Climate Change

He made money by building a successful business and then selling it. He sold it to people who make business decisions based in reality, not in deluded propagandavision.




Firstly, what he does with his money is surely a freedom he has (as long as it's legal)? Or is that a freedom you'd like to take away from him?

Secondly he has not funded people to block roads.

Thirdly he is not "lining his pockets with climate subsidies".

But then you know all that - https://www.diynot.com/diy/threads/renewable-energy-growth.649329/page-3#post-6079384

What do you hope to achieve by repeating the same false claims which got discredited there?




Only by the presence of people here who think that if they repeat something untrue it will morph into being true.
He funded just stop oil - just stop oil blocked roads - he knew this was their main tactic and MO - he paid them to block roads - he stopped paying them - they stopped their blocking roads action. -
His company was handed subsidies/ grants -from the tax payer- he makes money from his company - he uses that money to pay nutters to lie in the road to further his agenda - so he receives more subsidies/grants --his company expands - he makes more money and around and around it goes. Feel scammed yet.
 
Last edited:
You do make me laugh sometimes!

I am aware of the slow drift of the magnetic north pole and the potential for the poles to eventually flip. That would happen gradually over thousands of years. It was the earth crust displacement bit that I was unaware of. Apparently, it is an idea developed by a history professor called Charles Hapgood. Or you may have been watching the film The Core!

Or reading the novel The HAB Theory.

Which is quite entertaining.
 
He funded just stop oil - just stop oil blocked roads - he knew this was their main tactic and MO - he paid them to block roads - he stopped paying them - they stopped their blocking roads action. -
His company was handed subsidies/ grants -from the tax payer- he makes money from his company - he uses that money to pay nutters to lie in the road to further his agenda - so he receives more subsidies/grants --his company expands - he makes more money and around and around it goes.

I explained the truth behind all your nonsense in the other topic.

I can't decide if you genuinely didn't understand it, or are pretending not to. If I had to pick, I'd say the latter, as you're one of those who has to deny truths which undermine their fantasies.


Feel scammed yet.

No - you're going to have to get much better at scamming before I fall for your mendacity. I doubt your abilities even begin to get good enough.
 
won't have navigated wth map and compass for some 15 years

I hope that if you ever put yourself in a situation where you might need to, you equip yourself to do so, rather than assume that relying on GPS will be OK.
 
There is little to fear in this country. Maybe our usual fish will move north. And we will have more floods. But nothing massive.


This is the thing about climate change - it takes no notice of the people who say it isn't happening, or it will be beneficial in some way.

And insurers and property developers believe in realities, not the swivel-eyed nonsense the deniers are peddling.

In Florida, despite Ron DeSantis removing all official mention of climate change (or maybe because of it?) insurance companies are leaving the state in droves.

In Boston USA, if you have a building near the seafront, and it isn't designed to allow for large floods you won't get insurance and you won't get buyers or tenants.

In Tenbury Wells, Worcestershire, major civic buildings are now without insurance and could be lost forever after the next flood. Businesses are packing up and leaving because they can't get insurance. They at least have the "luxury" of not renewing their lease - homeowners with uninsurable houses aren't so "lucky". The high street has increasingly more abandoned properties. The next major flood could well effectively destroy the town.


These realities laugh in the face of the deniers.
 
You sound almost proud of that.
You are becoming deranged now - 7 posts one after the other quoting old stuff that has been delt with -- NOBODY cares about your rantings. And if you want some nonsense ask denso about the hundreds of thousands :ROFLMAO:
 
By that logic then, a denier who produces reams of drivel is less credible than someone who produces only one or two bits of "research"?

Volumes are irrelevant. Deniers are always less credible than people who actually know what they are talking about.
 
Oh you can't argue with hundreds of thousands of climate scientist

But you can with 15,000. Or 10,000. Or 20,000.

You can argue against a >99% consensus where the tiny minority of disagreeing papers often contained errors.

1760538898017.png


OK.
 
Looks like NASA thinks the the whole climate thing is BS and a waste of their time and resources.

That's like you claiming that someone who'd decided to stop paying for a Netflix subscription because they wanted to spend their money differently was denying the existence of Netflix.
 
Back
Top