The Climate Change Conspiracy... Conspiracy | Anjali Appadurai | TEDxSurreySalon
Вставка
- Опубліковано 16 кві 2024
- Anjali Appadurai recounts a profound realization during a focus group with a young mother, highlighting her guilt over her contribution to climate change despite limited choices. The talk delves into the historical deception by petroleum companies regarding climate science and introduces the concept of "the new climate denial," acknowledging climate change but advocating for more fossil fuels. The speaker urges viewers to challenge this denial by envisioning bold climate solutions that benefit society as a whole. By rejecting incremental solutions and embracing transformative action, the talk inspires hope for a sustainable future, emphasizing the need for collective action to combat the climate crisis and create a better world for future generations. Anjali Appadurai is a climate justice organizer and campaigner. As a young activist, she worked with youth movements from around the world to build a strong civil society voice at the UN Climate Convention and to ensure that social movements' demands were heard in the halls of power. She runs the Padma Centre for Climate Justice, a project that brings together diasporic communities to build power around issues of climate and economic justice, and she works as Campaigns Director at the Climate Emergency Unit. This talk was given at a TEDx event using the TED conference format but independently organized by a local community. Learn more at www.ted.com/tedx
The companies should be held accountable!!!
For what? Supplementing the atmospheric CO2, a necessary trace gas that makes plants grow faster? For chemical fertilizers that largely solved all food productivity problems? For novel materials like plastics that are instrumental in life saving medicines and therapies?
Yeah, thanks Exxon. Thanks BP. Thanks shell.
WE user, costumer are the one USING the products !
Stop using the products or reduce and problem is solved - and the companies CAN'T do anything against their downfall.
Everyone! why? because everyone wants to be right but no one wants to do the RIGHT thing when they're wrong.
The only obligation that a corporate business has is to maximize the profits for it's shareholders. It is the shareholders that we must change.
😂
Which is one of the reasons why I don't hold shares in oil & gas companies.
I bet you are not aware of the Net Zero investment company run by Mark Carney investing in foreign oil
@@eilaollinheimo4573 Management and investor relations became an issue a number of years back. Management wanted to become more socially responsible, but investors wanted more profits. The courts sided with the investors.
Thank you, thank you, thank you for this video. I was turning in circles at home, worrying about my two children and the state of the planet. You brought me easy and HOPE. xx
Her informed passion so well said.
I read one of Carl Sagan's books. In that book he claims cosmologists discovered global warming.
Venus is many times hotter than Earth. Cosmologists were trying to understand why. They decided the cause was carbon dioxide. They noted that Earth's carbon dioxide emissions in the atmosphere were rising.
Cosmologists rang the global warming alarm bell.
Carl Sagan was an eminent scientist, whom I trust.
If she is in Southern B.C., why did she not go to the Columbia Ice Field nearby at the Banf National Park. The Glacier at the Ice Field retreats since 1840.
CO2 Emissions from combustion engines are blamed for the warming up of the atmosphere.
Gottlieb Daimler, Karl Benz and Rudolf Diesel have invented the combustion engines only about 50 years later.
QUESTION: How can this be explained?
The idea is that human industry and energy production are _artificially_ increasing the rate of climate change. In a general sense, the world has warmed since the last glacial maximum; at some point it will begin cooling as the current "interglacial" period winds down. That is, unless human pollution interrupts the glaciation cycle altogether.
It is disappointing that with such wisdom and knowledge the world gets stuck with the kind of idiots that we have in parliament.
One guess about who funds their election campaigns.
It's going to be extremely difficult.
Climate change was already noticed when we were just 1-2 billion. Now we're 8.
Even if our carbon footprint would be 15% of what it was 100 years ago - without cars, electronics, travel - we'd still stay on trend. We need 8x as much mining, 8x as much furniture and heating. More, in fact, since we don't live in multi-generation cottages, and we renew and replace our homes every so often. We insulate better but also heat more. (25°C is the minimum expected in offices, malls, homes.)
It all begins by shaming the Economic Growth. Which is difficult because public debt is designed with it.
As long as our comfortable life style will be more expensive than the cost of the consequences of global warming there are little chances for real change
@@patpat5135 difficult ? yes. Impossible ? No. The future of energy production should prioritize renewables, particularly solar and wind, supplemented by storage batteries. Utilizing just 175 square miles of desert land could feasibly generate enough electricity to meet 100% of the USA's needs, representing a mere 0.1% of the country's desert area.
However, this vision is often dismissed as "impossible" due to concerns about its perceived costliness rather than recognizing its potential as an economic opportunity. Given that the USA possesses a sovereign currency, concerns about debt are largely mitigated as long as inflation remains manageable.
The prevailing notion that governments should manage finances akin to households is a fallacy that persists.
Strange, because I'm already seeing change. That change is predicted to accelerate this decade.
Hold on to your hat, because big change is right around the corner.
Already Coal is dying. It is now the most expensive way to make electricity, while Renewables with storage, is the cheapest.
What that means is that it is increasingly uneconomic to use coal for pretty much anything.
Gasoline might seem strong today, but it's already in trouble. (That trouble is being hidden from the public with some very creative accounting.)
I have a feeling the oil industry is going to make Enron's creative accounting look like amateur day, when it all hits the fan.
This is why I don't invest in these companies.
I don't like losing my money.
So you recommend poor folks freeze to death...Got it
@@eilaollinheimo4573
Fear mongering.
How original of you.
With things like ground based heat pumps no one who has a furnace now has to freeze to death.
Fear mongering and lies are all that's left to fossil fuels.
A powerful, intelligent and detailed talker. 10/10, a true professional
🤣
Communications professional?
At 2:00 to 2:06 She said: "Thanks to some excellent research by Harvard and the pop-stem institute."
Am I hearing hear correctly "Pop-stem institute"? I did a google search. All I'm seeing is Salata Institute.
@@kennorthunder2428
Potsdam institute.
By the way you probably make several mispronunciations every time you open your mouth, as do I.
So let's not call out others for what we do ourselves, shall we?
Slavery was convenient too. But we outgrew that.
No we did not. The media just don't cover it any more. Still slavery going on.
Na we just find a more convenient way to exploit the masses.
Excellent analogy, to our current situation.
Just like now that took a lot of fight from everyday people to make that happen.
So there's no slavery in our world now? Hmm
An intensely emotional start, but then interesting insight into various issues follows. Regrettably, policy makers and government leaders often do not make decisions in the best interests of the people and the environment. We need more people talking and asking questions, and that includes opposing voices.
I have been hoping so long to no avail I am thinking that hope might not be the way to anything.
Next try behavioral activation
The best hope is doing something. Even something small. It may make no difference at all. (at least that's what they'll tell you)
Do it anyway, even if it only makes you feel better, because "they" are wrong. every tiny bit of CO2 that isn't added to the total, makes that total a tiny bit smaller.
While the things we do ourselves won't fix the problem by themselves, if we don't do our part, then we can't force industry, and government to do their part.
Only when we get all three doing their part will we really see a big change, and it IS going to happen.
So chin up and fight harder!
@@jimthain8777 I admire your optimism.
Learn to make bio char, not hard and actually words
Hope isn't the answer to disinformation.
Correct and verified information is the answer to disinformation.
The science is done, now its about the politics.
Now it's about the -politics- greenwäshing extörtion rackët! FIFY.
Now it's about depopulation via starvation and other means.
@@horsepaste817 you say that like its a bad thing
@@trickslies844 So are you going to voluntarily starve yourself to death for the planet? Something tells me you won't.
If the science is done, where is the model? Do you have any idea what kind of computing power you have today? When I was in college, 1000 people would share a single computer for a school of 30,000 people to do engineering work on. You have that in your pocket now. Yet no models are available, they are supposedly "too complex", well they claimed to have accurate reliable models in the 1990s.
Very nice lecture and it's all true , it's simple to solve the problem but it's not comforting .
We have to leave consumption behind us if we want to have fresh air and water .If you take the example of Amish people you don't have to worry about climate change
But the easiest way to contribute to climate change is not to have kids and you have done a lot
While you're right about consumption, that last part is not true. While it is folly to have too many children, a husband and wife having 2 children only replace themselves without adding.
How do we stop people from having more children than that?
We make them wealthier, we make it so their children will survive, that's what we need to do.
For 500 million years there has been no correlation between CO2 and temperature. What has changed?
Politics. The UN funded research into finding a correlation. Notice the usual gloss over the science (everyone knows the science, right)? Straight into the politics of blame and shame. One day in the future that mother will look back and realise how we were deceived.
Thank you.
But wait….mis-information is a 2-way door.
Early part of this had some good content. Never mentions Solar and Battery as it is the cheapest way to product Electricity period. Costs will drive more change than her two ways out. We are in a great time where there are now good options. Options that cost alone will drive positive climate change.
Agreed.
The change is going to come faster than some people will be able to handle.
Disinformation has greatly slowed our transition to sustainable energy. Exxon CEO recently dared us to put a price on carbon. Change is done by policy and regulations and local are regional regulations are working even if the federal level is bogged down by lobbyists.
The solutions are so simple and do-able!
Hi Anjali,
Firstly, let me say that I genuinely appreciate the passion and dedication you bring to environmental issues. Your advocacy is inspiring and undoubtedly necessary. However, I believe it's crucial to examine the broader picture when discussing climate change and the proposed solutions.
I'm no fan of oil or gas, but I'm also not thrilled with the idea of windmills covering vast land masses and large-scale solar farms. While solar panels, wind turbines, and biofuels might offer solutions on a smaller scale, they come with their own set of challenges when implemented broadly.
CO2 Levels Over Time: Did you know that in the last 600 million years, the average CO2 level was about 2,600 ppm-nearly seven times higher than today’s 400 ppm? Even during the Quaternary period, CO2 levels averaged around 230 ppm and peaked at about 300 ppm some 320,000 years ago. A 300 ppm increase could actually boost plant growth by about 46% across various crops. This historical perspective challenges the dire narrative around current CO2 levels and their supposed impact.
Greenhouse Gas Theory Contradictions: The theory that greenhouse gases absorb energy and cause the Earth to warm contradicts the Earth's spectral radiation curve. According to Kirchman's interpretation of the Stolman law and Newton's law of cooling, the Earth should be radiating more energy, not less, if the greenhouse gas theory were valid. Additionally, thermal emission spectrometer data from the Mars Global Surveyor in 1996 shows a CO2 'bite' in Earth's spectrum, raising questions about where the blocked radiation by CO2 goes.
Thermodynamics and Emissivity: The sun is the primary energy source, and Earth's temperature is determined by thermodynamic equilibrium. Humans can only alter the planet's temperature by changing its emissivity, not CO2 levels. This perspective suggests that our understanding of climate dynamics might be more complex than the current narrative acknowledges.
Critique of Modern Climate Science: Many academics fail to verify their data through experiments or practical applications. The greenhouse gas theory is often used for political purposes rather than being scientifically grounded. For instance, the rate of sea level rise has not accelerated significantly over the last 110 years. Vancouver's sea level has been rising at just 0.55 millimeters per year, contrary to catastrophic predictions. Historical data also show that the Earth's temperature and CO2 levels have fluctuated naturally over millions of years.
Renewable Energy Challenges: The production of solar panels, batteries, and wind turbines involves significant mining activities and generates substantial waste. Is this really the 'green' solution we’re told it is? Mining for lithium, copper, nickel, cobalt, and other minerals essential for green tech is environmentally damaging and reliant on fossil fuels. For example, the carbon footprint of electric vehicles is substantial when considering the entire lifecycle-from mining to production and disposal.
Natural Climate Drivers: David Dilley argues that Earth's climate has been cooling for the past 7,000 years with short-term shifts. We’re entering a global cooling cycle expected to be noticeable by 2030. This challenges the prevailing warming narrative and suggests natural cycles play a significant role. The Earth's elliptical path around the Sun changes over a 12,000-year cycle, affecting its distance from the Sun and, consequently, climate patterns. Additionally, the Moon’s elliptical path around the Earth causes variations in gravitational pull and tidal patterns, influencing climate events like coastal flooding.
Political and Economic Influences: The push for net-zero emissions laws, like those in Delaware, and mandates for electric vehicle infrastructure may face public backlash as they begin to affect daily life. Every plant on Earth grows faster today than it would have in millions of years, with the Earth gaining 18 million square kilometers of leaf cover between 1982 and 2015. This is equivalent to adding all the plants on the continental United States multiplied by two to the planet.
Epistemology and Validation Theory: Kirchman’s theory of validation found an inverted causal relationship between temperature and CO2, suggesting the greenhouse gas theory is invalid. Furthermore, the production processes for generating electricity for electric vehicles (EVs) involve significant resources, including methane gas extraction through fracking, coal mining, and the manufacturing of batteries. These processes contribute to carbon emissions, challenging the notion that EVs are a cleaner alternative.
Microplastics and Environmental Impact: Contrary to popular belief, many microplastics found in the ocean are natural and have been there for a long time. The volume of microplastics in the ocean is only 1% of the total ocean water and weighs less than 8% of the ocean's total weight. This perspective suggests that human contribution to the microplastics problem might not be as significant as commonly thought.
Why aren’t we discussing these aspects more openly? Why does challenging the narrative often lead to being labeled a 'denier'? It’s essential to think harder and broader about these issues instead of simply blaming industry for all our woes. Governments and political agendas play significant roles, and we must critically examine their policies and motivations.
Thanks again for your perspective. While I could be wrong, and we all end up facing severe environmental consequences, it’s vital to have these discussions openly and honestly.
Many Blessings,
J W RIDDELL
Because we live in a democracy the economics weighs heavily on getting votes.
Big money has immense power over politicians and false narratives.
Putin has a stranglehold over all oil resources and economic sectors.
What level of control are we under compared to Russia?
How do we stop our politicians from speaking from the power and oil industries perspective?
Who stopped Alberta wind expansion?
The ideas and possibilities to expand green power technologies must be encouraged by our Alberta Premier not stifled.
The only real way to fix this and future similar issues is to just get money out of politics and limit timeline of campaigns so we aren’t all at each others throats for more than 4 months of a year, and then to give them each a lump sum and let them go at it
Is that why Mark Carney run net zero investment company invest in foreign oil?
@@eilaollinheimo4573
In my opinion that's a bad idea. He stands to lose a LOT of money by the end of this decade.
I am sure that these backroom deal making politicians know more than you and me where to invest
Please read, Kenneth E Boulding's poem, A Conservationist's Lament, it's as relevant now as it is when it was written in 1956.
The Irony is that the latest COPS summit in Dubai was led by an oil proponent. Now they are setting the agenda to slowdown quick efforts to reduce oil consumption.
Did you hear about the flooding in Dubai this year?
Some would call that Karma...
She has not looked at long-term warming and cooling cycles of the earth. We are in a warming cycle at this point.
True, earth cycles are real the problem is we accelarate the process and aggravate its effects with our current practices.
@@D.NogueraMusicWhere did you see that we accelerate the process? Graphs that correlate solar activitiws with temperatures have no place for CO2.
@@praem9597 You know what CO2 does to the ambience right? Imagine we are in full summer heat and instead of turning the AC on we turn on the heater. Thats the greenhouse effect. Temperatures rising are natural causes, but greenhouse effect is man made.. we only need to adapt to the natural cycles.
@@D.NogueraMusic You are talking complete nonsense. Why are you lying?
@@D.NogueraMusic You are talking complete nonsense.
The mournful cries of violins are about the only thing missing from this steaming pile of …
For changing world to better future
You're welcome, "SENTENTIA OPTIMUM" waitng...
It's waitng for learnig, it's waiting for spreading...
The course that will inspire you...
NOVA Polar Extremes Ice Worlds punch it up on YT..! Not Boring, I Promise..! Awesome Documentary..!
Powerful, PetroNationalism! Great Job.
Is Ted Talks now the new NPR?
I’ll admit the oil companies took too long to come out, but they have also been exploring and creating alternative energy and petroleum products and clean-er solutions.
No matter how you FEEL, petroleum is in almost everything you possess or use. It will take DECADES to SLOWLY Transition.
Nope.
Green washing, that thing they accuse everyone else of doing is what they do.
You have clearly fallen for it. Many do.
Nope again.
It will take about a decade to do a lot of the transition, and once we break their back that will only speed things up.
I know that sounds crazy today, but if you told someone in 1901, that horse would disappear from the cities in about 20 years, you'd have been laughed at.
Yet that's exactly what happened.
The same happened with the industrial revolution.
The change we are experiencing is pretty much the same level as the industrial revolution.
AS always animal agriculture is the elephant in the room.
Unfortunately, it’s too late for renewable energy to save the planet. Respected top scientist Jim Hansen and his team released a paper recently that said even with no more emissions the planet is in for a 10°C rise within about 400 years, and roughly another 2°C rise by the end of the century to 4°C. The planet has dimmed, by shrinking ice slightly reduced cloud cover. What is needed is mainly ocean cooling by Marine cloud brightening.
"Marine cloud brightening". You want to precipitate an ice age?
More untested ideas to mess up
with natural equilibrium.
@@eilaollinheimo4573 What natural equilibrium?
Not all ideas that sound good on paper should be implemented if there could be unintended and unknown consequences. Oppenheimer never quite think the human toll of his work
Do you have a reference for that Hansen paper?
Who would trust the UN!???
THE QUESTION SGOULD BE who is getting rich by solar and wind SO CALLED GREEN ENERGY. Billion have been given of the tax payers money to B with no results that are green or reliable. who is paying her ?
The entire SYSTEM itself MUST be changed in a way that put's an end to 'infinite growth on a finite planet' being the ONLY way the system can 'work', and the only possible way you COULD do that and still have a system that 'works' would be by making it financially worthwhile for people to SHARE the jobs we NEED to have done and working much less. A world where the human race is no longer working primarily FOR money but sharing in doing something we agree we NEED and getting paid to do it!!...An entirely different goal of the system.
Listened to the first 3 minutes. Stopped to avoid throwing up at this chunderous agent of politicisation and misinformation!
Her job is to tell the politicians story!
The Aztec calendar points to this period in the astrological position in time they calculated there would be a global scale change. Their Calendar was predicting the rapid climate change that will take place on earth caused by the alignments of planets stars galaxies calculations unmatched by even by todays computers. We must prepare ourselves not try to stop which is unstoppable like time
The question no one wants to talk about is population, there are arguments it's not about population as we can still squeeze the worlds population on to say the land mass of Denmark. This is missing the point as if we had less then half the exciting population we would do half the amount of damage to our planet. There are to many of us and we are living to long. The wildlife around us is not living longer, we are a parasite on the earth and just like any parasite if there are to many of them the host dies.
We need to discuss the population issue not just the temperature of the plant.
Beautifully said and I hope for a future, but I know that it is too late. Our time has come and gone, while we were asleep at the wheel. It is not this planet's first mass extinction, or even its second but once we are gone nature will try again, so, there will always be a future -- just not one that Humanity will be a part of, or most of the biodiversity that currently exists.
Fossil fuel industry, and certain powerful and ultra rich individuals whom fund the think-tanks and misinformation.
She tries to be a Martin Luther King of our days.
The way she speaks is very hypnotizing, isn't it? Ridiculous. 0 carbon=0 life.
BTW; petroleum is NOT a fossil fuel and definitely is not pollution.
It was only 10 000 years ago that you could walk from england to denmark direct. The rising sea levels would have caused an immense catastrophy to the inhabitants of the Dogger Bank. Midway. Now there is a wind farm planted into the water called the North Sea on their farm land. All caused by global warming but it was totally natural and the only solution was retreat. Man must adapt and not try to be King Canute.
By volume, the dry air in Earth's atmosphere is about 78.08 percent nitrogen, 20.95 percent oxygen, and 0.93 percent argon, adding up to 99.96 percent. A brew of trace gases accounts for the other approximately 0.04 percent, including the greenhouse gases carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide and ozone. To think that a small increase (200 parts per million in the last hundred years) of carbon dioxide would affect the weather is absurd.
I'm impressed you could make this comment and it's visible. Complex comments with detailed information and thinking is generally deleted by an AI on this site.
Here's what the science says: "Small amounts of very active substances can cause huge effects." It doesn't matter if you do not wish to understand it or want to call the science, "absurd". It matters that CO2 is a greenhouse gas. Oxygen and nitrogen are not.
all the LSD i take comes in 2 kilogram tablets,...did you know you can choke to death on Oxygen?
From a manual on employee safety - "H2S is immediately fatal when concentrations are over 500-1000 parts per million (ppm) but exposure to lower concentrations, such as 10-500 ppm, can cause various respiratory symptoms that range from rhinitis to acute respiratory failure."
Small ppm of a gas can have significant effect on life.
With the ppm of atmospheric carbon going high above anything seen in the last million years, nothing on earth is adapted to the atmosphere we are creating.
Millions of scintist and researchers agree that high levels of atmospheric carbon are a problem. Despite your feelings on the issue, sorry I will believe them instead.
@@5353Jumper CO2 is not higher than it ever has been in MILLIONS of years. Not anywhere close. Our atmosphere has about 0.04% CO2. At 0.02% plants can't grow, they die. Plants are STARVING for CO2.
People in power LIE, don't you know that by now? There's no climate emergency, we're not destroying the planet.
Very well done.
This huge dose of hope is sadly a huge dose of hopium. We are locked in regardless - yes we can try SRM via cloud brightening, diamond dust, covering 1/3 the equatorial region with mirrors, but we do not have the tech for this, and the tech that we have 'sitting on a shelf' is not to scale. Right now, the money is on the war machine. What we can do is walk lightly - reduce our energy footprint and show love & compassion to all living things. Cheesy? Maybe, but the alternative offered here is to try to OD on hopium so we can continue BAU.
I think No Hope... nothing changes ...
Actually things are changing right now.
Keep watching and you will see change over just the next couple of years that you would not have imagined possible at all just 5 years ago.
You, Madam, blew more hot air in 15 minutes than 5 major oil companies combined. Most of us have lost faith in major corps, but we have also lost faith in our politicians and their approach to the problem.
While we are taxed heavily to have the cleanest air in the world, please take a quick trip to east Asia, middle east and Africa to see what real pollution is.
I also encourage you to investigate why north America doesnt implement a more efficient recycling policy.
While you're doing that, lookup the cost on extracting precious metals to make electric vehicles.
One more thing, oil isn't just for burning in cars, look around your house and see how many items are made with the by-products of oil; what is your solution for that? What and how do you suppose the clothes, shoes, jewelery, purse, phone etc are made?
Now, who do you think is the true gullible puppet?
Add medical and health field. MRI plastic frame, syringes etc
A true Goddess.
Yup.
We have not studied the earth's long tern natural cycles to know if we have any effect. We know there was an ice age 6000 years ago and the oceans were hundreds of feet lower. We are going the other way. The First Nations of the world picked up and moved as the oceans rose as the ice age melted. We have to move as the natural world channges.
Move where? We now have more science and technology to mitigate climate change than the First Nations of the world, so shouldn't we take advantage of that? It is not easy to combat climate change, but we have never been more capable than today.
STAR TREK isn't widely available yet
@@pyunneglesias2974 I doubt that the First Nations of the past were as stationary as we are today as they would have had to follow the herds of animals that were their food source.
The climate change conspiracy conspiracy is a conspiracy 😂😂. The world has changed forever and keeps changing adapt
Europeans and americans exagerrate this so called "Climate Change".😂😂
If it was that serious then why not europeans stop all of their companies and industries?😂😂 Instead of telling poor countries to not use cars. Europeans are just clowns😂😂
Sound like you are just regurgitating bs that you ate from a bad politician 😂😂😂
@@ylfzo Sounds like you have been brainwashed by the global elite scam, if it were true these so called scientists and politicians wouldnt be jetting around the world for a conference party every year would they, get a clue.
@@hussierdaadi6855 Oh really, whys that then? Seeing as more Co2 and warming temperatures mean much more plant and crop growth.
@@hussierdaadi6855 Yeah cause the dinosaurs had no water and no plants when it was far hotter with more Co2 did they? Oh wait. Stop falling for this climate cult BS.
In the 1980s, scientists were looking to the next ice age, based upon core samples.
Now they are only paid for Global Warming agenda.
That was only a handful of some scientists and not the vast majority, who were shouting for the rooftop saying the planet is Heating and we're going to be in trouble. And the fact of the matter is we are not only going to miss the next ice age that we should be trending towards soon, which is where the forecast for coming from in the 70s about a pending ice age, but also because we're going to radically accelerate the heating beyond the normal cycle we've had for the last several million years
@@JonathanLoganPDX You are talking nonsense. Are you paid to write that?
@@praem9597 Nope. I've 40 years experience in climate science.
@@JonathanLoganPDXWhich one of Al Gore predictions is your favorite?
QUE ES MAS PELIGROSO, LA SOBREPOBLACION QUE CONSUME ENERGIA O LA CODICIA DE LA ECONOMIA CAPITALISTA PIB. ENTRE LAS DOS HAN AUMENTADO "EL CALENTAMIENTO GLOBAL" Y LAS SEQUIAS.
If climate change really was an issue our world leaders would've adopted a net zero approach towards wars & weapons manufacturing - Peace & diplomacy is the easiest way to swiftly reduce our footprint
no it isn't
This is beautiful 🎉🎉🎉
This lady is beautiful 😍
so electric is a distraction.
mild winter? depends where, come to Quebec City lol -25°C at least+ windchill hehe
- We live in the same climate as it was 5 million years ago -
I have an explanation regarding the cause of the climate change and global warming, it is the travel of the universe to the deep past since May 10, 2010.
Each day starting May 10, 2010 takes us 1000 years to the past of the universe.
Today April 25, 2024 the state of our universe is the same as it was 5 million and 99 thousand years ago.
On october 13, 2026 the state of our universe will be at the point 6 million years in the past.
On june 04, 2051 the state of our universe will be at the point 15 million years in the past.
On june 28, 2092 the state of our universe will be at the point 30 million years in the past.
On april 02, 2147 the state of our universe will be at the point 50 million years in the past.
The result is that the universe is heading back to the point where it started and today we live in the same climate as it was 5 million years ago.
Mohamed BOUHAMIDA.
Save tree 🌲🌴
She has a big kitty!
Globally planned, regionally organized and locally executed, planetary actions.
Where is the money going
Complete and utter B/S.
Hard to believe anyone any more. 😢
If we keep wanting to believe people rather then understand them its easy to get fooled.
Well you either believe scientists or you believe uneducated idiots like Trump and his idio$ supporters...wake up...
@@Skouta007 Scientists will automatically lose their career if their research leads them to question the "official" climate change narrative. So I'm sorry to tell you the "science" is irrelevant.
@@trickslies844 Anthropogenic climate change is a hoax, thankfully more and more people are realising this now and not falling for the laughable propaganda.
Try following the money. I’ve always found that to be the best path. The cigarette companies had the same disinformation campaign and it worked great for many years 😢
I'm writing this comment in May, 2024: I was born in WW2, so climate change will not have much time to damage my life, but I see many people born since 2,000 who are ready to vote for the candidate for America's President who denies global climate change and who has told the fossil fuel companies that he will remove antipollution regulations while reducing incentive programs for consumers to go green.
All of which amounts to little compared to the accelerating carbon dioxide output from Asia.
Naw in India ant Road trafic wehicle rull BS6 level liked in ocean trafic heavy carrier sheeps heaving what Carbon emition limitation rull as per latest all Co2 emitions frome these seeping corporations doings ?
Try that again in english.
Winters are not getting warmer, if anything in some locations around the world, they're getting colder.
The majority of places are seeing warmer winters.
The places seeing the most change are the places that are usually the coldest.
While a difference of 5 degrees in Greenland might not seem like much, at the end of winter it can bring rain instead of snow.
That makes a BIG difference.
Sad story of this young mother but ... where is her husband?
A heap of claims but no facts to back them.
Quit talking about it. Do something All.we do is blow more hot air and co2 into the air. If we all put your money where you're mouths are and just start doing something besides look for some one to blame don't talk do something about. We're all the problem
Bored. Boring. Nothing is going to change if you sound like a book on tape reading chapters. Typical TedTalk.
Sounds like a bedtime story.
Try praying
Clearly we’ve been forgotten already…
@@jhodapp Who did the forgetting?
What happens when there is a globally-coordinated campaign to incentivize (or force) farmers to produce less food? Starvation much?
The only thing risking famine right now are the self destructive practices of industrial scale farming
@@trickslies844 Not true. New policies which make it impossible for many European farmers to continue producing food will likely lead to famine. And here in the UK farmers are being offered vast sums of money by the government to stop producing food on their land. These are destructive policies. The government, the EU, the UN - they are not your friend. Are you a paid propagandist or do you genuinely believe in anthropogenic climate change?
@@horsepaste817 Those policies are there because framers keep keep over using fertilizers and such which is poisoning our water supply and killing the environment. Turns out drowning the country side in manure isn't a good idea.
None of which has anything to do with global warming . Nor are we at risk of a famine in any way. For one thing the UK has been a food importer for centuries and the other is that we waste far more food on a day to day basis then we would lose to these policies
@@trickslies844 Politicians, those at the EU, the UN, etc - they don't have any genuine concern for the environment. I guarantee you that. We are definitely at risk of famine as a consequence of destructive decisions of western governments over recent years, so we'll just have to agree to disagree. " the UK has been a food importer for centuries" - for one thing, have you thought about how WWIII might influence food imports? Do you think western leaders have done everything they possibly could to prevent a hot war reaching their soil? Quite the contrary.
@@trickslies844 No. Not at all. We have completely revolutionized farming. It's easy to end starvation today.
Where are the oceans rising? Not anywhere Ive been.
Go to the South Pacific Islands!!!
@@Skouta007 I've been surfing for 42 years from Florida to Hawaii in the ocean almost every day. It is a the same level. Only difference is erosion and islands sinking due to subsidence like in Hawaii or the South Pacific.
So you have scientifically measured the sea level...come on...Dunning Krugerish...😊
How's Dubai going??? And don't blame it on cloud seeding!!! How are the Russian and Chinese floods going????
@@Skouta007 It is called weather.
She talks politics. She does not talk science. So I am unpersuaded.
What???
Rubbish...Trumptards talk nonsense.
Wake up idio$...stop believing idiots like Trump.
@@Skouta007 Come back once you've watched the recent documentary called "climate: the movie" - featuring scientists from Harvard, MIT, Caltech, etc. There you will hear the other side of the debate, which is normally hidden.
@@horsepaste817 huh???
I can't believe the number of myths this woman is peddling.
Such as?
@@jhodapp Such as the assertion that anybody who questions the orthodoxy is in the pay of some corporation.
@@normanstewart7130 Did she say "anybody" or just mention some oil companies and their scientists?
That tends to be their only claim. They are not willing to debate and refute the points. They just smear.
She talks complete bollox
Home schooled, were you?
@@preimer22 indoctrinated were you?
I agree.
Already in the introduction this lady is talking nonsense: wildfires are not increasing, in fact they are steadily decreasing. What does increase is the amount of media-coverage of wildfires, giving people the impression wildfires are out of control (source: Bjorn Lomborg, 2023).
He's Bjorn blomborg, he would say that. Its bogus.
Bull$hit...where is your evidence...stop crapping on Trumptard...
Bjorn Lomborg is not a Source you thick c**t. A source is something we can actually verify and nothing coming out of Lomborg's mouth on climate change has ever been confirmed to be true
A fact-free ideological assertion built on forgiving oneself for not doing the hard work of becoming better minded.
Misinformation is totally acceptable and even encouraged, provided it's the right kind of misinformation.
Very earnest , but unfortunately more woke nonsense !!