Imgflip Logo Icon

What if i told you

What if i told you | WHAT IF I TOLD YOU; MOST PEOPLE BELIEVE IN CLIMATE CHANGE BECAUSE THEY WERE TOLD TO BELIEVE IN IT | image tagged in what if i told you | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
429 views 32 upvotes Made by sharps45 1 month ago in politics
What if i told you memeCaption this Meme
54 Comments
8 ups, 4w
Upvoted. No surprise. It's the simple truth. People are supposedly taught the 'science' during their public school years and then told to forget the science in the face of leftist based ideology and scams. So that's what all to many of these natural sheeple types do.
6 ups, 4w,
3 replies
made w/ Imgflip meme maker
4 ups, 4w
Excellent!!
2 ups, 4w,
1 reply
Damnit
1 up, 4w,
1 reply
heh heh
1 up, 4w,
1 reply
Do you believe in Climate CHange?
0 ups, 3w,
1 reply
Climate Change has been a reality on Earth for 5 billion years Here are the major fluctuations over the
last 2500 years, some hotter than no | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
Great term, because it's indisputable. Global Warming ran aground in 2000 after crawling higher till 1999. I was supposed to be able to grow mangoes out back by now.

But I found your comment to be funny, short and to the point.
0 ups, 3w
But like its caused by humans
0 ups, 3w,
2 replies
Certainly no shill for Big Coal here but there's a bit more context to this story.

Firstly, it's a few years old (although that's by the by).

The Keyenberg wind park next to the Garzweiler coal mine consisted of only 8 turbines. They were built in 2001 and govt subsidies only run for 20 years, so they were at an age when they could be decommissioned or replaced with newer versions anyway (or at least make less financial sense to keep operating). Since they were old, they were much less efficient than newer turbines. Expanding the mine if necessary and thus dismantling the turbines was already (apparently) in the contract when they were built over 20 years ago.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/oct/26/german-windfarm-coalmine-keyenberg-turbines-climate

Germany is still due to phase out coal plants by 2030. It was actually originally 2038, but RWE, the company that owns the mine, did a deal in 2022 with the German govt to bring the date forward.

So they dug up the old turbines as part of the original agreement, but later separately committed to ending coal extraction 8 years earlier than planned in exchange for keeping a couple of plants running longer than scheduled. Energy security concerns, (especially in light of the Ukraine war), and due to Germany scaling back nuclear, played a part. Germany is still building 100s of wind farms on other sites every year and has set a target of 80% renewables by 2030 (100% by 2035) and being carbon neutral by 2045.

https://www.rechargenews.com/energy-transition/well-more-than-compensate-rwe-defends-green-credentials-in-scrap-wind-for-coal-mine-row/2-1-1343916?zephr_sso_ott=BePtwd
https://www.iea.org/countries/germany

https://www.cleanenergywire.org/news/germanys-aim-80-percent-renewables-electricity-2030-well-within-reach-minister#

It's still controversial (especially given lignite is one of the dirtier forms of coal) and obviously not a good look. Building new wind farms takes a lot longer than just replacing turbines on an existing site, even if it was only a few turbines. So lots of protests ensued. "Naturally", Greta was there. But it's not like Germany is suddenly rolling back on its renewables targets and digging up turbines everywhere to ramp up coal mining.

https://brusselssignal.eu/2023/08/germany-starts-dismantling-wind-farm-to-make-room-for-lignite-coal-mine/

https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/comments/1657uiy/germany_begins_dismantling_wind_farm_for_coal/

PS Feel free to fact check any of this.
0 ups, 3w
Yes, there are more trees on the planet now than over a decade ago. Thanks to India and China using fossil fuels... NASA said so.
0 ups, 3w,
1 reply
Certainly Obtuse
0 ups, 3w,
1 reply
Sorry, who's being obtuse? I mentioned Universal Basic Income in a separate comment as one option in the (hypothetical) context of AI and automation potentially replacing jobs. I don't know if that will ever happen or is even viable. It's never been tested on a large scale (but small-scale trials have shown promising results). Are you making an acute observation? 🤔

And I pointed out some background to this story above about a wind farm being dismantled to allow for expansion of a coal mine, because some important relevant details were left out of the original post and it was potentially misleading. Details matter. Many others would not take the time to do that and would just post personal insults, resort to whataboutery, or refuse to dialogue. Everything I post is free to be challenged and you can check all the sources yourself to scrutinize them or suggest better ones.

Also correction to the above: I meant "100s of wind turbines*", not farms.

And yes, global greening is a thing and I believe you are correct. It's a fascinating phenomenon, actually. As CO2 levels rise, the planet actually initially gets greener up to a point as it encourages plant growth. But this is complex and doesn't take into account other problems like biodiversity loss and ecosystem disruption, and simultaneous desertification and loss of permafrost and ancient forests in other areas, among other things. More trees in one area doesn't necessarily offset environmental damage elsewhere on the globe.

Admittedly according to my understanding because I don't have a PhD in Climate Science or a relevant field. And I don't claim to be an expert. If any actual climate scientists would like to weigh in, that's welcome. I'm just a layperson trying to make sense of a highly complex phenomenon that I'm not even sure anyone fully understands, as I assume many (if not most) here also are.
0 ups, 3w
ok
4 ups, 3w
6 ups, 4w,
1 reply
Welll, those people are idiots.
3 ups, 4w
*It's taken 60yrs for Henry Kissinger's pet student to get things set up for this moment in time, allegedly

https://www.weforum.org/about/klaus-schwab/
4 ups, 4w,
1 reply
0 ups, 3w,
1 reply
2 ups, 3w,
1 reply
Coming out of the little ice age and that scary graph of 100 years goes up one degree. Big scare for no reason
0 ups, 3w,
1 reply
you see that big spike at the end of my other post? and the little ice age took hundreds of years to develop, as seen by this picture.
2 ups, 3w
I'd put more stock in contemporary reports of failed crops and famine than scientists trying to score some research bucks
4 ups, 4w
At least Global Warming/Cooling makes sense. 'climate change' covers whatever we say today.

WYTM 201
https://youtu.be/vDGorIWYz-A?si=fYmVR1GgKs2LqeIm
2 ups, 4w,
1 reply
Amen,

https://www.weforum.org/about/leadership-and-governance/

...and AL GORE invented the internet so he one day could be on the Board of Directors
with Biden's appointee to the World Bank, whom is on the Board of Directors also with Kamala Harris great plans that she made up all by herself for her 2021 PCA Partnership for Central America. (Like a good Marxist, it was/is a melding of Private and Public Tax Money, USAID for Social Engineering) And the 2025 hotlist of 116 Young Global Leaders under 40 years old, practicing age discrimination for the alleged purpose of eliminating the USA and destroying the Bill of Rights of the USA Constitutional Republic from within. Who knew UTOPIA could originate from such an elite group of humans? Right?

www.wef.ch/ygl25

*Ivanka Trump was once on this list, yet at age 43, she's timed-out on their definition of "young".

https://www.marketplace.org/story/2021/05/28/harris-engages-companies-to-help-central-american-economies
2 ups, 3w,
1 reply
Al Gore *did not* invent the internet. Not sure where you got that idea from or if you're just messing around and I missed the joke. Presumably, you're referring to a CNN interview he gave in 1999, in which he said:

"During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet."

This was later commented on by two of the *actual* pioneers of the internet, Cerf and Kahn (see below), who in fact wrote in defence of Gore:

"But as the two people who designed the basic architecture and the core protocols that make the Internet work, we would like to acknowledge VP Gore's contributions as a Congressman, Senator and as Vice President. No other elected official, to our knowledge, has made a greater contribution over a longer period of time."

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/internet-of-lies/

The idea that Al Gore "invented the internet", or even explicitly claimed to, is a myth and was debunked ages ago. He was just sloppy and careless with his words.

What actually happened:

The internet was a collaborative effort involving dozens of scientists and engineers over many decades, the most well known of them being US engineers Vinton Cerf and Robert Kahn, who were instrumental in coming up with the TCP/IP, which is the suite of protocols that the internet is built on.

https://www.history.com/articles/who-invented-the-internet

https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/government/cerf-kahn-bio.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_protocol_suite

As for the World Wide Web, which is not the same as the internet, it's common knowledge that that was invented by a British computer scientist, Tim Berners-Lee.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Berners-Lee

PS I agree that arbitrary age limits (especially upper age limits) are very annoying, actually, and they do my head in too (although tbf it is called "Young Global Leaders" and there's no shortage of schemes around the world that have similar age cutoffs). But there's no conspiracy going on.

The Young Republicans is just one of countless examples of programmes open to people within a specific age range (in this case, 18–40). It's a pro-Republican movement and "the oldest political youth organization in the United States". You can look them up for yourself if you want.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Young_Republicans
2 ups, 3w
Well, since you are so up on AL GORE,
be so kind as to tell us why such an upstanding statesman, a former Vice President of the USA, could possibly quote verbatim (Theodor Adorno) in reply to a question in a recent interview with Bill Maher,
and give us your insight as to why AL DOES NOT attribute his important quote,
to the person he quoted?
3 ups, 4w,
1 reply
2 ups, 4w
Don't confuse me with facts, my mind is made up!
4 ups, 4w,
3 replies
Nope, we were shown data and arguments.
As for people who don't believe in it, where do they get that belief from? 🤔
6 ups, 4w,
1 reply
From reading the data and arguments in the reports, not just the introduction and cover letters
5 ups, 4w,
1 reply
The same ones you look ay
2 ups, 4w,
1 reply
🤔
3 ups, 4w,
1 reply
Try the UN Climate Change report. You'll find computer predictions that have never been close, and the scientists admit it. Also check historical records and how temps have been far warmer in the past. Of course you won't
4 ups, 4w,
2 replies
It's too much effort to possibly destroy a long held belief, that's why
4 ups, 4w
Exactly precisely
1 up, 3w,
2 replies
Anthropogenic climate change (ACC) is not a "belief", btw. I don't "believe" in climate change the same way I might believe in fairies, leprechauns, a flat earth, The Flying Spaghetti Monster, that my grandma makes the best apple pie in the world, the New England Patriots are the "best" NFL team in history, Bill Gates is secretly a lizard, or that Elon Musk is an alien from the X Persei star system. (Actually tbf that last one could be true. 🤔👽)

I simply accept the consensus of the vast majority of climate scientists based on a large body and decades of research, hypotheses, experiments and peer-reviewed studies, and people who've dedicated their careers to studying this stuff and gathering data from real-world observations.

The whole point of science is you *don't believe it* and you're not ever supposed to; you're supposed to actively go out of your way to *disprove* it and falsify every claim/hypothesis. If it can't be falsified, even theoretically, then it doesn't stand up to scientific scrutiny.

If ACC can be falsified and reliably demonstrated to be false using well-designed studies, and accepted as false by global scientific consensus following careful analysis, then I will reject it, along with the scientific community. Simple as that. This has happened countless times throughout history. It's how the entire process works. There are scientists out there who don't follow the consensus, but so far no one has satisfactorily proven the whole thing to be false.

It's not about seeing who is right to get ego points (although I'm sure that can't be avoided because everyone is only human); it's about getting closer to the "truth" (ie reality as it is; not how we'd like it to be), so that humanity and future scientists can use that knowledge to build on (literally, bc you don't want your house to collapse if the maths is wrong) and come up with new theories/tech to move us all forward. You wouldn't be reading my message on your device without this, bc we'd still "believe" the earth is flat and lightning was made by Zeus.

No point doing experiments based on obsolete models because they won't yield accurate results so it actually backfires on you. It'd be like using a 100-year-old map to go on a road trip. Doesn't matter how much you love the map; it won't be much help if it says there's a gas station 10 mi up ahead and there's actually a lake.

Is that how it works for "belief" in what Trump says?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability
4 ups, 3w,
4 replies
Climate Change = Human Overpopulation

It's not about the Weather.
It's about WHETHER LibWeirdos care enough, and FEEL willing to do something collectively with a sense of urgency,
...about the perceived scientific consensus of "The Problem" too many humans cause,
and then implement the agreed upon remedies to combat the cause of these perceived problems.
1 up, 3w
Human Overpopulation IS "Climate Change",
These Globalists at one time said this OUT LOUD in the 1970's.

They just found a way to talk openly about their perceived problem,
w/o the possiblity of discussion, nor debate. The only option is to agree with them.
This solutions based comradarie of Komrades is the entire purpose of the
World Economic Forum,

...so if you agree with Human Overpopulation Causes Climate Change Crowd, that's fine, just please do not buy into the WEF solving it,
being benevolent with solutions.

They'll RADICALLY change what it means to be a FREE human.
You'll be free to be controlled, surveilled, and monitored with your every move.
They are scheming for this. Google WEF, C4IR and find out.

and as far as AI Robots not paying taxes. That's fine too, as they have a new system to replace the monetary system based upon energy credits
You know, the plan of the Technocracy Movement of the 1930's is now the WEF global technate and digital currency to replace the 'Price System' economic model with a fresh new shiny Soviet Style Economic Model (originating in Theodor Adorno's New Left, new and improved Frankfurt School of improved Marxism
(for the utopian future of Ernst Bloch, combined with M. King Hubbert ideas)
0 ups, 3w
OBTUSE
0 ups, 3w
"a new system to replace the monetary system"

Yes. It's called UBI. 💪 If it ever happens (or is even workable)...
0 ups, 3w
Overpopulation is a big problem, I agree. (So are declining birth rates in a lot of developed countries (alongside ever-increasing life expectancy). Bit of a paradox. That needs fixing or it may cause big socioeconomic problems down the line. Combine that with automation and AI and it accelerates it. You can replace a lot of the young workforce with robots, but you can't replace them as consumers (yet?), so who's going to buy stuff in a consumer economy (or support the unemployed young people if their jobs get automated and they don't have the opportunity to upskill? Robots can't pay taxes or contribute to your pension fund either.)

If you're talking about how the narrative shifted from the 80s/90s when everyone talked about environmental problems like global warming, deforestation, desertification, acid rain, pollution, recycling, hole in the ozone layer, species going extinct, oil spills, landfill, etc, and then it somehow all got smooshed together into "climate change" as the One Big Problem, then I also agree. Big own goal by the environmental movement. People can just dismiss that and throw the baby out with the toxic bathwater and we carry on as normal and forget about the other stuff.

Seems you hardly ever hear about deforestation these days. Bit harder to argue with that. Can just look at photos of the Amazon. I'm not sure trees are falling down by themselves. Unlike with climate which is super complex, takes ages for the full effects to show themselves, and we can debate it til forever (or at least til one viewpoint is proved right).

Thing is, though, if humans aren't having any impact on the climate by burning fossil fuels, then surely it shouldn't make a difference to the climate anyway whether we have 9 billion people or 50 billion producing CO2? 🤔

I think you're maybe talking about the other environmental stuff which is more obvious. Nine billion people make a lot of pollution and plastic waste and put strain on natural and other resources like water, food and land. That's still a problem even if we don't accept that humans are causing the climate to change. I think we've all got a bit distracted arguing over climate and have forgotten some of the other problems.

Even if we can't agree on climate change, I think we should still be all hands on deck to fix the other stuff. You can probably already notice the difference in wildlife in your own garden/neighbourhood from 20 years ago, and how many birds you hardly see any more. My 2c.
3 ups, 3w
So many points you can examine
Ice samples showing both temperature and co2 show no correlation between temperature rise and co2 except that co2 tends to follow temperature rise
Historical data of much warmer times in human history of higher temperature with no industrial revolution to cause it
NOAA maps of temperature reading sensors being encroached upon by temperature holding asphalt etc. Creating heat traps, in violation of NOAA guidelines.
That should crack open your eyes
3 ups, 4w
For Starters, Dr. Henry Kissinger, through his protege', Klaus Schwab

https://www.weforum.org/about/klaus-schwab/

Currently ? Likely the people handpicked for his pet project that he leaves the planet:

https://www.weforum.org/about/leadership-and-governance/
[deleted]
0 ups, 3w,
1 reply
Scientist were not told. They investigated and came to conclusions on their own. Your mene and attitude is doublespeak.
2 ups, 3w,
2 replies
If covid taught us anything, it was that everyone has their price
[deleted]
0 ups, 3w,
1 reply
Can you concede that some debacles: climate, covid, psychiatry, 7-11 big gulps etc happened for no good reason. I'm merely in the camp that is more forgiving of humans when they leverage disaster circumstances for profit. Because that sentences there is also a description of a meta-debacle. And who in God's name leverages such big picture messes ups. I would not even want to know.
3 ups, 3w,
1 reply
I'll go along with big gulps; the rest were money or power over your fellow beings
[deleted]
0 ups, 3w
...my last gasp of arguing: 7-11 is GOD!!!!!!!!!! (Thxs for the interaction.)
0 ups, 3w
Ikr? My vaxxes were all free. The masks cost a few bucks though. Ripoff. 🙄
Show More Comments
What if i told you memeCaption this Meme
Created with the Imgflip Meme Generator
IMAGE DESCRIPTION:
WHAT IF I TOLD YOU; MOST PEOPLE BELIEVE IN CLIMATE CHANGE BECAUSE THEY WERE TOLD TO BELIEVE IN IT