The “carbon neutral” narrative is straight out BS which is sold to society to make huge amounts of profits on the gullibility of normies.
How can you say something is carbon neutral if you don’t take into account the polluting way nickel, cobalt and lithium is mined.
Clown world vibes
Object permanence basically 😂
If you can’t see it, it doesn’t exist 🫠 
Indeed. And if you say any valid argument to a normie they start raging and screaming that you’re a climate change denier or a conspiracy theorist 🤣😅
What kind of arguments do you hear the most these days for climate change?
“The science says it’s happening”
“How do you explain the warmer weather”
“This billionaire says it’s happening”
🤣🤣🤣🤣
By hearing these arguments you already know how stupid they are.
There is no “the science”. Science isn’t a consensus. If we had to trust the consensus, the sun would still be circling around earth and earth would be flat.
First, you’re right that there’s not THE science. As a scientist I can 100% confirm that as soon as you have a total consensus in science, it’s not science anymore. I can’t imagine a situation in which I would fully agree with my competitors (they’re doing bullshit anyways 😂).
Second, the climate change is undoubtedly happening. However, there’s caveats (as usual 😉). 1) Whether or not it’s human made is still a matter of active debate. There’s no killer arguments in favor of human-made global warming. We only see correlations, but correlation is not causality. 2) The human brain is a master of over-interpretation. The simplest example of this bias is Simpson‘s paradox: whatever appears as a trend on a shorter timescale, can be exactly the opposite trend on a longer timescale, but our brain is not able to comprehend this due to our short life time and the bias of the brain towards finding patterns where there’s simply none.
Thanks for this!! Really appreciated.
I’m not an expert on it but isn’t it also BS that they can stick a number of degrees they can lower the temperature by lowering carbon outputs?
Always wondered why nobody can give some good numbers without falling in the “it’s the science” narrative.
I’m definitely not a denier of climate change (that has always happened over the past thousands of years). But I’m convinced this is all for a very big part a marketing stunt to get a lot of money.
Well the so called +1.5 degrees per year number they are talking about is a collective measure of the global average temperature increase. Local fluctuations can be of course much stronger. This is the science part. Now comes the politics. It is convenient to explain the politicians what the situation is using a few number (I mean we all know most of them ain’t well educated anyways). The problem is rather what conclusions they draw from these numbers. It is not science‘s business to tell them what to do in my opinion, because sciences is about unclosing and explaining complex mechanisms, not about dictating people what to do.
Now the carbon stuff. It’s true that if you drastically reduce the CO2 output, the climate would change. The problem is, how are you gonna measure this? There’s not THE CO2 detector 😂 You can only do indirect measurements. So all these CO2 certificates for the industry is complete bullshit 😂
суть в том ... что потом нужно заставить их вернуть деньги))) подожди немного)))) я это сделаю.... какая первая страна банкрот ты хочешь???
It’s crazy how thoroughly the entire world was propagandized on carbon hysteria. Complete nonsense but hardly anybody cares to figure it out for themselves.
Have you watched or read anything by William Happer?
