Global Climate DisruptionTM - The Politics (Part 2)

Posted On: Wednesday - January 11th 2017 9:43AM MST
In Topics: 
  Lefty MegaStupidity  TV, aka Gov't Media  Global Climate Stupidity  Globalists

Continuing on from here, we must discuss what are the methods the elite and their leftist and treehugger sycophants use to push this agenda. First, it should be added right here, that we at PeakStupidity do not believe in some overarching conspiracy on the part of the elites. They are not smart enough for that. It's just, that with issues like this many think and act the same way with the same motives.

Due to the fact that the public still stupidly gets much of their news (and opinion pushed at them) by the Gov't/fake media via TV, the part played by the "journalists" in the spreading of the whole doomsday Global Climate DisruptionTM meme (yeah, meme, because that's all the hell it really is, one big meme) is major. As we left off this post with, the journalists are not bright enough, even if they actually try to be honest, to understand a scientific paper. It is very important to keep the viewers, so of course the stories will lean toward some worst case scenario inferred from the science papers. Again, once they get in the limelight to any degree, the scientists themselves will be loath to downplay any limitations and wide tolerance bands of their doomsday-forecasting models. That would put a damper on things.

A very good example of this behavior is the case of one Carl Sagan, a former (well dead now) cosmologist (to be neither confused with the cosmetologists (cuter but dumber) nor the climatologists (medium intelligence with some make-up on due to TV)). He became a media darling because he was good at explaining the astrophysics, that he studied, to the public. He was the go-to guy for any story on TV about astronomy and physics on the large-scale. I'm guessing he was a good scientist back when that's all he was, but he let the media attention get to his head. In the latter part of his life, he was all into the whole "nuclear winter" (called "nuculer winner" where I lived) thing. That was the projected - using math models again - changes to the entire earth's atmosphere in the even of major nuclear war. It turned out later that it was mostly a lot of hooey. Hey, listen, none of us want nuclear war, especially us at PeakStupidity (we just payed for a multi-year hosting agreement, for crying out loud). But, please, don't give us some BS just to scare us, or we will quit believing your lyin' asses. Hmmmm... that brings up right back to the topic of the post again.

One of the methods used to push this multi-decade GCDTM dealio is to change the language. One will hear and read the word "emissions" wrt CO2 all the time, for example, in order to conjure up the idea of it being a "pollutant". Without any argument about the greenhouse effect involved (and we don't have any), Carbon Dioxide gas is just plain NOT POLLUTION in ANY SENSE of the word! Even if the climate models were accurate (retro-spoiler alert: they're NOT), CO2 gas is a natural part of the atmosphere. (I really believe that some want the most gullible part of the public to confuse this with CO, carbon monoxide, which is poisonous.) I particularly don't like the use of the term "by-product" for the CO2 resulting from combustion. Nitrogen Oxides are BY-PRODUCTS, i.e., they can result from non-optimal combustion where the Nitrogen from the air is involved in an unwanted reaction. Sorry to tell you, but CO2 is a PRODUCT of any combustion of HYDROCARBONS (molecules of CARBON, C, and HYDROGEN, H) in Air. The Hydrogen combines with Oxygen, making water*, and the Carbon combines with Oxygen, making Carbon Dioxide, and hopefully the Nitrogen - in the form of N2, 80% of the composition of the air - stays put (inert). Those are the 2 PRODUCTS, so quit using wrong terminology, people.

Now, I'm not letting all scientists in the field off the hook either, as might be assumed by this and previous posts on this topic.

There will be a small post about the scientists role in the politics, and another post about the high level globalist scum that use this meme as another tool in their control-freak toolbox. Stay tuned, don't change the frequency of your router!

*Water has its own "greenhouse effect", and is much more a factor in this process than CO2, which should be accounted for in any mathematical model. Why do we not hear much about "water emissions"? We here at PeakStupidity know the answer, as we note stupidity as soon as we see it.

No comments

WHAT SAY YOU? : (PLEASE NOTE: You must type capital PS as the 1st TWO characters in your comment body - for spam avoidance - or the comment will be lost!)