Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Climate change is a theory. It's not a fact. People arent obligated to go all in on your theories to give up air conditioning and eat bugs so that cows stop farting.

Yep. Follow the money.

Would anyone in this thread like to buy some carbon credits/carbon offsets?

Climate scientists aren't the ones buying megayachts. You're thinking of the fossil fuel guys.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Climate change is a theory. It's not a fact. People arent obligated to go all in on your theories to give up air conditioning and eat bugs so that cows stop farting.

It’s the only theory that hasn’t been proven wrong. The only people that benefit from climate science denialism are the fossil fuel industry and real estate industry. Everyone else loses. 20% of humanity across the globe may have to move away from coastal areas due to the changes occurring.

Of course, this denialism is basically a requirement to be a Republican now.

You'd be stunned how many theories have been proven wrong.

In 20 years, no one will talk about climate change anymore. There's a reason your leftist overlords have stopped talking about it. They used it to make everyone nod along while they handed out money to make windmills and solar farms that we pretend are better for the environment than other energy generation sources. But now that it's crystal clear that we won't have enough energy in the future, they suddenly dont talk about climate change or green energy. They know they radicalized democrats with that Al Gore documentary and can't tell you its over, but its over. "Genocide" is the new "climate change," get with the program comrade.

If you believe there won't have enough energy in the future, then start talking about the dangers of bitcoin mining and datacenters holding petabytes of information.

Anonymous wrote:Climate change is a theory. It's not a fact. People arent obligated to go all in on your theories to give up air conditioning and eat bugs so that cows stop farting.

I am very sympathetic to your frustrations with some of the more extreme policies proposed by nihilistic climate change nuts who want to kill grandma by banning air conditioners. However, even if you don’t care or believe in climate change the actual increase in outdoor CO2 levels will become an issue to human health. Human brain functions start to become impaired around 1,000 ppm and the negative impacts increase and CO2 levels go higher. On the current trajectory outdoor CO2 levels will exceed 1,000 ppm before 2150. At 5,000 ppm and above long-term exposure will cause permanent brain damage and high enough levels become fatal. So this issue needs to be addressed in some form in the long-run purely to protect human health if nothing else.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Climate change is a theory. It's not a fact. People arent obligated to go all in on your theories to give up air conditioning and eat bugs so that cows stop farting.

It’s the only theory that hasn’t been proven wrong. The only people that benefit from climate science denialism are the fossil fuel industry and real estate industry. Everyone else loses. 20% of humanity across the globe may have to move away from coastal areas due to the changes occurring.

Of course, this denialism is basically a requirement to be a Republican now.

You'd be stunned how many theories have been proven wrong.

In 20 years, no one will talk about climate change anymore. There's a reason your leftist overlords have stopped talking about it. They used it to make everyone nod along while they handed out money to make windmills and solar farms that we pretend are better for the environment than other energy generation sources. But now that it's crystal clear that we won't have enough energy in the future, they suddenly dont talk about climate change or green energy. They know they radicalized democrats with that Al Gore documentary and can't tell you its over, but its over. "Genocide" is the new "climate change," get with the program comrade.

Anonymous wrote:Climate change is a theory. It's not a fact. People arent obligated to go all in on your theories to give up air conditioning and eat bugs so that cows stop farting.

Yep. Follow the money.

Would anyone in this thread like to buy some carbon credits/carbon offsets?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Climate change is a theory. It's not a fact. People arent obligated to go all in on your theories to give up air conditioning and eat bugs so that cows stop farting.

So is gravity. Are you bolting your furniture to the floor?

It’s 2025 and you have access to an unimaginable about of information and you still don’t know what a scientific theory is?

+10000000000000000

The sheer stupidity

Zeldin is a FLID.

Anonymous wrote:Climate change is a theory. It's not a fact. People arent obligated to go all in on your theories to give up air conditioning and eat bugs so that cows stop farting.

It’s the only theory that hasn’t been proven wrong. The only people that benefit from climate science denialism are the fossil fuel industry and real estate industry. Everyone else loses. 20% of humanity across the globe may have to move away from coastal areas due to the changes occurring.

Of course, this denialism is basically a requirement to be a Republican now.

Anonymous wrote:Climate change is a theory. It's not a fact. People arent obligated to go all in on your theories to give up air conditioning and eat bugs so that cows stop farting.

So is gravity. Are you bolting your furniture to the floor?

It’s 2025 and you have access to an unimaginable about of information and you still don’t know what a scientific theory is?

Anonymous wrote:Climate change is a theory. It's not a fact. People arent obligated to go all in on your theories to give up air conditioning and eat bugs so that cows stop farting.

I suggest you read some actual scientific literature on the subject, because clearly you haven't. Nor have you read anything about actual policy proposals. Just weird right wing echo chamber garbage.

Climate change is a theory. It's not a fact. People arent obligated to go all in on your theories to give up air conditioning and eat bugs so that cows stop farting.

Anonymous wrote:Perhaps check out what the founder of GREENPEACE says about climate change.

Oh please. Quoting Patrick Moore on climate science is like citing a dropout to disprove a PhD. He left Greenpeace in the '80s, sold out to big industry and has since spent decades shilling for polluters. The global consensus includes NASA, the IPCC, and thousands of peer-reviewed studies, not one guy cashing fossil fuel checks.

It’s like a bad guy from a Captain Planet cartoon come to life and now winning.

Hopefully, this can all just as easily be turned around with a new administration. I know it will take a while to rebuild though.

Perhaps check out what the founder of GREENPEACE says about climate change.

I’m floored by the sheer volume of climate denial coming from this administration. On the “Ruthless” podcast, Trump’s EPA chief Lee Zeldin announced the U.S. no longer considers carbon dioxide a problem. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gReirNB2rwA That’s not just wrong—it’s a full-on rejection of science, law, and reality.

He mocked the EPA’s Endangerment Finding, sneering at the idea that CO₂ and methane are pollutants. But here’s the truth: the Supreme Court ruled in Massachusetts v. EPA (2007) that greenhouse gases qualify as “air pollutants” under the Clean Air Act. The EPA’s finding wasn’t some casual opinion—it was a legally binding, science-backed determination that these gases endanger public health.

Zeldin’s dismissive “more than zero” comment about CO₂’s role in climate change is a rhetorical dodge. The Endangerment Finding is built on decades of research from the IPCC and USGCRP showing exactly how greenhouse gases drive global warming. It’s not vague—it’s damning.

He then falsely claimed the EPA only studied CO₂ in mixtures and only regulated mobile sources. Wrong again. The 2009 finding focused on vehicle emissions because the Court required it, but its implications extend far beyond cars. Stationary sources were regulated later, based on the same science.

Zeldin also claimed the EPA never studied CO₂ individually and skipped public comment. That’s a lie. The agency reviewed mountains of data, received over 300,000 public comments, and conducted economic impact analyses. This wasn’t a backroom decision—it was one of the most transparent regulatory processes in EPA history.

Then came the cow strawman. “They want to kill all the cows because of methane.” No serious climate policy proposes that. What’s actually being discussed? Feed additives, manure management, and better livestock practices. Not cow genocide.

He misquoted AOC, twisted environmental justice funding, and claimed subgrantees can “do whatever they want” with billions in climate funds. Again—false. Federal grants come with strict oversight, reporting, and audit requirements. The EPA isn’t handing out blank checks.

And the cherry on top? Zeldin says the EPA will “get rid of that stupid start-stop feature” in cars. Newsflash: the EPA doesn’t mandate that feature. Automakers use it to meet fuel economy standards. If those standards are gutted, sure—expect more idling and more emissions.

This isn’t just misinformation—it’s a coordinated effort to dismantle climate protections under the guise of “deregulation.” The science hasn’t changed. The law hasn’t changed. Only the political will to ignore both. Zeldin has turned out to be another science-denying charlatan and con-man doing industry's bidding.