Gen Z Voters Have Climate Crisis (scam) At The Top Of Their Minds

Aren’t these the same people who were eating Tide Pods? And cannot get a coffee without taking a selfie?

For Gen Z voters, combating climate change is top of mind

Shaped by frequent flooding, extreme heat waves and increasingly destructive hurricanes, Generation Z is serious about taking bold action to tackle climate change. And, they are aiming to fight for it when they make their way to the polls next week.

So, they’ve been brainwashed into thinking things like this have never happened before. Can they explain how the prediction was for 14-20 storms, 6-10 being hurricanes, and 3-5 being major, when, in reality, there were just 12 storms, 5 hurricanes, and only 2 major?

“As time moves on every single moment becomes more and more of a critical point for climate action,” said Iris Zhan, an 18-year-old from Maryland who is voting for the first time this November and considers climate a top priority. “That’s where the politics and the legislation need to be to make a difference.”

In 2020, the most recent presidential election-year, 53 percent of 18-to-29-year-olds cast a ballot, a nine percentage point jump from 2016.

At that time, youth-led environmental organizations such as the Sunrise Movement mobilized millions of people to vote in record numbers, with organizers as young as 12 and 13 making countless phone calls to talk to community members about what’s at stake and registering eligible peers to vote.

The midterm elections on Nov. 8 are set to determine if young climate activists will be able to continue to throw their political weight around at a time when control of Congress is up for grabs and a majority of the top youth issues are on the ballot, including climate change, abortion, gun control and LGBTQ rights.

“If we think about what’s coming with the climate movement, when we see, you know, the young people who are protesting, who are getting trained in civil disobedience … that’s happening as the planet warms up and we experience substantial climate shocks,” said Dana Fisher, a professor of sociology at the University of Maryland who studies protest movements. “So I think what we’re going to see is that come together to push for social change.”

Social change, eh? Why does it always come down to politics? It’s almost like this isn’t a science? When do these Gen Zers give up their own big carbon footprints and practice what they preach in their own lives?

“Gen Z overall really pushes for gun safety, climate change, the right to choose. And, that’s all kind of backfired,” said Kate Fraser, a 17-year-old from Florida who is not old enough to vote during this election cycle but has been working to register hundreds of her peers to vote on a climate platform.

“I think it could absolutely be big if we actually get people registered, and we actually get people to the polls,” she said.

Just science, right?

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

28 Responses to “Gen Z Voters Have Climate Crisis (scam) At The Top Of Their Minds”

  1. Elwood P. Dowd says:

    When cons take back America, they need to take back the schools!

    You can stop teachers from mentioning global warming, the Big Bang theory, evolution, slavery, the age of the Earth or LGBTQ!

    But the dang media talks about these things on the TV and cell phones. When you take back America you might want to take control of the media, too.

    Unfortunately, an even bigger problem is that kids today have access to the internet. They can read about the threat of global warming… unless when you take back America you also take back the internet!

    This mocking of christians has to stop too, don’t you think? Church attendance in the US is dropping year after year, now at an all-time low under 50%!

    • Doom and Gloom says:

      You can stop teachers from mentioning global warming, the Big Bang theory, evolution, slavery, the age of the Earth or LGBTQ!

      You misunderstand Dowd. There is a big difference between teaching these things and preaching/Indoctrinating and brainwashing.

      There is nothing wrong with teaching global warming and giving the truth and the facts and not OH MY GAWD WERE ALL GONNA DIE and HOW DARE YOU! etc. Ad nauseum.

      Taking back the schools is a priority for MOMS and DADS. Rest assured. Then you can whine about it for the next two years.

  2. H says:

    Americans have been reducing their carbon footprint at a steady rate of 1% per year. By 2050 the carbon footprint will be at 50% or less. Probably even less if the Saudis and Russians continue to “skyrocket” their prices.
    Teach, USA oil production is at 12MM bpd.this is more than the average pumped under Trump
    Why is the price high? Do you think that if we were pumping 13MM bpd, increasing global production by 1.2%, that our gasoline price would be lower? Or would the Saudis just cut production to protect the set oil price. When the Saudis (Trump’s friend) threatened the USA with JIHAD
    For daring to sell 50MM barrels from our reserves (3.5 days US production) Biden laughed at them.

    • Jl says:

      Yes, Mr. Carbon Offset-that’s why we need more fossil fuels in the form of fracking. That’s what mainly brought down emissions, so as to make those like you scared of the CO2 molecule happy!
      I think if the crazy libs hadn’t blocked Trump from filling the Strategic Petroleum Reserve at 24 dollars a barrel, we would have had much cheaper gas, at least for a while.

  3. Elwood P. Dowd says:

    Teach: In 2020, the most recent presidential election-year, 53 percent of 18-to-29-year-olds cast a ballot, a nine percentage point jump from 2016.

    Yikes! Does that help explain President Biden’s blowout win?

    The last thing conservatives want is for more people to vote.

    • Doom and Gloom says:

      Yikes! Does that help explain President Biden’s blowout win?

      No but it does explain ballot harvesting by leftists.

      • Elwood P. Dowd says:

        Now, if you just had evidence of ballot harvesting! Surely you have evidence. Or is a claim of cheating enough?

        I did see Mark Finchem (R-AZ) interviewed yesterday and he did say they found ballot harvesting in Arizona 2020! When asked he said (lied) he wasn’t sure how many. The reporter had done his research – 4 votes. People who had delivering legit votes for friends.

        • Jl says:

          “Now, if you just had evidence…”. Asked by the person who never has evidence himself…

          • Elwood P. Dowd says:

            We’ll take that as no, there is no evidence.

            There is evidence of global warming. There is no evidence to support the Big Lie.

  4. Elwood P. Dowd says:

    Teach typed: Just science, right?

    Teach, you can’t be this dense. Nothing is just science, is it?

    Crime is on the rise, but rather than rely on anecdotes, social scientists actually collect data! Science! But it’s meaningless unless actions are taken to once again reduce crime. See? Science to determine if there’s a problem and taking necessary appropriate actions to resolve the problem.

  5. david7134 says:

    I have talked to a number of these poor kids. It is clear that they have been fed a steady diet of lies and misinformation, besides, they don’t appear very bright. And that includes folks from the east coast as well as Berkeley. In fact the elders at Berkeley clearly have lost the ability to think, much like our two trolls who seem to view themselves as intelligent. Much like the kings invisible clothes. I really fear for the coming generations as the ability to read, understand and question is very poor.

  6. Jl says:

    Funny-but there’s no empirical evidence that it’s CO2, which is the whole ballgame…

    • Elwood P. Dowd says:

      You don’t accept the evidence that CO2 absorbs infrared radiation?

      • drowningpuppies says:

        Science! Read and learn something about empirical evidence, Rimjob.

        Bwaha! Lolgf

      • James Lewis says:

        Dear Elwood:

        “There is evidence of global warming. There is no evidence to support the Big Lie.”

        I have explained this before. But I will try again.

        There is such a thing as a theory and a Scientific Theory.

        To be a Scientific Theory:

        “A scientific theory is an explanation of an aspect of the natural world and universe that has been repeatedly tested and corroborated in accordance with the scientific method, using accepted protocols of observation, measurement, and evaluation of results. Where possible, theories are tested under controlled conditions in an experiment.”

        What you have is just a theory. All it requires is conversation and belief.

        That’s also known as religion.

        • david7134 says:

          He doesn’t even have a theory, just a hypothesis. Then he runs around asking stupid questions like doe CO2 absorb radiation. Yes, big deal. That one little fact does not support a thing. But we have educated this clown and John multiple times.

        • Elwood P. Dowd says:


          Thank you. 99% of scientists disagree with your opinion.

          • James Lewis says:

            Dear Elwood:

            So 99% of scientists do not believe in what a Scientific theory is?


          • david7134 says:

            No, 99% of scientist do not adhere to the carbon religion. And that original number was made up.

          • Elwood P. Dowd says:


            Thanks. Sorry for any confusion.

            99% of scientists disagree with your opinion that global warming is hypothetical.

            The scientific theory of global warming predicts that adding CO2 to the Earth’s atmosphere will cause the Earth to warm. True dat.

            CO2 absorbs wavelengths of infrared radiation (heat) and re-releases it in the atmosphere in all directions – up, down and around. The radiation can interact with water molecules, other CO2 molecules or other greenhouse gases. If these gases absorbed ALL the escaping heat (they don’t) the Earth would be like Venus. Ask the Venusians how they feel about that!

            Is this increase in CO2 causing the Earth to warm? It is certainly consistent with known physics and chemistry. We have been conducting the critical experiment for over a century. Let’s see if increasing atmospheric CO2 increases the mean global surface temperature. It did, but correlation does not imply causation! And clearly there are other influences on the short-term mean surface temperature – volcanoes, albedo, clouds, insolation, El Nino, La Nina etc.

          • david7134 says:

            Total horse shit jeff. and the carbon god increases albedo?

  7. Elwood P. Dowd says:

    Musk is floating the idea of paid twitter accounts.

    • drowningpuppies says:

      And Rimjob cares because…?

      Bwaha! Lolgf

    • david7134 says:

      Go back and read it again. He desire $20 per month for verified accounts.

    • James Lewis says:

      Dear Elwood:

      Uh, Twitter Blue has been $4.99.

      “Twitter is strongly considering charging verified users $19.99 per month to use Twitter Blue, according to reports in The Verge and Platformer, as Elon Musk seeks alternative ways of picking up revenue.

      According to the reports, which broke Sunday, Musk, who is expected to set out more layoffs this week, has tasked staff with updating Twitter Blue and quadrupling the subscription price from its current level of $4.99 per month. If staff fail to update by November 7, they could lose their roles, according to the reports.

      Twitter Blue is a feature for verified users, those with a blue tick, that unlocks additional features. Under Musk’s plan, these thousands of verified users would have 90 days to subscribe to the new version or lose their blue tick — seen as a badge of honor in many professions.

      One of Musk’s major moves since his botched acquisition of Twitter first started gaining traction has been to focus on verified accounts and bots.”

      Looks like no more free rides for Lefties.

      • Professor Hale says:

        Botched acquisition? Last I looked, Musk owned Twitter. looks like a successful acquisition to me.

    • Professor Hale says:

      There are already paid twitter accounts. They are negotiating a new price, not the concept of paying for it. As the old joke goes, “we have already established what kind of girl you are”.

      It would be great to charge everyone a one time or nominal annual fee. That would cull the bots from the site. Spammers aren’t going to pay $10-20 for each bot account.

  8. Jl says:

    it’s basically saturated at this wavelength. It’s been shown that clouds, or lack of, and/or shortwave radiation, have a much greater effect. CO2 absorbs infrared radiation, but there’s no evidence that’s causing warming.

Pirate's Cove