I am not 100% fully educated in the arguments when it comes to "climate change" but:
- when back in the 70s when the "experts" were perdicting a new ice age in the near future AND IT DIDN'T HAPPEN
- when in the 90s & 2000s the "Experts" changed their tune and said it's "global warming" now, with Al "The Messiah" Gore blaring the "Earth has a fever" and Miami will be underwater in 20 years AND IT DIDN'T HAPPEN
- where there is no real consensus among scientists when it comes climate change. just because someone says "a consensus among scientists" doesn't mean the consensus is correct. there are plenty of scientists who disagree with the causes of climate change. The dissenting voices are harshly shouted down or at least ignored.
- when I'm told in order to save the earth I need to limit my meat intake and eat more veggies, when it is been proven that it takes MORE land and water to produce vegetables and more harsh on the environment using modern agricultural methods.
- or being told we should EAT MORE BUGS for protein. NO, but FUCK NO!
and the "Elites" are still puttering around in gas-guzzling jets, or sitting in gigantic homes with 13 different air conditioners, eating Big Macs or Whoppers?
CONSIDER ME A SCEPTIC. I don't trust any of them. They have an agenda, and it's control of the population. It's not about money. Money is just a means to an end. It's about POWER AND CONTROL.
"He who controls a thing can destroy a thing".
That goes with people.
If anyone really thinks the Elites have the well-being of us poor unwashed masses at heart, you are lying to yourself.
It's all about POWER and CONTROL
In the late 1960s, they thought that pollution was blocking sunlight, and that it would lead to an ice age. They found out they were wrong when global cold spells disappeared after 1976. They realized that while soot was blocking sunlight CO2 was trapping surface heat.
Decades later, deniers funded Berkeley Earth to debunk conclusions made by the NAS. BEST ended up confirming what the NAS said.
What about power and control? The world population is controlled by only a few thousand corporations, and mostly in finance. They can only maintain power not through decreased consumption but by the opposite. Why? Because income and returns on investment are dependent on increasing sales and consumption of goods and services plus more financial gambling.
What about governments and even military forces? They are dependent on the same rich for funds, and they also need more consumption, like more public services and more and better armaments, to show that they're working.
In short, those in power want business as usual, and their idea of sustainability is actually sustainable development, i.e., continuous economic growth.
What's the problem, then? When you look at reports published by the Pentagon, banks like HSBC, insurers like Lloyds of London, and others for their clients and personnel, you see that they are warning of more risks due to combinations of war, epidemics, pandemics, financial crashes, pollution, food and other shortages, energy crises, and more, and ultimately driven by two things: business as usual going against physical limits, and the consequences of that.
Finally, why are the poor, unwashed masses ignorant of this? Because most of them are poor and don't want to be poor, which means they need to earn more in order to spend more. And the non-poor are counting on them to do that because their own investments and income are dependent on ever-increasing production and consumption of goods and services. In short, no one wants to hear bad news even though not just experts but even the same rich that fund them to study the matter know of such things. That's why they've been buying up land in various countries and having places to escape built. They're hoping that they can ride it out.