And who is the people you put trust in for this story? Because I think it is easy to distrust one. The more difficult one is only whom to trust. And when one only knows the ones to distrust, one is a complete puppet of some unknown.
Discussion
Trust nothing. Even when you find some influencer that says all the things you agree with, don't trust or follow that person. They will build a following, then insert a new message, and half the herd will go with it. The only things should believe (well, you be you, but this is how I think) are what you can verify yourself and then build your own conclusions up from that. 99% of articles don't present anything real - they just invoke experts and sound authoritative. F that... You deserve better.
An example is when I figured out that climate change was a hoax, at least in part. Not all worries are unfounded, I'm not saying that. But as its presented, its basically a hoax and it benefits certain people. So, I was teaching a science class, and I was really making an effort to teach them to be inquisitive. There was no curriculum, barely any oversight, no books - every aspect of the class was entirely up to me. It was in China, and it was a brand new private school, and I was the wrong guy for the job, but sometimes that's just how things happen. Anyhow... I wanted to teach them to be environmentally conscious, so I started building lessons about the environment and human impact. But I had never closely examined my beliefs, and I had to be able to answer "why" questions. So I dig into it... I found data from ice cores, was really puzzled why it told a different story than the media presents, I emailed professors, one of which was Dr. Ridd (iirc) in Australia, and he emailed back a fucking data dump on corals in the great barrier reef... And basically, the whole narrative is a big fucking lie. Corals aren't dying, they're thriving. CO2 doesn't cause desertification - it does exactly the opposite, and its ability to warm the planet diminishes at higher levels. It is still potentially bad to breathe at higher levels, so we should level off emissions at some point, but its also necessary for our lungs to work. So the picture that began to appear was that CO2 is about as harmless as anything can be, but we're all told to be terrified of it, meanwhile thousands of chemicals that are carcinogens go unregulated and no one pays attention. I found a US government website that estimated 100k chemicals being dumped into the environment that have never been studied in any way.
I could go on. The point is, I trusted the narrative, but when I looked for myself, something totally different was going on. Don't trust anything. Investigate it yourself.
Think of narratives like this - why would a narrative ever be needed if it was the truth? True things are self evident. You need a narrative when you deviate from truth.
You know that all aroud CO2 and climate is only about the well proven warming effect. It is not because it is harmful when we would double or triple it. Since it is of no intrest for our bodies. It is what we exhale.
So maby start digging to start with understanding again.
I don't think I can free your mind.
No. For this you would need to actually understand something to explain it.
So far, I've been the only one explaining anything. If you're so smart, prove it.
Uff quiet a lame lie. I explained it in easy words here. On what points of you fail on objective measures.
I'm not clicking your link. You spoke to me in bad faith - I have every reason to believe the link is unsafe.
It is the post five comments above this one explaining CO2 and its effect.
Why?
Since you mentioned, you are the only one explaining. And there I say that there is also no concern that CO2 would harm us humain or animals or plants. The only concern with higher CO2 concentration is that the general temperature heats up with the greenhouse effect. This is such a basic experiment, I am sure you are able to replicate it yourself.
And this is a full counterargument against your arguments about CO2 not being harmful. Because you debunk nothing, since there is no one in the first place to make the claim that CO2 is harmful to anything else but the climate.
And this website is very nice to show the logic of trust and its impact.