It can’t wait for Government to run your life. Not the Warmist Elite’s life
Deadly silence: The world can’t afford to ignore climate change much longer
Our government could do something about climate change, but it refuses. In fact, most elected leaders and political candidates don’t even talk about it.
As the fossil-fuel industry increasingly allied itself with Republicans to block climate action over the decades, Democrats became the party more willing to address it. But now, even many Democrats have gone quiet. As the November midterms approach, think tanks and consultants are advising them to avoid the topic global warming because “it is not a priority for voters.”
The silence is called “climate hushing,” the strategic choice to avoid talking about global warming to avoid political backlash, polarization or economic anxiety. In other words, our elected leaders should avoid mentioning the huge elephant in the room, even as it gets more dangerous.
Hardly an evening newscast goes by today without reports of major weather disasters and millions of Americans under threat of fire, flood, killer heat or other calamity. Community after community is turned to ash by wildfires, blown into rubble by tornadoes or washed away in flash floods.
That’s called “weather.” Also, why is it that the government has to Do Something? I’ve been saying for 22 years, Warmists could stop using fossil fuels in their own lives, but, most refuse to do that.
A study late last year by the Center for American Progress reported that “climate-accelerated shocks are contributing to some of the largest food price increases American families have faced in recent years.” Beef is an example — as prolonged drought reduced cattle herds, the Department of Agriculture projected a 12 percent increase in beef and veal prices.
Yeah, once you mention CAP, you’ve gone off the deep end in partisanship.
Is it possible, just possible, that “most elected leaders and political candidates don’t even talk about it” because they are persuaded that it is a vote loser?
In the end, the
global warmingclimate activists want fascist control over individuals who simply will not comply willingly.Elwood?????????????????????
Say you??????????
https://www.facebook.com/reel/2861710157526137
James,
The Heartland Institute is known for its rejection of both the scientific consensus on climate change and the negative health impacts of smoking.
The notion that global warming is saturated or maxed out has never been demonstrated. The argument (such as it is) is that more CO2 cannot cause increased warming.
We ARE fortunate that the gods gave water a high specific heat!!! Water can absord significant amounts of energy before it heats up!!
Relax. We’ve made the collective decision to allow global warming to keep on keepin’ on!!
What could we have done to reduce CO2 emissions? Europe and U.S. significatly reduced their/our emissions without fascism!!
The problem now is China, and to a lesser extent India and all the other developing nations.
Mr Donny is helping out by going all in on fossil fuels so we’ll burn it up faster. The future folks will have to replace fossil fuel energy on their own!
But Donny also just repealed the Endangerment Finding encouraging greater emissions of CO2, not to mention mercury and other heavy metals.
The future generations can find their own way, much like the Greatest Generation who weakend the current generations (boomers et al) by defeating the Nazis and Axis goons and surviving the depression, all while building modern America!! But we’re soft! We’ll make our descendants solve the problems we leave them. It’ll make ’em tough!!
Ah, scientific consensus. Would that be one that killed George Washington? You know, ALL the doctors conceded that bleeding the pneumonia patient was a cure……
So you don’t accept the scientific consensus on tobacco use? Or on CO2 causing warming?
How about:
Evolution by Natural Selection: All life on Earth shares a common ancestor and diversifies over generations through natural selection and genetic mutations.
Plate Tectonics: The Earth’s outer shell is broken into large, moving plates that slide over the mantle, causing earthquakes, volcanoes, and continental drift.
Atomic Theory: Matter is made of tiny fundamental units called atoms, which consist of protons, neutrons, and electrons.
Vaccine Safety and Efficacy: Vaccines safely train the immune system to fight diseases and do not cause autism.
Germ Theory of Disease: Specific microscopic organisms, such as bacteria and viruses, are the cause of many specific infectious diseases.
Characteristics –
Based on evidence: It emerges from converging lines of independent research, peer review, replication, and meta-analysis rather than an arbitrary decree.
Not absolute proof: It represents the best available knowledge at a given time and can evolve as new data and better testing methods emerge.
Distinct from authority: Consensus is built on transparent, data-backed peer review rather than a simple appeal to an authority figure.
Open to revision: Historical shifts and paradigm changes occur when accumulated anomalies challenge existing frameworks, which helps science progress.
So how’d that scientific consensus on Covid work out?
Got the latest booster yet, dipshit?
Bwaha! Lolgfy Rimjob!
MAGA47 Motherfucker!
Or the scientific consensus that a low fat, high carb diet was the way toward health? Or that ulcers were caused by food? “Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts” Richard Feynman, Nobel prize winning physicist
Science is always open to correction
It is always improving according to new data and observations.
Also. ,windmills do not cause cancer
Extended Interview: Air Force officer shot down in Iran on surviving behind enemy lines – CBS Video
https://commoncts.blogspot.com/2026/09/extended-interview-air-force-officer.html
The best way to get scientific consensus is to pay them. The next way is to install gatekeepers to prevent unorthodox positions from being heard. Our current system uses both. Climate change will remain consensus until people with courage break through that wall.
Scientific consensus is not science.
A scientific consensus is not an opinion or a vote. Consensus can change!! How? With more evidence!! But not with ignorant bullying.
Cancer is not a punishment from the gods.
You seem able to learn since you’ve finally stopped demanding scientific proof.
So who are the “money men” behind the “global warming hoax/scam”? The tech billionaires? The gubmints? The churches? Corporations? Cults? Do you have evidence?
The scientific consensus on global warming is that the continued and accelerating level of atmospheric CO2 is causing warming. This consensus is not “bought” or “ideological” but is based on evidence.
“Consensus” Science by a show of hands. What could go wrong?