David Hogg is more or less “dangerous” than Greta Thurberg?

[Peatful]

David has never been mentioned on this forum

But
He is relevant

I know our forum user base has changed a bit recently
But
If anyone has anything of interest to say here
Please jump in

If not
Simply consider this a PSA

 

[Layne]

What's your point?

 

[Peater]

I just see two horrible little commie gremlins.

 

[Peatful]

What's your point?

To start a conversation
Hopefully helpful and or productive

Do you have an opinion?

 

[Layne]

Well this is interesting. Two other posters besides me on this thread, one whose username is "Peatful", the other whose user name is "Peater' (what to make of that) And they both seem to be intent on somehow demonizing two young people who are passionate about a political cause (I hope I'm wrong on this count).

One wants to get the world to wake up to the urgency of climate change. The other about the urgency of stopping gun violence, especially at our public schools. If only some responsible people in power had acted many decades ago on these two critical issues, we wouldn't be facing the climate extremes we're now experiencing around the globe. And many people who've died from gun violence would still be alive.

So it appears these two young people are considered dangerous and horrible by some who seem to consider themselves to be Ray Peat followers or believers (I hope Ray Peat isn't rolling over in his grave).. As far as I know, both of these young people have been advocating peacefully, as opposed to perhaps going to Washington D.C. and attacking and ransacking the Capitol, and being responsible for the deaths of some police offocers. and injuring over a 100 other police officers in the process.

I think there are a lot more dangerous people to be concerned about in this world than two young people looking to make the world a better place. I wish them all the best.

 

[Peater]

Well this is interesting. Two other posters besides me on this thread, one whose username is "Peatful", the other whose user name is "Peater' (what to make of that--I hope Ray Peat isn't rolling over in his grave). And they both seem to be intent on somehow demonizing two young people who are passionate about a political cause.

One wants to get the world to wake up to the urgency of climate change. The other about the urgency of stopping gun violence, especially at our public schools. If only some responsible people in powder had acted many decades ago on these two critical issues, we wouldn't be facing the climate extremes we're now experiencing around the globe. And many people who've died from gun violence would still be alive.

So it appears these two young people are considered dangerous and horrible by some who fancy themselves to be Ray Peat followers or believers. As far as I know, both of these young people have been advocating peacefully, as opposed to perhaps going to Washington D.C. and attacking and ransacking the Capitol, and inuring over a 100 police officers in the process.

I think there are a lot more dangerous people to be concerned about in this world than two young people looking to make the world a better place. I wish all the best.

There is no way you are this naive. "Perceive, Think, Act"?

Climate change is caused by the sun not our friend CO2.

Gun violence has been increasing since SSRIs were introduced.

As you've been here since 2019 I'm sure you're deeply, deeply familiar with Ray's work, and won't need me to explain those points to you.

By the way: Without oil, you, me, and everyone on this forum is dead. Fertilisers, pesticides, herbicides, all come from oil feedstocks. That's before you even factor in the farming, processing, packaging, distribution and refrigeration. There's your sweet kind activist for you.

 

[Peatful]

Well this is interesting. Two other posters besides me on this thread, one whose username is "Peatful", the other whose user name is "Peater' (what to make of that--I hope Ray Peat isn't rolling over in his grave). And they both seem to be intent on somehow demonizing two young people who are passionate about a political cause (I hope I'm wrong on this count).

One wants to get the world to wake up to the urgency of climate change. The other about the urgency of stopping gun violence, especially at our public schools. If only some responsible people in powder had acted many decades ago on these two critical issues, we wouldn't be facing the climate extremes we're now experiencing around the globe. And many people who've died from gun violence would still be alive.

So it appears these two young people are considered dangerous and horrible by some who consider themselves to be Ray Peat followers or believers. As far as I know, both of these young people have been advocating peacefully, as opposed to perhaps going to Washington D.C. and attacking and ransacking the Capitol, and inuring over a 100 police officers in the process.

I think there are a lot more dangerous people to be concerned about in this world than two young people looking to make the world a better place. I wish them all the best.

Thx for your honest reply

We come from a very different world view

Are you in the US?

I believe- as Peat did to an extent- that…
Well…

I believe in MK Ultra
I believe that children born into - say- a One Eyed Religion family (Greta)
Or and FBI patriarchal family (Hogg)
Are being used as pawns or players for some deeply evil and false narratives


Once people can see it
Discern
Think critically
These people can really make a difference for our children’s future

The US can become a police state sooner than we think
Our gun rights are certainly about more than a right to bear arms
But it is for our freedom
Our lives


Thx again

 

[Layne]

We come from a very different world view

OK, one point at a time. Do you believe CO2 creates a greenhouse effect, and is warming the earth, leading to climate extremes? Scientists (the vast majority of them) have been warning about this since at least the 1950's, including Big OIl scientists who decided to hide their findings. That anybody still does not believe this totally baffles me.

 

[Peater]

OK, one point at a time. Do you believe CO2 creates a greenhouse effect, and is warming the earth, leading to climate extremes? Scientists (the vast majority of them) have been warning about this since at least the 1950's, including Big OIl scientists who decided to hide their findings. That anybody still does not believe this totally baffles me.

Are these the same scientists that decided a novel type of mRNA injection was the best way to treat an illness with a 99.9% survival rate while ignoring all other available therapeutics?

 

[Layne]

Are these the same scientists that decided a novel type of mRNA injection was the best way to treat an illness with a 99.9% survival rate while ignoring all other available therapeutics?

Short answer is no. Scientists began warning of climate change 70-80 years before the advent of mRNA vaccines. And I would be shocked if climate scientists today had or have anything to do with these mRNA vaccines.

On a point of agreement: I am aghast at those dangerous and deadly COVID vaccines, and even more aghast at the mandates that have been put into place by those in power. Just because a current government advocates for dangerous policies and calls it "science" doesn't invalidate all scientific discoveries and viewpoints that have occurred in the past.

 

[Peater]

Short answer is no. Scientists began warning of climate change 70-80 years before the advent of mRNA vaccines. And I would be shocked if climate scientists today had or have anything to do with these mRNA vaccines.

On a point of agreement: I am aghast at those dangerous and deadly COVID vaccines, and even more aghast at the mandates that have been put into place by those in power. Just because a current government advocates for dangerous policies and calls it "science" doesn't invalidate all scientific discoveries and viewpoints that have occurred in the past.

Why is the climate on the other planets changing?

 

[Layne]

Why is the climate on the other planets changing?

I suspect because climates are always changing. But since you brought it up, you may know more about this than me. All I can say about the earth's climate, is that the extremes we've been experiencing were predicted many years before they occurred. The predictions were accurate because they were based on science. It's almost incomprehensible to me that somebody would somehow disagree with that, or even dispute it.

Are you aware that scientists have been able to look at the historical record of earth CO2 levels and temperatures going back hundreds of millions of years? Interestingly--if you interested--there's a direct correlation between CO2 levels and earth temperatures. When scientists saw the enormous amounts of CO2 going into that atmosphere many decades ago, it was pretty easy to predict it would result in higher temperatures.

 

[Peater]

I suspect because climates are always changing. But since you brought it up, you may know more about this than me. All I can say about the earth's climate, is that the extremes we've been experiencing were predicted many years before they occurred. The predictions were accurate because they were based on science. It's almost incomprehensible to me that somebody would somehow disagree with that, or even dispute it.

You cannot be serious.

Even "global warming" became "climate change" so that any permutation from a manufactured baseline could be blamed on people driving V8s - and CO2 being the perfect proxy for life itself. Would that statement make Ray "roll in his grave", do you think?

 

[LLight]

I hope Ray Peat isn't rolling over in his grave

I would be interested to know Ray Peat opinion about this topic. Are there specific excerpt of discussions showing he would be rolling over in his grave?

 

[Ben.]

I suspect because climates are always changing. But since you brought it up, you may know more about this than me. All I can say about the earth's climate, is that the extremes we've been experiencing were predicted many years before they occurred. The predictions were accurate because they were based on science. It's almost incomprehensible to me that somebody would somehow disagree with that, or even dispute it.

Are you aware that scientists have been able to look at the historical record of earth CO2 levels and temperatures going back hundreds of millions of years? Interestingly--if you interested--there's a direct correlation between CO2 levels and earth temperatures. When scientists saw the enormous amounts of CO2 going into that atmosphere many decades ago, it was pretty easy to predict it would result in higher temperatures.

While i do not have a "strong" opinion on the whole climate debate (as its warming up either way and i am questioning/unsure of the severity of how much of that is realy human involvement)

Correlation does not have to equal causation.
It also doesn't help that the policies and premises that are proposed from climate activists and politicians are batshhit insane.

 

[LLight]

Correlation does not have to equal causation.

I recently read someone stating that the correlation could represent an "reverse" causality. I don't remember the mechanisms but he supposed that an increase in temperature would make the sea release CO2 or something like that.

 

[Peater]

I recently read someone stating that the correlation could represent an "reverse" causality. I don't remember the mechanisms but he supposed that an increase in temperature would make the sea release CO2 or something like that.

Yep. Same principles as the humble SodaStream...it's all back to front, because the powers that be get more control, power and money that way.

 

[Layne]

I would be interested to know Ray Peat opinion about this topic? Are there specific excerpt of discussions showing he would be rolling in his grave?

Hi @LLight -- Just to clarify, I wasn't referring to Rey Peat rolling over in his grave about somebody believing (or disbelieving) in climate change. I was referring to the "situation" of two people on this forum, who for some reason had "peat" in their username, who would pretty mercilessly go after two young people (in their teens I believe) who are peacefully advocating for political change.

It doesn't really matter to me whether these two young people are "right" or "wrong". They have a right to peacefully advocate for whatever they believe in. To try to shut them down by denigratingly referring to them as "dangerous" or "horrible commie gremlins" is what got my dander up, and what I can hardly believe Ray Peat would approve of.

 

[Peater]

This channel is very good for all things climate, solar, and astro...even if no one watches all the videos, it should highlight the absolute inanity of reducing climate change down to a gas that makes up 0.04% of the atmosphere. (Yes, I'm not denying the climate is changing. It always has and always will. Sometimes drastically)


View: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLHSoxioQtwZcqdt3LK6d66tMreI4gqIC-

I see the vid has the YouTube Banner of Truth, like all the COVID ones.

 

[LLight]

They have a right to peacefully advocate for whatever they believe in.

Thanks for the clarification about what you meant.

They have indeed every right to do that. The issue is not free speech of an individual or two.

The issue is that these people seem not to be organically becoming famous and making the news. They seem to be "created" to support and legitimate the narratives associated to the anthropic climate change hypothesis (decarbonation of the economy, carbon pass, etc).