Federal Government Confirms Nearing Apocalypse -- it's very hard to dismiss this. - Page 14 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in the USA and Canada.

Moderator: PoFo North America Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#14995322
jimjam wrote:Nearly two-thirds of the lower 48 states will have an elevated risk of some flooding from now until May, and 25 states could experience “major or moderate flooding,” according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

“The flooding this year could be worse than anything we’ve seen in recent years, even worse than the historic floods of 1993 and 2011,” said Mary C. Erickson, deputy director of the National Weather Service.

More rainfall in the Midwest is a predictable consequence of climate change, according to the most recent National Climate Assessment, which was produced last year by 13 federal agencies. A warmer atmosphere can hold more moisture, which comes down as precipitation. :eek: (I wonder if this concept is too complex for Donald to grasp.) (That is, obviously, beside the point due to the fact that any effort to reduce global warming would involve taking measures that would adversely affect the cash flow of his 0.1% plutocratic buddies.)

President Trump knows that it is all BS. So do I.
HalleluYah
#14995366
Hindsite wrote:President Trump knows that it is all BS. So do I.
HalleluYah


I'll bet you do :lol: . You're not a bad guy and, for your sake, I hope you live on a hill. In a few more years even Captain Bone Spurs and his mentally challenged zombies will not be able to deny the non political facts.

I feel bad for America's farmers. First Donald fucks them with his "easy to win" trade war and now: Across parts of the Midwest, hundreds of livestock are drowned or stranded; valuable unsold, stored grain is ruined in submerged storage bins; and fields are like lakes, casting doubt on whether they can be planted this year.

This ^ is, of course, fake news because it is news that doesn't support your fantasies.
Image

God Bless America^

H.S. …… I just don't know what I would do if I didn't have a foil like you to provide daily entertainment ;)
#14995388
jimjam wrote:I'll bet you do :lol: . You're not a bad guy and, for your sake, I hope you live on a hill.

Yes, I do live on a flat area of high ground, but not up at the very top since no one lives up there. I am not likely to get any flooding of my house.
Praise the Lord.

jimjam wrote:I feel bad for America's farmers. First Donald fucks them with his "easy to win" trade war and now: Across parts of the Midwest, hundreds of livestock are drowned or stranded; valuable unsold, stored grain is ruined in submerged storage bins; and fields are like lakes, casting doubt on whether they can be planted this year.

Don't feel bad for them. They should not have been so stupid. Also God requires the farmers to let the land rest without planting every seven years.
#14995742
jimjam wrote:In a few more years even Captain Bone Spurs and his mentally challenged zombies will not be able to deny the non political facts.


You people have been saying that for the last 30 years and still no apocalypse...

and a flood in the midwest is not exactly a harbinger of global cataclysm, the midwest has had regular flooding for millennia.


Every weather event is like Jack Van Impe Presents with you people. :knife:
#14995785
Sivad wrote:You people
Hindsite wrote: BS propaganda


I find you people interesting. Can you explain why there is a generally global outcry over global warming and it's effects? Why are so many rightly or wrongly concerned? Yes I know all the usual MSM one size fits all catch phrases but why is the MSM and a few dozen other sources such as NASA and NOAA all singing the same tune? A conspiracy? But why a conspiracy? A good route to the truth, especially in semi psychotic areas like politics, is to follow the money. Who is getting rich over this "scam"? Perhaps the manufacturers of the rolls of paper towels that Donald was tossing to crowds after Puerto Rico was decimated recently by a hurricane.

Why the outcry over global warming if it has no basis in fact and is "B.S."?
#14995810
jimjam wrote:Can you explain why there is a generally global outcry over global warming and it's effects? Why are so many rightly or wrongly concerned?


I dunno, why did the majority of people throughout the world rightly or wrongly believe that the earth was the center of the universe and demonize a minority for going against the scientific consensus on geocentrism?

The appeal to consent or majority belief is not a convincing line of reasoning and is in fact a fallacy. argumentum ad populum.
#14995811
Victoribus Spolia wrote:I dunno, why did the majority of people throughout the world rightly or wrongly believe that the earth was the center of the universe and demonize a minority for going against the scientific consensus on geocentrism?


I do not think that ever happened.

While geocentrism was widespread in Europe up to the early 1600s, it may not have been widespread outside of Europe.

Even if it was, the demonising to which you alluded took place in Europe and most of the world was not even aware of the debate at the time.

Also, geocentrism should not be considered as the scientific consensus at the time. Science was only about a century old in Europe at the time, and there had never been a field wide debate about heliocentrism at this point.

The controversy at the time was mostly due to a theological consensus.
#14995814
Pants-of-dog wrote:I do not think that ever happened.

While geocentrism was widespread in Europe up to the early 1600s, it may not have been widespread outside of Europe.


Who cares about outsides of Europe in the 1600s. Not interested in the savages.

Pants-of-dog wrote:While geocentrism was widespread in Europe up to the early 1600s, it may not have been widespread outside of Europe.

Even if it was, the demonising to which you alluded took place in Europe and most of the world was not even aware of the debate at the time.

Also, geocentrism should not be considered as the scientific consensus at the time. Science was only about a century old in Europe at the time, and there had never been a field wide debate about heliocentrism at this point.

The controversy at the time was mostly due to a theological consensus.


This is false, the geocentric model was adapted to a theological view, but originated in Plato and Aristotle and was therefore a secular notion that became accepted later in the Christian west.

Likewise, even a cursory glace on articles regarding geocentrism would show that there was a scientific system behind it, that it was a useful model for quite some time, and was the "consensus" amongst the intellectual elites of the time.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geocentric_model

Image
#14995818
Victoribus Spolia wrote:Who cares about outsides of Europe in the 1600s. Not interested in the savages.


Then why did you mention them?

This is false, the geocentric model was adapted to a theological view, but originated in Plato and Aristotle and was therefore a secular notion that became accepted later in the Christian west.

Likewise, even a cursory glace on articles regarding geocentrism would show that there was a scientific system behind it, that it was a useful model for quite some time, and was the "consensus" amongst the intellectual elites of the time.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geocentric_model

Image


Anyway, the comparison to the scientific consensus on anthropogenic climate change is weak at best.

The main weakness is that the geocentric model was never empirically tested and then accepted, while the ACC theiry has been tested and has experimental support.
#14995830
jimjam wrote:Why the outcry over global warming if it has no basis in fact and is "B.S."?

Most people are followers, like those kids who are scared by their teachers, so they believe what their leaders claim is the most important things they should be concerned about.

Climate change predictions have been wrong for decades. In 1970, Harvard University biologist George Wald predicted, "Civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind." Sen. Gaylord Nelson, in Look magazine in April 1970, said that by 1995, "somewhere between 75 and 85 percent of all the species of living animals would be extinct."

Climate change propaganda is simply a ruse for a socialist agenda under globalism. Consider the statements of some environmentalist leaders. Christiana Figueres, the U.N.'s chief climate change official, said that her unelected bureaucrats are undertaking "probably the most difficult task" they have ever given themselves, "which is to intentionally transform the (global) economic development model." In 2010, German economist and Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change official Ottmar Edenhofer said, "One must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy."

The most disgusting aspect of the climate change debate is the statements by many that it's settled science. There is nothing more anti-scientific than the idea that any science idea is settled. Very often we find that the half-life of many scientific ideas is about 50 years. For academics to not criticize their colleagues and politicians for suggesting that scientific ideas are not subject to challenge is the height of academic dishonesty.

Kids sue the government to fight climate change -- and win

TEDx Talks
Published on Mar 22, 2018


World Government Summit: Leaders prioritize climate change solutions

#14995849
Hindsite wrote:Most people are followers, like those kids who are scared by their teachers, so they believe what their leaders claim is the most important things they should be concerned about.

Climate change predictions have been wrong for decades. In 1970, Harvard University biologist George Wald predicted, "Civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind." Sen. Gaylord Nelson, in Look magazine in April 1970, said that by 1995, "somewhere between 75 and 85 percent of all the species of living animals would be extinct."

Climate change propaganda is simply a ruse for a socialist agenda under globalism. Consider the statements of some environmentalist leaders. Christiana Figueres, the U.N.'s chief climate change official, said that her unelected bureaucrats are undertaking "probably the most difficult task" they have ever given themselves, "which is to intentionally transform the (global) economic development model." In 2010, German economist and Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change official Ottmar Edenhofer said, "One must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy."

The most disgusting aspect of the climate change debate is the statements by many that it's settled science. There is nothing more anti-scientific than the idea that any science idea is settled. Very often we find that the half-life of many scientific ideas is about 50 years. For academics to not criticize their colleagues and politicians for suggesting that scientific ideas are not subject to challenge is the height of academic dishonesty.

Kids sue the government to fight climate change -- and win

TEDx Talks
Published on Mar 22, 2018


World Government Summit: Leaders prioritize climate change solutions



my question was actually a real question. Not our usual good natured (I hope) ranting back and forth. I really don't understand why climate change is such an emotionally charged issue. I am hardly an expert but have noticed that there seems to be a general convergence of opinions that the climate is and has been on a warming trend for some decades now. These opinions come from a rather large number of organizations such as NASA and the NOAA that deal in mathematically measurable statistics, not talk show opinions. Certainly they are not politically pure but I feel they are relatively objective. So, I ask myself, why the politically charged hysteria over the issue? Yes there are wackos on both sides of the issue which should not be permitted to tilt the argument decisively one way or the other. I generally like to follow the money. It seems to me that money will pretty much be the prime motivator of humans in this life. Accordingly I look at the current economic setup as pertains to energy. Fossil fuels pretty much run the show (no pun intended). It is quite predictable that the fossil fuel guys do not want their party rained on by, for example, solar energy. So …. perhaps protecting vested interests and not wanting to upset the economic apple cart is behind the climate change hysteria.

In any event, it seems to me that the climate is warming and that serious destructive weather events are becoming more common. Just read the reports and study the math. But i'm not ready to fight to the death over the issue. In time the truth will out. Anyway …… I live on a hill that is 162 feet above sea level on the coast of Maine and i'll be dead before it gets real bad. Let the grand kids deal with the mess I leave behind.
#14995858
@Hindsite, Most followers were conditioned and raised to be followers. They were raised to think that they actually need to follow others to motivate themselves to work, be "happy," and not do any dangerous crime.

If you teach a child that they need a slave owner to be happy and to work, then the child will actually support slavery.
#14995860
jimjam wrote:In any event, it seems to me that the climate is warming and that serious destructive weather events are becoming more common. Just read the reports and study the math. But i'm not ready to fight to the death over the issue. In time the truth will out. Anyway …… I live on a hill that is 162 feet above sea level on the coast of Maine and i'll be dead before it gets real bad. Let the grand kids deal with the mess I leave behind.

That's the spirit. Keep looking at all your blessing now and relax and enjoy them. Leave the climate change scare to those that want to worry about it. Not us.
Praise the Lord.
#14995899
jimjam wrote: the MSM and a few dozen other sources such as NASA and NOAA all singing the same tune? A conspiracy?


It's a confluence of factors. There's definitely conspiracy and fraud, but there's also just a convergence of interests. Agencies want bigger budgets, globalist technocrats want more control over global economic development, media wants a threat to hype, politicians want a good crisis that also conveniently serves as good wedge issue, scientists want funding and career advancement and status. Mel Brooks explained a lot of it with his harrumphing functionaries gag:



That's how paradigms are established and enforced. :lol:


A good route to the truth, especially in semi psychotic areas like politics, is to follow the money. Who is getting rich over this "scam"?


Plenty of people are getting rich off this scam, from emissions trading speculators to those in the alternative energy sector that have received over two trillion dollars in subsidies and investments in less than a decade. And a better method than following the money is following the power, any crisis that can be used to radically "transform the (global) economic development model" is naturally going to be seized on by technocratic control freaks who are always looking to expand their own power and privilege.
#14995902
jimjam wrote:
In any event, it seems to me that the climate is warming and that serious destructive weather events are becoming more common.


No it doesn't, you can't detect the few tenths of a degree variation in the global average temperature or slight variations in weather patterns.


Just read the reports


I have, you should read them, they all say they can't detect any global warming signal in extreme weather patterns. Hurricanes , droughts, floods, etc haven't increased in frequency, intensity, or duration.
  • 1
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15
  • 16
  • 50

Both of them have actually my interest at heart. […]

Israel-Palestinian War 2023

As predicted, the hasbara troll couldn't quote me […]

...Gaza could become a tourist attraction if the […]

The importance of out-breeding

DOG BREEDING https://external-content.[…]