- This topic has 6 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 3 years, 10 months ago by .
Nancy, MoonBeam Brown, lefty PHDs ( piled hi and deep), kook doctoral candidates, the $2-trillion-per-year climate “science” and “renewable” energy industry, media and political allies, Chuck Todd and an entire panel of alarmist climate “experts” – punks, thugs, thieves, liars, dogs one and all.
All this headline-grabbing gloom and doom is backed up by little more than computer models, obstinate assertions that the science is settled, and a steady litany of claims that temperatures, tornadoes, hurricanes, droughts et cetera are unprecedented, worse than ever before, and due to fossil fuels.
And on the basis of these hysterics, we are supposed to give up the carbon-based fuels that provide over 80% of US and global energy, gladly reduce our living standards – and put our jobs and economy at the mercy of expensive, unreliable, weather dependent, pseudo-renewable wind, solar and biofuel energy.
As in any civil or criminal trial, the burden of proof is on the accusers and prosecutors who want to sentence fossil fuels to oblivion. They need to provide more than blood-curdling charges, opening statements and summations. They need to provide convincing real-world evidence to prove their case.
i extracted a few paragraphs from a great opinion piece that provides an accurate summation of the current ‘climate debate’. It’s easy to discern that those who want to shaft the U.S. via psuedo-science ‘consensus’ are irrational and can not – and will not – rely on actual real data and studies. They will however hysterically name-call, evade the sunlight that discredits their bogus screeds, and re-echo each others vapid slogans.
The ‘climate change’ scam is being pushed by those who want to re-distribute peoples wealth in exchange for reassurances from elitist snots that they know better ways to spend your money than you do.
Screw the liberal leftist scam advocates and their political hacks.
Capricorn posted on November 15, 2019 at 09:15
Adult language is permitted if it is contextual and not aimed personally at a poster.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.