Environmentalism: Evidence Suggests it Was Always and Only About Achieving World Government

[rangerrebew]

Environmentalism: Evidence Suggests it Was Always and Only About Achieving World Government
Guest Blogger / 12 hours ago May 27, 2019   

Guest Opinion: Dr. Tim Ball

It is common sense to protect our environment, but what has occurred for 50 years is exploitation of that idea for a socialist agenda. We wasted 50 years believing that humans are not natural, and everything they do is destructive. We wasted and continue to waste trillions of dollars on unnecessary policies and useless technologies, all based on false assumptions, pseudoscience, and emotional bullying.

We now know 50 years later that every single prediction concerning the environmental demise of the Earth and the people made in the original Earth Day Report was wrong. We also know that every additional claim, such as overpopulation, global warming, sea level rise, desertification, deforestation, and sea ice collapse, among many others, were wrong. I challenge anyone to produce empirical evidence that proves anything happening today is outside any long-term record of natural activity.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/05/27/environmentalism-evidence-shows-it-was-always-and-only-about-achieving-world-government/

[dfwgator]

Duh.

[truth_seeker]

I do not simplistically dismiss environmentalism.

Those of us living in the Los Angeles basin can remember dirty, smelly, debilitating skies from the 50s 60s 70s.

The contrast is stark. The US NEEDED to clean the environment. We changed the refineries. We changed the gasoline/diesel. We changes the vehicles. We changed the fueling facilities.

That is NOT the SAME as saying we have documented, human-caused global warming, and the need for massive measures.

Understand?

[Sanguine]

I do not simplistically dismiss environmentalism.

Those of us living in the Los Angeles basin can remember dirty, smelly, debilitating skies from the 50s 60s 70s.

The contrast is stark. The US NEEDED to clean the environment. We changed the refineries. We changed the gasoline/diesel. We changes the vehicles. We changed the fueling facilities.

That is NOT the SAME as saying we have documented, human-caused global warming, and the need for massive measures.

Understand?

Yes, and it is easy for that point to get lost in the forest of false science and hysteria. 

[roamer_1]

I do not simplistically dismiss environmentalism.

Those of us living in the Los Angeles basin can remember dirty, smelly, debilitating skies from the 50s 60s 70s.

The contrast is stark. The US NEEDED to clean the environment. We changed the refineries. We changed the gasoline/diesel. We changes the vehicles. We changed the fueling facilities.

That is NOT the SAME as saying we have documented, human-caused global warming, and the need for massive measures.

Understand?

Partly true - but not all that simple. I hold no fault against our fathers of the industrial age. Largely they were doing the best they knew how. You have to remember the level of technology they had at the time.

[ChemEngrMBA]

I do not simplistically dismiss environmentalism.

Those of us living in the Los Angeles basin can remember dirty, smelly, debilitating skies from the 50s 60s 70s.

The contrast is stark. The US NEEDED to clean the environment. We changed the refineries. We changed the gasoline/diesel. We changes the vehicles. We changed the fueling facilities.

That is NOT the SAME as saying we have documented, human-caused global warming, and the need for massive measures.

Understand?

I am quite sure the OP "understands" whatever point it is you attempted to make.
Do YOU understand that the U.S., with all of its faults, is far ahead of most of the world in clean air and water?
Do YOU understand that just because we now test everything to a millionth of a part per million does NOT mean that traces of impurities are dangerous and "polluted"?
Do YOU understand that third world crapholes are consistently the dirtiest anywhere?

What is the only country in the world currently classified as having a "sustainable" economy? I'm quite certain that you don't know. When you find out what country that is, you will not want to move there.  People are dying to get out, literally.

[Free Vulcan]

So basically rain is wet, the sky blue, and bears are poopin' in the woods.

[Bill Cipher]

I do not simplistically dismiss environmentalism.

Those of us living in the Los Angeles basin can remember dirty, smelly, debilitating skies from the 50s 60s 70s.

The contrast is stark. The US NEEDED to clean the environment. We changed the refineries. We changed the gasoline/diesel. We changes the vehicles. We changed the fueling facilities.

That is NOT the SAME as saying we have documented, human-caused global warming, and the need for massive measures.

Understand?

True enough. 

[ChemEngrMBA]

What is the only country in the world currently classified as having a "sustainable" economy? I'm quite certain that you don't know. When you find out what country that is, you will not want to move there.  People are dying to get out, literally.

Nobody has a clue.



Cuba