What do you really know about climate change?
Your opinions may not be “your” opinions
I spoke about climate change in a recent podcast but I feel the need to re-state it in written form so it’s not misunderstood. In reality, I’m not really speaking about climate change. My challenge was and is to listeners — and now readers — to hear what it is I’m actually saying. I’m not taking a stand or choosing a side vis-a-vis climate change. That’s secondary to this discussion. I am, however, exploring how and why we may each come to our point of view on such a potentially weighty subject.
Conventional wisdom tells us that recent human behavior has created conditions that lead to disastrous climate change (previously called “global warming”). On a surface level, this appears to be compelling evidence. But what we know about history (or think we know about history) teaches us that there are myriad other sources of climate change. How else does an Ice Age happen, for example?
Other sources of climate change may include:
Complex gravitational interactions, including changes in the Earth’s orbit, axial tilt, and torque can influence climate patterns and ultimately lead to noticeable variations in seasons.
Gradual slight variations in the Earth’s orbit around the Sun can strongly influence temperature extremes.
Changes in the sun's energy
Volcanic eruptions
Movement of tectonic plates
Speaking of tectonic plates, it’s an ideal topic to highlight how slowly “the science” learns. The idea of continental drift was first proposed in the early 20th century but it wasn’t until the 1970s that the science of tectonic plate theory was “settled” and thus accepted as “fact.” Translation: We know precious little about the earth but are so ready to use words like “fact” to describe our minuscule discoveries. Once something is deemed factual, however, “the science” neatly lines up behind it.
The foundation of the theory that human behavior is currently creating climate change is that “most scientists agree” it is. Meanwhile, the pandemic has shown us how insane it is to take “scientific consensus” too seriously. “Most scientists” lined up behind masks, social distancing, lockdowns, and mRNA. “Most scientists” were tragically or willfully wrong. FYI: “Most scientists” line up with other scientists through monetary and funding channels.
So sure, industry, chemicals, factories, cars, etc. are relatively new. It sounds logical to assume these creations would result in human-induced climate change. But it also “sounds logical” that a cloth mask would blocks germs — but it doesn’t. Not even close. Science needs more proof than empirical guesswork that “sounds logical” to the majority of pre-programmed humans.
As for “proof” of recent climate change, we trust “the science” when it tells us that current conditions (average temperatures, sea levels, etc.) are new and have never been seen before. But how do we know that’s true? How do they know it’s true?
Please allow me to introduce another pandemic comparison to highlight my climate change musings. The elites — the powers-that-shouldn’t-be — always blame the little guy. We have to bring our bag to the market while the spotlight is never on the eco-destroying corporations. Right now, we have to wear masks and stay home while the rich party and steal all our money.
Remember, those in power will ALWAYS exploit a crisis to consolidate their power and increase wealth. Sometimes, of course, they will manufacture a crisis in order to speed the whole process up. We’ve been living through this for the past two years. In terms of climate change, we may or may not have been living through a manufactured and exploited crisis for multiple decades. Even honest scientists are part of the system and are almost always informed and influenced by the tainted work of corporate scientists.
If we are being lied to by Big Pharma, Big Tobacco, the automobile industry, and so on — why do we suddenly believe corporate science is telling us the truth about the climate? Never forget that the elites primarily use science as a way to exert authority.
I’m not denying anything but I am pointing out the chronic mass psychosis at play. We believe what we’re told to believe. We ignore what we’re told to ignore. We also embrace gloom and doom because it empowers us to virtue signal. We get to look like the good guys when we wear a mask or recycle our plastics — even better, wear a mask with a recycle symbol on it.
Pro tip: The 1% also love to virtue signal. It enhances their brand when they pretend to care about racism, gay rights, or the environment. It increases the likelihood that we will passively turn to these high-profile experts to fix the crises they claim are happening.
In such a setting, how can we ever know when we’re being lied to and manipulated? Is it even possible to know unless you step outside the system and ask questions that may get you ostracized? Even if the climate is changing because of humans, who can we trust to educate us on this crucial topic? And who can we trust to help guide us to better choices — especially when virtually all corporations are owned by the same companies and are working to further the World Economic Forum agenda?
In this article, I’m offering you important questions — potentially life-altering questions — but right now, I’m more interested to know your unfiltered answers to these two inquiries:
Can you read this article without getting defensive?
Can you actually hear what it is I’m saying?
While you ponder that, I’ll leave you with a thought: At this moment, there is something that matters far more than whether or not the ecosystem is dying at the hands of humans. That “something” is: where do your opinions come from?
Unless you practice diligent intellectual self-defense, I’m making the safe assumption that your opinions are not really “your” opinions.
Mickey Z. is the founder of Helping Homeless Women - NYC, offering direct relief to women on New York City streets. To help him grow this project, CLICK HERE and donate right now. And please spread the word!