- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Bad news for the climate bros?
Posted on 5/6/26 at 8:00 am to weagle1999
Posted on 5/6/26 at 8:00 am to weagle1999
I'd like to say they will all come out like this and give it a rest
But you can't get more money if you did that. They'll pivot and start pushing some other way to hold businesses and governments hostage. Or they'll somehow try to say the "science" is fabricated, don't believe it. The left is not big on understanding their own hypocrisy.
But you can't get more money if you did that. They'll pivot and start pushing some other way to hold businesses and governments hostage. Or they'll somehow try to say the "science" is fabricated, don't believe it. The left is not big on understanding their own hypocrisy.
Posted on 5/6/26 at 8:05 am to weagle1999
It’s almost as if a certain political ideology was manipulating climate data to push their agenda.
Who could have seen this coming?
Who could have seen this coming?
Posted on 5/6/26 at 8:06 am to weagle1999
Yeah this group will suddenly see their funding disappear
Posted on 5/6/26 at 8:12 am to Gifman
But AlGore's now California's problem as he moved from Tennessee (which didn't vote for him) to California which has suitable mansions for he and Tipper.
Posted on 5/6/26 at 8:24 am to weagle1999
quote:
This is important because the IPCC's changes resulted in "an update to the Science Based Targets initiative’s rules eliminates the need for steep emission cuts by 2030," Trellis reported on Friday. In other words, even the people committed to radically reduced carbon emissions now say we don't need to radically reduce carbon emissions to save the world or whatever.
I read it more as "since we're not anywhere close to the doom and gloom levels we've been hyping for decades, we're just going to readjust our findings to move the 'end of the world' further out." In other words, they are still going to hype it as a crisis, but they are re-aligning from "WE NEED MONEY NOW OR WE DIE TOMORROW" to "WE NEED MONEY NOW TO KEEP US FROM DYING DECADES IN THE FUTURE".
Posted on 5/6/26 at 8:24 am to weagle1999
You mean bovine flatulence isn't a deal breaker after all??
Posted on 5/6/26 at 8:50 am to BenAround
quote:
PJ Media is a POLITICAL, OPINION-BASED ‘source’.
They have a direct link to the IPCC report if you don’t like PJ Media.
This post was edited on 5/6/26 at 8:52 am
Posted on 5/6/26 at 8:53 am to lowhound
quote:
I'd like to say they will all come out like this and give it a rest
They should be shouting this "good news" from the mountaintops.
This post was edited on 5/6/26 at 8:55 am
Popular
Back to top


1









