TheGuySwann on nostr

Open in Damus

@TheGuySwann 1765909097

It really is wild to me that the propaganda has been so strong that people literally think CO2 is bad for the environment. Even people trying to counter the idea, tacitly frame their position in this direction (like but methane is even worse!) to not cause outrage.

CO2 is literally the only reason an environment exists. It is the literal life creator.

It's like demonizing language itself as being "bad for communication."

6215❤️51🤙7❤️3💯3🚀2🧡2

From Los Angeles Times, June 30, 1989: "Entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000", a senior U.N. environmental official said. It's been over 36 years since that prediction and absolutely nothing like t...

Toxic Bitcoiner · 13w

Fun, inconvenient observation: As CO2 increases, the stomata on plant leaves don’t need to open as much to intake CO2, which also means that the plant retains more H2O. More H2O retainment means that plants can survive in more arid environments. Which means that plants can encroach further into de...

Tjefferson · 13w

People are brainwashed.

Big Barry Bitcoin · 13w

Specifically, your language. And your CO2

Sid Shattuck · 13w

I share an office with some executives that are entirely focussed on "decarbonization". That's their job. It is quintessentially fiat. Imagine trying to have a conversation with these people.

solipsist · 13w

Okay, so let me use a metaphor: you have an outdoor plant, that needs to be watered only every once in a while, it adapted to the surroundings and the climate, and the rain itself is sufficient for it to grow and stay healthy. Sometimes it rains more, sometimes less, but overall the plant can handle...

https://youtu.be/VXwOQENL3fg Go to 9:30.

they legit demonize language itself too

This graph shows the outflow of energy depending of the different atmosphere composition. TLDR, There is literally no effect of doubling the amount of CO2. https://cdn.nostrcheck.me/7de24b6373777d4b04b9bcc0f21b5d9c3ac75bbf5265152d63d64358edf42e63/105a115fcd3ab3d4ec0ae8c8b522ad0e14ba5a67cc1439ee216f6...

dudewithaj · 13w

I see what you’re saying, but there is merit in the concern around absolute obliteration of entire ecosystems that have maintained our climate for millennia. Factory farming is fiat. Covering the earth in corn, soy, and wheat just to feed other farmed animals is fiat. Destroying the lungs of our...

We are the carbon they want to get rid of.

Chad Lupkes · 13w

Life will survive. Life will adapt. Life will thrive in the new environmental conditions. That's not in question. Humanity in our current form evolved to live within the web of life. That web of life evolved to thrive at concentrations below 320 ppm, in patterns that go back a million years. Th...

nostrich · 13w

https://skepticalscience.com/global-warming-positives-negatives-advanced.htm Here your claim seems to be the number 3 of the most used climate myths and what the science really says list. Also, inb4 misquoting Ioannidis et al. about why most science is wrong and all

₿en Wehrman · 13w

How far down the geoengineering rabbit hole are you? Provides a lot of context on why such ridiculous ideas are pushed onto the public to focus on