Last edited:
Climate Change
- Thread starter Chippy_Tea
- Start date
Help Support The Homebrew Forum:
- Status
Do you believe that people paid to promote the climate change story have models which can predict the future weather decades ahead over the tiny variation in CO2 that western nations can make, out of the tiny proportion of CO2 that is man made anyway, given that the big future and present polluters, China and India, are going to ignore restrictions?
If the climate could be killed by CO2 at any time, why didn't some natural event like a volcano end the world? Why didn't the world end when Nordstream leaked 500k tons of methane? Out of the 10 years some of these people say we have to live, how many disappeared in that pipeline leak?
If the climate could be killed by CO2 at any time, why didn't some natural event like a volcano end the world? Why didn't the world end when Nordstream leaked 500k tons of methane? Out of the 10 years some of these people say we have to live, how many disappeared in that pipeline leak?
I love pies. I saw that you can buy ready rolled short crust pastry. I will have to have a go at making one. I made some Danish pastries with puff pastry. Very easy.I think one for pies would be more popular
Sorry couldn't resist.
Did you see this old interview with a Soviet defector? He said that at a certain stage of ideological subversion you could show people all of the documents, all of the proof, that they have been tricked, but they can't accept it. Here is a clip. The whole interview, and his talks, are very valuable.Careful @BobShandy the red pilling is looking like the advanced level, go at it too hard and you will find yourself restricted from posting in certain threads
Many can't handle an alternative view which may be bordering on the truth -- changing paradigms* takes time and some never get there.
* in this context that just means even just listening to an alternative view.
Stan's Brew
Regular.
Yes, and if you are talking about the Club of Rome then you will appreciate the long hiistory behind all of this.
We are in trouble already as we are far off the climate change topic.
Or are we?
https://www.technocracy.news/club-of-rome-the-origin-of-climate-and-population-alarmism/
Last edited:
![BREWING THERMOMETER STICKERS ACCURATELY MONITOR FERMENTING BEER & WINE LIQUID TEMPERATURES 5PCS HOME BREW SPIRITS WINE LCD ADHESIVE [US]](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/311DDjo2X3L._SL500_.jpg)
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2020
- Messages
- 2,286
- Reaction score
- 2,849
I often think, usually when I'm half asleep and daydreaming, that there is one thing that everything in the universe is determined by. Everything from the expansion of space to the bitterness of a beer to whether you slip over on a patch of ice...
Ratios
Last edited:
In an attempt to try and bring some balance to the debate, two articles outlining the opposing arguments. First is primarily scientific, second considers socio-economic positioning.
https://climatechange.procon.org/
https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/alternative-views-climate-change
My summary is that the evidence indicates it is highly likely the increases in global temperatures seen over the past 100-150 years can be directly linked to greenhouse gas emissions from human activity (due to the increased amount of CO2 in the atmosphere since the industrial revolution and the specific carbon isotopes present).
Whether that will lead to catastrophic climate change is much harder to predict. The vast majority of models seem to indicate there will be negative implications of a 2degree rise in global temperatures. Some suggest that this will not be the case.
We could of course sit around and hope that the models are wrong but that seems a bit optimistic. We have things we can do to try and help mitigate the situation so why wouldn't we do it?
This is where the arguments about 'government control' and 'profiteering' come in. However, I counter this on two parts; if government control was the objective there are much easier and cheaper ways to achieve it (e.g. China's communist policies). Profiteering is an inevitable consequence of the capitalist world we live in; it's no different to how oil companies have profited from the last 100 years.
https://climatechange.procon.org/
https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/alternative-views-climate-change
My summary is that the evidence indicates it is highly likely the increases in global temperatures seen over the past 100-150 years can be directly linked to greenhouse gas emissions from human activity (due to the increased amount of CO2 in the atmosphere since the industrial revolution and the specific carbon isotopes present).
Whether that will lead to catastrophic climate change is much harder to predict. The vast majority of models seem to indicate there will be negative implications of a 2degree rise in global temperatures. Some suggest that this will not be the case.
We could of course sit around and hope that the models are wrong but that seems a bit optimistic. We have things we can do to try and help mitigate the situation so why wouldn't we do it?
This is where the arguments about 'government control' and 'profiteering' come in. However, I counter this on two parts; if government control was the objective there are much easier and cheaper ways to achieve it (e.g. China's communist policies). Profiteering is an inevitable consequence of the capitalist world we live in; it's no different to how oil companies have profited from the last 100 years.
Last edited:
Stan's Brew
Regular.
Excellent - now explain how Western governments would be able to implement Chinese style levels of control on a Western population in an easier and cheaper way than by convincing the population to vote and pay for those policies voluntarily ie not forced.
We have already seen global governments try to force policies before the population is convinced, Covid as a failed example being an experiment in a massive ongoing fear campaign the likes of which have never been seen before, it worked in the very short term and yet there is massive pushback on boosters after only 2-3 years and as more information emerges the pushback and eventual legal recourse will finally convince 80-90% of the population that it was a massive mistake, the vaccine psyop has failed.
The twists and turns of climate change prove similar to Covid to a certain extent but over decades long timescales, only until global governance organised to punish the big corporates using the banking system unless they fell into line has any movement in the population happened, now the propaganda can't be escaped, it's 24/7 news, it's institutionalised, it's part of the education curriculum, it's part of everybody's working day, industry is spending money where they have been told to spend it - or else go bankrupt, the agenda has taken advantage of the same fears as Covid in the ramp-up to 2020 and now in the post era by creating alarmism and an emergency targetting 2030.
https://www.theguardian.com/environ...is-bankrupt-mark-carney-bank-england-governor
Weak minded Western populations are likely to never understand how this works to it's fullest extent or how the world changed around them, how life became so much harder than before, even though large numbers will be impoverished, freezing in the Winter, have fewer opportunities for travel, suffer in constant fear and anxiety, be forced to eat foods unimaginable a decade before, every ££ tracked, monitored for spending on the allowed 'correct items'.
It may yet fail, there are signs that there are divisions, the shrill calls to implement policies faster and spend more money, money, money, but people need to understand first what they are getting themselves into before being able to understand how to resist the level of control that is planned for them and their children.
https://www.reuters.com/business/en...g-out-money-needed-tackle-climate-2023-01-17/
Last edited:
We're not here to debate government control and associated conspiracy theories so I don't want to drag this thread miles off topic. But to answer your question; ever read 1984? The technology already exists to do pretty much everything that is described in that book and therefore would require a fraction of the cost of manufacturing a 'climate crisis' and associated solutions.
At the end of the day, I don't believe there is anywhere near enough evidence to suggest climate change is a government-manufactured conspiracy when there is such strong scientific evidence that it is a genuine concern. That doesn't mean I fully agree with our current governance and economic systems though; there is vast room for improvement in both but I don't believe climate change is the right battlefield for that.
Ultimately, we all have a choice. I'm choosing to believe the scientific evidence that is available and as a result I'm willing to take steps to try and mitigate the identified risks. If the scientific models are wrong then the risks may turn out to be unfounded, but from my perspective doing nothing and hoping for the best is an even riskier strategy.
Clearly, you don't agree with that position and nothing I say is likely to ever change that. But that is your choice.
I think I've said more than enough on this topic now, so I'm going to leave it there as I fear we'll just end up going round in circles otherwise.
Last edited:
This global warming climate change thingymebobs has been around now for decades, so much so it is now an industry employing thousands of people who have to justify their jobs, just for minute think what would happen if one of the top boffins came out and said sorry world we got this one wrong, thousands around the world would lose their jobs and imagine the money the big boys and governments would have wasted, who in there right mind would admit such a **** up, and remember many a true word has been said in jest, and if they have realised some were along the way and said well put some spin on it and carry on anyway and use it as a form of control
You can't get people to accept a dictatorship from one day to the next. You need the co-operation of a lot of people who have to be told some kind of story. They have to get something out of it. For some people, moral grand standing is enough. Others are going to want ££££, like scientists who get grants if they include "climate change" in their research title.
There is no climate crisis. So it didn't cost anything to engineer a crisis. A great deal of money has been spent creating a narrative around normal weather variation, telling people they have to have their behavior and spending controlled or the planet is going to die. They have been telling people these stories for a hundred years, and each time they have been wrong. New York was supposed to be under water by now.
Climate change lock down trials starting in Oxford:
I find if funny that people are willing to support taking away liberty in this country, supposedly to save the planet, when our country contributes insignificantly to the problem and the big polluters aren't going to care.
People don't care about climate change. In the system of democracy people have no representation and no redress. If we had a free and fair discussion climate change would be dismissed. But our public squares facebook, youtube, the legacy media, don't allow a free discussion.
https://www.reuters.com/business/en...rinks-globally-threat-grows-study-2022-10-19/
Where there are genuine environmental problems, like plastics, governments are asleep. Where is global action over falling sperm counts?
You do realise the news article shared in that tweet is fake? False climate lockdown claims in Oxford lead to death threats
Nobody is going to have to ask permission to leave their neighbourhood.
It is all about encouraging people to use alternative means of transport to navigate around the city centre: Council approves £6.5m traffic filter scheme - BBC News
Last edited:
I agree, locked while the mods discuss this threads future
Last edited:
- Status
