If not now, when?


image.png

image.png

I'm really disappointed to see a post like this on Steemit with support from whale accounts.

When? When is the right time to react?

Does anyone actually think nothing should be done about it? It's already clear that people will die from the effects of climate change. Why should there not be more funding about this topic? Why shouldn't the everyday citizen not be concerned about this?

We already know what increasing CO2 levels do. That's not a forecast. It increases temperature on the Earth. The coral reefs are currently dying. This is not a forecast. No we shouldn't consider "pumping more CO2 into the atmosphere".

When do you want to be concerned about the environment. When it's destroyed? Why can we not act preemptively. Ecosystems are very complex and the problems can compound creating problems that move at an exponential speed. Once certain parts of an ecosystem are destroyed it's likely they will not be able to recovered anymore. Even if you do not value them intrinsically they undoubtedly have economic value.

I understand that predictions and forecasting are off. I don't think the way the narrative is presented as a doomsday or restrictive actions like banning meat are the right answer, but how can you ignore this problem and deny facts?

The way the world is run is not sustainable. That's just a fact. If you are believer in human ingenuity than you should support the side of the environmental movement that believes tech will be able to fix these problems and encourage projects that are working on solutions. Don't make this some political conspiracy theory. I'm understanding of people who do not like the narrative that is pushed by Greta Thunberg. There's not just one environmental movement and one ideology.

However, at the end of the day the goal is to control the damage and leave the world better than we found it. Have some compassion for the future generations and the poor of the world who will be the first to experience these effects.


Comments 101


The attempt to bring about a solution by way of force is what I have a problem with. If someone wants to try and address the climate issues that they believe there are then my hope is that they do so voluntarily and don't violate the rights of others in order to achieve that goal. Good ideas shouldn't require such force and the 'greater good' has been used too many times in the name of tyranny.

28.09.2019 21:25
1

Your pointless ideology is killing the planet. That is real force.

28.09.2019 23:00
0

I think the "rights" of others are confused with the desires of others. No one has the "right" to exploit or pollute a shared resource. there is no political or god given "right" to pollute air that others must breathe or the "right" to claim and sell water from a natural aquifer. These "rights" that you speak of are man made inventions made for the purpose of political expedience and economic greed. They don't take into account all peoples rights to life.

I define life as the ability to sustain oneself through access to what the earth provides freely. air. water. natural medicines found in plants. food grown in non polluted soil. it is not a companies "right" to pollute the earth in order to make money, thus robbing others of the right to breathe, drink and eat uncontaminated food.

so when you say "by way of force", if the government allows companies to pollute the air, they are in turn "forcing" people to breathe contaminated air. they are taking away OUR right to life free from harm. if you need statistics on how pollution causes disease and death, you have only to google.

so before you talk about "rights" and "force", you better define terms about who is forcing whom, and what rights have already been violated for decades with little recourse.

a good idea is to throw out old school thinking, and begin to value to environment for its irreplaceable ability to sustain not just human, but plant and animal life, if it remains in balance.

29.09.2019 07:12
4

Your rights end where my freedom begins. Good response torico!

29.09.2019 13:08
0

Rights are absolutely often confused with desires. Like the right to internet access or the right to healthcare which is a service that is provided by willing participants with skills in that field.

I define life as the ability to sustain oneself through access to what the earth provides freely.

Right, you have no right to infringe violence upon any other.. which includes violating their natural rights and individual liberty from the get-go with the emergence of a system that disregards individual consent. I agree that no one has a right to pollute a shared resource, at least without the authority of those who own the resource, but collective property ownership as we have today through government contributes to the problem and I will never be surprised when property that is collectively owned as such falls into disrepair because someone always expects another individual will take responsibility for the problem and they pass the buck. By saying I don't want gov to solve the problem that doesn't translate into me being a fan of pollution in any way. If someone wants to take care of and be a good steward of the land they are blessed to live on then that is a very respectable endeavor that I would support. Just the same, if someone wants to cut down on their garbage etc then how could that be construed as a negative action? Why use more if you could and prefer to use less? Go ahead, I think it's great to try reusing whatever possible. The same gov that violates our consent every single day and doesn't respect our natural rights, wants to pretend to be a savior of the plant and will use taxes and violence to help protect it?
Give me a break.

If the gov allows them to pollute they are taking away our freedom.. but they have already done that with their establishment from the onset. Your consent is violated and you are forced to participate in a system you don't want to.
✌️

Throwing out old school thinking, the disease that is statism which has been perpetuated for thousands of years now, is exactly what I am all about, which is why I embrace voluntaryism :)

Good ideas shouldn't require such force.

29.09.2019 21:14
0

i will agree with you on this, re: govt is a shit show, and yet, we live within the system. we are part of the matrix. any time we vote or obey a law we are buying into the system. we give consent.

..violating their natural rights and individual liberty from the get-go with the emergence of a system that disregards individual consent..

so how do we escape it? we cant just claim government is invalid for everyone because some people want government and believe its important to maintain. the option is to personally denounce government, however that does not solve the problem we have here.

my solution is to do what we should have done centuries ago. recognize the importance of the natural world. give it economic value greater than what it has. make it an uncorrupted commodity to be held in trust for further generations, something that must be sustained, and not sold off as an asset by the government.

if we are only one person doing good while the monster does evil, and uses all of its charm and persuasion to convince others that we are "rebels and terrorists", then we have little chance at success.

its my opinion that we need to become a united group of consent. strategy wise, the best way to address pollution in a timely manner is to make sure the government maintains the environment indefinitely, without loopholes for corporations. a not for profit trust that is unbreakable, that we hold to be above economic manipulation.

we cannot wait until the idea of doing away with government becomes agreed upon. the earth simply might not be able to sustain us that long.

29.09.2019 21:49
1

if someone forces you to accept a service, that doesn't quality as consent. A monopoly is not consent.

Most people might not want to escape, so I don't worry about trying to reach that goal and make it happen, I don't believe true freedom is ever going to happen. Most people are not interested in freedom, they are more interested in using the system we have today to be brutal and destructive against those who they don't agree with, unfortunately too many still enjoy watching others suffer who are different from them. It is ultimately a war on ideas and still, statism and collectivism are winning.

It is difficult to get a group or 2 or 3 to agree, let alone billions of people. I think it's little more than a fairtytale to strive toward such an endeavor that everyone might eventually embrace, and using force via government to make sure they comply? Rather a sickening sight.. The government could be construed as the biggest corporation of all and it has no legitimacy in operation so long as it continues to disregard the consent of those to choose whether they want to be a part of it or not, and subjecting them to violence in any way when they choose to exit the system isn't affording them a right to choose whatsoever.

I didn't say we need to wait until gov is gone to start taking action on reducing any contribution to the problem.

I think at this point we just agree to disagree 😉

29.09.2019 22:11
0

you talk as tho one persons right to choose is sacred over the needs of the whole. i disagree. this is where the issue is. dont get me wrong, i think that consent is important. but i also believe that life is important, and not just my life, or human life. what about plants, animals, insects.. do they get a choice? if we could ask them im sure they might tell us that they do not consent to us polluting their environment. so when is the right to consent more important than the right to life? what if a murderer does not consent to being arrested or jailed? is that more important than the right to life of the person he killed without consent?

this is where you take libertarianism too far. just because YOU choose to believe in the absolute need for consent doesnt mean that the rest of us should be harmed because we choose a different approach to solving the issue. i choose life as the more important factor.

29.09.2019 22:25
1

Nah let's make fun of the first person to actually bring a lot of attention to the issue who has aspergers and say it's all a political move and ignore the facts and how most people in power are not giving a single fuck to making a change about it.

28.09.2019 22:11
4

The ableism of these people is whats truly disgusting.

28.09.2019 23:10
0

You're a fool and you fell exactly for the trap they laid. They put up a girl with mental illness so whenever someone criticizes her, they can whip out the mental card. So, we should let her go unchallenged because of she's sick and out of pity? People with illness should be getting medical help, not being thrown in the spotlight. Keep playing identity politics.

29.09.2019 15:50
2

If you think asperger's is a mental illness then you need to do a lot more research, dude.

29.09.2019 17:05
0

She has our point exactlyat qualifies.illness. What do you keep wasting my time? Also, communism is a mental illness, it causes people to make stupid comments.

29.09.2019 17:40
1

Again, not a mental illness.

29.09.2019 17:41
0

If it's not a mental illness (I don't know what is...) then great, she's a fine and healthy girl. Don't bring up Asperger's when you're trying to defend her.

29.09.2019 17:57
0

But no one does that, its a strawman

29.09.2019 18:15
0

Disorders are not illnesses. Illness means it detracts from your life, disorder means your life experience is different.

Words arent this hard, kid.

29.09.2019 18:15
0

well, shit if they can use the mental illness card to protect themselves from any counter argument, then I will play the race card.

My ancestors are of Yoruban and Native American heritage. Remember the people that greeted Columbus and paid for it with genocide?

Challenge anything I say and you’re a racist.

That’s how dumb this feigned outrage is.

These people expect to be unchallenged no matter what unproven or disproven things come out of their mouth.

29.09.2019 21:32
0

Are you talking about me or them? lol

29.09.2019 21:54
0

EI’m talking to everyone who uses a guilt card to support an argument.

Let it stand on it’s own merit!

Or I can play the disenfranchised Latino card and call you racist...

See how it works?

29.09.2019 21:58
2

I don't know what you're talking about, dude.

Attacking people based on race, status, or whatever is just stupid. I never did this, so what are you talking to me for?

29.09.2019 21:59
0

You purposely ignore the content of my reply.

Let’s break it down since you want to play.

Propping up mental illness or defect as a defense rather than providing actual support of your argument is a shit move and is just as discriminatory as someone who would mock someone for an illness.

Entiende?

29.09.2019 22:05
1

Cubans are always wrong, fyi.

29.09.2019 22:20
1

😘

29.09.2019 22:21
0

I only say that because you're brown.

29.09.2019 22:21
1

And when did I do that? Do you need an eye examination?

I specifically responded to abelism in this post, as that was the subject matter. You can pretend that's my only post on the total subject if you want, but I suggest opening your eyes and reading.

29.09.2019 23:06
0

I would feign surprise and shock that a leftist would try to shout down a lowly spic like myself but the mass graves my family are buried in reminds me that you do not see me as human and makes that response completely unbelievable.
’d drop out of this pointless conversation but that would be enabling your bubullshit and bigotry. You can pretend not to understand me if you like.

You’rehe typical racist bigoted hyperviolent socialist. Why don’t you just join your parent organization and burn a cross in my lawn already?

29.09.2019 23:09
2

Nice try, dumbass.

29.09.2019 23:11
0

Omg calling me names?

Typical.

You can’t bully me. I’m not afraid of you.

29.09.2019 23:13
1

You should write this fanfiction in book form and it'd be a best seller

29.09.2019 23:25
0

That doesn’t make any sense.

Take your meds and try again.

29.09.2019 23:36
1

Reading comprehension surely isn't your strong suit.

30.09.2019 00:45
0

I have asperer's syndrome. It is an illness. But it doesn't make people any less intelligent. On the contrary, aspies are usually specialized in a certain type of knowledge, making them that much more reliable.

It can be considered an illness because it gets in the way of social development up to a certain point, making us less prone to develop our interactions properly mostly during our teen years. This hurts us through life, even after we finally outgrow these issues.

It can be considered an illness by medicine because, in this shitty world, when you suffer because you don't follow society's standards, due to a neural or physical difference, the origin of that is considered an illness.

01.10.2019 09:22
1

The DSM-V categorizes Asperger's as a developmental disorder, not an illness. Just for reference. Thinking of yourself as ill isn't a good frame of mind.

But other than that, I agree. It's sad how people think anything other than "normal" is somehow worthy of mockery and attacks. It's disgusting.

01.10.2019 13:22
0

No I've been aware of the issue way before Greta but nothing was being done about it and no one was able to get it the right attention, so if this is what works then so be it. I couldn't give more of a shit about who or how, all I care is that the greedy 1%ers who are nearing the end of their corrupted life surrounded about the biggest scam we call money get fucked and have to draw back the profits so they won't jeopardize the future well being of the planet.

Also, go fuck yourself.

29.09.2019 18:01
2

If it wasn't getting attention that's because it's a flawed theory. The socialist agenda constantly targeting the 1% isn't going to solve anything.
Also, go fuck yourself.

29.09.2019 18:06
2

Oh yeah, cause the right and important things are surely getting enough attention in this day and age with clickbait and fake news.

At least I didn't start out the conversation by calling someone a fool cause you disagree with their stance, asshole.

29.09.2019 18:09
0

Feel the love.

29.09.2019 18:12
1

Things your kids will never say to you?

29.09.2019 18:14
3

get the 1%'s money, you think it will save you from doomsday? Erratic thinking for an erratic generation.

It's not about getting their money, it's about pulling back on how they are making more for their greed and raping the planet while doing it. What kind of other generation do you think I belong to, are you born in the 70s?

29.09.2019 18:12
0

This person is all strawman arguments and no substance. He read a script and follows that script to the letter. When you push him off the script, he gives up and does something else. I've had these same interactions with this guy like 10 times now.

29.09.2019 18:49
0

Maybe he's a bot.

29.09.2019 18:57
0

He's the product of right wing brainwashing, thinking that killing millions of people is fine just because a little girl (one of many millions of activists) said something on TV.

It's grotesque behavior.

29.09.2019 19:18
0

To listen to the audio version of this article click on the play image.

Brought to you by @tts. If you find it useful please consider upvoting this reply.

28.09.2019 22:21
0

I tried arguing with drakos but he is fully absorbed by right wing brainwashing
They all are. Steem is counter culture and as a result most people here feel "victimized" for their "opinions" about how evil people with asperger's are because that's definitely a nuanced and intelligent position.

This community is too far gone. Ignore them and just blast your voice and others that agree as much as you can to make this site not seem like a cesspool to people who come and look.

Posted using Partiko Android

28.09.2019 23:02
0

I feel sorry for your ignorance of science and logic. Who needs logic nowadays, it's all about emotions. Young girl bitching emotionally at the UN, oh yes, we MUST listen to her, SHE knows best.

29.09.2019 15:59
1

Your strawmanning is so bizarre and in a different reality that it's hard to even process what you're trying to say.

29.09.2019 17:04
0

The point is you are the one being brainwashed by the left wing climate change propaganda and emotion, the sooner you realize that, the better. Probably never.

29.09.2019 18:03
2

Why do you assume every climate activist is brainwashed by AOC or Greta? We've been posting about it for years dude. It's fucking weird. You need new lines of attack, these make no sense at all.

29.09.2019 18:47
0

AOC and Greta are the new mainstream climate celebrities. They're getting my attention for sure, hence my recent posts. Before that, I've been ignoring the climate agenda because it doesn't make any sense.

29.09.2019 19:01
1

So you admit that you don't actually follow the news and just hop on hype trains without any prep to insult "the left" because it turns you on?

29.09.2019 19:17
0

Of course I follow the news, mainstream and non-mainstream. Then I compare to determine which is ridiculous, then formulate my opinion. The left has gone loco and is dangerously affecting this generation.

29.09.2019 19:47
3

No sources to be found.

29.09.2019 20:01
0

What I love about steem is the right of everyone to have a voice. Even the people I disagree with. I'm not particularly a Greta fan, but applaud her for getting the discussion out there into the mainstream, where it needs to be. Touche and kudos for that. There are MANY young eco activists doing stunning work, offering SOLUTIONS and helping people create change. But, change for the masses starts with awareness, and yay to Greta for her huge and successful role in that.

I'm not sure calling people out for voting on things we disagree with is the way, though. People have a right to vote the way they choose. That is the beauty of decentralization, steem and no censorship. Their opinion is as valid as mine.

I appreciate you posting this simply to be able to reflect on that reality again.



Leading the curation trail for both @ecotrain & @eco-alex.
Together We’re Making This World A Better Place.

Click Here To Join the manually curated trail "@artemislives" to support quality eco-green content.

ecoTrain

29.09.2019 02:41
1

Supporting murdering indigenous people is just as bad as actually murdering them.

It costs $0.00 to not be a terrible piece of shit.

29.09.2019 13:10
2

I wanted to post it to call attention to the video and maybe for some of the whales to at least consider their stance and support for the content. There is information that is incorrect in the video and by upvoting and giving attention to it they are spreading incorrect information.

29.09.2019 14:59
2

Their opinion is as valid as mine.

Opinions are not equal since individuals who are expressing them are not equal. In example... Some of them are smarter. Some of them have ill intents. Some of them are trolls.

So no, a person's opinion is not necessarily as valid as another person's opinion.

01.10.2019 09:30
0

I'm understanding of people who do not like the narrative that is pushed by Greta Thunberg.

Greta is not pushing any narrative at all. Her parents are.

29.09.2019 05:47
4

Not an argument, not funny. Just gross and stupid.

29.09.2019 13:09
0

Most likely her parents and other people have a lot of influence over her since she is just 16 and leading a global movement.

I'm really not trying to focus on Greta in the post. The main point is about the incorrect information in the video about CO2 and the idea that because it's not possible to forecast precisely we shouldn't do anything.

29.09.2019 15:04
1

It’s just that when people use “the science is settled,” as an argument, I doubt very much that a scientist is speaking. The demographic of people who claim that the science is settled tends to still doubt that the science is settled in other areas, say, like the biological definitions of gender.

So why is this science settled and not that? Because “the science is settled” is not a scientific argument.

29.09.2019 16:24
2

There is a scientific consensus on this issue. Why not be proactive on these issues? It's the best information we have based on 40 years of research.

29.09.2019 16:34
1

Because the institutions that abdicated their role in preventing this situation are now asking us to do something.

29.09.2019 16:55
1

How did they abdicate their role? I don't think they ever had enough power to change it on their own. You need the people to make a difference.

29.09.2019 17:01
1

In the US, they have this document called The Constitution. The courts are supposed to uphold it. One of the things that The Constitution, and thus the courts, should protect protect is "private property." It is my contention that when the courts failed to protect "private property rights," it lead to this situation we're now in.

It would be my preference to return to protecting private property as a means to protect "the environment." Either by going back to the doctrine that The Constitution has laid out, or by switching to a more effective system.

In the meantime, any system that fails to protect private property in order to save the environment is immoral, or at best, the means justifying the ends.

29.09.2019 20:58
0

environment
private property

These are treated as the same thing nowadays, therefore any system will fail to protect one from the other, unfortunately making your comment pointless.

Immoral > no enviroment.

01.10.2019 09:13
0

I don't think they ever had enough power to change it on their own.

Nowadays they can't because it gets in the way of some industries' profits. The top groups who command multiple industries are also the ones who basically command the world.

01.10.2019 09:26
0

No they aren't? If they were, they would do something. They aren't, that's why people are angry and bringing attention to it. You have no clue what you're talking about, and that's the core issue here.

29.09.2019 17:06
0

Has it really become necessary to insult already?

29.09.2019 18:28
1

When you support the deaths of millions of people, don't expect civility.

Also, I didn't even insult you there, snowflake.

29.09.2019 18:46
0

Well, you claimed I am clueless and now genocidal for no reason. I don't see how this is in any way productive. Your argument is purely ad hominem.

29.09.2019 20:50
1

But it's not. You just won't read the scientific information related to the subject and are instead following mass hysteria generated by your pals.

You attack "biological gender" (whatever that means) as a scapegoat to form an argument in defense of climate denial.

What does that mean, by the way? You have no real thesis at all.

29.09.2019 21:53
0

You just won't read the scientific information related to the subject and are instead following mass hysteria generated by your pals.

How did you come to that conclusion? I read tons of scientific information. I'm also a big fan of thunderf00t, veritasium, and answerswithjoe, all of whom do videos in support of climate change evidence. None of them make the "The Science is Settled" argument.

I listen to them in order to understand the case being made from a scientific perspective. I trust many of their conclusions. When they talk about climate change, I listen to their position and form my own conclusion.

My conclusion is that protection of private property rights is the way to solve the problem morally.

As for the "biological gender" argument, that was an observation, not an attack; I was observing that science is being cherry picked.

29.09.2019 22:06
1

Wrong, there's no scientific concensus on climate change. There's plenty of scientifc studies and analyses that debunk every element of the climate change movement. Of course, main stream media doesn't broadcast them because it's a one-sided discussion.

29.09.2019 18:15
2

when you are so addicted to the strawman you think everyone who isn't you watches mainstream media

29.09.2019 21:52
0

Nobody is going to die because of climate change, it has happened repeatedly throughout our existence. People can live in extreme climates, from the icy north to the scorching deserts. They're not dying are they? Understand that and you'll understand the lies being shoved in the population's throat.

29.09.2019 15:53
2

People can survive harsh climates with the proper resources. The problem is going to be there won't be access to those resources. CO2 is not the only driver of climate of change, but it's a significant source.

We already see the effects. Coral reefs are dying currently directly because of CO2. Why would you want to kill the coral reefs by pumping more CO2 into the atmosphere?

29.09.2019 16:28
0

CO2 and temperature are not the main causes of coral reefs decline.

Human impact on coral reefs is significant. Coral reefs are dying around the world. Damaging activities include coral mining, pollution (organic and non-organic), overfishing, blast fishing, the digging of canals and access into islands and bays. Other dangers include disease, destructive fishing practices and warming oceans. Factors that affect coral reefs include the ocean's role as a carbon dioxide sink, atmospheric changes, ultraviolet light, ocean acidification, viruses, impacts of dust storms carrying agents to far-flung reefs, pollutants, algal blooms and others. Reefs are threatened well beyond coastal areas. Climate change, such as warming temperatures, causes coral bleaching, which if severe kills the coral.

29.09.2019 16:48
1

Nearly all of those are related to CO2 and temperature: warming oceans, ocean's role as a carbon dioxide sink, atmospheric changes, ocean acidification, viruses, pollutants, algal blooms, coral bleaching

29.09.2019 16:59
2

He never replied to this one, did he...

01.10.2019 09:27
0

People have already died from climate change.
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/2019-09-23/climate-change-already-killing-us

I know you won't read a source, because facts and reading are too hard, but at least give it a skim.

29.09.2019 17:08
0

Pollution causes health issues, not the climate.

29.09.2019 17:50
1

You advocated to pollute the air with more CO2 and now you're backtracking.

At least I budged you a bit!

29.09.2019 18:47
0

CO2 is not pollution dude, it's a natural molecule that's required for life growth.

29.09.2019 18:57
3

Excess CO2 emissions often contain other pollutants. Did you really not know that?

29.09.2019 19:19
0

By all means, I'm all for removing toxic pollutants (and we have the technology to do it), whether they're mixed with CO2 or otherwise.

29.09.2019 19:43
2

So then you agree that we need to do something about the problems with the climate?

29.09.2019 20:00
0

Pollution != climate

29.09.2019 22:15
1

Pollution changes the climate, as it pollutes the air in the climate and leads to sickness.

Therefore it is climate change. Try again, kiddo.

29.09.2019 23:04
0

Your logic is flawless.

29.09.2019 23:14
2

You really dont know what climate means huh

29.09.2019 23:24
0

It's something that you obviously don't understand.

30.09.2019 19:46
1

If you think that air isn't part of the climate then... fucking lol dude

01.10.2019 04:53
1

If you think that air
Isn't part of the climate
Then... fucking lol dude

                 - cyberdemon531


I'm a bot. I detect haiku.

01.10.2019 04:54
1

fuck yea

01.10.2019 04:56
1

and leads to sickness

If you edit this out, it makes sense literally. But it doesn't take much of a brain to get your point either way. Don't let yourself get trolled by him.

01.10.2019 09:34
1

Breathing toxic fumes definitely leads to sickness, but cause and effect is probably too hard for the dummy to understand ;P

01.10.2019 13:24
0

i have to agree with this the fact that science is never settled, because we are always learning more about our world. yet at the same time I agree with schubes.

first off, just because science is never settled does not mean that the facts we have are wrong. it just means that we dont know enough to interpret them like they were a math equation. there are too many variables. earth is a complex ecosystem that we might NEVER fully understand, but because you think that we dont know everything we should just do nothing? I think this is more about people not wanting to admit to the problem because then they would have to look at how to solve it. So sure, deny the elephant in the living room exists.

we are wasting a whole lot of energy attacking a girl and shame blaming her, instead of thinking about her actual message: our planet is having issues. im scared and angry no one is doing anything

some people think we can just "adjust" to climate change, and maybe we can. but at what cost? it will come at the cost of human lives, food crops, ecosystems and the cost of rebuilding infrastructure. is it more expensive to adapt or to prevent?

do we really need to focus on the minutia of political stupidity? everyone is sidetracking to how greta is such a tool, or how they disagree about one aspect of science (when they arent scientists themselves) instead of addressing the issues.

is it debatable that CO2 in the atmosphere has risen alarmingly? (no it isnt debatable. just because you don't want to believe the facts that 90% of scientists put out there doesn't mean that the conspiracy theories are true). is it a possible threat to the planet? (yes, read the news) has it changed weather patterns to the extent that it poses a risk? what should we do about it at the local, national and worldwide levels?

these are the questions that you should be looking at, not whether some girl annoys you and you are using this as an excuse to deny the whole issue.

29.09.2019 18:00
1

Hello @schubes, I totally understand how your feeling when reading your opening description of the post...and the world and its universe keep facing some dangerous issues including climate changes.

Thanks for sharing with us on NaturalProducts.Today and this is our guidelines when using #naturalproducts in your posts.

Regards.

30.09.2019 08:41
0

CO2 is a good measure, but it seems to be the only one... barium, aluminium, fibers and metals are worse and not measured.
The reefs ? There are ocean fertilization programs with chemicals (you can look it up) some also linked to geoengineering and radiation from Fukushima on the ocean.
People are just being diverted :x

02.10.2019 00:41
1