The assertion that cancer among young people increased 79% between 1990 and 2019 is a transparent lie. We know why the timeframe was picked, and we know why an alarming (and fake) increase was alleged.
Ooh, drones controlled by AI? Or, Skynet as I believe Arnie called it.
Yet another thing to not look forward too, along with the wacky ideas for "controlling" the climate, transporting electricity under the Atlantic, scaring mice, wondering about virulent cancers in young people...the excitement just goes on and on doesn't it? "It was the best of times, it was the worst of times"
Climate change is not going to stop. If man had never existed, climate change would still be happening. Is it more rapid as a result of humans? Probably, but we can't say how much.
Geoengineering is another big sinkhole for taxpayer dollars. There's is little change of it doing more good than harm. And the climate change will happen anyway.
Here's something to consider: Why do you live where you live? Why are populations dense in some places, and not in others? Did people decide where they wanted to live, and then alter the climate to suit them, or did they find the places with livable climates, and then move there? Stupid question, right? Hold that thought, while you consider how stupid it is for people to think that we're going to change climates around us, rather than move to the climates that suit us. If the climates change, we can move. Populations have been doing that for as long as there's been populations.
Steve Koonin is a climatologist who wrote "Unsettled". He explains what we know, and what we don't know about climate change. He explains that scientists don't go around proclaiming, "The science is settled." Only stuffed suit politicians do that. And Koonin offers possible likelihoods for how it will be in a hundred years. We will almost certainly be far better off, just as we are all far better off than people were a hundred years ago.
Too bad the lab leak model did not factor in the lack of replication fidelity for any RNA virus or the veracity of the official sequences supplied.. just because it has no basis in biology doesn't mean a FOIA case can't be built to make the impossible seem plausible!
The assertion that cancer among young people increased 79% between 1990 and 2019 is a transparent lie. We know why the timeframe was picked, and we know why an alarming (and fake) increase was alleged.
Ooh, drones controlled by AI? Or, Skynet as I believe Arnie called it.
Yet another thing to not look forward too, along with the wacky ideas for "controlling" the climate, transporting electricity under the Atlantic, scaring mice, wondering about virulent cancers in young people...the excitement just goes on and on doesn't it? "It was the best of times, it was the worst of times"
Climate change is not going to stop. If man had never existed, climate change would still be happening. Is it more rapid as a result of humans? Probably, but we can't say how much.
Geoengineering is another big sinkhole for taxpayer dollars. There's is little change of it doing more good than harm. And the climate change will happen anyway.
Here's something to consider: Why do you live where you live? Why are populations dense in some places, and not in others? Did people decide where they wanted to live, and then alter the climate to suit them, or did they find the places with livable climates, and then move there? Stupid question, right? Hold that thought, while you consider how stupid it is for people to think that we're going to change climates around us, rather than move to the climates that suit us. If the climates change, we can move. Populations have been doing that for as long as there's been populations.
Steve Koonin is a climatologist who wrote "Unsettled". He explains what we know, and what we don't know about climate change. He explains that scientists don't go around proclaiming, "The science is settled." Only stuffed suit politicians do that. And Koonin offers possible likelihoods for how it will be in a hundred years. We will almost certainly be far better off, just as we are all far better off than people were a hundred years ago.
Too bad the lab leak model did not factor in the lack of replication fidelity for any RNA virus or the veracity of the official sequences supplied.. just because it has no basis in biology doesn't mean a FOIA case can't be built to make the impossible seem plausible!