Jump to content

Chief minister declares climate emergency


Albert Tatlock
 Share

Recommended Posts

Certain Governments have the technology to alter weather, hence some unusual weather fluctuations across the world using HAARP

What I do not understand is if they can create snow to fall and lay in the Saudi Arabian desert, then why can't they freeze the so called icebergs in Antartica unless it follows what GD4XXX said a few posts ago?

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, manxy said:

Certain Governments have the technology to alter weather, hence some unusual weather fluctuations across the world using HAARP

What I do not understand is if they can create snow to fall and lay in the Saudi Arabian desert, then why can't they freeze the so called icebergs in Antartica unless it follows what GD4XXX said a few posts ago?

They really don’t manxy. Honest

Edited by dilligaf
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We are such a bunch of mugs and so easily manipulated. If people don't pretty quickly wise up and not accept everything they're told at face value, we're going to end up worse off than farmyard animals - with the same fate in store for us.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Moghrey Mie said:

I'm waiting for the 'action' to begin. We've had enough promises about how wonderful it will be in the future.

One thing it will not be is wonderful. We're aiming for the least worst-case scenario.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/12/2019 at 3:55 PM, GD4XXX said:

It's all a giant con trick:

First a problem is created and designed to elicit a certain reaction out of the public. Then the people demand something be done about the problem and willingly accept the pre-planned solution; a solution that always involves actions or legislation that never would have passed under normal circumstances.

It works like this – the 'manipulating body' covertly creates a non-existent problem and then directs the media to incessantly focus on it without recourse. The problem could be anything – a war, a financial collapse, a rash of child abductions, or global warming. The power of the media can create the false perception that a big problem exists, even if it doesn’t … Once you have created this problem you make sure that an individual, a group or an aspect of society is blameworthy. This then rallies the population behind the desperate lunge for a solution to the problem. ‘Something must be done!’ they cry in unison. The people that created the problem in the first place then come back in and offer the solution that the people demand. Remember – the people screaming for a solution do not know that the problem was artificially created in the first place. The solution to the problem is always a further curtailment of freedom and/or massive tax rises  – which is precisely what the manipulating body wanted from the outset.

 

What a load of tosh.  Perhaps read NASA's opinion or Skeptical Science's opinion :

 

"Expert consensus is a powerful thing. People know we don’t have the time or capacity to learn about everything, and so we frequently defer to the conclusions of experts. It’s why we visit doctors when we’re ill. The same is true of climate change: most people defer to the expert consensus of climate scientists. Crucially, as we note in our paper:

Public perception of the scientific consensus has been found to be a gateway belief, affecting other climate beliefs and attitudes including policy support.

That’s why those who oppose taking action to curb climate change have engaged in a misinformation campaign to deny the existence of the expert consensus. They’ve been largely successful, as the public badly underestimate the expert consensus, in what we call the “consensus gap.” Only 16% of Americans realize that the consensus is above 90%."

 

Or even wikipedia on the scientific consensus

It suits people to deny it so they don't have to feel guilty about doing nothing, do anything that makes them feel uncomfortable or consider denying themselves of the pleasure they currently feel from indulging in wasteful, harmful practices

the con trick is the deniers and you may as well be a flat-earther as to deny climate change.

 

Edited by Butterflies
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Butterflies said:

What a load of tosh.  Perhaps read NASA's opinion or Skeptical Science's opinion :

 

"Expert consensus is a powerful thing. People know we don’t have the time or capacity to learn about everything, and so we frequently defer to the conclusions of experts. It’s why we visit doctors when we’re ill. The same is true of climate change: most people defer to the expert consensus of climate scientists. Crucially, as we note in our paper:

Public perception of the scientific consensus has been found to be a gateway belief, affecting other climate beliefs and attitudes including policy support.

That’s why those who oppose taking action to curb climate change have engaged in a misinformation campaign to deny the existence of the expert consensus. They’ve been largely successful, as the public badly underestimate the expert consensus, in what we call the “consensus gap.” Only 16% of Americans realize that the consensus is above 90%."

 

Or even wikipedia on the scientific consensus

It suits people to deny it so they don't have to feel guilty about doing nothing, do anything that makes them feel uncomfortable or consider denying themselves of the pleasure they currently feel from indulging in wasteful, harmful practices

the con trick is the deniers and you may as well be a flat-earther as to deny climate change.

 

Anyone who denies climate change is nuts, but the question is, how much of it can be reversed by changing man's activities? There's no doubt that we have contributed to the current changes in some way but isn't the climate always changing? Doesn't the climate change and land also rise and fall due to volcanic activity? 

One of the problems with relying on a consensus is that even there there is an unwillingness to listen to views that disagree which can finish the careers of those who question it. This leads to the allegations of conspiracies by governments etc. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Somebody has obviously pointed out to him the various money spinning whilst preaching opportunities. The headline in the examiner is no more fossil fuel heating for new houses. Presumably they'll all be using electric instead. Those protesting kids were mere prawns in the game, I suspect Phil the gawne led them out like the pied Piper.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, the stinking enigma said:

Somebody has obviously pointed out to him the various money spinning whilst preaching opportunities. The headline in the examiner is no more fossil fuel heating for new houses. Presumably they'll all be using electric instead. Those protesting kids were mere prawns in the game, I suspect Phil the gawne led them out like the pied Piper.

Be pretty damn convenient in respects of bills to help pay off the MUA debt for the foreseeable future too.

As for the Pied Piper. The story was a musician leading the kids and longtails. Not a longtail leading the kids and politicians, surely? :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/12/2019 at 3:55 PM, GD4XXX said:

It's all a giant con trick:

First a problem is created and designed to elicit a certain reaction out of the public. Then the people demand something be done about the problem and willingly accept the pre-planned solution; a solution that always involves actions or legislation that never would have passed under normal circumstances.

It works like this – the 'manipulating body' covertly creates a non-existent problem and then directs the media to incessantly focus on it without recourse. The problem could be anything – a war, a financial collapse, a rash of child abductions, or global warming. The power of the media can create the false perception that a big problem exists, even if it doesn’t … Once you have created this problem you make sure that an individual, a group or an aspect of society is blameworthy. This then rallies the population behind the desperate lunge for a solution to the problem. ‘Something must be done!’ they cry in unison. The people that created the problem in the first place then come back in and offer the solution that the people demand. Remember – the people screaming for a solution do not know that the problem was artificially created in the first place. The solution to the problem is always a further curtailment of freedom and/or massive tax rises  – which is precisely what the manipulating body wanted from the outset.

 

David Icke coined it "problem-reaction-solution".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Albert Tatlock said:

Just introduce a large tax on families with more than two kids. 'Save the planet...keep it in your pants'.

 

Nonsense!

A girl i know has just had her tenth manx child.good luck to her and what an amazing achievement. The more the merrier!

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...