2092
Comments (167)
sorted by:
89
Scuffers 89 points ago +90 / -1

I remember this being touted some 10+ years ago only to get buried in the climate change bullshit.

42
deleted 42 points ago +44 / -2
16
Killroyomega 16 points ago +20 / -4

As a side note, the conclusion of this study would be that hurricanes must have been horrible one and two thousand years ago.

Over two thousand years ago, yes.

That was before the Earth entered a cooling phase/ice age.

The climate was vastly more volatile and the Earth'a volcanic activity was much greater.

Predictive models, the non-cucked ones, have repeatedly shown that we're nearing the end of a greater ice age. The polar ice shall melt, the average temperature will increase, and there will be a massive boom in biodiversity. It'd a cycle that feeds into itself creating, for example, a higher oxygen density in the air which allows once more for larger land creatures.

14
VyseLegendaire 14 points ago +14 / -0

Cooler climate leads to more dangerous and volatile weather, not the other way around. Not sure if you're a glowie or not. We are currently entering a mini ice age / global cooling period tied to a 'Grand Solar Minimum' for potentially 100s of years, so don't get your hopes up about the end of a 'large scale cool period' any time soon. Learn to grow food and make friends with your neighbords.

5
YesImWhite 5 points ago +8 / -3

Temperature difference leads to volatility. The melting of ice is a large temperature difference and will induce volatility.

We have BEEN in an ice age the entire time America has been a country. We are LEAVING the ice age, but it is fluctuating with nature.

6
DrCowboyPresident 6 points ago +6 / -0

We are in an interglacial period of an ice age.

0
YesImWhite 0 points ago +1 / -1

Yes, I suppose it is unfair to say we are leaving an ice age as that would mean I am making a prediction about 50,000 years in the future.

What I mean is our Ice Age has greatly headed towards a reduction of the magnitude, back towards the worlds average state.. of no ice.

1
Me2020 1 point ago +1 / -0

The melting of ice desalinates our oceans. Cooling is result. In addition our electromagnetic field is weakening at a faster rate and poles are also moving at a nice clip. It’s gonna get wild in te next couple of decades.

1
YesImWhite 1 point ago +1 / -0

the electromagnetic field has nothing to do with the temperature of the climate and almost entirely relies on the turbulence of the molten iron core. I have no clue what rate the poles are moving but this has long been a skeptics idea as well as its effects are pretty unknown to reality/live in theory.

Cooling will result in greater temperature differences, which causes thermal driving forces, as Ice will absorb the latent heat needed for phase change.

2
Killroyomega 2 points ago +5 / -3

We've been in an extended ice age for a very, very long time. What you are referring to is not a mini ice age, it is a solar cycle.

Cooler climate leads to more dangerous and volatile weather

Wrong.

Weather is about temperature differentials, terrain, and air/particulate/water density.

1
Inquisitor_Corvus 1 point ago +2 / -1

Fun fact, we are in an ice age. An ice age occurs when you have ice on land, glaciers, Antarctica.

5
Guruchild 5 points ago +5 / -0

Ice ages are also not the norm for earth’s climate.

9
YesImWhite 9 points ago +10 / -1

We have ICE on earth. We are in an ICE AGE.

Most of Earths history, I believe 70% of it, has HAD NO ICE AT ALL.

People are retards.

6
Gurren_Laggan 6 points ago +7 / -1

Negative Ghost Rider the disaster is coming.

Currently heading straight into a 12000 year disaster on the earth/sun/galaxy cycle. The magnetic poles are shifting at an alarming rate and are set to go through a major shift here soon. Look up the Younger Dryus or Lake Mungo events, will lead you down a rabbit hole of knowledge. Have fun!

1
Killroyomega 1 point ago +2 / -1

Yes, I know.

The poles follow the cycle of the inner Earth as the various greater regions shift into a new stable position.

As I wrote, this will signal the end of the greater ice age as the poles reset and stabilize in a new position causing great upheaval in the various current, and soon to be formed, volcanic belts.

1
IRScansuckmyanus 1 point ago +1 / -0

So more volcanic eruptions?

3
Talon54 3 points ago +4 / -1

We are currently in the Pleistocene Ice Age. It has been going on since about 2.5 million years ago. The last glacial period ended about 10,000 years ago. Many people confuse the two.

Where did you see the rest about oxygen density? I have never seen that data.

-1
Killroyomega -1 points ago +1 / -2

Where did you see the rest about oxygen density?

It's just a simple logical follow through.

As the ice caps melt and the temperature of the water increases, the biodiversity will also increase. Alongside this, there will be an increase in plankton creating a much higher oxygen percentage in the atmosphere. Further, this will fuel the growth of rainforests and create a de-desertification effect as what was once arid, dry land becomes host to a shifting weather system. Most notably this will effect current "snow deserts" AKA tundras.

2
RuleoVicus 2 points ago +2 / -0

Larger temperature differential cause more energetic storms. Raising polar temperatures negates that.

0
Killroyomega 0 points ago +1 / -1

It's not a zero sum game, you realize?

More than just the poles are and will continue to change.

15
taxationistheftt 15 points ago +18 / -3

they release this because democrat in power. else they release hurricane climate change bad vote democrat

8
deletedandreacted 8 points ago +13 / -5

Engrish mush?

5
HockeyMom4Trump 5 points ago +6 / -1

😂

2
taxationistheftt 2 points ago +2 / -0

just lazy. the msg is correct.

1
deletedandreacted 1 point ago +1 / -0

I thought it was funny.

2
TommyJarvis 2 points ago +2 / -0

because it's just as stupid an idea as any other climate change bullshit idea.

48
SHILL_DETECTOR 48 points ago +49 / -1

cleaner air also causes more "warming" (in relation to the sun)

apparently a lot of the "pollution" particles reflect / absorb sunlight in the upper atmosphere which causes less heat to reach the earth.

44
Brooklyn_Patriot_76 [S] 44 points ago +46 / -2

I mean the fastest way to cool the earth is a volcano, how is less carbon going to help save us again?

37
Taqiyya_Mockingbird 37 points ago +38 / -1

You’re the carbon they need to reduce.

5
Destineed369 5 points ago +5 / -0

You gotta have carbon to tax it.

3
OGpsywar 3 points ago +3 / -0

As Ghandi might advise them: "You must be the change you wish to see in the world".

2
stratocaster_patriot 2 points ago +2 / -0

I'd love to see endless couches full of change but inflation and the stock market have made me broke.

6
VoidWanderer 6 points ago +7 / -1

By causing food shortages from plants producing even less than they are now leading to starvation.

Oh you meant save, not enrich the ones pushing the deathcult to make sure their slaves are at a controllable population level.

1
MillstonesForAll 1 point ago +3 / -2

Seems like they’re killing people currently with too much food, leading to crippling obesity and massive medical bills to keep these pigs alive. It must take too long though, for them to finally croak. That, along with drugs, homosexuality, trannies, screwed up, anti natal culture, will reduce the population but it isn’t fast enough, evidently.

6
SHILL_DETECTOR 6 points ago +7 / -1

bingo

4
GrayManNumber333 4 points ago +5 / -1

It’s carbon sin of course it’s bad and causes all bad things!

16
Brooklyn_Patriot_76 [S] 16 points ago +16 / -0

diamonds are pure carbon

diamonds are used in wedding rings

therefore gay marriage caused the climate change crisis

CHECKMATE!!!

0
KernalMustard 0 points ago +4 / -4

Then explain to them why Venus is the way it is. Volcanos going off all the time and no life there. It might have been cool but it built up over time. No plant life=no way to remove the CO2. It's a delicate balance. Venus also doesnt have plate tetonics. Earth got lucky to be quite honest.

3
Unaor2 3 points ago +4 / -1

The barometric pressure on the surface of venus is 93 bars. Greater pressure = higher temperatures. This is literally how cooling compressors work, compress gas, the temperature spikes as the energy is condensed, then you dump the heat with a heatsink, then you expand the gas again and it is now much cooler.

1
sixfingerdildo 1 point ago +1 / -0

delicate balance... like a salt water aquarium. a little too hot or too cold or too saline, not saline enough, big fucking rock breaking the glass...

-1
GuruNemesis -1 points ago +1 / -2

It's way closer to the sun.

Next question?

0
Neze 0 points ago +1 / -1

Except Mercury is even closer and not as hot as Venus

2
GuruNemesis 2 points ago +2 / -0

Mercury has no atmosphere, vensu has an incredibly dense atmosphere.

There's an endless list of differences so th initial "explain venus" was a dilly road tonstart down.

5
Halfstache 5 points ago +5 / -0

Correct. Sulfur dioxide molecules make clouds more reflective instead of absorptive of sunlight, causing a cooling effect. Sulfur dioxide was also the target of the "acid rain" scare back in the day.

3
SHILL_DETECTOR 3 points ago +3 / -0

barium and aluminum sulfates

thanks obama and clapper

3
AnPrim 3 points ago +4 / -1

Scare?. There are still sterile lakes in the Adirondacks and they're still dumping lime in lakes with helicopters to try and reclaim them.

1
MillstonesForAll 1 point ago +1 / -0

Sterile from what? And what does lime do?

5
stratocaster_patriot 5 points ago +5 / -0

Acid lowers the PH of the water and living things die. Lime is basic and neutralizes acid.

2
AnPrim 2 points ago +3 / -1

From acid rain.

Lime is a high-alkalinity calcium compound, so it counteracts the effects of acid rain.

Much of the source of acid rain has been neutralized, but the pH of many lakes won't recover quickly with out chemical help.

Funny thing is, the DEC used to kill all the first is some of these lakes with piscicide because they wanted to stock what they called the original species there (brook or lake trout) and they had perch/bass in them.

1
stratocaster_patriot 1 point ago +2 / -1

Yeah it wasn't a scare. We have statues around the Capital that are deformed from the acid rain.

3
ParticleCannon 3 points ago +4 / -1

This part of the Global Warming explanation never made sense to me. Yes, clouds and particles can insulate because they reflect IR back to the surface (cloudy nights in the desert are warmer), but why wouldn't they also reflect incoming IR back into space?

2
SHILL_DETECTOR 2 points ago +3 / -1

i think they really just want a reason to spray us

1
stratocaster_patriot 1 point ago +1 / -0

Both happen but what you get is additive. Take 2 photons from the sun, one absorbs, one bounces. The one that absorbed now tries to escape and but still bounces back in or let's just say 1/2 of it dissipates. Now take 2 more photos incoming, one absorbs, one bounces and so on. Not you 1.5 sunlights trapped. In theory if this goes on and on then the planet warms.

2
YesImWhite 2 points ago +2 / -0

Water vapor accounts for 97-98% of all "greenhouse" heating effects. lol

1
SHILL_DETECTOR 1 point ago +1 / -0

indeed.

their "science" is always opposite of reality

you can tell when they are doing this because actual scientific discussion is not allowed

29
K-Harbour 29 points ago +31 / -2

Cleaner air also means higher high temperatures and lower low temperatures.

Just about any kid with high school science can figure this out —- it does not take 30,000 highly paid climate science morons to figure this out.

25
Brooklyn_Patriot_76 [S] 25 points ago +26 / -1

30,000 highly paid climate science morons

hey bud, that tax money isn't just going to launder itself

1
doug2 1 point ago +3 / -2

Why

14
BigBootyJudy 14 points ago +18 / -4

q=mc(delta T)

Cleaner air has less particulates (mass) that can retain heat. Think of each particle as a sort of "battery" that is able to store thermal energy during daytime and then slowly release it during nighttime as they cool down.

3
Unaor2 3 points ago +4 / -1

Why would someone downvote this comment?

3
BigBootyJudy 3 points ago +3 / -0

I dont know. I dont care about downvotes anyways

2
GabeC1997 2 points ago +2 / -0

Shills.

1
GabeC1997 1 point ago +1 / -0

Because any light those "Green House Gasses" would trap would, by the very same logic they use to claim global warming, bounce off the atmosphere first before being able to get trapped in the first place.

26
RealTXPatriot 26 points ago +27 / -1

Now it all makes sense why my leftoid dumbfuck neighbor runs his truck for hours on end in his driveway.... he's trying to halt hurricanes.

14
Brooklyn_Patriot_76 [S] 14 points ago +15 / -1

literally, a hero.

ROLL COAL AMIGO!!!!

2
RealTXPatriot 2 points ago +2 / -0

meh, he's a faggot. His heffer wife is a chair fungus waiting at the DMV for her retirement, he's only here because he was here illegally and fucked her and had a tranny kid..... funny part is the kid is tranny and now Texas makes it a crime to put your kid through trannyness.... and she's a state employee, hahahahaha

5
stratocaster_patriot 5 points ago +5 / -0

Think about this: they started making cars that you can start from your phone now. Do you think the average person is going to buy a car like that and admit that they never need the functionally and simply not use it? No way, these people all remote start and waste gas. Hell most of the people with big trucks where I live are accountants and pencil necks who feel they need a truck they could cattle ranch with. It get 35F here in the winter and trucks just running 30 minutes every morning lol.

13
GrayManNumber333 13 points ago +14 / -1

It’s one fucking analysis paper. I hate this pseudo science journalism, it makes it seem like one paper is all it takes to reveal a new truth. Nothing about repeatability.

7
VoidWanderer 7 points ago +8 / -1

Repeatability, as well as actually following the scientific method, is white supremacy and dangerous to our democracy. Didn't you know that?

1
stratocaster_patriot 1 point ago +1 / -0

"following the scientific method"

This is the thing that kills me. Never do I hear people say that. They say, "I follow the science here." That doesn't mean anything!!!

5
narvster 5 points ago +5 / -0

Remember with climate "science" its models all the way down. Even huge parts of the US temperature data is based on "modelling"

5
GrayManNumber333 5 points ago +5 / -0

All we do with physics is to try and make a mathematical model of reality. So that part is fine, but they don’t use any data to test. They test with a model! Then if it doesn’t work they just tweak the quadratic parameters until it fits and past facto declare “ it fits!”

2
narvster 2 points ago +2 / -0

It's anti-science tbh, they have a conclusion and then tweak things until it matches what they want.

There has not been one single falsifiable climate prediction that has been proven accurate, not one.

3
GrayManNumber333 3 points ago +3 / -0

Carbon heathen! Repent your carbon sin ways!

1
stratocaster_patriot 1 point ago +1 / -0

This was always the thing about physics that bothered me and it's a lot like evolution in this regard. "Well our theory doesn't quite work mathematically but if you assume 28 dimensions well then the math works out." Great, I found a circle to fit the oval hole and nothing more. It's deterministic once you get past Newtonian mechanics which are repeatable and observable in a lab. Sure things exist that we can't see but not just because, "well if I say this is this and then remove this term then I can integrate and I get this." Yeah out of thin air buddy. It's interesting but it isn't real. And it's fine if you are a theoretical physicist but when you are a "climate scientist" you need to f-off with that and look at something real.

2
GrayManNumber333 2 points ago +2 / -0

You’re talking about string theory and dark matter.Yea it’s fake science. Quantum mechanics, electrodynamics, both relativities all that kind of stuff is very rigorous with no hand waving. The biggest bullshit ever is dark matter, it’s wheels upon wheels for people who want to use Newtonian physics for galactic scale stuff and it just doesn’t work.

2
Neze 2 points ago +2 / -0

Dark matter is placeholder terminology for something that we can't see but absolutely detect having a shitton of gravity effecting the universe around it. That's all we know.

So not fake science, incomplete science we're still working to fill in.

1
GrayManNumber333 1 point ago +1 / -0

No. It’s fake. We see and effect that doesn’t fit a model. Either there is missing stuff or the model is shit. The model I used to see used was Newtonian gravity. That’s known to be wrong. Got a paper showing GR math and still saying there is unaccounted for mass?

3
Eatinglue 3 points ago +3 / -0

Yeah. These are extremely complex chaotic systems. Narrowing it down to being caused by spraying too much spray paint is insane.

1
stratocaster_patriot 1 point ago +1 / -0

I never thought that in the last 5 years of my lifetime humanity would advance so far and fast that we would completely understand the complexity of chaos and at the same realize that humans have been eating wrong for thousands of years and should have been vegan the whole time. This is the best generation ever!!! But bail us out too!!!! lol

9
MythArcana 9 points ago +10 / -1

Wake me up when we have a million years of sampling data.

2
stratocaster_patriot 2 points ago +2 / -0

Hey I have these tree rings here.....

8
Snack_Destroyer 8 points ago +8 / -0

I remember the media saying that less pollution from the lockdowns was causing global warming. So pollution causes global warming, but no pollution also causes global warming. Gee, it's almost as if they are lying. Weird.

6
Brooklyn_Patriot_76 [S] 6 points ago +6 / -0

racism causes global warming

7
ParticleCannon 7 points ago +7 / -0

Everything causes global warming and its irreversible, everything is going to melt and flood and all the polar bears are going to drown unless you give my friends trillions of dollars and give me a Nobel Prize. Sent from my beachfront palace.

6
9x10again 6 points ago +6 / -0

They are still running that propaganda polar bear commercial. Lying bastards!

2
MillstonesForAll 2 points ago +2 / -0

Fuck polar bears. Fuck all bears, for that matter. Hate them!

1
stratocaster_patriot 1 point ago +1 / -0

And to date that's all we have proof of.

7
Lol_Garrus 7 points ago +7 / -0

Ice creams sales increase during the Spring/Summer months.

Murders also increase during the spring/summer months.

Therefore eating more ice cream causes more murders.

7
Brooklyn_Patriot_76 [S] 7 points ago +7 / -0

damn, what does it take to get good common sense ice cream control?

4
stratocaster_patriot 4 points ago +4 / -0

I got my butt wiped!!

2
Lol_Garrus 2 points ago +2 / -0

Rocky Road is now a euphemism for a high-crime area.

5
South_Florida_Guy 5 points ago +6 / -1

They're so fucking retarded and so is anyone that believes anything they say. Guess it's time to crank out some more carbon emissions!

6
Brooklyn_Patriot_76 [S] 6 points ago +6 / -0

I just did my bit by releasing a semi-productive cloud of methane

2
stratocaster_patriot 2 points ago +2 / -0

Eh mine have all been unproductive ever since I left home and no little brother to torment/entertain.

1
xanax123 1 point ago +2 / -1

I just bit my lip by releasing a semi-gaseous cloud of flatulence.

4
Poopyonurface 4 points ago +4 / -0

Umm no, CNN has already informed me that all natural disasters are a result of CO2 from cows farting too much which is why we must ALL switch to soy.

3
TheMadManDidItAgain 3 points ago +4 / -1

HURRY!!!! WHAT DOES THE_SCIENCE™️ SAY ABOUT THIS???

1
ShotgunJoe 1 point ago +1 / -0

100% safe and effective, two weeks to fix!

3
Wild___Bill 3 points ago +3 / -0

Why do i not give a fuck about any of this?

1
Brooklyn_Patriot_76 [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

because you live in the midwest?

2
Wild___Bill 2 points ago +2 / -0

Nah I'm talking about govt funded research in general. This wasn't a dig at the post but at the people wasting our tax dollars to fund double think

3
deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
3
Trump2024 3 points ago +3 / -0

Look, if we all tightened up our belts another notch and paid a little more in taxes we could solve this problem together! Doesn't anyone care about the children? Come on frens, let's do this!

3
stratocaster_patriot 3 points ago +3 / -0

It turns out smoking makes you less susceptible to covid. It can stop you from getting sick and yet your doctor would never in a million years support something as evil as big tobacco. Gee I just can't see them getting in bed with any big evil corporations./s

3
ShotgunJoe 3 points ago +3 / -0

If you ever have to wonder “does the government control hurricanes” just look at the one that was rolled up and parked right next to NYC during 9/11.

3
sandinyourteeth 3 points ago +3 / -0

If you are in the hurricane zones, consider that any damage your home sustains will be difficult to have repaired due to low numbers of workers, very busy, and supply problems. Have a plan. We are taking down some of the threatening trees around our house in anticipation of some big winds this season.

3
MillstonesForAll 3 points ago +3 / -0

Yes, smart. We took two down and got hurricane shutters and a well with a hand pump. Hopefully will work on solar panels someday. We do have a generator though. Gotta be prepared in hurricane prone areas.

1
sandinyourteeth 1 point ago +1 / -0

We need to bite the bullet and get a generator. I've been searching for a builder to put up a garage/guest house and they are all slammed busy. The plan was to make the guest house fitted with all we'd need with power and water loss with storms.

3
SaltyTrumpSupporter 3 points ago +3 / -0

To be fair some were blaming Bill Gates for buying all that farmland and leaving it fallow for those storms that tore through the midwest last week.

3
Tripin 3 points ago +3 / -0

CO2 is plant food, CO2 levels use to be much higher and there was lush green vegetation all across the planet.

2
Censorddit 2 points ago +2 / -0

📡🛰 my ass

2
gunzby 2 points ago +2 / -0

It's because the hurricane is healthier from not breathing in so much pollution. I bet now that there's healthier hurricanes Guam will probably get blown over and capsize

2
-c-i-a- 2 points ago +3 / -1

Why more hurricanes are a good thing.

2
ViaToil 2 points ago +2 / -0

hurricanes are nature's way of dispersing the heat from the center/north. Speaking of "cleaner air" Uh, pretty sure that all that SAND and (what ever crap pollutants) that has been blowing west out of Africa en mass the last few years.. has now covered the entire globe (as of recently) upper sand coverage look up, shows it is everywhere now, cant hardly find a spot of clean blue (reason for a lot of odd colored sunsets/rises noticed). Oo Am about expecting new photos of earth from space to show us a green planet not blue (sand yellow mixed with natrual blue reflection) soon heh.

2
Neze 2 points ago +2 / -0

Fun fact, sand from the Sahara blows across the ocean and provides nutrients to the Amazon rainforest that can't be found there naturally, which helped its growth. It's been happening for far more than just the past few years.

1
OhLollyLollyPop 1 point ago +1 / -0

Don't forget the volcanoes.

1
MillstonesForAll 1 point ago +1 / -0

Space isn’t real, they’ll just keep showing made up fake ass pics so they can “justify” the trillions they waste on NASA.

2
alien123 2 points ago +2 / -0

hurricanes are caused by water vapor n the air which evaporates over the ocean. the wind hits the water droplets.

particles in the air cause hurricanes, because the wind hits the particles the same hitting a wall.

clean are prevents hurricanes

1
ViaToil 1 point ago +1 / -0

Hurricanes are natures heat dispersal units, no hurricanes = stagnant air/temps. heh heh.

2
NotAHandshake 2 points ago +2 / -0

Don't ask questions, prole. Just vote Democrat.

1
Brooklyn_Patriot_76 [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

double, double ungood.

2
hillaryforprison 2 points ago +2 / -0

At first glance I thought they were wanting to create more hurricanes to clean the air.

2
BallsackPaneer 2 points ago +3 / -1

We need 10,000 leaf blowers kicking up dust in the Sahara to prevent more Gulf Hurricanes.

2
Brooklyn_Patriot_76 [S] 2 points ago +3 / -1

me gusto!

2
QueensOwn 2 points ago +2 / -0

This is science but just watch how fast they will work to discredit this guy. When it’s science they don’t “agree” with despite evidence it’s got to go. The billions the climate change scammers are counting on is dependent on maintaining the orthodox of belief.

2
9x10again 2 points ago +2 / -0

They can call it "Global Clearing" crisis.

2
NotaBagel 2 points ago +2 / -0

Spend your way out of debt

2
TommyJarvis 2 points ago +2 / -0

Correlation vs causation

in the 70s and 80s the air from europe was dirty and we also didn't have as many hurricanes, but starting in the 90s when the air from europe was cleaner we started to see more hurricanes

1
OhLollyLollyPop 1 point ago +1 / -0

Or it could just be a weather cycle or the North Atlantic Current warming.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
2
MillstonesForAll 2 points ago +2 / -0

Maybe smoking doesn’t really cause cancer? If the media and the oh so trustworthy medical establishment say something, I’m pretty unwilling at this point, to listen. Seems like cancer rates keep going up, even though people smoke less. They’re fatter and unhealthier nowadays, as well. Maybe it’s vaccines that cause cancer? We know for a fact that the polio vaccine was contaminated with SV40, a cancer causing virus. What do we not know about other vaccines? Especially since tobacco was used medicinally by American Indians. Maybe smoking it constantly isn’t good for you but I’d imagine that taking boatloads of pills and eating garbage “food” and being obese is just as cancer causing yet we never hear about that. Funny, huh? (No I’m not a smoker any more).

1
Brooklyn_Patriot_76 [S] 1 point ago +2 / -1

Sin causes illness. God is in control, whether or not we observe that is the essence of our free will.

2
rossiFan 2 points ago +2 / -0

They are literally making shit up. Just like they did with covid.

2
FreshFriggy 2 points ago +2 / -0

The smoking thing is really interesting when you dig deep into it. There are multiple studies that show that you are 2x less likely to develop lung cancer if you are a tobacco smoker. Interestingly, you are twice as likely to develop lung cancer if you have a diet high in grains and pasta. I started digging into it because I was curious about cigarettes being recommended by doctors back in the day. Then you had that shit about smokers being more resistant to covid, but there are a lot of people trying to dispel the notion that tobacco causes cancer based off of numerous studies.

4
Brooklyn_Patriot_76 [S] 4 points ago +4 / -0

so you're saying I should kick my 2 pack a day spaghetti smoking habit?

2
DixMcCoy 2 points ago +2 / -0

Rigatoni has the best flavor

3
Fr330rD13 3 points ago +3 / -0

I have read some very interesting stuff on this topic as well. Mainly some lab studies trying to recreate lung cancer in lab rats utilizing smoke exposure, in which they were unsuccessful, however they were successful causing lung cancer in lab rats utilizing radioactive isotopes.

It's also interesting that the overall number of smokers in this country is reduced drastically, what hasn't reduced is the number of lung cancer patients.

Some people believe that some of our cancer issues today are not as they appear, they believe that we completely irradiated our atmosphere with nuclear testing in the 60's and 70's before scientists figured out it wasn't a good idea to be blasting nukes in the atmosphere, it's theorized that their are enough radioactive isotopes floating around in the upper atmosphere to kill everyone on earth 10x over, invisible, odorless, tasteless....if you are exposed to one...cancer. Kick one up at the beach, lands on your skin, cancer. Inhale one, lung cancer, they are everywhere. Don't know if I believe the stuff I read but they did a good job writing it.

As far as Covid, I read something about the virus being designed to attach to nicotine receptors which smokers typically have occupied with smoking hence it supposedly makes it harder to catch. This wasn't so well written and I probably don't buy it but I do read the information, because I like to read and decide things on my own.

3
RedAltoids 3 points ago +3 / -0

One of the first things I can remember from when Coovid hit was the French stating that smokers rarely got sick from it. This didn't stay in the news for more than a day. From what I understand nicotine inhibits viruses from attaching to the cells, and this is pretty solid.

1
OhLollyLollyPop 1 point ago +1 / -0

John Wayne first developed cancer when working on movies close to the area of above ground nuclear testing. Lots of the actors and crew on those pictures got various forms of cancer rather soon after filming there. Of course, John Wayne also was a cigarette smoker, so that was likely what finally killed him.

3
80960KA 3 points ago +3 / -0

I have a pet conspiracy theory that the cancer risk was hyped up to cover for all the cancer clusters caused by fallout from above ground nuclear testing in Nevada. The nuclear testing may have also made tobacco a bit more cancery for a while because tobacco is really good at extracting nutrients, and it's not going to turn down something like a nitrate just because it's attached to an unnatural isotope.

Ciggy smoking is still bad for you in multiple ways, and there are plenty of known-carcinogenic things in all plant pyrolysis products, but it's also probably not a lot worse than the indoor wood and coal fires that were standard kitchen equipment for millennia.

I started digging into it because I was curious about cigarettes being recommended by doctors back in the day.

Doesn't mean they were right. Medical marketing didn't start with covid.

1
sustainable_saltmine 1 point ago +1 / -0

maybe the tar plugged up the receptors in respiratory cells so the virus couldn't attach

-1
RPD2 -1 points ago +3 / -4

Giving up cigarettes isn't just for health, but also so that the air doesn't smell like crap for everyone in the immediate vicinity.

4
Sumarongi 4 points ago +4 / -0

Wear a mask bro

3
MillstonesForAll 3 points ago +3 / -0

I’m more offended by the stench of fabric softeners emanating from every single dryer in a neighborhood, endlessly. Now THAT is one offensive, nasty, cancer causing stench! I don’t smell one smoker outside for more than a second, and only if I’m right up close to them. I smell dryer sheets from literally miles away. Also I’d rather smell cigarettes than car exhaust, fast food smells, foreigners and their weird smells/BO, I can think of a million worse smells than tobacco.

1
Brooklyn_Patriot_76 [S] 1 point ago +2 / -1

Jeez mods - that was my fastest sticky ever, LOL! Due to climate change?

1
EdisonHwy 1 point ago +1 / -0

Did Al Gore approve this news?

1
sustainable_saltmine 1 point ago +2 / -1

this is "climate science" for you.

Anything they can say to keep the farce going that there's some "existential crisis" going on and "humans are the cause", so we have to alter our daily lives "for the planet" under government rule

1
Brooklyn_Patriot_76 [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

God punishes the earth for faggotry, that's the only human cause I will subscribe to.

1
9x10again 1 point ago +1 / -0

Because, uh, they said so!

1
Induceddrag 1 point ago +1 / -0

Hurricanes are the Crying Indian’s fault? What about California emissions standards?

1
Steady3 1 point ago +1 / -0

You best get your funding money back for that "study."

1
80960KA 1 point ago +3 / -2

Oh look more simulation-based "science".

1
deleted 1 point ago +2 / -1
1
Sparks1017 1 point ago +2 / -1

Another "Gubmint funded study" GTFO

1
MycologyofMAGA 1 point ago +1 / -0

Centurions smoke and if you watched watch the water on rumble they say people that smoke didn’t have covid or have it as bad because the snake venom enzyme inhabits the same spot in the brain that the nicotine inhabits so it basically doesn’t let them get as sick

1
OnlyTrump20 1 point ago +1 / -0

Clean air allows more sunlight to penetrate and heat up the oceans. Warm oceans cause hurricanes.

0
LibtardJesus 0 points ago +1 / -1

Government is going to have to start reviewing these studies before public viewing is allowed. Should be kept classified or confidential to prevent laymen from developing an understanding of how the world really works.

2
Brooklyn_Patriot_76 [S] 2 points ago +2 / -0

username checks out

we definitely need some kind of government ministry to make sure we only see the truth

2
narvster 2 points ago +2 / -0

I look at the raw data whenever I can, it's lead me to some different conclusions, perhaps the government should block access to this, unless you're and "accredited" climate scientist™

1
FakeNametag 1 point ago +2 / -1

No, it's CNNs job to read things for us dummies.