Topic: Reddit’s science forum banned climate deniers. - page 14. (Read 636455 times)

Yes and no and sort of. Examples.

We're not losing the art of making fire, gunpowder, IC engines, many things.

Consider. I have wikipedia, 90+gb, on a device. (kiwix.org) worried about the end of the world because of solar flares? Put that device in a tin can, along with a solar panel, seal the tin can.  Done. Wikipedia survives solar flares.

I thought about the bio issues but did not include them, yet the answer is likely the same. Until and unless people take control of such things, and put the knowledge in permanent blockchains not secreted by one government or another, high levels of risk exist, both in the possible events that may happen, and in the response to them.

I made a joke about the planet being 6000 years old here somewhere. This is the classic, tired old joke some people make against Christians and their Bible. A few days later I realized the oldest modern civilization known from historic facts was the Sumerian's. Beginning around 5,500 years ago... Göbekli Tepe maybe 12000 years old but we don't know much about it (by design?).
It is strange that glimpses of what we know as 'Technology' and our thirst to understand our reality started less than 13000 years ago, and our written history 6000 years ago. Before that we were what... Totally stupid, running around naked being eaten alive by giant moths?  Yet we are the same humans with the same brain size for at least 50000 years or way more.

Memory loss.
A civilization dies with its last survivor and its knowledge accumulated inside him/her. Other humans across the world will be fine surviving. It does not have to be a massive solar flare or an impact from outer space to kill a civilization.



I get your main point. Getting paid to keep people locked in the killing field of lies, deception and darkness may be a strange occupation in life at first, but it is simply part of human nature.
We can't control our ultimate demise, but we can feel like we can control others before everything ends for us...

Neither asteroids nor Carrington/EMF events represent certain total civilization killers.

Asteroids vary in size and hence in effect, widely. There are countless more 100 meter sized rocks that are a threat than 1 km sized. In all cases, though, they are fairly easily handled 10-100 years in advance. It's fairly true to say they cannot be diverted or destroyed on the final swing inbound even with the largest hydrogen bombs. Also we have not developed delivery systems to handle these threats. ICBMs won't do it.

EMF threats from enemy nation states have known radius in which electronics is destroyed. Infrastructure can be hardened, few or no nations have done that. Recently Trump ordered it for the USA.

Carrington events AFAIK do not present a known scale of intensity, because we understand solar thermodynamics very poorly at this time. These events might affect a part of the planet, or the largest part, depending on several factors. Hardened infrastructure is the solution here, even if a country does not have an enemy that presents a nuclear threat.

It does appear that the alarmists of climate doom, their paid Internet posters and their countless sock puppets, are a pretty cheap investment to keep the public from actually thinking their way through realistic wide scale threat scenarios and likelihoods.

I suspect that what this means is that The People, having taken Money into their own hands with bitcoin and crypto, next will have to take direct control of these various real world risks. For example, they'll / we'll need to blockchain solar data, climate data, asteroid path and orbit calculation. Because if we can't trust governments with the climate issues, which does seem well proven, there are some other things we cannot trust them with.

That in turn has implications for various political parties who claim, "Trust us. We'll take care of xyzzy..."

That's obsolete talk by the walking dead zombies of the past, but when will it be realized and actualized?

You can force people to pay a tax for an invisible threat. It is impossible to do so for a total civilization killer event everyone can see approaching day by day. The corrupted rats are always the first in their elite underground bunker anyway. It is by design.

The Derinkuyu underground city. It was built for specific reasons. Only a guess to why such gargantuan work had to be done, but I guess there are rooms ready for AOC and Al Gore...

Note that we ARE NOT TOLD to worry about asteroids destroying the Earth, or about Carrington/EMF events. I conclude that not only are the only SOLUTIONS presented for consideration are those amendable to corruption, but the only PROBLEMS we are told to worry about are those amendable to corruption.

It will be great for them indeed. Climate changes are what define our little human adventure... Look into the past, all those ancient monuments lost in a jungle, or in a desert... They thought things would stay the same forever... They were wrong.



We only have 12 years left to live according to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez...

Have you paid your Carbon Taxes lately? Participating on a popular forum like bitcoinalk has an irreversible impact on the polar manbearpig population living inside Al Gore's pocket.

Pay up, do it for the children...

Rest assured, the ONLY options which are presented for consideration are those amendable to corruption...

i also dont belive in climate change caused by human activity, besides there is much more land gain in siberia and northern asia than landloss at the coasts, go go on with climate change,

plus there will be cheaper routers through arctic for shipments between europe and asia

I might need one of those MAGA hats.

I know this. There might be some of those metrosexual pansy-waist coffee shops where you get disrespected if you wore one.

But around here, and I suspect pretty much anywhere, that would never happen in a bar.

And hotter than ever. My kind of global warming...
https://www.reddit.com/r/hottiesfortrump/

But our country is still hot!

http://weknowmemes.com/2015/07/40-gorgeous-examples-of-america-the-beautiful/

What If "Toxic Masculinity" Is The Reason For Climate Change?



When a person walks out of the grocery store holding an eco-friendly canvas bag instead of a plastic bag, what gender do you think they are? Most likely, your unconscious bias answers that they are female. This is the type of answer Dr. Aaron Brough of Utah State University is trying to get to the bottom of through his research.

Brough co-authored a paper with professors from four other universities to understand how gender norms affect sustainable decision making. They report data from seven experiments that included over 2,000 participants from the US and China. What they found was remarkable.

They found that both men and women associated doing something good for the environment with being “more feminine.” And when men’s gender identity was threatened, they tried to reassert their masculinity through environmentally damaging choices. The report states that “men may be motivated to avoid or even oppose green behaviors in order to safeguard their gender identity.” This unearths a deeply held unconscious bias that Brough and team call the “Green-Feminine Stereotype.” Once this unconscious bias is revealed, it has the potential to help society shift our increasingly precarious relationship with the environment for the better. If it remains hidden, it has the potential to greatly damage our environment permanently.


In one of Brough and the team’s experiments, both men and women were asked to recall a time when they did something good or bad for the environment. Those who recalled having done something good for the environment rated themselves as more “feminine” than those who recalled having done something bad to the environment. One might expect this type of gender stereotyping around green behavior to happen only when someone is concerned about how they appear to others. But even upon self-evaluation judged themselves feminine when acting responsibly towards the environment. This experiment shows how deeply held this bias is.

Another experiment took the idea further and applied the concept of the “Green-Feminine Stereotype” to product and brand selection. Male participants were exposed to one of two Walmart gift cards—one that used more comically feminine design elements like pink and floral selected to threaten masculine stereotypes or another gift card that was designed to not threaten masculinity. The men were then asked to make a series of choices between green and non-green products to purchase. Men who were shown the “gender threat” gift card chose more non-green products than men shown the other gift card. That means that when men felt emasculated, they asserted their masculinity and safeguarded their gender by making choices that would ultimately harm the environment.

[...]
https://www.forbes.com/sites/carolyncenteno/2019/04/03/what-if-toxic-masculinity-is-the-reason-for-climate-change/#3057f57837e4

--------------------------
I knew it the day I learned some men took control of fire 6000 years ago... What? Couldn't they use a microwave like all civilized women?

 

Wetherspoons, which has over 1,000 pubs across the UK, warned that supply of draught lager and fizzy drinks could be cut off within days.

The shortage of gas has been heightened due to warm weather across Europe and World Cup when demand for fizzy drinks and beer is higher than normal.

And Coca-Cola has "temporarily paused" some production due to the national shortage of carbon dioxide.

Pepsi Max has fallen foul of the CO2 crisis with prices up by 8 per cent and stock numbers running seriously low.

Carbon dioxide is also used to create dry ice which keeps food frozen during transportation.


----------------------------------------------------
CO2 is good for all of us. Why deny it Reddit? Rather pollution is bad for all of us. Why not focus on that and recycling, instead of good old CO2?

 

oh noes

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6639642/co2-shortage-running-out-carbon-dioxide/

My thoughts exactly.  I'll even toss you a few merit points for beating me to it.

When one knows the game, one can use bullshit propaganda from the mainstream media to hypothesis test.  Because I believe that 'global warming' is a fraud aimed at having the plebs grant full control of weather manipulation to a small handful of 'leaders', I would expect to see all kinds of hooks, backdoors, limitations, history editing, etc, in Google's 'platform' for tracking 'climate change'.

If Google does provides an honest and useful method of fully tracking what is really going on I'll be totally shocked.  IMHO, Google is totally 'in bed' with the 'global technocratic world order', and a good candidate to even be the major driving force behind the project.  Control of the weather has been a timeless desire of those who dream of power and control, and this has not diminished in modern technological age.  At all.

https://weathermodificationhistory.com/

Of course if climate data was maintained on public blockchains, then no one would be able to ADJUST IT, and a lot of problems would just go away.

But that wouldn't be acceptable to the powers that be, because it wouldn't be capable of being corrupted.

Google Teams Up With UN To Create Climate Change Tracking Platform








Tech giant Google will help the United Nations track climate change data by sharing information from its environmental satellites.

The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) announced July 16, that it was working with Google to create a platform that “aims to expand what the world knows about the impacts of human activity on global ecosystems.”

Caroline Haskins, writing for The Outline, bemoaned Trump administration cutbacks in funding for climate change research which led the UN to “lean heavily into private partnerships.” But a privately funded company producing open source data could possibly produce more accurate data than the opaque systems that created data debacles like Climategate. Unless Google’s liberal views and “shared vision” with the UN regarding climate, lead to compromises of its data.

“When completed, the platform will leverage Google’s cloud computing and earth observation public catalogs and for the first time enable governments, NGO’s and the public to track specific environment-related development targets with a user-friendly Google front-end,” a UN press release declared.


https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/business/paul-wilson/2018/07/19/google-teams-un-create-climate-change-tracking-platform

Once you start to forbid to express opinions which are not in tune with the maistream consensus, you stop being democratic, and you also stop being scientific. You basically become a fundamentalist, if not even a dictator. No matter which the arguments which you decide to forbid actually are.

Dead wrong.

It is that very conflict that is required for the advancement of science. That's the competition of ideas and of facts, through which process science slowly advances.

For science it makes no difference what "they do not like" or "what they believe in."