Topic: Hoax is a hoax - page 8. (Read 2037 times)

Whilst we're on the subject of conspiracies I'd like to offer my own: the Russians benefit from global warming!
At least as far as I see it from my admittedly amateur position. GW opens up the vast Siberian wastelands for habitation and development. Whilst everyone else bakes and suffers with fire and drought, the great wastes of Russia gradually thaw out. Russian influence on the world has been far smaller than you'd expect over the years, given its size - largely because it lacks a warm water port - global warming will provide the answer to this as well.

What do people think? Does this sound reasonable?

I can understand people saying 'conspiracy!' when it's just a few voices claiming something as fact. But when it is literally thousands of the world's greatest experts, armed with vast amounts of cold hard facts, surely it becomes harder to dismiss?
Soon the conspiracy will be so big that almost the entire world will be in on it!

The article you linked talks briefly about how some climate change people are taking things to court to make climate change a legal thing. Let's get the scientists on the stand, themselves, under oath, so that they can show exactly the research that they did, and swear that it is as they say.

Then, let the opposition do the same.

But before this is done, we need to get the media on the stand to prove that there were 11,000 scientists the way they say.

Are they all willing to put their money where their mouths are? If they aren't, this is simply some kind of a game they are playing. but it might turn into damage for the public if they are lying, or don't know what they are talking about.

Btw, we need more CO2 in the atmosphere so we get more GW, so that we get more moisture and heat up there, so that we can open more lands up for cultivation and habitation.

^^^




Robert Simmon Big Blue Marble "It Has to Be Interview" -- https://youtu.be/CbRQlgt0mfE

There are countless thousands of globe photos. But fanatics are simply dismissing them without any argumentation.
All what they can say is "CGI" or "Photoshop". Then why even bother to ask, you will tell the same.

Yeah, good luck with that:


Turns out the nuclear people are even more serious about keeping the truth under wraps than the missile commanders defending the Antarctic ice wall.

^^^ You mean like the fact NASA can't produce a photograph of the globe or, that I can go swimming and drink the water in the cooling pool of a uranium nuclear plant with no ill effects?

Feel free to disregard everything I say, you tow the "official narrative" on every issue thus it's pearls before swine offering you any facts. If you're interested in any of my claims then do your own research.

Evidence is a hoax, though? Fact is a hoax?
You can't just dismiss facts without considering them and explaining why you disagree.

Globe earth is a hoax, "global warming" is a hoax, the dangers of atomic energy is a hoax and, "peak oil" is a hoax.

Jesuit mind control is a fucking bitch, remember the 5th of November!

-- https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/

You forgot that global warming is a hoax as well. Recursion.

Facts and evidence aren't enough to convince people though. We have mountains of factual evidence, and still that isn't sufficient proof.
Just yesterday, 11,000 scientists published a paper warning of a climate emergency (and including lots of evidence, 29 charts to start with, plus references to supplementary evidence). They also list the actions we need to take. That is, actions to change human behaviour, to rein in human-caused climate change:

• Use energy far more efficiently and apply strong carbon taxes to cut fossil fuel use
• Stabilise global population – currently growing by 200,000 people a day – using ethical approaches such as longer education for girls
• End the destruction of nature and restore forests and mangroves to absorb CO2
• Eat mostly plants and less meat, and reduce food waste
• Shift economic goals away from GDP growth

Well, if we will talk seriously, there are places on Earth where natural backround is much higher than that in the Exclusion Zone.

Like this place, for example:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramsar,_Mazandaran

http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2018/ph241/lance2/

People are living there, and there is a significant tourist flow. Nice place for vacation, but not for those who like to drink alcohol because it's banned in Iran. 

All you are showing that if hoaxes are hoaxes, we can't believe anything until it is taken to a jury with real tests, and real witnesses, and evidence, before we can believe. Get them on the stand, under oath with penalty of death, and let them prove what they are saying.

or take a geiger counter on a world tour
if you hear lots of clicking noises.. try not to stay there too long or you'll get more than just a tan

That's the case for sure. I suppose we need to ask local representatives for Zionist Occupational Government. Maybe they have declassified some papers.
But even their refusal to answer will serve as confirmation.

So you're saying the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone is just a cover-up for the fact that it was really a gas explosion? But then what was the gas explosion a cover-up for? (They're always a cover-up for something, aren't they?)

Nuclear energy is a government conspiracy. There are no NPPs.
The so-called NPPs are secretly burning gas to generate power, while the gas is delivered via underground pipelines.

I think I've argued against you on most of those. Not nuclear weapons yet though.
Do you believe in nuclear power stations? That might be a good starting point.

Here are a few of my favorite hoaxes:

Atheism,
Gravity,
The Big Bang,
Outer Space,
Planets,
The Globe,
Evolution,
Dinosaurs,
Everything NASA,
Nuclear Weapons.

my sentiment is that some atrocities did occur people did die, buildings were destroyed and such.
but
although there was before isis alot of radicals who were angry about the abuses they received due to the many wars of the ottoman era all the way through to the gulf wars (1900-2000)
but after the millenium. the organisation and formalisation of all the radicals became a planned group.
funny part is in the UK a few years back there was news of stuff happening in the middle east. they had someone that was so called high up in the rankings who was organising attacks and doing propaganda stuff to recruit radicals..
the guy was a british. went to british schools and colleges and had business management skills due to his university degree.

so his particular 'cell' was of british management as h was nicknamed because he and a few other british based leaders were given the tag the beatles and h was called jihadi john.

so t me if it wasnt for the management/formalisation of the cults of radicals.. the radicals as independant nut cases would have just been angry armchair activists that their ancestors got hurt. and less recent events would have occured without the formalisation of the group(s)

so. in summary
dead or secretly alive being questioned in Guantanamo style prison.. doesnt matter. as long as there is no/less leaders organising the radicals. then great.
so unless a vido surfaces that shows h is alive and organising more attacks, it just doesnt matter