AOC's FALSE FLAG Green New Deal; says we will all die in 12 years? The Germans Dont Think So!

a reply to: TerryMcGuire

The first link was to a German plan of which I had no interest so I skipped it and moved on to the next link about AOC's statement.

No worries.
Everybody else has had no interest in the germans since the mid 40's or so either.

I have no idea what that "green deal" is, but the Energiewende has nothing to do with expanding the use of fossile fuels!

Instead, the use of renewable energies is the target of Energiewende, along the deactivation and deconstruction of nuclear powerplants.

Congrats to the UK for going a week without fossile fuels!!

a reply to: TerryMcGuire

The op didnt deny climate change anywhere in the post.
What was pointed out was the ridiculous deadlines being hyped up to get awful legislation passed.

a reply to: Bluntone22

Correct, just as I pointed out in my post.

''Here, she made a quick soundbite comment that has been picked up by media (you know, media''?) and turned into a quick little easily digested meme, you know like the daily complaints against media for taking Trump's words out of context? ''

My point was that she made a soundbyte comment and the media took it and sensationalized it. Rather than calling her names and calling her crazy for listening to the dire warnings coming form the international climate scientists that are quoted in those articles we should be thanking her for helping keep this problem front and center in our consciousness.

a reply to: TerryMcGuire

well perhaps maybe some day she will listen to actual scientists and not make up meme worthy quotes,
but not today
a girl says not today

a reply to: TerryMcGuire

I compare her climate change ideas to a three year old giving medical advice.

She does more harm than good by spouting off about something she obviously doesnt understand.

The reason why we will not be destroyed in 12 years by global meltdown is because in 10 years we will be wiped out by a huge asteroid.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: TerryMcGuire

well perhaps maybe some day she will listen to actual scientists and not make up meme worthy quotes,
but not today
a girl says not today

Trying to get your point straight here ok? You are saying that the scientists of the IPCC are not actual scientists? Is that what you are saying?

www.un.org...

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: TerryMcGuire

I compare her climate change ideas to a three year old giving medical advice.

She does more harm than good by spouting off about something she obviously doesnt understand.

So just what ideas about CC does she spout like a three year old that differ from the IPCC report found in one of those links above.
www.un.org...

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
a reply to: Bluntone22

Correct, just as I pointed out in my post.

''Here, she made a quick soundbite comment that has been picked up by media (you know, media''?) and turned into a quick little easily digested meme, you know like the daily complaints against media for taking Trump's words out of context? ''

My point was that she made a soundbyte comment and the media took it and sensationalized it. Rather than calling her names and calling her crazy for listening to the dire warnings coming form the international climate scientists that are quoted in those articles we should be thanking her for helping keep this problem front and center in our consciousness.

Yes you are correct - what the media did was very much like what they do with Trump time and time again. Can't seem to recall you defending him, though.

a reply to: Waterglass

please do not scream " false flag " when its so obvious you have no idea what the term means

a reply to: Waterglass

By the way, fair is fair. I've ripped on you for previous threads with baseless claims built into the title sold as fact.

This was a good thread. It went after substance and policy which is exactly how we should weigh our politicians.

The topic is up for debate, but you provided a clear argument to the topic at hand.

Kudos

Edit: the one point of constructive critism as the poster above noted, the false flag reference is a bit misused. I think your threads would benefit without the attention grabbing.

a reply to: UKTruth

The next out of context statement that media reports on trump, please message me to bring it to my attention and I will weigh in on it as well. OK?

Which Germans don't think so, the ones running VW Porsche?

More evidence that "wrong programming" caused Porsche diesels to cheat on their finals, and score better emissions that was true.

OH, but not those business-Germans. The Energiewende comes from government germans. The ones we can trust not to kill us with airborne pollutants disguised as environmental savings....

a reply to: TerryMcGuire

12 years....

We are all dead by then...

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: TerryMcGuire

12 years....

We are all dead by then...

To be fair, once summer time hits I'm forced to down cold ones to combat the heat. Global warming is killing my liver.

Joking aside, if someone wants to address the environmental concerns that certainly need attention... I see ambition as achieving something attainable rather than turning people off with reaches for the stars.

And as always with my pickiness for government programs, I'm OK with trying out new things so long as they don't increase taxes. There is plenty of money in the mix as it is.

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
I read these ''it's all a puff of smoke'' threads for information to allay my concerns over climate change. I look for substantial science that is claimed to refute the predominate science that says man made climate change is real.
This thread fails miserably.
OP offers a number of links supporting the ''liar lair'' stance taken so I gave them a glance, read them actually.

The first link was to a German plan of which I had no interest so I skipped it and moved on to the next link about AOC's statement. Opps it was in the Washington Post. Ain't that still fake news around here? Anyway, moving on, that article points out the inaccuracy of her statement but does not refute it. Then the article goes on to support that general position that warming is man induced and that a time frame for correcting our poor stewardship of our planet is running out.

Indeed the whole gist of that article was to point out how a simplistic statement like that is used by ''deniers'' to poke holes in the whole subject. Following that link to other links that really quote her statement I found

""Millennials and people, you know, Gen Z and all these folks that will come after us are looking up and we’re like: The world is going to end in 12 years if we don’t address climate change and your biggest issue is how are we gonna pay for it?" "This is the war — this is our World War II."

Here, she made a quick soundbite comment that has been picked up by media (you know, media''?) and turned into a quick little easily digested meme, you know like the daily complaints against media for taking Trump's words out of context?

Anyway my search for more ''refuting climate change'' moved to the next link from Axios. That one as well did not refute that man made climate change is real but rather and only attempted to refine the notion of how we should be dealing with it and offer a more mature timeline of our actions to have a positive effect for us, our children and our children's children.

a reply to: IAMTAT

WOW!...You have FIVE toilets...while most of us are forced to crap in hats?

AND we'll be taxed every time we relieve ourselves.

The gospel according to a village in NY that's missing their idiot.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

I'm all for exploring green tech and keeping the environment as clean as possible but crippling the economy to do it is foolish.

Its doubly foolish to expect the government to choose the best course of action.
They are the ones that put ethanol in our gasoline.

Stupid is as stupid does...