Ready for the next Ice Age? Winter is coming.

George Soros Emerges as Major Funder of ‘Global Climate Strike’ Groups

At least 22 of the left-wing activist groups listed as partners in the Global Climate Strike received $24,854,592 in funding from liberal billionaire George Soros between 2000-2017 through his Open Society Network, Joseph Vazquez reported Thursday for the Media Research Center.

Though ostensibly ignited by the protests of 16-year-old Greta Thunberg, the Global Climate Strike has borne from the outset the indelible fingerprints of well-funded, radical environmental activists. As it turns out, much of the funding has been coming from professional disrupter George Soros.

Among the organizations receiving Soros funding were Fund for Global Human Rights, Global Greengrants Fund, 350.org, Amnesty International, Avaaz, Color of Change, and People’s Action. Each of these groups has climate-related agendas and goals spanning from reducing global carbon emissions to less than 350 parts per million and 100 percent “clean energy,” to the elimination of new fossil fuel projects and a “green civil rights movement.”
 
FluffyMcDeath said:
Did I not make myself clear? Greta is completely irrelevant. the hysteria is perhaps necessary but also irrelevant
Click to expand...

You just contradicted yourself. The new face of the AGW is not irrelevant, and the hysteria is by design. Memba when Al Gore was the face of AGW? Memba when he got a Nobel Peace Prize for his Mockumentary? Why is he never talked about anymore? Don't be sheep.

"FluffyMcDeath said:
So, again, why is it so necessary to you that your energy to come from oil, coal and gas instead of non-carbon sources?
Click to expand...

Because I don't believe in mass genocide of billions of people in the 3rd world. I don't believe in Global Communism with unelected 1/10 of 1% of the people controlling the 99.90% of the population.

Ask yourself, why does this new prefab movement ignore China's CO2 emissions? If CO2 is so bad, why ignore the biggest producer?
 
redrumloa said:
You just contradicted yourself. The new face of the AGW is not irrelevant, and the hysteria is by design. Memba when Al Gore was the face of AGW? Memba when he got a Nobel Peace Prize for his Mockumentary? Why is he never talked about anymore? Don't be sheep.
Click to expand...
Either I explain myself poorly, or you are deliberately obtuse or you cannot comprehend. If Great was a 30 foot tall lizard shooting death rays from her mouth she would still be irrelevant to that facts which are that climate change is happening, in large part, because of the CO2 we are bringing out of the ground and putting into the air. It is happening whether or not Greta says anything. At a certain point mechanisms we cannot even hope to control will take over but for now we are the responsible party. If we clean up our act we can avoid the point of no return.
Because I don't believe in mass genocide of billions of people in the 3rd world. I don't believe in Global Communism with unelected 1/10 of 1% of the people controlling the 99.90% of the population.
Click to expand...
What you believe in is also irrelevant. There is survive and there is die.
Ask yourself, why does this new prefab movement ignore China's CO2 emissions? If CO2 is so bad, why ignore the biggest producer?
Click to expand...
It doesn't, but we are not China. This must be a planet wide effort and it will have to include China. but it has to start somewhere. if the US had invested it's military budget over the decades since the fall of the Soviet Empire on switching energy we may already have fusion by now - and that would be a net boost in wealth. But you would rather get your energy from oil, gas and coal. Why?
 
FluffyMcDeath said:
But you would rather get your energy from oil, gas and coal. Why?
Click to expand...

You assume poorly. I get the majority of my energy from Nuclear and Natural Gas. I do use oil for transportation, because I am not a millionaire and can't afford a pretend green electric vanity vehicle. Only oil is viable now and for probably decades.

I will not be forced into perpetual poverty under global communism for a hoax.
 
redrumloa said:
You assume poorly. I get the majority of my energy from Nuclear and Natural Gas. I do use oil for transportation, because I am not a millionaire and can't afford a pretend green electric vanity vehicle. Only oil is viable now and for probably decades.
Click to expand...
Oil will remain the only viable for decades if they get people to believe that. We have a power structure that needs this to be true. However, "pretend green electric vehicles" ARE greener than oil distillate vehicles, even if power plants are oil fired because big power plants are more efficient than little combustion engines, and with a large enough market, just as affordable. Now, if your gas power was replaced with more nuclear (or a combination of renewables) would you be in perpetual poverty because of it? It would be bad for you if you owned rights to a gas field, of course, but do you?

I will not be forced into perpetual poverty under global communism for a hoax.
Click to expand...
You should be relieved to know that it is not a hoax.
 
FluffyMcDeath said:
Heaven and hell are hoaxes. Carbon Dioxide really does retain heat. That is physics. You can confirm it experimentally.
Click to expand...

Somehow I managed to edit your post in my reply, apologies.

Geologists would strongly dispute your claim.
 
redrumloa said:
Somehow I managed to edit your post in my reply, apologies.

Geologists would strongly dispute your claim.
Click to expand...
A) They are geologists.
B) Many wouldn't dispute it.

Remember, it is possible for the Creation Institute to find geologists that support its claims.

The problem with the climate hoax claims is that they are so similar to the moon landing is a hoax claims and the globe earth is a hoax and the creationists, that is that they ignore the masses of evidence to pick some minor nits (which turn out to have been addressed and resolved before but they'll pick them again in ten more minutes) and any evidence to the contrary is all part of a grand conspiracy.

It's not a conspiracy that CO2 in the atmosphere is rising, and it's not a conspiracy that the world extracts nearly a hundred million barrels of oil per day (about 12 million tons) and most of that is burned for energy producing about 30 million tons of CO2 per day. It's not a conspiracy that the CO2 from burning oil is new CO2 in the atmosphere (as far as human history is concerned) and it's not a conspiracy that all of that new CO2 is trapping heat. It's also not a conspiracy that the Arctic sea ice is getting thinner every year. These things are plain and simple and real.

And when someone says : oh, but CO2 is plant food - they are just admitting that we are pumping more CO2 into the atmosphere but they are trying to make it sound like a good thing.
 
redrumloa said:
Click to expand...
What percentage of the history of the earth was it ice free? What percentage of the history of the earth was is humanity free? What is the only climate we have ever built a global civilisation in? How did it get to be global and what will happen to it if climate changes?
 
Now we only have a few months left until we are all dead! We need to start eating babies to save the planet!

 
FluffyMcDeath said:
AOC remained calm and respectful - and let other people deal with her - as one should when a crazy person in the audience starts ranting.
Click to expand...

Bzzt! Trolls have gone to Republican rallies and started zeig heiling, or started chanting racist nonsense, and they get shut down QUICKLY. It is telling that AoC and the crowd take her serious, very telling.
 
redrumloa said:
Bzzt! Trolls have gone to Republican rallies and started zeig heiling, or started chanting racist nonsense, and they get shut down QUICKLY. It is telling that AoC and the crowd take her serious, very telling.
Click to expand...
I don't think they take her seriously. They are just trying to be nice to the nutter. You weren't paying attention. AoC and the crowd are NOT comfortable with this - but they know they can't make fun of her nor crack down on her without looking bad. They are trapped in "acting respectfully" with their own, or those who could be their own.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top