Restoration of America has produced a new video exposing the Left’s use of certain buzzwords and made-up terms like “carbon pollution” to claim carbon dioxide is somehow a threat to humans and the environment.
“The language of the Left shifts as fast as the weather,” says the conservative media group founded by entrepreneur Doug Truax .
“In this new video series, we tackle the Left’s top political buzzwords one-by-one to reveal the bias, lies, and truth-twisting by the media.” Watch the video below and leave your comments in the comment section:
Basic eighth grade chemistry: nothing is either lost nor gained, only changed. Today’s natural gas (methane) burned is tomorrow’s trees, which live, then die, then turn into next week’s ‘swamp gas’ (methane). Nothing is either gained nor lost, only changed. And for the record, the Earth currently experiences an extreme low in atmospheric CO2 compared with the ages beyond the last few millennia.
@AK:
Too much logic and actual science for the hard left climate kooks. They need fake science and manipulated science for their theories to work. Your steady state theory, via transition, by way of the cycle of natural change is valid. But don’t expect climate wackos to comprehend it. It’s outside of their bailiwick of scientific understanding. To them, it’s all about political propoganda and how to effectuate an outcome.
Carbon is man and woman’s best friend. The building blocks of life. The life food of plants.
Let’s not get ahead of ourselves: the coming generations will need to fend for themselves. If they have to fight to survives, so be it–may the best win. We know that Earth won’t last forever. And certainly all the good guys have been long dead. The thoughtful survivors will be selfish and mean to get and maintain the edge on their “friends” and neighbor.
Just don’t want too much of the stuff like Mars.
The USA has never added CO2 to the atmosphere, in fact Mother Nature uses North America to reduce worldwide atmospheric CO2. Search ‘North America carbon sink’ for a technical explanation.
The amount of man-caused CO2 is too small compared to the remaining greenhouse gasses to make any significant, measurable temperature change. Look it up outside the green-biased websites. Carbon is just a taxation excuse.
The best thing for the left to do to limit CO2 emissions is to stop exhaling.
Is the society we are living in “democratic or republic”? This was a big question for the founders of the Constitution. What type of society was the framers of the Constitution really afraid of? Seek the answer and then you will really see a play on words in today’s society.
All of the climate change mania is just more reason that we need a really free press that explores both sides of an issue. Sadly, the elites that press on the garbage have decided that science should stop and the earth should be a closed system with just 500 million slaves in attendance to them, according to the WEF. The fact that the sun will eventually consume the earth is beyond them. Worst is scaring the kids into suing to stop all mining and development.
I have noticed the shifts in language too. Back in the 1990s, science books talked about global warming because of greenhouse gases but mostly focused on the ozone layer and the really bad ozone-depleting greenhouse gases such as CFCs, halons, and HCFCs. The books of the time acknowledged that CO2 was a greenhouse gas but mostly considered it to be harmless because plants need it. I don’t remember much about methane except as a byproduct of natural decay of organic matter, natural gas, and so forth. What was absent was an alarmist narrative about impending apocalypse from a changing climate. Indeed, the ozone layer and other pollution problems were of greater concern at the time.
In three decades, we went from “This might be a problem someday,” to “We have an emergency that is so extreme that everyone must give up his/her freedom and fossil fuel use for the greater good.” Sounds a bit too familiar in light of recent events.
There are also a number of buzzwords and phrases like “just transition,” “climate justice,” “intersectionality,” and lots of other weird stuff that I have never seen in any one of my science or engineering books. The conversation has clearly changed from being speculation and study about how CO2 and other greenhouse gases could be influencing the climate (a legitimate scientific effort) to being an irrational panic contest.
The scientific consensus is that the earth is warming and that greenhouse gases like CO2 and methane are contributing to the warming. Computer models predict that we could be headed for about three degrees of temperature increase from preindustrial times by the end of this century at the present rate of emissions.
What is important to understand is that the serious scientists do not assert that this is an apocalypse. Instead, they think that there could be some significant changes and needs for adapting to those changes. None of the serious ones seem to think that all of the ice will melt or that the earth’s climate will run away with itself and turn into another hellscape like Venus. We are talking about the potential for significant changes over decades or centuries versus apocalyptic scenarios that are about as likely to arise from a meteor, a super-volcano, or an all-out nuclear war as they are from climate change.
Here is another fact. Fossil fuels will eventually be in a state of decline and will make up smaller proportions of the energy pie as they become increasingly difficult to extract. Think of them like mining bitcoin. The easy stuff has already been extracted. Now, we are extracting the moderately difficult stuff. Eventually, extensive technical interventions will be needed to extract oil and gas, and other energy sources will dominate. We can expect this to happen within the next few decades or so. By that point, we will be over half-way done with the 21st Century. Economics will provide a more effective constraint on fossil fuel use than any form of legislation ever will, and that won’t require a big government to enforce.