3154
Muh Scientists (media.patriots.win)
posted ago by winn ago by winn +3157 / -3
Comments (116)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
49
JimzeBMk1 49 points ago +50 / -1

Ladies and gents, the state of science today means I don't buy into any of the "climate emergency" crap - you've failed in all your predictions over the last 50 years and you use an autistic truant with foetal alcohol syndrome as a way to deflect criticism from your scaremongering bs. No, I don't buy it, and I never will.

31
mestama 31 points ago +31 / -0

I am a scientist and an avid outdoor enthusiast so I am also an environmentalist. That being said, global warming has been lied about so much that it wouldn't be a stretch to call it a hoax. I remember doing an analysis of the global temperature measurement algorithm when it changed from HADCRUT3 to HADCRUT4. This was back in 2012 after it was released that there had been a cover up of a 10 year stop of global warming. The end result of the analysis showed that the algorithm had been biased to show a warmer result by removing measurement sites that were historically cooler. It was at that moment that I started saying global warming is not scientific.

20
JimzeBMk1 20 points ago +20 / -0

Good info - I’m a country boy, so I most definitely consider myself a conservationist, but not some sort of climate hysteria cult follower - as far as I’m concerned, look after where you live, conserve all these amazing areas of natural beauty, and don’t allow totally unregulated exploitation of resources.

11
Shalomtoyou 11 points ago +11 / -0

Makes sense.

Clean the river near your town.

Doesn't mean we have to become a third world country.

4
AVeryNakedMan 4 points ago +4 / -0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOHrYY3yAGE

When the scientific data says that global warming isn't happening, the leftists just change the data.

-2
deleted -2 points ago +7 / -9
2
R-A-T-S- 2 points ago +2 / -0

Yeah. Like one of the biggest things with the CC stuff here is we could pivot it to learning innovations that could allow us to terraform planets, but we'd want a set of parameters Like how much CO2, nitrogen, oxygen and other gases do we want in the atmosphere to make it breathable and support whatever other functions we need air to do?

It shouldn't just be "Lets stop doing things to stop CO2 getting in the air. " but like being able to pull CO2 out of the air, or adding other non-greenhouse gases. etc.

2
independentbystander 2 points ago +2 / -0

> bullshit green technologies

Notice how the Tolerant Left gets triggered over engine exhaust or even something completely natural like a fire (when convenient, that is: the predictable fires in California are generally used as an attention ploy with no mention of the "CO2 emissions.") For decades, they have been freaking out over any "pollutant" they don't approve of for one reason or another ("second-hand smoke" was a high-priority boogeyman,) but go about poofing "sik cloudz, yo" of vape-cloud in people's faces. Chemicals are bad, unless it's the chemicals they like.

But do any of them consider the "environmental cost" of producing those "green" high-tech cars and internet devices? Member when Foxconn had an issue with flash-fires in their Chinese factories from rubbing-compound dust used for polishing cell-phone/tablet screens? I member that. That's a good thing, because Google doesn't. But DuckDuckGo will remind us of the true purpose of those "safety nets" and fences Mitt Romney was so excited about: Foxconn employees were jumping off the building due to the grueling work conditions of prison labor, as well as terrible contamination from aluminum dust and other hazardous industrial chemicals they were exposed to. But screw those guys, we're not here to talk about the human cost. They have to get the iPhone 13 out there!

The R&D and manufacture of batteries is not a clean tidy process, not as far as the ingredients go. Even if a company handles their chemicals etc in the most safe/ethical way possible, who knows about the safety practices of the Chinese supplier who packaged those chemicals? Painting cars and working with carbon fiber or fiberglass makes lots of fumes. Smelting the metal the car is made of makes fumes. Producing the plastics makes fumes we don't even want to know about. Even if glass is fairly conventional, that's a process of melting and forming sand: something went into the air, if nothing else the fumes of the heat source and maybe even the dreaded CO2.

tl;dr I have never heard an SJW mention the "environmental cost" of producing a Tesla car or an iPhone/iPad. They seem to think these "green" items come from a box or from a dealership, and do not consider what actually went into the manufacturing of the product and packaging.

-5
deleted -5 points ago +3 / -8
10
War_Hamster 10 points ago +10 / -0

The science is settled......

And therefore no debate will be allowed.

2
KingSweyn 2 points ago +2 / -0

The science is never settled, only suppressed. Science without debate is like politicians without representation.

8
MustafaJones 8 points ago +8 / -0

I legit read a letter sent in the late 60s to President Nixon that said the world would end by the late 70s due to climate change. I’m pretty sure they are still sending that same letter to US presidents only with the dates changed. That why I will NEVER believe the “world ends in 12 years” BS.

5
JimzeBMk1 5 points ago +5 / -0

It’s not just “it’ll end in 12 years”, it’s become “in 8 years, in 14 years, in 10 years” - it seems to change every other day.