How in the world could anyone ignore what is happening the sky day after day. Do these planes have to do figure 8’s before people start paying attention? Unless major cities have moved around in the past 20 years, they aren’t following predictable (or historical) flight paths. Often they’re not even flying in a straight line, hundreds of miles from the nearest airport. And the phrase “blue sky” seems to be largely obsolete, a relic of an earlier time, you know, like arrowheads from the stone age. But only on certain days. If you actually start paying attention to your local weather broadcaster, compare the low-lying hazy streams that you often see after “sunny day” forecasts with ordinary low-lying cumulus clouds. (not high-flying cirrus clouds) You know, the ones that look like cotton balls? Kinda like clouds look? Hmmm…
Here’s a good intro to cloud physics: http://ffden-2.phys.uaf.edu/211_fall2010.web.dir/Levi_Cowan/index.html
If you don’t see the profit/social control/population control motivations behind the AGW hoax it’s because you don’t think like a rockefeller. Consider yourself lucky. Now consider this: if the planet really is your plantation via the fake money scam ( http://thoughtcrimeradio.net/2017/03/censored-ben-franklin-on-the-real-cause-of-the-american-revolution/ ) and all the other scams laundered through wall street and london, you’re aleady running out of new business opportunities. You need to manufacture crises and their subsequent “cleanups” to keep the profits coming in. This is called disaster capitalism and it’s fostered through techniques such as the “Shock Doctrine” (see the book). It’s just a variation on agriculture: invest some energy in manipulating and disrupting natural processes (in this case the natural process of human socioeconomic self-organization) and reap the harvest later. Just another business model for the ubergarchs:
AGW is an excuse to impose carbon credits and global taxation to finance global government and the disaster capitalist business model. Seriously, they’re that brazen. Why not? They own most of the media and the vast majority of the people blindly follow whatever their trusted friends on the TV screen say. When TV’s are enhanced to include neural interfaces to the viewer then trust will give way to dopamine hits. I’m only half joking.
Here’s an obvious elephant in the living room: http://thoughtcrimeradio.net/2018/08/soros-backed-media-matters-pushes-facebook-to-eliminate-global-warming-deniers/
But I’m sure I’m arguing with our authority simulacrums because I hate babies and apple pie.
(Natural News) The great social media purge of 2018 is showing no signs of slowing down: Now that Alex Jones has been banned, the left-wing is on a power trip — and they’re already demanding more censorship. Media Matters, a left-wing organization funded by George Soros, has already stepped up to the soapbox, calling out Facebook for allowing “climate deniers” to have space on the network.
Writing for The Guardian, Dana Nuccitelli also recently called out the social media giant, with a headline declaring, “Facebook video spreads climate denial misinformation to 5 million users.” She goes on to argue that fake news is still running amok at Facebook. The call to silence anyone who presents opposing information is strong, and it’s coming from a variety of fronts.
Climate science is far from settled
The truth is that there is plenty of science to support the notion that global warming as we’ve come to know it is a hoax. Earlier this year, a pair of climate experts re-assessed simulations carried out by the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The team ultimately found the future impact of climate change was overstated by up to 45 percent.
In 2017, a shocking report revealed that climate scientists had been fudging temperature data to make climate change look more pronounced. The science on climate change is far from a settled matter. Multiple reports have shown that much of the science surrounding climate change has been tampered with in one way or another.
Science that contradicts previously held beliefs is not automatically “fake news.” If that were the case, we’d all still believe the Earth is flat. It is wrong to silence every point of view that doesn’t align with left-wing dogma. These are important studies and people have the right to know about them. People have the right to hear and see divergent opinions: It encourages critical thinking and independent thought.
More censorship coming down the pike
Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg stated in a recent interview that he does not support flat-out banning “climate denial” or similar ideas. He reportedly commented, “Our goal with fake news is not to prevent anyone from saying something untrue — but to stop fake news and misinformation spreading across our services. If something is spreading and is rated false by fact checkers, it would lose the vast majority of its distribution in News Feed.”
Zuckerberg espoused similar sentiments regarding InfoWars before banning him from the site. How long will it take for the Zuck to cave into the pressure from Democrats and left-wing organizations this time remains to be seen. But one thing is for sure: The Left doesn’t want conservatives to have any space to voice their opinions, at all.
As Media Matters writes, “Combating fake news is key to combating climate change. As an editorial in the journal Nature Communications argued last year, ‘Successfully inoculating society against fake news is arguably essential’ if major climate initiatives are to succeed. Facebook could be a big part of the solution.”
They go on to accuse Facebook of “kowtowing” to conservatives; it would seem the Left won’t be happy until the conservative voice has been erased from the internet entirely. The notion of inoculating society against certain points of view is particularly troublesome — it’s as if the Left is admitting they want to control what people think.
The censorship of Alex Jones was just the beginning. Now liberals want to censor climate science — what will come next, censoring pro-liberty speech?
See coverage of real climate news at ClimateScienceNews.com.
Sources for this article include: