Are you in favor of starving? Your children starving? Some regulation is good. But the enviros are not serving the environment but rather an anti human political agenda to supposedly save the planet.
A scientist said the ocean is much healthier than 30 years ago but CBS morning cut him off when he said that.(They we’re talking about shar…
Are you in favor of starving? Your children starving? Some regulation is good. But the enviros are not serving the environment but rather an anti human political agenda to supposedly save the planet.
A scientist said the ocean is much healthier than 30 years ago but CBS morning cut him off when he said that.(They we’re talking about sharks.) I never thought I’d see a bald eagle here in the Midwest but they are a common sight.
She's willing to starve actual people today in the hope that she can save somebody from starving in the future, when the earth is warmer and we can grow food on more of its surface.
That scientist was lying as is anyone who says things are less than catastrophic. We are about five years away from complete and unavoidable absolute collapse of the ecosystem for the entire planet. My children probably WILL starve and anyone who isn’t in paralyzing panic right now is a damned fool.
There is no science anywhere supporting "complete and unavoidable absolute collapse of the ecosystem for the entire planet" in 5 years or 100 years. Read the IPCC detailed reports, rather than banking on AOC and politicians hell bent on evoking, "paralyzing panic right now." You are likely in the same group panicking over a surge in cases of a now cold-level pandemic virus. They are working you and you cower in fear.
They’ve been saying that since the 70’s. Back then it was an ice age. There are so many predictions of catastrophic collapse in my lifetime that have never happened. The fact that scientist was censored tells me he was saying something that doesn’t fit the narrative. The fact scientists who disagree with the catastrophe model are censored leads me to believe they are onto something. True science thrives of disagreement and debate, not a monoculture of narrative. They said we’d starve in the 70’s. It didn’t happen. People may starve because of these needless regulations. Look at Sri Lanka. Look at the Netherlands. All this fear is about controlling us, not helping the environment.
We were all going to starve in the 70’s. Then there was the green revolution. The world including human accomplishment can bring about surprising solutions. The fact bald eagles are common is nothing short of a miracle. Same for many other animals that were rare when I was a girl.
Are you in favor of starving? Your children starving? Some regulation is good. But the enviros are not serving the environment but rather an anti human political agenda to supposedly save the planet.
A scientist said the ocean is much healthier than 30 years ago but CBS morning cut him off when he said that.(They we’re talking about sharks.) I never thought I’d see a bald eagle here in the Midwest but they are a common sight.
She's willing to starve actual people today in the hope that she can save somebody from starving in the future, when the earth is warmer and we can grow food on more of its surface.
That scientist was lying as is anyone who says things are less than catastrophic. We are about five years away from complete and unavoidable absolute collapse of the ecosystem for the entire planet. My children probably WILL starve and anyone who isn’t in paralyzing panic right now is a damned fool.
There is no science anywhere supporting "complete and unavoidable absolute collapse of the ecosystem for the entire planet" in 5 years or 100 years. Read the IPCC detailed reports, rather than banking on AOC and politicians hell bent on evoking, "paralyzing panic right now." You are likely in the same group panicking over a surge in cases of a now cold-level pandemic virus. They are working you and you cower in fear.
They’ve been saying that since the 70’s. Back then it was an ice age. There are so many predictions of catastrophic collapse in my lifetime that have never happened. The fact that scientist was censored tells me he was saying something that doesn’t fit the narrative. The fact scientists who disagree with the catastrophe model are censored leads me to believe they are onto something. True science thrives of disagreement and debate, not a monoculture of narrative. They said we’d starve in the 70’s. It didn’t happen. People may starve because of these needless regulations. Look at Sri Lanka. Look at the Netherlands. All this fear is about controlling us, not helping the environment.
My middle school year book in the late '80s had a 'save the earth' theme.
We were all going to starve in the 70’s. Then there was the green revolution. The world including human accomplishment can bring about surprising solutions. The fact bald eagles are common is nothing short of a miracle. Same for many other animals that were rare when I was a girl.
And I imagine you conceived it.
Scientists who don’t support the narrative don’t get grants. Science is being strangled
I am so sorry for you that you believe that. I hope you can find help.
We’ve been five years away from catastrophe for decades now. The original information used to make the terrifying predictions is obviously faulty.