Why don't you accept climate change as fact?

Why don't you accept climate change as fact?

Other urls found in this thread:

atmos.washington.edu/2009Q1/111/Readings/Lorius1990_ice-core.pdf
jpost.com/Business-and-Innovation/Environment/EU-ambassador-calls-for-Israel-to-ratify-Paris-climate-accord-472306
imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png
livescience.com/44330-jurassic-dinosaur-carbon-dioxide.html
youtube.com/watch?v=EjmtSkl53h4
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Don't really care.

Even if you went and lived in the bush like a tribal, the effect an individual has on it is basically negligible.

we don't deny climate change. We deny the fact that is man-made.

That is exactly what your pics implies, by the way.

im 43 i wont be alive long enough to see the effect so who gives a fuck

Do you support parties that promise action on climate change?

Do you not believe the produced CO2 is such that it could ever have an effect or do you not believe that the greenhouse effect exists?

Kids?

because the epica and vostok expeditions already proved that this rock we call earth have seen a lot worse than this so called climate change...

in fact if you put this vs historic times(millions of years) this looks like just another monday on geologic times for earth..

If you believe in "climate change", you are either ignorant of the fact that you are spreading Communist China's anti-free-market-capitalism propaganda or you are willfully and actively working to advance Communism and destroy free market capitalism.

we've only been around for 4-6 million years and our temperature record dates back to around 65 million years before then to my knowledge. Yes the earth has been warmer but our current population couldn't survive such.

>Everyone who doesn't agree with me is LITERALLY A COMMUNIST CHINESE PROPAGANDIST

>Do you support parties that promise action on climate change?

Specifically? Nah.

Ultimately, I think there are bigger issues and choosing specifically to support something like The Greens over another party is just a waste of time.

It's never a deciding factor in supporting one party over another.

And if we're talking modern form of human only about 200 000 years

What could be a bigger issue then the entire earth becoming nearly inhospitable and unable to sustain human life in the not too distant future? This is far more of a threat to humanities survival than any other.

Yeah its fact... but its not man-made and you can't change anything about it Tommy.

Could it be that climate change is real but it is badly exaggerated?
I bet someone are controlling the narrative and earning good money on it.

Eh, worse case, it'll make some nigger countries inhospitable.

White people will adapt, we always do.

my point is that overinflated shit that we caused the current climate change is just a bogus
the earth has a regular pattern that heats up after an ice age and in geologic time we just passed through one so its understandable..
also the shit can go sideways even with a volcano explosion pinatumbo erruption lasted 3 days and made the earths climate to fuck up for almost 4 years...and if the theory of that new planet is reliable then you can add another form of destruction there for us..

fact is we can fucking get killed by a thousand ways before the climate kills us all

problem is that there is a huge amount of money behind anything green and that is the main reason behind this

>"Everyone who doesn't agree with me is LITERALLY A COMMUNIST CHINESE PROPAGANDIST"

I didn't say that. I said that people who shill for the religion of climate change are either ignorant of the fact that they are spreading Communist China's anti-free-market-capitalism propaganda or they are willfully and actively working to advance Communism and destroy free market capitalism. They are ignorant of the reality, whether willfully or not, that the myth of anthropomorphic climate change is a construct of China's Communist party.

Suit yourself, ozzy, if you prefer to live in denial. Be aware that the Chinese are coming for Australia first. They are already actively attempting to surround and isolate your nation by forming alliances and economic infrastructures with South East Asian countries.

We know past warming due to orbital variations couldn't have possibly been of the magnitude we measured without some kind of amplifying effect and we can demonstrate that CO2 and other greenhouse gases would have this amplifying effect. Would it not then follow if we were to pump CO2 into our atmosphere that we would then see a warming as the greenhouse effect occurs amplifying heating from the sun? Pic related, positive feedback loop of warming triggered by CO2 increase.

atmos.washington.edu/2009Q1/111/Readings/Lorius1990_ice-core.pdf

Yeah it could be if you believe someones altering all the data.

Can you stop earth rotation?
Or it moving around the sun?
Or volcanoes from exploding?
Or the movement of tectonic plates?

Those are the same elements of our ecosystem as systemathic climate change.

During humanity existence there was at least one extinction level event, that ended with a decade of almost constant winter (Toba Supervolcano). We faced hundreads of "small ice ages" and famine inducing dry, warm episodes.

What more, our species started its run at the eve of last major Ice Age.

Whats worse the "climate change" movement focuses on the most useless things. Fox example China, the worlds greatest pollutant does not care, Farm animals are much greater CO2 factor then all plants, factories and cars combined, and if we so desperately need clean power, why the nuclear hate?
Modern, safe nuclear power is the best way to create abundance of "clean" energy.

It's all about lobbies and cliques fighting over influence.

>Yeah could be if you believe someones altering all the data

Not giving it a thought would be naive with all the corruption around us. But of course, I don't have any proof.

>religion of climate change

Not gonna lie stopped taking you seriously here

>Communist China's anti-free-market-capitalism propaganda or they are willfully and actively working to advance Communism and destroy free market capitalism

That would still make me a communist Chinese propagandist just an oblivious one

>They are ignorant of the reality, whether willfully or not, that the myth of anthropomorphic climate change is a construct of China's Communist party.

I don't know if you'll believe the data but we have a good idea that CO2 was responsible in the most part for both past warming and theres no reason it can't be the reason for warming today. See

...because the Left likes to pair it with draconian economic and tax policies that vastly expand government control and fuck-over Western economies.

well you can see how nasa does it..

some months ago they said the earth is hotter than it was for 10.000 years
the some weeks ago they said the earth is hotter than it was for 20.000 years..
either we saw a temperature rise of +3 in a 3 months span
or something is seriously fucked up
also if you start ammasing data from local weather stations and compare the nao readings and the impact of la nina and el nino in general something just doesnt add up at all

they even said that the n. atlantic current up to the iceland was slowing down and the area was being cooled because of the dramatic(sic) melt of the ice cap
then you see the ice met office saying that the winter they just had was the coldest in 120 years..

seriously the shit doesnt add up in any way or form you see it

Yeah its natural, but not necessarily systematic. In the past its been in response to variances in orbit resulting in increases in temperature and thus increases in CO2 as it came out of solution with the sea then causing the greenhouse effect causing further warming and so on. So yes, naturally the earth will respond by warming if CO2 concentration in the atmosphere is increased.

Priorities? If we were to be fighting a war would you argue against moving towards rationing of supplies? Besides the fact that the left demands change in policy because of it doesn't make it any less true.

I only accept global warming because I feel it
its mid November and we still didn't have any rain
10 years ago it started raining mid october here

haven't you had some bad forest fire years lately, Canada?

>Why don't you accept climate change as fact?

Because it's a jewish pyramid scheme to extract wealth from all goy nations.

Hey Israel, do you pay money to the world bank for climate change?

Ah, so Trump DID con someone. I wasn't sure if anyone would believe his "the Chinese made it up" gibberish. Wow.

>some months ago they said the earth is hotter than it was for 10.000 years
the some weeks ago they said the earth is hotter than it was for 20.000 years..

Those two things can both be true. Besides this isn't hard to believe especially when you consider that our view of past temperatures is constantly being refined and changing as new data comes in.

>also if you start ammasing data from local weather stations and compare the nao readings and the impact of la nina and el nino in general something just doesnt add up at all


I'll need to see that

>they even said that the n. atlantic current up to the iceland was slowing down and the area was being cooled

Ice sheets melt over very long periods of time you know. Of course whilst this winter may have been colder previous winters may have been far hotter. Show me the trend in heating.

So no argument just jews

the difference being that advanced human societies did not exist then, and they DO exist now. You are quite right to say that the planet has seen worse... but WE haven't.

>Do you not believe the produced CO2 is such that it could ever have an effect or do you not believe that the greenhouse effect exists?

peeps here believe that the resulting effect of vaporizing water and higher resulting cloud cover reduces the effect of CO2 by a factor of 0.5 instead of 3 like the popular consens.

i guess i still need more data to be convinced.

It is "Aussie", septic.

>As world leaders gather in Morocco for this year’s United Nations Conference on Climate Change, European Union Ambassador Lars Faaborg-Andersen called upon Israel to ratify the universal Paris Agreement on Thursday.
>Two of the world’s top emitters, the United States and China, both ratified the document on September 3, while India did so on October 2. The European Union ratified the accord on October 5, but Israel and 10 other OECD countries still have yet to do so.
jpost.com/Business-and-Innovation/Environment/EU-ambassador-calls-for-Israel-to-ratify-Paris-climate-accord-472306

Top kek.

It is a fact, but man does not cause it.

But why didn't that happen in past warming events? We have the data on this and we know that CO2 has caused the earth to warm in the past and will warm the earth today.

logically, that would lead into explosion of flora, both land and marine kind, since there is more heat and food for it.

In fact that is how ecosystem responded for such changes before humans apeared.

>but WE haven't

again, Toba reduced human population to around 26k units. It created genetic bottleneck.

I would prefer to not live threough extinction event if possible through

always follow the nose, ffs when will this stop being so true

>the earth has a regular pattern that heats up after an ice age and in geologic time we just passed through one so its understandable..
The earths natural temperate fluctuates over the course of thousands of years. It doesn't heat up naturally over the course of decades like it is now.

Here's a shitty meme-image to illustrate things for you: imgs.xkcd.com/comics/earth_temperature_timeline.png

Additionally, we have evidence that those past fluctuations in temperature were caused by the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere.

Trees extract carbon from the air to build themselves, so in a high-carbon atmosphere they'd grow faster than in a low-carbon atmosphere. I'm sure you already know about tree rings, and how each ring represents a single year. In an atmosphere with high CO2 levels the tree rings are larger than in a low-CO2 atmosphere, because there is more carbon in the air to extract.
By examining the tree rings on ancient trees we can see a direct connection between the thicker rings (indicating high-CO2 levels) during the times that the earth was hotter. So, we have a direct link between the past temperature fluctuations and the CO2 levels in the atmosphere at the time.

Now that we know that CO2 does indeed correspond to an increase in temperature, it's only logical to conclude that as we pump more and more CO2 into the atmosphere the planets temperature will rise. This is proven by how the current rapid spike in temperature corresponds to the increase in atmospheric CO2 levels.

I'm not an expert or anything, just so you know. I just looked this shit up when I was a skeptic like you.

Also, if you want more evidence of the connection between CO2 and high temperatures you can compare the atmospheres and temperatures of different planets.
Venus, for example, is further away from the Son than we are, yet it has a far far hotter surface temperature. This is because its atmosphere is composed almost entirely of CO2 and sulfur.

>Venus, for example, is further away from the Son than we are, yet it has a far far hotter surface temperature. This is because its atmosphere is composed almost entirely of CO2 and sulfur.

No it's not m2^3

Venus is the second planet, Earth is the third
Venus -> Sun = 108.2 million km
Earth -> Sun = 149.6 million km

CO2 has caused warming in the past, we know this because past warming due to orbital variations was of such magnitude that it couldn't be solely due to the variations. This would have to be as a result of CO2 and other greenhouse gases which caused further warming. Why would the same thing not happen today if CO2 concentration were to increase?

Yes but those changes weren't good for most species at the time. Humans and most other animals are not capable of surviving any such warming. It would almost certainly lead to the collapse of ecosystems world wide as species less apt to deal with heat, ocean acidifcation and a variety of other causes of global warming went extinct.

This buddy

it's not that I don't believe, I don't care.
It's not something I can fix and it's not something I think about

Also I'm green hippy without trying.

it cant be true because the +3c temperature rise in AVERAGE means a maximum +7c in many places around the world which we dont see at all sure we saw a temp breaking record but it was +1.6 only..

well i dont have any single excel to give a proper view on those readings but they are there if someone wants to see them especially the nao readings they are as a flat and predictable as ever
also indeed the caps were melting but not because of the climate change but because barda is still boiling down there and katla (3 months ago) started to rumble and some flood where been spotted

Dang, sorry about that. Point still stands though.

Humans didn't exist back then. We didn't evolve in a high CO2 atmosphere.

Same here bruh. It's unreal.

Measurements account always for sun power

>it cant be true because the +3c temperature rise in AVERAGE means a maximum +7c in many places around the world which we dont see at all sure we saw a temp breaking record but it was +1.6 only..

Or we could have received new data that changed the previous data record of what the temperature was like between 10 000-20 000 years ago as well as seen a warming temperature over the time span. Source the NASA claims.

>sunpower
Do you even helioseismology?

WHO GIVES A SHIT DOE

THERE WUZ ICE AGES N SHIET IN THE PAST, WE HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH IT

IF THE COASTAL CITIES GO UNDERWATER IN A FEW HUNDRED YEARS HOW DOES THAT AFFECT ME

Oh absolutely

But is it bad through?
We're due another culling I think

Instead of feeding niggers in africa we could restart, the strong would adapt and we could start this mess anew.

Not really
Venus is full of vapourised sulfur, that is hundread times heavier then CO2

It's been in runaway greenhouse effect since we are able to observe it, so comparing it to Earth, especially becuase its 1/3 closer to the sun, is intelectually dishonest.

Arguments like this are my greatest gripe with NDT. He's such a smart nigger, and yet he lowers himself to such dishonest arguments to pander the crowd.

And he compares himself to Sagan...

So you believe that climate change is man made and has catastrophic effects?

Climate change won't cause the end of the world, or even the end of humanity.

It will, however, cause droughts and famines, leading to a massive migration from the equator towards the polls.

Think for a second, who lives near the equator? Do you really want those hundreds of millions of people to flee towards our civilized societies?

When the middle east is an even more inhospitable dust bowl it'll create a migrant crises that will put this Syrian bullshit to shame. The droughts are bad enough as it is.

I don't know who NDT is. The Venus thing was something my brother told me.

>Not really
Yes really. Unless you're just ignoring everything I said in this () post except for the final sentence.

I think the better question would be to ask why millenials are so fanatically devoted to this quasi-religious bullshit. My answer is education. A series of re-education programs that swept through US, UK and Commonwealth in mid 80s indoctrinating children with multiculturalism, GMO acceptance, feminism and global warming. Over the years, you see how all of those marxist teachings had lasting social and political agenda aimed at undermining human reproduction and industrial progress in developed nations.

I have yet to see any party promise an action that wasn't simply randomly banning shit, or worse, sending the poluting job to China, where they get al lthe economic advantates, with even less oversight.

In my uneducated opinion, human impact on climate is directly linked to human population on this planet. So moving a big ass number of people from the third world to say Europe, is a massive issue.

>I think the better question would be to ask why millenials are so fanatically devoted to this quasi-religious bullshit.

Because them and their children will have to suffer the consequence if swift action isn't taken?

The reason they say Venus is a run away green house effect is because the sulfur which absorbs much more radiation than CO2. You don't seem to understand that Venus is the hottest planet in the Solar System just because of that fact. And it seems that CO2 has been proven to increase temp, which CAN result in larger problems. So why risk humanity because
>Muh profits.

Climate change won't reach catastrophic levels until we're all dead. We might as well enjoy current prosperity. What happens after we're dead won't effect us at all, so it's fundamentally illogical to care about it.

Baby boomers have the right idea.

I believe it was due to happen anyway. Existence of humanity, and most importantly our complex argiculture, and not extraction of fossil fuels are just accelerating the process.

Will it have catastrophic effects? Possibly, dunno really. Humanity as a race will adapt and survive. Will our current civilization? that is more doubtful.

NDT = Neil Degrasse Tyson, the smart negro, Hayden Planetarium guy

wow, It's like you read all what I posted, and then decided to ignore it.

Venus effect on earth is not possible simply because we have not enough sulfur, and we are too far from the sun. Earth will never "melt" into venus. It's simply impossible.

Even if we glassed entire planet with nukes, it would lead to nucler winter, and in 100 years of so temperature would stabilise (that radiation through)

having a one world dictatorship and carbon rationing will not change the climate

dinosaurs dindu nuffin
livescience.com/44330-jurassic-dinosaur-carbon-dioxide.html

also the CO2 greenhouse effect is much less severe than expected, we're not turning into venus

What about the clathrate gun?

Last time a similar event happened, it led to absolutely massive extinctions.

>peeps here believe that the resulting effect of vaporizing water and higher resulting cloud cover reduces the effect of CO2 by a factor of 0.5 instead of 3 like the popular consens.

And on what do they base this? A warmer atmosphere actually suppresses the formation of clouds instead leaving water in the atmosphere in its vapour form.

actually the co2 levels were just as high when the houmans were evolving because dont forget that this period was the one that most of the biggest supervolcanoes errupted..
in fact the current rise is expected to pass the mt pinatubo co2 release in 2018.. and im not even gonna beging to say that passing the last yellowstone or toba erruption co2 emmisions is far into the future if ever..
i dont know nasa just acts like a political tool nowdays instead of a science org...
from march to september they said that almost each month was a +2 above from the average that heat didnt dissipate into anywere so its magically gone into the space i assume because with that kind of thermal expansion on the sea we would have seen insane numbers of hurricanes and big fucking storms all over the place.. which we dont see certenly not above the usual stuff

Mercury is closer than Venus yet Venus is hotter.

Hey look another cc thread

ORRRR they'll immigrate here and europe and retards will let them in

>think of the children
>suffer the consequence

Even your counter arguments are proselytistic and dogmatic like those of a religious fanatic rather than thinking human being. CTRL + F how many times you've used the word "believe" in this thread. Your entire rationale is based on blind faith and premature indoctrination rather science and logic. It'd take me 2 fucking minutes to take apart and demolish your religion but in the end I'll just end up reaffirming your convictions. You're zealot.

Deforestation is the only influence man has bad on the climate.

The climate does change, true. Does any expect climate to never change?

And that is because Mercury is so close to the Sun it's atmosphere got almost completely blown away.

Without atmosphere there is no way to retain heat. It's surface temperature during the day can peak to 700K from radiation alone through. Not hot enough?

climate change is real. global warming is the hoax..

The earth has cooling and warming cycles based on what hemisphere is cooled/warmed by our slightly eliptical orbit, the intensity of the sun, the angle of earth's tilt and something else I can't remember.

These natural cycles are by far the strongest influence on earth's climate. Our release of greenhouse gasses give our climate a nudge in a warmer direction.

For claiming to be "red pilled", this board is maximally blupilled when it comes to religion and science.

Well, if that happens we're completely fucked.

Mass migrations and the potential collapse of western civilization is the best case scenario. Fingers crossed I guess.

There were many kinds of animals alive back then... we'll be fine...

there is natural climate change,
but global warming is when they blame any change in the weather on human activities, if a new ice age happened tomorrow they'll say it is because of global warming, even though they happened before

ask yourself why are other planets in our solar system also experiencing atmospheric changes? venus has gotten brighter, there are giant storms on saturn, jupiter lost a ring, all of these things make our changes on earth look like nothing

And what do you think will be done that will actually stop climate change?

You think the dinosaurs were driving SUVs?
livescience.com/44330-jurassic-dinosaur-carbon-dioxide.html

>It will, however, cause droughts and famines, leading to a massive migration from the equator towards the polls.
>Think for a second, who lives near the equator? Do you really want those hundreds of millions of people to flee towards our civilized societies?

Plenty of room in Antarctica, Canada, Siberia
GROWING COCONUTS IN SIBERIA WHEN?

I think the better question would be to ask why millenials are so fanatically devoted to this quasi-religious bullshit.

Because it is a religion

Al Gore = Jesus
Scientists = Priests
Original Sin = Carbon Use
Sacrifices = Carbon taxes

it's all there, to speak against global warming is to be a heretic

>again I dont want to risk millions of years of evolution because Oy vey meh scheckles.
The CO2 can still cause problems with certain species disrupting ecosystems and having a butterfly effect that will eventually reach us. We may be able to adapt to changing temps. But bees who pollinate our crops may not be able to. So why risk it. If we use cleaner energy then huza we averted something or nothing. Why risk a few million years.

youtube.com/watch?v=EjmtSkl53h4

Because there is nothing we can do to stop it without sacrificing our comfortable way of life. You want us all to live like North Koreans?

>also Venus's atmosphere is 90% CO2. And Sulfuric acid clouds because of said CoO2

>We might as well enjoy current prosperity

If you really think earth is fucked, then it's more important to colonise another planet before things get uninhabitable, and it's a good insurance plan if an asteroid wanders by

it won't be possible to colonise other planets if we go back to living in caves because we're scared of using electricity

Climate-change deniers are literally the flat-earthers of our times.

>Without atmosphere there is no way to retain heat.

This is the point I was getting at. Atmosphere makes the difference, because of the greenhouse effect.

I'd like to hear it. I doubt you've done any research of your own beyond watching shitty youtube videos.

Doesn't matter, gonna run out of oil at some point and why do you guys want to keep forking out to fund UAE army, I really don't get it.

>GROWING COCONUTS IN SIBERIA WHEN?

Russia should be pushing for MORE climate change.

Just imagine all that frozen taiga turned into farmable land, and arctic sea thawed all year.

>So why risk it. If we use cleaner energy then huza we averted something or nothing.

I agree, why not use more cost-efficient, safe, modern nucelar power.

Sadly Climate Change people disagree with us. They want cost ineffective solar and wind farm that need constant subsides from the government, that drive electricity costs higher and higher.

Just dont build those reactors on fault lines, like those crazy japs

>90% CO2.

There is not enough Carbon on the planet to give us that ratio. Even if we turned all biological life into carbon we would not reach that. And sulfuric acid clouds are effect of vaporised sulfur mixing with CO2 in high energy enviroment.

More alternative energy, tell fat fucks to eat less meat, plant more trees.
We'll be fucked regardless, but these are the right steps.

Yes there is. 75% of human emission is from power generation. We have a solution available right now.

Granted the Atmosphere of Venus is 3x thicker than the Earths. Its is primarily made up of CO2, which is proven to cause heating. And seeing that slight temperature differences can cause a butterfly effect in ecosystems we dont wanna fuck with that shit.

>but global warming is when they blame any change in the weather on human activities

Global warming doesn't necessarily mean warming over the entire planet. When the oceans warm some regions become warmer and some become colder. The media misunderstood this and ran with a clickbait lie.

Do you know that climate change is the PC topic of academics? You absolutely cannot talk about it without being branded enemy of liberalism and being ousted.

>Fusion
>Thorium
>Tidal
All viable energy sources, all lobbied over Solar and Wind something that oil doesn't have to worry about because it's so inefficient.

>More alternative energy
You seriously think that solar and wind can provide first world living conditions for 7-8 billion people?
>tell fat fucks to eat less meat
Ahahahaha no.

>We have a solution available right now.
And what is this miracle solution?

The point is, just like you need to be in goldilock zone to have life, and you still need proper chemical and geological composition to sustain life.
Venus is in the unlucky position of being far enoug for it's atmosphere to not be not blown away, and yet still get thrice the radiation we get.
At the same time it was Carbon and Sulfur rich which over time led to it's current predicament.

Earth is a different planet, with different gological and chemical composition.

Titan, one of Jupiters moons, is almost completely covered in methane. If it was close enough it would be the hottest body in the solar system, but it's not.

>And what is this miracle solution?

Nuclear. Honestly, given politics is today more about one-upping the other side, I think the right should accept climate change and push for nuclear as the only solution. Some lefties don't want nuclear power. AGW is real. Wouldn't it be ironic if the right were the ones to fix it after all this time?

Climate change is a real and present danger. There is plenty of evidence for it and several predictions climate scientists made have already come true.

Either present arguments against it or just admit you're just a contrarian.

>You absolutely cannot talk about it without being branded enemy of liberalism and being ousted.

This is delusional.

ITS A REAL AND EVENTUAL INCONVENIENCE

ONE OF THE TENETS OF LIBKUCK RELIGION

>Nuclear.
Yeah good luck convincing the liberals on that.

I don't think we're really in disagreement. All heat any solar body receives comes from the sun. All greenhouse gasses can do is trap some of this heat. If we had no atmosphere we'd be much colder during the nights than we are. Likewise if we add more GHG the amount of heat 'trapped' will increase.

not an argument

It is as abundant for a less severe disaster to happen. If the average temp changes by 2C, then we have pollinators unable to pollinate and die out. Causing starvation. Granted ill say that most of the Carbon is locked up in the ecosystems. But its the fact we're not trying to get to Venus's level we are trying to get roughly 3-5% of it's levels. Which can cause heavy influence on ecosystems.

Hence saying the puch should come from the right. If they accept that global warming is real and needs a solution, but the masses hit back saying 'I'm not taking any hit to my standard of living' then the ONLY solution will be nuclear. And if the right are the ones pushing it, they win again.

>If we had no atmosphere we'd be much colder during the nights than we are

If we had no atmosphere we would be the moon, and no life, because no oxygen.

Moon is the same distance from Sun as Earth and has no atmosphere.
It's surface temp varies from +200 to -200 C

Honest question, to what extent are you people for real, and how much of it is just ironic trolling?

When I see ALL CAPS I'd normally assume you were just pretending to be stupid, but the American flag through me off.

Seriously, all pretense aside, and without trying to save face or look cool, can you tell me if you're for real? Is "libkuck," spelled with a K and written in caps, something that really represents you as a person?

I can't tell the difference anymore.

Not at the twilight zone, it's actually rather habitable being closer to mar's winters.