What's Worse: Climate Change, Terrorism or Fake News

[Father Heathen]

As far as I know terrorism and climate change mostly fake news too.

I don't get climate change denial, as if every scientist ever all telepathically agreed to lie about something for no reason, with nothing to gain and everything to lose by doing so. Whereas lobbyists for the fossil fuel industries and their pocketed politicians have no reason to nor would they ever lie to, manipulate, or mislead the public.

 

[Father Heathen]

Problem is, one the three things listed doesn't even exist as a real threat...

You're right, and it's the trend of dismissing news that's not favorable to Trump as "fake".

 

[leov]

I don't get climate change denial, as if every scientist ever all telepathically agreed to lie about something for no reason, with nothing to gain and everything to lose by doing so. Whereas lobbyists for the fossil fuel industries and their pocketed politicians have no reason to nor would they ever lie to, manipulate, or mislead the public.

Lots of money and power involved. Climate change is a fact, it is permanent in history of Solar System. It always is. But stock trading of carbon credits is not, e.g.

 

[Father Heathen]

Americans will never get it until they realize their news is controlled and/or scripted. Talk about fake news! The fact anyone thinks you even have real news is deception!

Climate change? Give me a break. What people should be worried about is the true climate change. World governments have been in control of the weather for decades. It's no joke that they can cause weather disasters and do all kinds of things. They are playing God and it has to be exposed before there can be accountability.

Research Chem trails.

Climate change is just a narrative to push ulterior agendas.

Terrorism is largely controlled and used for the same purposes.

This post can be summed up as "scientists drool and wizards rule!"

 

[Father Heathen]

Lots of money and power involved.

Elaborate. Deniers often suggest ulterior agendas, but never actually give a coherent explanation.

 

[leov]

Elaborate. Deniers often suggest ulterior agendas, but never actually give a coherent explanation.

Control economy and polytics, taxes in hundreds of billions, the first world was using the third world riches for hundreds of years and the third world wants payment. Control of people's consciousness. We do some harm to environment, no question, but 99% of the reason either is not known or is not told us.

 

[Father Heathen]

Control economy and polytics, taxes in hundreds of billions, the first world was using the third world riches for hundreds of years and the third world wants payment. Control of people's consciousness. We do some harm to environment, no question, but 99% of the reason either is not known or is not told us.

...I said a coherent explanation.

 

[leov]

...I said a coherent explanation.

Simple we are under control, all the time, and climate change is another multifaceted button for control...

 

[leov]

...I said a coherent explanation.

I was watching this issue for years, if you can understand this you may grab the essence of this issue , it is just an example
Dumping Iron and Trading Carbon

 

[Twilight Hue]

But isn't that "socialist"?

It can't be.

Nothing is being banned, and Peter isn't robbed to pay Paul.

 

[Father Heathen]

It can't be.

Nothing is being banned, and Peter isn't robbed to pay Paul.

But by this criteria neither is a lot of other stuff you've called "socialist."

 

[Father Heathen]

Simple we are under control, all the time, and climate change is another multifaceted button for control...

Neeeever miiind.

 

[leov]

Neeeever miiind.

May be this would give you an idea: Pricing Carbon

Can of worms is huge...

 

[shmogie]

I don't get climate change denial, as if every scientist ever all telepathically agreed to lie about something for no reason, with nothing to gain and everything to lose by doing so. Whereas lobbyists for the fossil fuel industries and their pocketed politicians have no reason to nor would they ever lie to, manipulate, or mislead the public.

Well, every scientist doesn´t buy into it. So, you will say 93% of scientists agree that humans cause climate change.

Really ? 100% of scientists have been polled ? uh, no.

Even if they had been, do you propose that an entomologist, or a hydrologist has some inherent ability to have a more valuable opinion than the average person ? I don´t think so.

So, who counts ?

What do Climatologists say ? Or others in different disciplines of weather science ?

Further, Science hasn´t had a great track record in predicting cataclysmic changes on earth.

I remember Paul Erlich and his ideas of the early 70ś,that overpopulation in the early posed an existential threat to humanity. His scientific pontifications were considered gospel by many. He said that by the year 2,000 the world would be ravaged by famine, authority will have broken down and we all would be scrabbling for food and fighting over it.

Then there was the total consensus by science in the 70ś as well, that earths oil would be totally depleted in 20 years.

I remember a magazine, I think Time, of about 40 years ago that had a cover that said ¨How to survive the coming ice age¨ with a snappy science article to match.

Of course, there is my favorite, Al Gore, who parlayed climate change into a massive fortune, who said that by now NY would have been flooded by the rising sea from ice melting.

The climate is changing, but it is always changing. Has humanity made a major contribution to this change ? If it has, is destroying economies in trying to correct it worth the tradeoff and will what is done even work ?

I am not a believer or unbeliever. I simply view the hysteria fraught with bad information and have seen little convincing evidence.

 

[shmogie]

Simple we are under control, all the time, and climate change is another multifaceted button for control...

Great point ! Always, always, there are forces that want to limit your freedom and control your life. Tyhe federal government in the early 20th century is a great example. Small, with the states running most things., The feds instituted a temporary measure for WW1, income tax.

Since it was temporary, I have been waiting for 50 years for it to end.

With it's hand in every workers pocket, the federal government consumed money like monkey consuming bananas on a banana plantation.

'With the money to do so, the feds began usurping the states, thus a NY bureaucrat tells people in Wyoming or Arizona how to live their lives. Now the feds have become great at controlling us, their courts, their regulation authority, their intrusion, first in our pockets, then into our lives.

Political ideologies that must control to achieve their goals are falling all over climate change as the methodology to finally gain their coveted authority.

Is it really caused by man ? I don;t know, but I am not going to take the word f a ditzy punk bartender from NY.

 

[Terry Sampson]

What's your alternative? Create a State media like North Korea to make sure there's no more fake news?

Aye, .. State control seems to be an increasing problem, as much or more so even outside of the U.S..
I remember in my youth (1950s and 1960s), fake news was the norm in the (U.S.-based) National Enquirer and the Star and 1st Amendment Free Press was deemed sacrosanct. Now that charges of "fake news" are in the Donald's tweets daily, he admires political leaders outside the U.S. who maintain tighter control on the free speech advocates in their countries. Kim Jong Un (North Korea), Putin (Russia), Erdogan (Turkey), and Orban (Hungary).

Recently, I read this report:

Freedom and the Media 2019: A Downward Spiral

 

[Father Heathen]

Great point ! Always, always, there are forces that want to limit your freedom and control your life.

You mean like the people who've opposed gay marriage, reproductive rights, and cannabis legalization?

 

[shmogie]

Aye, .. State control seems to be an increasing problem, as much or more so even outside of the U.S..
I remember in my youth (1950s and 1960s), fake news was the norm in the (U.S.-based) National Enquirer and the Star and 1st Amendment Free Press was deemed sacrosanct. Now that charges of "fake news" are in the Donald's tweets daily, he admires political leaders outside the U.S. who maintain tighter control on the free speech advocates in their countries. Kim Jong Un (North Korea), Putin (Russia), Erdogan (Turkey), and Orban (Hungary).

Recently, I read this report:

Freedom and the Media 2019: A Downward Spiral

Regardless, ALL news outlets apply their political spin. Objective reporting is as dead.

 

[shmogie]

You mean like the people who've opposed gay marriage, reproductive rights, and cannabis legalization?

Pot, who cares. Abortion, damn straight, I oppose genocide and infanticide, also murder. This is going to change.

Homosexual marriage, I opposed it, because it obliterated a word that for thousands of years in Western culture meant MARRIAGE between a man and woman.

Instead, for homosexuals, I supported civil unions, all of the rights and responsibilities of marriage without bastardizing another term to fit the social warriors demands.

Eventually up will mean down, blue will mean red, and truth will be considered to be lies.

 

[Terry Sampson]

Objective reporting is as dead.

Can't even get objective reporting from Christian sources, can ya'?