payne1000

I've had many exchanges with Zionists on this forum and others. I'd estimate 85% to 90% of those Zionists deny climate change.

Richard94611

I am surprised that there is any intellectual association.

payne1000

What do you mean by intellectual association?

Richard94611

I mean that when a person believes one of these propositions that they are likely to believe the other.

Richard94611

Do you think it works the other way ? For instance, if one denies climate change he or she is very likely to be a Zionist ?

ColdDrink

It is not avoidance when I say I am not a climatologist so I have no opinion on climate change; it is just a fact. I can quote either side to make a point but I am clueless to who is telling the truth. Can anyone here truly clear it up?

Richard94611

All I can do to attempt to clear it up is to say that based on my research, which includes reading books on the subject and taking a college level course on the subject, climate change and global warming are very real and very serious.

You might start by reading a widely acclaimed book now in paperback called "Merchants of Doubt," which describes how a group of eminent scientists after the cold war were paid by the tobacco interests and by oil interests to create doubt in the minds of the public about a number of things, starting with a connection between smoking and cancer (funded by the American Tobacco Institute), the the ozone hole and its importance, eventually climate change and global warming, and finally on their last mission to claim that DDT does not cause harm to wildlife or humans and that over 500,000 people in Asia and Africa have died as a result of Rachael Carson's activities, especially her book "Silent Spring." The book "Merchants of Doubt has been widely acclaimed, and the authors would have been sued out of existence by the people and companies they named in the book if their facts had not been thoroughly checked, found to be true, and provable.

larry

Thank you for the support. It seems that instead of building on the solution, More vegetation, everybody is trying to cut back on the wrong end of the problem. Sure it makes sense to reduce the generation of bad gases, but it makes more sense to provide for the future by increasing the ability of what we have to do the job they were designed to do. All we have to do, is keep the green side up. Now if the doubters don't want to plant trees, let them dream up a process that does the same thing, that trees do. Convert Co2 into wood and release the O2. The way to solve the problem, is to increase this activity, not decrease the other. Instead of going backwards we need to make a giant leap forward Build a system that sucks the "bad" stuff out of the air and puts in the good stuff. If we could invent a mechanical tree, the problem would be over.

Blade_Runner Loc: DARK SIDE OF THE MOON

I can guarantee that you won't find any answers here. Knowledge of climatology won't help either. However if you study some on the political agenda of the liberal/progressive ideology as it relates to climate change, you may begin to understand.

payne1000

It's still not clear to me what you're asking.

I don't think the Zionists or most of the fossil fuel defenders actually believe climate change is not happening. They deny climate change because fossil fuel is an economic or political benefit for them.

payne1000

No, that makes no sense at all.
If one denies climate change, that person most likely benefits from the fossil fuel industry in some way. On this forum that benefit may be from being a paid troll.

payne1000

Population explosion is the real problem in the world. More people require more forest products, more industrial activity, more automobiles, more and more carbon being put into the atmosphere.
The spraying of chemtrails is an attempt to mitigate climate change in a way which will allow the fossil fuel industry to continue in abundance.
They won't tell the public they are doing it and they won't tell us what they are spraying. Why is that?

http://thecolbertreport.cc.com/videos/lv0hd2/david-keith

larry

Any one can see, that the answer to excessive CO2 in the atmosphere is due to the decrease in O2 generation. Killing trees, excessive snow, shorter grouth of conversion plants, overpaving of nature, killing the ocean kelp, and all the hot air coming out of congress is really responsible. Just stop all the talk by liberal lunatics, and things will generally improve.

larry

Every one benefits from fossil fuel. But it will eventually run out, and then we will devise another way to keep ourselves from freezing and migrating. What say we all stop breathing, that will reduce the CO2.

payne1000

We will stop breathing if we don't cut CO2 emissions.