No evidence for anthropogenic climate change

Stay on topic, use your head.

Greta is the poster child for the climate change agenda and it is, therefore, perfectly reasonable to explore her motivation.
If she is backed and/or funded by someone(anyone) with a hidden agenda, it is also valid to explore those links.
If those links are uncomfortable for some to discuss, then maybe they/you shouldn’t be here? I’m sure there are lots of safe spaces you could frequent more productively.

1 Like

He’s not a scientist so you dismiss what he has to say, but at the same time you are happy to take what a 16 yr old, with psychological problems, says, as gospel - Gimme a break.


The whole problem with climate change in a nutshell - the solution is to make sure Africa stays third world - we can’t afford to let all those Africans get cars - just imagine the pollution that will cause.
You won’t hear that from Greta tho.

What the heck are you talking about, I haven’t said anything about any 16 year old girl…

Bingo! He and his rump wranglers do this all the time because they are desperate for attention due to the fact the threads they do create is basically bullshit conspiracy theories and no one is interested in them, so he goes to other’s threads and shit posts stuff that has no relevance to the thread topics! He does it all the time! Want proof?

He did it here!

He did it here too!

I really hope the moderators end up getting fed up of having to edit threads all time because of this dirtbag asshat of wanting and screaming for attention all time that he has to shit post on everybody else’s threads and ban this retard!

Just report it!

There are several issues involved here.

  1. Is there any climate change?
    Yes. Climate always changes.
    (We are sitting in the middle of an Ice Age where there are regular changes among changes among changes for over a million years.)

  2. Is there any anthropologenic climate change?
    No. But the bankster elite are using this straw man argument to justify mass culling of “useless eaters.” (Population reduction)

  3. How do they push this straw man argument?
    They use a mentally unstable kid as their poster child.

  4. Can we do anything about climate change?
    Absolutely nothing.

  5. Can we and should we call foul on the bankster elite?
    Yes, especially the use of mentally unstable kids.

  6. Should we investigate the background (especially the religious background) of this mentally unstable kid?
    Yes, I think so. Imagine if the kid is a Muslim from Iran. The whole Western world would be up in arms, calling it Fake!

1 Like

Greta is 16 and you obviously believe her every word.

I have never spoken to that…:man_shrugging:

IMO, leaving the politics out of it and all the finger pointing and nasty barbs between both sides, the burning of fossil fuels is absolutely polluting, and measures to reduce that are noble, as are efforts in R&D for renewables. Clean air, water and soil is an interest to humanity irrespective of politics.

You called out Moreno bc he’s not a scientist but not a word abt Greta why?

So how much CO2 do you want to get rid of?
All of it?

When I was a kid it was called the weather

1 Like

Corrupting science in pursuit of this is ignoble, and that’s what’s being done here. “Climate science” is politicized pseudoscience, Lysenkoism.

This branch of “science” has found that argument from authority, exaggerated claims, and ad-hominem attacks on critics isn’t working. Now all that they’ve got left is enlisting kids to say that their childhood is being stolen. Another political issue into the “sob story” phase.

“There is no climate emergency. Therefore, there is no cause for panic and alarm,” they note. “We strongly oppose the harmful and unrealistic net-zero CO2 policy proposed for 2050.”

1 Like

She wasn’t the subject of the post I was responding to…:man_shrugging:

And therein lies the problem, people confusing weather with climate…

Climate, and the study thereof far predates your childhood.

I will support all measures that reduce, or better, eliminate pollutants that harm air, water and soil. And consider it odd that that’s controversial…

Not controversial, just misguided - so how much do we need to reduce Co2 by

As much as is possible. Wanting clean air, water and soil is misguided???