The agenda has been set. They are going to push the climate angle 100%. We will have a carbon tax, in addition to all of the other covid vaccine tracking and monitoring bs. Hell, they might even try to say that economic slowdowns they are causing are good for the planet.
What difference could it possibly make at this point? No matter who is king or PM or what president could replace them the outcome would be the same.
The only meaningful revolution would be a complete overhaul of the system from top to bottom, and probably quite a few breakups. I think we both know that's not going to happen through voting.
No one literally feels strongly about it, you're witnessing the result of 100 public entities who didn't give a shit, but were pressed and nagged to make a statement on it and collectively it begins to seem important, but it's the result of a few people doing a lot of nagging. It's like the ESG score given to traded corporations, you get a higher ESG score if you mention green shit in your commercials. So you get the PERCEPTION that suddenly everyone has awareness or wants change, but it's all artificially created by a few wealthy influencers. No different with the "Royal family", these chumps get pushed around by jew bankers left and right.
Carbon levels are not very high at all. For most of the history of the planet CO2 levels have been way over 1000 ppm, which is 2x what it is now. It was so a million years ago. It was so for most of the tim that genus homo has been on earth. It's been so for most of the time mammals have roamed Earth. The function of carbon levels to global temperature is real but it craps out as carbon levels go up: its a logarithmic function which means that carbon increases have basically no effect above around 1000 ppm. The rain forest will grow back a little faster. So will crops.
This is all just a scam to have jews in control of all of your energy. Energy is the most important commodity.
The function of carbon levels to global temperature is real but it craps out as carbon levels go up
I disagree, I think the relationship is the inverse: High temperatures cause release of carbon. In the climate record carbon spikes tend to come after the temperature spikes, not beforehand.
Well there is a greenhouse effect: certain gasses like carbon do increase the temperature of earth by about 15C and there will be warming if the greenhouse gasses increase as a proportion of the atmosphere. but we know from the geologic record that much of the time since the paleozoic carbon dioxide has been in the neighborhood of 2000 ppm and the world was much like it is today-- there weren't deserts and lakes of fire everywhere. So we should assure people that the world will not end if CO2 gets to 1000 ppm which is a long way off.
So what would be the mechanism causing the release of carbon as temp increased?
Remember that CO2 is greatly released from volcanic activity. I would expect that during periods of high volcanic activity, temperatures might go down from ash clouds while carbon went up. Looking at really long time frames, carbon and temperature don't seem to correlate at all. We know they do, but there are 20 other things that drive temp.
Well, don't the Vostok ice core samples prove that not only has the planet experienced massive spikes in climate change pre-human recording (i.e., from natural heating and cooling of the Earth)...but Methane - CO2 levels have risen and fell many times and we're on the same cycle - nature is the beast, and now we are the fodder? http://euanmearns.com/the-vostok-ice-core-and-the-14000-year-co2-time-lag/
Yeah people are dumb. The Sahara and Arabian deserts were habitable grassland a few thousand years ago. Iraq was awesome farmland.
Ill have to read that paper. Seems to be saying methane is a bigger driver at the beginning of a warming trend? Why does the carbon drop after the temperature?
Give us all the political power, all the money, all your reproductive rights, all your medical rights, all the energy production, and all the weapons and we'll tell you the sky is no longer falling, Chicken Little.
[ + ] Aze
[ - ] Aze 9 points 3.5 yearsNov 1, 2021 06:26:12 ago (+9/-0)
[ + ] UncleDoug
[ - ] UncleDoug 5 points 3.5 yearsNov 1, 2021 06:17:02 ago (+5/-0)
This wingnut is one of the worst royals.
He wasted his youth chasing mulatos and zambos at Carnivale in Rio de Janeiro then married a horse.
[ + ] Broc_Liath
[ - ] Broc_Liath 4 points 3.5 yearsNov 1, 2021 09:27:05 ago (+4/-0)
The only meaningful revolution would be a complete overhaul of the system from top to bottom, and probably quite a few breakups. I think we both know that's not going to happen through voting.
[ + ] boogienight
[ - ] boogienight 2 points 3.5 yearsNov 1, 2021 13:32:29 ago (+2/-0)
[ + ] dulcima
[ - ] dulcima [op] 3 points 3.5 yearsNov 1, 2021 06:19:53 ago (+3/-0)
The problem is what type of republic we'll get, and what type of president. Look at the state of us.
[ + ] Centaurus
[ - ] Centaurus 2 points 3.5 yearsNov 1, 2021 08:41:36 ago (+2/-0)
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 4 points 3.5 yearsNov 1, 2021 08:33:45 ago (+4/-0)
Carbon levels are not very high at all. For most of the history of the planet CO2 levels have been way over 1000 ppm, which is 2x what it is now. It was so a million years ago. It was so for most of the tim that genus homo has been on earth. It's been so for most of the time mammals have roamed Earth. The function of carbon levels to global temperature is real but it craps out as carbon levels go up: its a logarithmic function which means that carbon increases have basically no effect above around 1000 ppm. The rain forest will grow back a little faster. So will crops.
This is all just a scam to have jews in control of all of your energy. Energy is the most important commodity.
[ + ] Broc_Liath
[ - ] Broc_Liath 0 points 3.5 yearsNov 1, 2021 09:28:43 ago (+0/-0)
I disagree, I think the relationship is the inverse: High temperatures cause release of carbon. In the climate record carbon spikes tend to come after the temperature spikes, not beforehand.
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 0 points 3.5 yearsNov 1, 2021 11:50:51 ago (+0/-0)
but we know from the geologic record that much of the time since the paleozoic carbon dioxide has been in the neighborhood of 2000 ppm and the world was much like it is today-- there weren't deserts and lakes of fire everywhere. So we should assure people that the world will not end if CO2 gets to 1000 ppm which is a long way off.
So what would be the mechanism causing the release of carbon as temp increased?
Remember that CO2 is greatly released from volcanic activity. I would expect that during periods of high volcanic activity, temperatures might go down from ash clouds while carbon went up. Looking at really long time frames, carbon and temperature don't seem to correlate at all. We know they do, but there are 20 other things that drive temp.
[ + ] ymihere
[ - ] ymihere 0 points 3.5 yearsNov 1, 2021 11:02:25 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 0 points 3.5 yearsNov 1, 2021 12:15:41 ago (+0/-0)
Ill have to read that paper. Seems to be saying methane is a bigger driver at the beginning of a warming trend? Why does the carbon drop after the temperature?
[ + ] con77
[ - ] con77 0 points 3.5 yearsNov 1, 2021 11:04:08 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] con77
[ - ] con77 1 point 3.5 yearsNov 1, 2021 11:04:37 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] Hermes
[ - ] Hermes 0 points 3.5 yearsNov 1, 2021 17:18:51 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] sesquipedalienator
[ - ] sesquipedalienator 0 points 3.5 yearsNov 1, 2021 16:35:01 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Paradoxical003
[ - ] Paradoxical003 0 points 3.5 yearsNov 1, 2021 13:38:04 ago (+0/-0)
Trust us again just this one last time
[ + ] jewsbadnews
[ - ] jewsbadnews 0 points 3.5 yearsNov 1, 2021 06:34:44 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 0 points 3.5 yearsNov 1, 2021 12:18:39 ago (+0/-0)