Whether it's religious leaders or globalist controlled governments doing the fear mongering, guilty modern man takes to being told the end is nigh, like a duck to water. This year the end is nigh because of an imaginary plandemic, but until recently we were all going to die of "climate change" Now we are all going to die of an imaginary virus. Same plan, different fudporn.
Back in the 70s, the story was that we were all doomed because of global cooling – a new ice age was coming, and that along with the fact that oil was going to run out, would spell the end of humanity.
It actually may be true that we are moving towards an ice age eventually, but the oil thing is a whole different story. Oil being abiotic (not a fossil fuel), it is no more likely to run out than molten lava.
Following the guidelines of KISS (the acronym for “Keep It Simple Stupid” rather than the 70s band with tight pants and lots of make up. I’ll just focus on one key thing here because it’s very important.
The earth’s orbit around the sun is elliptical and takes one year to complete.
Now for the interesting bit - there is a variation in the shape of Earth’s elliptical orbit that follows a roughly 100 000 year cycle. The shape of the eclipse changes over time, and it takes about 100 000 years to shift from its widest to its tightest orbit and back again. As the orbit path changes, the seasons change, and the cold parts get colder. These variations are called Milankovitch cycles, and it's safe to say that reading about them in detail is a lot more complex than this post.
Basically, for most of the time, the climate is colder than it is now, and as we shift away from the agreeable orbit path that we have enjoyed for the past 10 000 years, the climate will shift back into colder state with more ice and lower sea levels (the opposite of what Al Gore was saying). But don’t panic, this will take about 50 000 years, and is entirely beyond the control of mankind.
Because humans really don’t relate well to 100,000 year time cycles, people like to freak out about time spans in the region of 100 years. But orbiting planets don’t really work in 100 year cycles. There are a bunch more things I could go on about now, but I’ll stop here because I’m aiming for KISS.
Here is an analogy.
Imagine if there was a large global organisation that specialised in lying to the people. Let’s say they were called the “Doom Is Coming Organisation” (DICO). They controlled 99% of all the media on the planet and they were presenting a story that the world going to fall into permanent darkness.
They neglected to mention that every 24 hours, the Earth rotates on its axis, and had everybody freaking out each day as evening fell fearing that the darkness was permanent. After a few years, the population became skeptical, so DICO started saying that permanent daylight was coming instead, and managed to freak the public out for a few more years.
Eventually DICO had to come up with something a bit more versatile – an apocalyptic vision that could cover both night and day, so they invented an undefined threat called “Daylight Change”. The way to prevent daylight change was global government, depopulation, and in the short term, more taxes. And the guilt ridden population eagerly embraced these ideas.
Does any of this sound totally fruitloops?
This post was originally posted on my blog: http://www.frot.co.nz/design/conspiracies/global-warming-the-new-apocalypse/
I am revisiting a few classic hoaxes to remind believers that everything we are told is complete bollocks and it always has been! Could be time to wake up now sheeple...
https://lbry.tv/@LOGICZOMBIE:0/1969:6
1969 was quite a year!
∴
Congratulations @sift666! You have completed the following achievement on the Hive blockchain and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :
Your next target is to reach 27000 upvotes.
You can view your badges on your board and compare yourself to others in the Ranking
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOPCheck out the last post from @hivebuzz:
DICO is far more concerned with keeping people in fear and despair.
But, to do that, they have taken over academia, teaching us that up is down, left is right.
So, now that we are facing the biggest set of catastrophes ever, most people are like
"i am skeptical" and nothing you say is important to me.
We have bad times, but also the most freeing times coming.
However, most people are barely moving towards prepping.
We have entered an ice age. (but, since science is taught wrong, no one knows what that really means.)
And that means shorter, harsher growing seasons.
We have also depleted the soil through "modern farming practices".
We are trying to curtail carbon emissions, when we should be increasing them.
International disruption to shipping/delivery paths is only going to get worse.
Thus, get working on self sustainable for production.
(like your life depends on it)
To be honest I'm fully confident the ice age will take at least 1000 years to kick in so it won't be my problem!
I'm more concerned with the chemtrails I spent a few hours photographing last month...
So, the correct thing to do is...
"Grow my own meat and stop paying taxes (legally of course)"
but i still don't know what that has to do with the weather.
Maybe because neither man nor meat has any real effect on the coming ice age - that will arrive whatever is or isn't happening on this planet.
"...everything we are told is complete bollocks and it always has been!"
Everything except this, right?
😂
Now imagine if you specifically refuted a single thing I've just said in my last two posts?
Just one.
Then apply that same level of research to the crap you are being programmed with.
I don't mean to attempt refute, just to amuse myself mostly and to engage in discourse.
What programming do you mean?
Almost all of it - from birth on, it's nearly all programming - under the guise of news, or tv, or education, or entertainment, or religion, or science, or society. It's programming because it isn't actually true, but people are too dumbed down to question it.
100 years ago people were wearing masks for a flu pandemic. There were shown to be not only ineffective, but dangerous. Now people don't even bother to study history and it is all being rewritten as we speak...
"...it isn't actually true..."
I couldn't agree more, though I think we may have subtle epistemological differences in worldview.
I think it isn't true because I'm a nihilist and I'm unconvinced that our senses, instruments, or reasoning can even ascertain the objective noumenal reality.
Essentially I think true-ness is far more elusive than it's treatment in common parlance, perhaps to the point of being completely inaccessible. Basic examples of what I mean can be found in questions of determinism in ethics, the hard problem of consciousness, and the problem of induction in science.
Here is another external link to a much shorter paper (with much less math) that deconstructs the idea of knowledge as justified true belief.
Though Gettier treats truth as ascertainable, he does demonstrate the trickiness of knowing which seems to me deeply related to issues of truth.
You do realise it is possible to just start with the basics and find real world evidence?
For example, when I have visited a particular glacier three times over the past 25 years and taken photos of it, I have real world evidence of it getting much bigger which indicates the temperature is cooling.
And when I see "news" reports saying that the very same glacier is melting, but they are reversing the order of their photos, that is evidence of another kind.
And when people avoid refuting any statements I make by talking in circles around the subjects, that is revealing a lot as well
I suspect your series of photographs is in no way a precise measurement, unless you happen to be employing surveying techniques.
Whatever the case, even were it an exercise in geometry, that is not an indication of temperature. At best it could be a correlate, because the glacial systems are governed by far more than just temperature. For instance they move through gravity alone without need for the intercession of temperature change.
A motion could easily be perceived as a change in size, and such motion may well be visible over a 25 year span.
Also I'm less interested in exploring the simple direct facts of your assertions than the attitudes and axioms that surround them, hence my tangential approach.
We could go back and forth simply contradicting each other, but that doesn't seem so amusing or illuminating to me as a dialectic analysis of the philosophy these propositions are swimming in.
"Does any of this sound totally fruitloops?"
Yes.
Which part specifically?
Well one part is the given analogy.
The idea that any substantial portion of people would be convinced by the given hypothetical organization that night/day is somehow apocalyptic, even controlling all but one percent of 'the media', seems preposterous to me.
Also the seeming assertion that all oil is abiotic in origin has the sound of a fruit flavored toroid.
Another minor thing is that the OP seemingly conflates materials being abiotic with them being plentiful. If that's the case, it seems like an erroneous conflation.
For instance, xenon is an abiotic material yet it's rather rare.
Hang on - you are questioning the truth of my fictional analogy? - that is something i made up to illustrate a point
And then getting into abiotic oil theory - I'm not sure you want to get into that one, I have a shitload of evidence. Maybe I'll post a summary tomorrow, it's a really interesting subject - here is a tiny part from my webpage about peak oil:
It appears that, unbeknownst to Westerners, there have actually been, for quite some time now, two competing theories concerning the origins of petroleum.
One theory claims that oil is an organic ‘fossil fuel’ deposited in finite quantities near the planet’s surface. The other theory claims that oil is continuously generated by natural processes in the Earth’s magma. One theory is backed by a massive body of research representing fifty years of intense scientific inquiry. The other theory is an unproven relic of the eighteenth century. One theory anticipates deep oil reserves, refillable oil fields, migratory oil systems, deep sources of generation, and the spontaneous venting of gas and oil. The other theory has a difficult time explaining any such documented phenomena.
So which theory have we in the West, in our infinite wisdom, chosen to embrace? Why, the fundamentally absurd ‘Fossil Fuel’ theory, of course – the same theory that the ‘Peak Oil’ doomsday warnings are based on.
"- you are questioning the truth of my fictional analogy? -"
Not exactly, I realize it's a fiction, but it doesn't seem very illustrative to me by virtue of being nearly nonsensical. I gather it's meant to be an allegory for climate change but it seems to me such a distorted caricature as to be rather impotent.
Also, I was previously aware of both biotic and abiotic chemistry that can produce oil deposits. Given life's prodigious ability to catalyze reactions and the timescales involved, it's to me puzzling this denial of the biotic pathways for oil creation.
Lastly, I'd like to note I have no love for the West or it's philosophy. In fact I find many of the notable tenets and philosophers to be contemptible, but I suppose one could find contemptible elements in many sets with enough analysis.
This is great line, I might use it for a meme!
one could find contemptible elements in many sets with enough analysis
Thanks 4 explaining the 2 oil theories... the fossil one was always taken for granted it seems.. But when they drill miles deep in the Gulf of Mexico and elsewhere.. you have to start thinking 4 yourself and find another explanation..
What do you mean?
Is offshore drilling somehow suspicious?
Thanks for this post and bringing a truthful sanity to the insane climate change crisis actors.
1967 National Geographic - the Sun's effect on climate and where CO2 will prove only marginal effect.
Some very old writings by wise men told to leave oil and gas in the Earth , it is there for good reason .
And as a mechanic i think , yeah , better keep the oil in it's gearbox ;-)
Hear, hear!
Greeks had patience when it came to finding answers to problems.. they would put the problem on a shelve and wait 4 someone to find the answer.. Modern man can't do that and has to come up with some explanation even if it is wrong.. Good post frot.. like to see more thought provoking posts like this along with your wacky sense of humor..
We've got 6 inches of snow in Arkansas... fucking global warming!!!