Global climate change
I have two questions about climate change: 1. What is the primary cause of climate change? 2. Who benefits by publishing faulty data?
You type: | You see: |
---|---|
*italics* | italics |
**bold** | bold |
While we're very happy to have you in the Gulch and appreciate your wanting to fully engage, some things in the Gulch (e.g. voting, links in comments) are a privilege, not a right. To get you up to speed as quickly as possible, we've provided two options for earning these privileges.
Previous comments... You are currently on page 4.
Gore just got started with that early by how he now uses napkins and toilet paper.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qEBun...
Hopefully, such PC funding will cease with Trump in office.
If so, such PC funding will resume should the scales of power tilt back to favor the globalist Jackass Party.
I was just now researching the Paleolithic Age and came across the Younger Dryas period, when apparently there was an abrupt climate change to a cooler period. Without getting into what consequences that would have had on the evolution of man, I wondered what could have caused it.
Now, "science," using the same concept, has jumped in as rent seekers.
Who benefits? Authoritarians looking for excuses for control and scientists looking for excuses more more funding for their studies.
They can't even make the case with "Natural" aerosols.
As far as human contributions to climate...you are correct...highly unlikely...except, perhaps, Geoengineering...ie. cloud seeding, electromagnetic mitigation or what ever...Carried out by Government!...Oh...I forgot, they are not human...at least in the same sense as conscious life is.
Has government harmed our environment? Yes, but that has no effect upon weather trends over a long, never mind short, period of time.
Pseudo Scientist and Gov't.
2) The Global kakistocracies, (governments by the worst and least qualified) and their crony connections all to lead a global collective to keep them in control and YOU unaware of what's really happening.
Not theory, it's observable and they have duplicated their faux theory and have repeated their ruse consistently over history.
The second point makes me wonder just how honest the climate scientists are. My reference point here is Dupont’s Freon. Just at the time that the patent on Freon was to expire it was ‘discovered’ that Freon was harming the environment by causing global warming and needed to be taken off the market. Lucky for us, Dupont just happened to have a new patent on R-134 refrigerant which would replace Freon and do less harm to the environment. Or maybe it was just a coincidence???