The Climate Change argument is rigged

I am neither a climate denier nor an activist who insists that humans are destroying the planet. I don't do enough research to have an opinion. What I do have an opinion about is that I don't believe that the governments of the world have our best interests in mind when they make sweeping changes in regulations. I think Covid kind of proved that to most sensible people around the world who saw their livelihoods destroyed by restrictions and lockdowns that had a near zero effect on the spread. We need only look at neighboring countries like Sweden and all of their neighbors to see that intense lockdowns made almost zero difference compared to places that had almost none. When this started happening it was kind of convenient that the media and government stopped talking about places like Sweden and Mexico isn't it?

I think that almost everything we are told by the government has one of two purposes: To rally voters behind an emotional cause that will make them dedicated voters on "their side," or to make money for the people who donate money to keep them in office. Very rarely do I think that the government, at least on a higher level, ever does anything to actually benefit the population. The way that the climate change debate is panning out is kind of functioning in a similar fashion.

While the media and governments promote a child to god-like status in the face of Greta Thunberg, actual scientists and i dunno, adults that actually know what they are talking about and have real data to back it up, are silenced if their presentations don't go along with what the narrative that is being pushed just happens to be at the time.

src

I can't stand this girl and the way that she was paraded as a spokesperson in front of world leaders to me was just a sign of how much of a clown world this earth has become. She was promoted to this position because if you opposed what she was saying you were being "sexist," "ageist," or some other -ist that are just words that were made up in the past 15 years for political reasons. If only she had been a POC and gay, she would have been beyond reproach.

I don't know the answer to the climate debate and guess what? Neither do you. I do know that there are tons of stories out there about how fearmongering and rigged data is being presented to the masses as "proof" that CO2 emissions are destroying the world and we have already gone past the predicted "end of times" date many times at this point.

Some of the latest stories that were rigged was when they reported that the water temperature in Florida had exceeded 100 degree F for the fist time in human history. Big names like the New York Times and NPR used this data as proof that climate change is real. What they didn't tell you was that this thermometer was in an area where the water was not moving and was in a shallow where the water temperature is always high and always has been high because of the geography. They would present the data with a picture of people swimming off the coast of Miami or something like that but then gave very little or no information as to where the data was actually collected. Even now, if you try to find information about this situation, Google is hiding the stories that point out that the data collection was rigged.

This is NOT science. When you have a desired result and then seek out information to back up that desired result this is called manipulation. The question that we should be asking ourselves is why is this being done to us?

Another story I recently came across was about how places like California are pushing for all vehicles to be electric by a certain year in the future, it might have been 2030 or something. However, when they talk to someone in the know about the electrical capacity of that part of the world they will openly admit that the power grid in California isn't anywhere near good enough to support something like this and this is evidence by brownouts that are already happening there. So we have an electrical grid that cannot handle what it is already charged with providing and we want to add millions of car batteries to the demand? That doesn't make a whole lot of sense does it? What will they do when there is no method of charging their cars and the streets are being patrolled by diesel-powered military vehicles that are insuring the public aren't using petroleum based products for getting around?

Another example of the silencing of anyone who doesn't tow the line is a recent Nobel Prize Winning physicist being uninvited to speak at the IMF when it was found out that the doesn't believe that the narrative of man-made climate change is real. His name is Dr. John Clauser and well, he won the most prestigious award that exists in science. So why would you uninvite him to speak? You can read more about it here if you like.

They claimed he was uninvited because his speeches are too technical and would confuse the people in attendance or some other BS like that, but the timing is a little suspicious don't you think?

My own beliefs are a "get off of my lawn" world view. I think we should all try to do what we can for the sake of the environment but whenever the government gets involved in FORCING people to do a certain thing I believe it is important for us to look into what it might be that is actually motivating the government to do such a thing. Covid was a huge eye-opener for a lot of people and it just solidified my rather antigovernmental stance on just about anything.

We were lied to over and over about almost anything you can imagine that the government is involved in and honestly, I don't think this is an exception. My own industry would be decimated if we were forced to switch to electric. I'd love to see how someone can get a 10 ton trackhoe to run off of a battery.