(Drumpfkins BTFO)

(Drumpfkins BTFO)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=D-m09lKtYT4&
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

>media still hasn't learned
(They will)

In what context? Its real, but its not an issue.

>mainstream media expecting me to believe what they say is real

>(((scientists)))

That ozone layer hole will kill us all someday, right?

It's a scam, plain and simple. I'm still trying to figure the purpose of it, though.

> cherry picking truths based on what you happen to like the idea of.

Who'd of thought it would be the right that usher in post modernity.

im sure the earth will be just fine no matter what we do to it. not sure what all the fuss is about. is it gonna implode or something?

Rule of Kike Journalism #1:
the number of words quoted is directly proportional to how hard the author is trying to accurately portray the selected quote

lots of words = lots of accuracy

little words = little accuracy

this article has an accuracy rating of 3. I don't know the units on that, but I can assure you it is very low.

> Carbon dioxide is destroying the world
> But let's ignore the garbage freighters dumping into the ocean, industrial runoff in the rivers, Designated Shitting Streets, ocean strip trawling, and thousands of other ways the world gets destroyed one reckless step at a time.
Shill. Sage.

>Injecting editorial opinion directly into a headline
0/10 journalism

>who would of
>would of

how come you marxists are not calling it global warming. Why is it called climate change, something that has a very loose definition one that can be molded to fit your agenda.

How come you are not posting facts but posting condescending remarks and insults. Try harder faggot.

Reminder that a usual 'drumpf btfo' thread, with a screenshot of a 'news' headline and without any link to said headline deserves nothing more than a sage and a report

Remember when the EPA was questioned, under oath, in front of the Congress and produced 0 (zero) scientific models which could predict the measurable, physical changes their proposed regulations would cause?

0 (zero) scientific models.

>It's a scam, plain and simple. I'm still trying to figure the purpose of it, though.
Shekels. A few certain (((((people))))) have a lot invested in the Green Energy industry. Plain and simple.

>0 (zero) scientific models.
anything that has no scientific models, evidence or facts should be stomped out of existence.

>assume that disagreeing with the actual degree that humans cause global warming is the same as outright denying global warming in its entirety
>assume there's no disparity at all in the degree that humans are influencing the environment because there is one correct way of understanding global warming
>assume that everyone believes that they as well as everyone else on the planet understands the exact same conception of what man made global warming is

nice try fags maybe you should assume the same things if you want your belief system to be as valid as mine ahha

Either that, or it's a sobering reminder that, regardless of the amount of regulations the EPA wants, and regardless of the increased funding that they shill for, it will not have any observable effect on our habitat.

(No they won't)

climate change is real- we were in an ice age around 10,000 years ago. the world moved out of it and is getting hotter we're in a warming phase. there have been hundreds of ice ages and periods of warmer temperatures like we're in now.

question is- does man made pollution have an effect on climate change. according to weather survey's, climate change is increasing at a more rapid rate than previously anticipated. this can be attributed to humans being morons and using non clean energy sources for power.

it's pretty simple, but big oil wants to keep a hold over the planet for profit. they dont give a fuck what happens in 100 years. if you understand how these corporate fucks work, all they want is money.

>it's a sobering reminder
an unwelcome one at that as well, these men/women were hired to oversee corrupt companies dumping waste in our parks and contaminating our food/water supplies.
these people have turned it into a corrupt system, they need to be unemployed & arrested.
Think i am extreme remember bill nye and david suzuki think that anyone who disagrees with them should be imprisoned.

>does man made pollution have an effect on climate change. according to weather survey's, climate change is increasing at a more rapid rate than previously anticipated. this can be attributed to humans being morons and using non clean energy sources for power.
Care to explain why the EPA was able to produce 0 (zero) scientific models which could predict the effects that their proposed regulations would have on our habitat?

Let's think of this from another perspective, since we pay for the EPA with our taxes. They bring you a box and want you to buy it. Naturally, you'll ask what's in the box. Except, they don't know what's actually in the box. They'll tell you what they think could be in the box, but then when you ask if you can hold the box and shake it a bit, so you can get a sense of how accurate their guess is, they pull it away from you and tell you that you need to buy it anyway.

>but its not an issue
according to Anonymous (ID: KNknir+1) right?

The EPA (((needs))) another $58 billion to build a supercomputer capable of m̶i̶n̶i̶n̶g̶ ̶b̶i̶t̶c̶o̶i̶n̶s processing the immense amount of meteorological data to figure out THIS time for sure. Honest!

You guys sure do love to take credit for this language and speaking it better for not knowing how to use proper grammar.

>EPA was able to produce 0 (zero) scientific models
publically funded organizations are notorious for producing nothing or little value. Least the ones in this (((current year))), perhaps the ones of yesteryear provided value/worth.
We need to gut the useless people out of government and make it a meritocracy again.

exactly, there were many people set up to start doing carbon credit trading at the beginning of obama's presidency. As much of an idiot as he is now, Glenn Beck kind of blew the cover of that stuff back in 2008-2009. literally 100's of Billion's of dollars a year industry was to be created out of thin air and trading things that don't exist.

>m̶i̶n̶i̶n̶g̶ ̶b̶i̶t̶c̶o̶i̶n̶s
That made me laugh, I doubt they are even competent enough to setup the mining software/hardware properly if they had the funds to acquire both.

Trump don't think it be like it is (it do)

kek

You guys sure like saying "BTFO"

Honestly, I'd be fine with the EPA and wouldn't mind paying a bit more in taxes if I knew exactly what the return on my investment was. However, when they can produce 0 (zero) scientific models showing the direct impact their regulations would have on ice reformation, it doesn't seem worth it.

Back to the box thing I just described. I have no interest in buying a mystery box. I want to know the exact effects of the regulations. If they could produce scientific models which demonstrated the effects of their regulations, and not just a broad "global emissions can cause this scenario" type of data, more people would listen. I want to know exactly why they want my money and why they want to increase the reach of the feds, and how it benefits me.

It's these kind of posts that start to transcend standard shitposting because it's just too real. Why do so many people think that throwing money at a problem and getting everyone to match their contribution will somehow fix a problem?

>1 post by this ID

These posts are made to destroy the abundant #pizzagate evidence.

Do not fall for them.

>it is
Do they provide proof that it is then, or just go on to slander Trump?

THAT'S FANTASTIC BECAUSE MAN-MADE CLIMATE CHANGE IS A CROCK OF SHIT!!!!!!
youtube.com/watch?v=D-m09lKtYT4&

Why the hell do you say BTFO so much, literally no one else says. Please just stop

LOL
BLUMPF A LUMPF A PUMPF A DRUMPF!!
UPVOTED
BTFOOOO!!!1!
ALL CAPS LOLOLOL
UPVOTE

MEDIA CLAIMS CLIMATE CHANGE IS REAL (Parentheses claims this is bullshit)

this isn't fucking journalism.