Sweden dumps climate agenda and scraps green energy targets

originally posted by: AlienBorg

originally posted by: AndyMayhew

originally posted by: AlienBorg

originally posted by: AndyMayhew

originally posted by: AlienBorg

originally posted by: surfer_soul
a reply to: AndyMayhew

So you’re still not aware of UN agenda 2030 and haven’t heard anything about net zero targets that various governments are aiming for?

Funny how they don’t talk about actual pollution, about things like how glyphosate and micro plastics are now everywhere. It’s always carbon this and carbon that, and carbon credits and ESG scores..

They talk about carbon dioxide as if it's a pollutant. When in reality it's a fertilizer.

CO2 increases atmospheric temperature. This impacts on weather which in turn impacts humans.

Even if it also aids plant growth*, would most humans prefer a) current plant growth and no further increase in severe heatwaves, droughts and floods or b) slightly better plant growth but with even more severe heatwaves, droughts and floods? You think only about the grass and bracken. Some humans selfishly think more about themselves.


* it's not quite as simple as the elite tell you. For example, more CO2 = less nutritional plants

scitechdaily.com...

I think you've confused what the 'elites' have been telling the public so many years. As I said a few posts back, carbon dioxide is presented as a pollutant when in reality is a fertilizer. Even a grade9 student is able to understand this simple fact or the fact there is no way to transition between genders.

CO2 is also a poison

You need to learn the meaning of the word context. Increasing CO2 may help weeds grow, but that does not mean it's good news for humans (or the crops we eat)

In what context is carbon dioxide a poisson?
Only activists and the woke push these narratives.

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

originally posted by: AndyMayhew

originally posted by: AlienBorg

originally posted by: AndyMayhew

originally posted by: AlienBorg

originally posted by: AndyMayhew

originally posted by: AlienBorg

originally posted by: surfer_soul
a reply to: AndyMayhew

So you’re still not aware of UN agenda 2030 and haven’t heard anything about net zero targets that various governments are aiming for?

Funny how they don’t talk about actual pollution, about things like how glyphosate and micro plastics are now everywhere. It’s always carbon this and carbon that, and carbon credits and ESG scores..

They talk about carbon dioxide as if it's a pollutant. When in reality it's a fertilizer.

CO2 increases atmospheric temperature. This impacts on weather which in turn impacts humans.

Even if it also aids plant growth*, would most humans prefer a) current plant growth and no further increase in severe heatwaves, droughts and floods or b) slightly better plant growth but with even more severe heatwaves, droughts and floods? You think only about the grass and bracken. Some humans selfishly think more about themselves.


* it's not quite as simple as the elite tell you. For example, more CO2 = less nutritional plants

scitechdaily.com...

I think you've confused what the 'elites' have been telling the public so many years. As I said a few posts back, carbon dioxide is presented as a pollutant when in reality is a fertilizer. Even a grade9 student is able to understand this simple fact or the fact there is no way to transition between genders.

CO2 is also a poison

You need to learn the meaning of the word context. Increasing CO2 may help weeds grow, but that does not mean it's good news for humans (or the crops we eat)

In what context is carbon dioxide a poisson?
Only activists and the woke push these narratives.

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

Nowhere near the levels we have in our atmosphere.

You guys try to make unfortunate connections. The concentration of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere is relatively low. You just found a random article online that you randomly trying to connect to the global warming phenomenon and climate change due to carbon dioxide.

Attempt: Failed

a reply to: AndyMayhew

Wasn't it you that stated that water (dihydrogen monoxide) kills everyone that comes into contact with it eventually?

a reply to: AndyMayhew

Concentrations >10% may cause convulsions, coma and death.

Do you know the percentage of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere presently?

And if it was so poisonous... why isn't everyone who drinks fizzy pop regularly.... dead?

originally posted by: AlienBorg

originally posted by: AndyMayhew

originally posted by: AlienBorg

originally posted by: AndyMayhew

originally posted by: AlienBorg

originally posted by: AndyMayhew

originally posted by: AlienBorg

originally posted by: surfer_soul
a reply to: AndyMayhew

So you’re still not aware of UN agenda 2030 and haven’t heard anything about net zero targets that various governments are aiming for?

Funny how they don’t talk about actual pollution, about things like how glyphosate and micro plastics are now everywhere. It’s always carbon this and carbon that, and carbon credits and ESG scores..

They talk about carbon dioxide as if it's a pollutant. When in reality it's a fertilizer.

CO2 increases atmospheric temperature. This impacts on weather which in turn impacts humans.

Even if it also aids plant growth*, would most humans prefer a) current plant growth and no further increase in severe heatwaves, droughts and floods or b) slightly better plant growth but with even more severe heatwaves, droughts and floods? You think only about the grass and bracken. Some humans selfishly think more about themselves.


* it's not quite as simple as the elite tell you. For example, more CO2 = less nutritional plants

scitechdaily.com...

I think you've confused what the 'elites' have been telling the public so many years. As I said a few posts back, carbon dioxide is presented as a pollutant when in reality is a fertilizer. Even a grade9 student is able to understand this simple fact or the fact there is no way to transition between genders.

CO2 is also a poison

You need to learn the meaning of the word context. Increasing CO2 may help weeds grow, but that does not mean it's good news for humans (or the crops we eat)

In what context is carbon dioxide a poisson?
Only activists and the woke push these narratives.

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

Nowhere near the levels we have in our atmosphere.

You guys try to make unfortunate connections. The concentration of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere is relatively low. You just found a random article online that you randomly trying to connect to the global warming phenomenon and climate change due to carbon dioxide.

Attempt: Failed

No, I provided evidence that, in some circumstances, CO2 is a poison - something you denied.

I never suggested it was the case with atmospheric concentrations.

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: AndyMayhew

Wasn't it you that stated that water (dihydrogen monoxide) kills everyone that comes into contact with it eventually?

Yes. It's the oxygen that's the real problem - highly corrosive!

originally posted by: AndyMayhew

originally posted by: AlienBorg

originally posted by: AndyMayhew

originally posted by: AlienBorg

originally posted by: AndyMayhew

originally posted by: AlienBorg

originally posted by: AndyMayhew

originally posted by: AlienBorg

originally posted by: surfer_soul
a reply to: AndyMayhew

So you’re still not aware of UN agenda 2030 and haven’t heard anything about net zero targets that various governments are aiming for?

Funny how they don’t talk about actual pollution, about things like how glyphosate and micro plastics are now everywhere. It’s always carbon this and carbon that, and carbon credits and ESG scores..

They talk about carbon dioxide as if it's a pollutant. When in reality it's a fertilizer.

CO2 increases atmospheric temperature. This impacts on weather which in turn impacts humans.

Even if it also aids plant growth*, would most humans prefer a) current plant growth and no further increase in severe heatwaves, droughts and floods or b) slightly better plant growth but with even more severe heatwaves, droughts and floods? You think only about the grass and bracken. Some humans selfishly think more about themselves.


* it's not quite as simple as the elite tell you. For example, more CO2 = less nutritional plants

scitechdaily.com...

I think you've confused what the 'elites' have been telling the public so many years. As I said a few posts back, carbon dioxide is presented as a pollutant when in reality is a fertilizer. Even a grade9 student is able to understand this simple fact or the fact there is no way to transition between genders.

CO2 is also a poison

You need to learn the meaning of the word context. Increasing CO2 may help weeds grow, but that does not mean it's good news for humans (or the crops we eat)

In what context is carbon dioxide a poisson?
Only activists and the woke push these narratives.

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

Nowhere near the levels we have in our atmosphere.

You guys try to make unfortunate connections. The concentration of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere is relatively low. You just found a random article online that you randomly trying to connect to the global warming phenomenon and climate change due to carbon dioxide.

Attempt: Failed

No, I provided evidence that, in some circumstances, CO2 is a poison - something you denied.

I never suggested it was the case with atmospheric concentrations.

You've made an attempt to connect it to global warming and man made emissions. This attempt has failed.

Same argument about oxygen. It could be poisonous too in high concentrations as well as a number of other gases.

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: AndyMayhew

Concentrations >10% may cause convulsions, coma and death.

Do you know the percentage of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere presently?

And if it was so poisonous... why isn't everyone who drinks fizzy pop regularly.... dead?

They've tried woke physics and it didn't work.
Others have tried woke biology and it didn't work either.

a reply to: AndyMayhew

Do you know what percentage of our atmosphere is co2 currently?

originally posted by: AlienBorg

originally posted by: AndyMayhew

originally posted by: AlienBorg

originally posted by: AndyMayhew

originally posted by: AlienBorg

originally posted by: AndyMayhew

originally posted by: AlienBorg

originally posted by: AndyMayhew

originally posted by: AlienBorg

originally posted by: surfer_soul
a reply to: AndyMayhew

So you’re still not aware of UN agenda 2030 and haven’t heard anything about net zero targets that various governments are aiming for?

Funny how they don’t talk about actual pollution, about things like how glyphosate and micro plastics are now everywhere. It’s always carbon this and carbon that, and carbon credits and ESG scores..

They talk about carbon dioxide as if it's a pollutant. When in reality it's a fertilizer.

CO2 increases atmospheric temperature. This impacts on weather which in turn impacts humans.

Even if it also aids plant growth*, would most humans prefer a) current plant growth and no further increase in severe heatwaves, droughts and floods or b) slightly better plant growth but with even more severe heatwaves, droughts and floods? You think only about the grass and bracken. Some humans selfishly think more about themselves.


* it's not quite as simple as the elite tell you. For example, more CO2 = less nutritional plants

scitechdaily.com...

I think you've confused what the 'elites' have been telling the public so many years. As I said a few posts back, carbon dioxide is presented as a pollutant when in reality is a fertilizer. Even a grade9 student is able to understand this simple fact or the fact there is no way to transition between genders.

CO2 is also a poison

You need to learn the meaning of the word context. Increasing CO2 may help weeds grow, but that does not mean it's good news for humans (or the crops we eat)

In what context is carbon dioxide a poisson?
Only activists and the woke push these narratives.

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

Nowhere near the levels we have in our atmosphere.

You guys try to make unfortunate connections. The concentration of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere is relatively low. You just found a random article online that you randomly trying to connect to the global warming phenomenon and climate change due to carbon dioxide.

Attempt: Failed

No, I provided evidence that, in some circumstances, CO2 is a poison - something you denied.

I never suggested it was the case with atmospheric concentrations.

You've made an attempt to connect it to global warming and man made emissions. This attempt has failed.

Same argument about oxygen. It could be poisonous too in high concentrations as well as a number of other gases.

Atmospheric CO2 is connected to global warming in the same way guns are connected to human deaths

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: AndyMayhew

Do you know what percentage of our atmosphere is co2 currently?

About 50% more than it was 100 years ago

a reply to: AndyMayhew

Do you know the actual percentage of co2 in our atmosphere now though?

a reply to: TheToastmanCometh

So, I tell you I'm a complete dumbass when it comes to chemistry and you send me two links that I wont understand.

Never mind.

If you want to communicate an idea with me, try more than a one liner and 2 links that I'm not really interested in.

Sorry. Don't have time to try to figure out what you are trying to say to me. Just say it in plain English like I'm 5 like I requested.

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: AlienBorg

Nuclear isn't fossil fuels.

Neither is oil.

And more breakthroughs in fusion are expected soon.

And they already have LFTR tech for clean, dramatically safer and far more sustainable nuclear energy, for any country willing to take the plunge.

originally posted by: AndyMayhew

originally posted by: AlienBorg

originally posted by: AndyMayhew

originally posted by: AlienBorg

originally posted by: AndyMayhew

originally posted by: AlienBorg

originally posted by: AndyMayhew

originally posted by: AlienBorg

originally posted by: AndyMayhew

originally posted by: AlienBorg

originally posted by: surfer_soul
a reply to: AndyMayhew

So you’re still not aware of UN agenda 2030 and haven’t heard anything about net zero targets that various governments are aiming for?

Funny how they don’t talk about actual pollution, about things like how glyphosate and micro plastics are now everywhere. It’s always carbon this and carbon that, and carbon credits and ESG scores..

They talk about carbon dioxide as if it's a pollutant. When in reality it's a fertilizer.

CO2 increases atmospheric temperature. This impacts on weather which in turn impacts humans.

Even if it also aids plant growth*, would most humans prefer a) current plant growth and no further increase in severe heatwaves, droughts and floods or b) slightly better plant growth but with even more severe heatwaves, droughts and floods? You think only about the grass and bracken. Some humans selfishly think more about themselves.


* it's not quite as simple as the elite tell you. For example, more CO2 = less nutritional plants

scitechdaily.com...

I think you've confused what the 'elites' have been telling the public so many years. As I said a few posts back, carbon dioxide is presented as a pollutant when in reality is a fertilizer. Even a grade9 student is able to understand this simple fact or the fact there is no way to transition between genders.

CO2 is also a poison

You need to learn the meaning of the word context. Increasing CO2 may help weeds grow, but that does not mean it's good news for humans (or the crops we eat)

In what context is carbon dioxide a poisson?
Only activists and the woke push these narratives.

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

Nowhere near the levels we have in our atmosphere.

You guys try to make unfortunate connections. The concentration of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere is relatively low. You just found a random article online that you randomly trying to connect to the global warming phenomenon and climate change due to carbon dioxide.

Attempt: Failed

No, I provided evidence that, in some circumstances, CO2 is a poison - something you denied.

I never suggested it was the case with atmospheric concentrations.

You've made an attempt to connect it to global warming and man made emissions. This attempt has failed.

Same argument about oxygen. It could be poisonous too in high concentrations as well as a number of other gases.

Atmospheric CO2 is connected to global warming in the same way guns are connected to human deaths

Arguing carbon dioxide can be toxic to us because of human emissions is a rather self defeating argument. Giving examples of the planet venus and trying to insinuate earth will become like venus because of these humans CO2 emissions shows a desperate attempt not to say absolute confusion on this issue. Physics isn't taught well in school or any other science imo.

But woke is taught very well and with a great success! It's so successful in schools to the point students believe the planet is on the path of destruction but there is still salvation if most men become women through self declarations.

originally posted by: AndyMayhew

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: AndyMayhew

Do you know what percentage of our atmosphere is co2 currently?

About 50% more than it was 100 years ago

You haven't been asked the comparison yet. The question stands and it will be good if you answer it. Then answer whether this concentration is really a problem for humans or toxic to us.

It seems to you to be a problem the concentration of CO2 has increased. Another belief as part of the belief system.

originally posted by: macaronicaesar

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: CoyoteAngels
Is this why Greta got arrested again?

Nuclear is kinda scary after Fukishima. I like my BlueFin Tuna not glowing. Nobody talks about that disaster much anymore. I guess it's all ok now? /s Maybe why cancer is on the increase? COVID vax or Fukishima or 100 other things, including smoking tobacco.

Oh, we are all gonna die!~

I think there are risks in any energy technology.

But compare the total of all deaths from nuclear contamination, to the total of all deaths due to fossil fuel pollution.

Fossil fuel air pollution responsible for 1 in 5 deaths worldwide

your article is complete bunk and written by the globalists who have an agenda.

The human race has been burning billions of tons of high carbon fossil fuels each year, for more than a century.

The pollution is real and extremely vast. Think about how much fuel it takes to run the 280 million cars and trucks that just the US has, and that is only one part of one country, of what we use carbon fossil fuels for.

It is undeniable and simple chemistry that underlies truth that we are polluting the only planet we can live on.

The article was written by a team of engineering students who collaborated across three universities in the UK and the US, who wanted to quantify the effects on human life.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: macaronicaesar

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: CoyoteAngels
Is this why Greta got arrested again?

Nuclear is kinda scary after Fukishima. I like my BlueFin Tuna not glowing. Nobody talks about that disaster much anymore. I guess it's all ok now? /s Maybe why cancer is on the increase? COVID vax or Fukishima or 100 other things, including smoking tobacco.

Oh, we are all gonna die!~

I think there are risks in any energy technology.

But compare the total of all deaths from nuclear contamination, to the total of all deaths due to fossil fuel pollution.

Fossil fuel air pollution responsible for 1 in 5 deaths worldwide

your article is complete bunk and written by the globalists who have an agenda.

The human race has been burning billions of tons of high carbon fossil fuels each year, for more than a century.

The pollution is real and extremely vast. Think about how much fuel it takes to run the 280 million cars and trucks that just the US has, and that is only one part of one country, of what we use carbon fossil fuels for.

It is undeniable and simple chemistry that underlies truth that we are polluting the only planet we can live on.

The article was written by a team of engineering students who collaborated across three universities in the UK and the US, who wanted to quantify the effects on human life.

Pollution is a real issue.
The end of human life or the catastrophy that is often pushed by the green agenda are very unreal and baseless.

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: AlienBorg
Venus has a mostly CO2 atmosphere but it doesn't seem very fertile , and it's very hot.

Yes, it is... of course it couldn't have anything to do with how close it is to the sun though, no, its just the CO2.

originally posted by: AlienBorg

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: macaronicaesar

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: CoyoteAngels
Is this why Greta got arrested again?

Nuclear is kinda scary after Fukishima. I like my BlueFin Tuna not glowing. Nobody talks about that disaster much anymore. I guess it's all ok now? /s Maybe why cancer is on the increase? COVID vax or Fukishima or 100 other things, including smoking tobacco.

Oh, we are all gonna die!~

I think there are risks in any energy technology.

But compare the total of all deaths from nuclear contamination, to the total of all deaths due to fossil fuel pollution.

Fossil fuel air pollution responsible for 1 in 5 deaths worldwide

your article is complete bunk and written by the globalists who have an agenda.

The human race has been burning billions of tons of high carbon fossil fuels each year, for more than a century.

The pollution is real and extremely vast. Think about how much fuel it takes to run the 280 million cars and trucks that just the US has, and that is only one part of one country, of what we use carbon fossil fuels for.

It is undeniable and simple chemistry that underlies truth that we are polluting the only planet we can live on.

The article was written by a team of engineering students who collaborated across three universities in the UK and the US, who wanted to quantify the effects on human life.

Pollution is a real issue.
The end of human life or the catastrophy that is often pushed by the green agenda are very unreal and baseless.

You know when pollution has killed all the fish in a river? (Image search of dead fish in polluted rivers)

Imagine if that pollution was in the air and we are all air breathers - but not only us, but every species that metabolizes oxygen would be similarly poisoned. (image search of smog and crowds)