Bill Nye the psuedo Science guy.
Okay, psuedo may be a little strong, though I suspect it would be easily enough proved. I watched a video of BNpSG vs Tucker on Fox. Nope, still don't watch FNC, but still watch clips occasionally.
By the way, I keep reading about how Tucker trashes all these people in interviews. I have watched a few, I won't lie, but am always left saying to myself, "Self, what did I miss, because I don't see how Tucker dominates these people?" Sorry, Back to BNpSG.
As I was watching the interview, I realized something very important. If you feel that the theology of man made climate change (that is what it is after all, a religion) is not a true religion or science like I do, then we need to address the real desire of their theology. The depopulation of earth. Unfortunately, Tucker didn't ask the question, and I think that no one is asking it. What is that question? First let me set a few premises.
First. Climate change is the new language, because the global warming isn't panning out, no matter what they say. A whistleblower for NOAA revealed that NOAA cooked the books. And when they sold their doctrine in Paris, decisions were made based on that false data. They have been cooking them since communism collapsed, and they needed a new control.
Second. I will grant that the climate changes. Guess what? There is a huge ball of burning gasses in our solar system that is not constant. As energy increases and decreases, the effect is felt on earth. Surprised? You would be if you listened to the High Priest of Global Warming, Algore.
Third. One thing that is never countered to these acolytes is that when they talk about how much of the earth is now too hot to live, is that there are millions of square miles of land that is now able to produce crops. So even if the temperature has gone up, there are balances.
The problem is that they have no way to say for certainty that it is directly caused by man. And so, we are asked to accept the words of their scientists. Settled Science, they say. Any scientist that says otherwise is obviously paid for by BIG OIL! Of course they don't mention that their science is paid for by even BIGGER GOVERNMENT! That is right kiddos. Their means to continue research depends on the money coming from government, which up until now, has said that carbon dioxide is a pollutant. I mean, if scientists paid for by BIG OIL may skew their results, how much more by someone with an seemingly endless supply of money?
So, BNpSG said that without man, the climate today would be the same as 1750. By the way, BNpSG, 1750 is right in the middle of what is known today as the "Little Ice Age". Hardly the baseline to compare to, but okay, fair game. The question that Tucker should have asked is...
What would the population on the earth be today, if we were still living in a pre-Industrial Revolution civilization? No antibiotics, no vaccinations, no machines to farm, no machines for transport. No telephones, TV, or internet. After all, it was the Industrial Revolution and the conveniences to daily life that allowed for some of these great discoveries.
Ever hear of Paul Ehrlich? he wrote a book called the "Population Bomb". You know, I said that Algore was the High Priest of this religion, but in reality, Mr. Ehrlich is. The root of all of climate change is not about reducing cars, or factories, it is about reducing people. The useful idiots won't admit this, they may not even know. But the honest ones do and will.
It is a religion that requires submission. It is a religion that requires sacrifice, by force. It is a religion that by destroying the economy, will ensure the reduction of population.
Well, Bill, how many people are you willing to kill, to save the planet? Be honest, and don't hide behind your creed.
By the way, I keep reading about how Tucker trashes all these people in interviews. I have watched a few, I won't lie, but am always left saying to myself, "Self, what did I miss, because I don't see how Tucker dominates these people?" Sorry, Back to BNpSG.
As I was watching the interview, I realized something very important. If you feel that the theology of man made climate change (that is what it is after all, a religion) is not a true religion or science like I do, then we need to address the real desire of their theology. The depopulation of earth. Unfortunately, Tucker didn't ask the question, and I think that no one is asking it. What is that question? First let me set a few premises.
First. Climate change is the new language, because the global warming isn't panning out, no matter what they say. A whistleblower for NOAA revealed that NOAA cooked the books. And when they sold their doctrine in Paris, decisions were made based on that false data. They have been cooking them since communism collapsed, and they needed a new control.
Second. I will grant that the climate changes. Guess what? There is a huge ball of burning gasses in our solar system that is not constant. As energy increases and decreases, the effect is felt on earth. Surprised? You would be if you listened to the High Priest of Global Warming, Algore.
Third. One thing that is never countered to these acolytes is that when they talk about how much of the earth is now too hot to live, is that there are millions of square miles of land that is now able to produce crops. So even if the temperature has gone up, there are balances.
The problem is that they have no way to say for certainty that it is directly caused by man. And so, we are asked to accept the words of their scientists. Settled Science, they say. Any scientist that says otherwise is obviously paid for by BIG OIL! Of course they don't mention that their science is paid for by even BIGGER GOVERNMENT! That is right kiddos. Their means to continue research depends on the money coming from government, which up until now, has said that carbon dioxide is a pollutant. I mean, if scientists paid for by BIG OIL may skew their results, how much more by someone with an seemingly endless supply of money?
So, BNpSG said that without man, the climate today would be the same as 1750. By the way, BNpSG, 1750 is right in the middle of what is known today as the "Little Ice Age". Hardly the baseline to compare to, but okay, fair game. The question that Tucker should have asked is...
What would the population on the earth be today, if we were still living in a pre-Industrial Revolution civilization? No antibiotics, no vaccinations, no machines to farm, no machines for transport. No telephones, TV, or internet. After all, it was the Industrial Revolution and the conveniences to daily life that allowed for some of these great discoveries.
Ever hear of Paul Ehrlich? he wrote a book called the "Population Bomb". You know, I said that Algore was the High Priest of this religion, but in reality, Mr. Ehrlich is. The root of all of climate change is not about reducing cars, or factories, it is about reducing people. The useful idiots won't admit this, they may not even know. But the honest ones do and will.
It is a religion that requires submission. It is a religion that requires sacrifice, by force. It is a religion that by destroying the economy, will ensure the reduction of population.
Well, Bill, how many people are you willing to kill, to save the planet? Be honest, and don't hide behind your creed.
Comments
Post a Comment