you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]ActuallyNot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

OMFSM.

There's people who's problem with Chuck is that he's not a climate science denier.

FFS, it's been 40 years since we've known that the anthropogenic greenhouse effect was kicking off. There's a whole fuckton of data showing that we're in line with the predictions. We're seeing the increase in fires, heatwaves, floods, and deserts pushing away from the tropics.

How much do you have to be paid not to see something so large sitting right on your boots?

[–]Feldheld 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

We're seeing the increase in fires, heatwaves, floods, and deserts pushing away from the tropics.

No, we're not. What we're seeing is a lot of self-induced hysteria. Just like the COVID cult the climate alarmism has become a religion and the media have become the new church for the majority of the people. Collective fear and mass psychosis is driving us back into a very dark age.

The climate is posing no danger to us. None of the predictions of the last 30 years have ever become reality, not even a little bit. The true danger to humanity are the scare mongers and their retarded audience who will cause immeasurable damage to mankind.

[–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

[–]Feldheld 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Cherry-picking data and time frames is the opposite of evidence, it is the implicite admittance of being wrong and lying about stuff.

[–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

True but irrelevant.

The time frames in for the studies linked were all the available data. Not cherry picked for effect.