but an order of magnitude more effective and dependable.
For all the corruption which is in some cases blatant, there is also a core which functions. It often functions in the wrong overall manner, for example bombing the Middle East, but it functions. It is not at the level of disarray as various Central American governments.
The American snake seems to be rotten at the head, but at the same time, the bulk of the economy AND government has characteristics of integrity. If it did not, we wouldn't have $50,000 GDP per capita, we would instead have $2,000 like Nicaragua.
So, I'm confident that the situation is not fundamental, and can be improved. However, whether it will be improved, is the matter...