Moth
Enemy of the Mechanism
★★★★★
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2025
- Posts
- 10,571
- Online time
- 6d 13h
Who? The Dajjal? The fucking Muslim Antichrist?I believe whatever the one-eyed jew tells me
Who? The Dajjal? The fucking Muslim Antichrist?I believe whatever the one-eyed jew tells me
The TV / media screenWho? The Dajjal? The fucking Muslim Antichrist?![]()
Clouds at night make it warmer thoughThe sun is hotter than it was before - say 30 years ago when it was still yellow - its white now...
But put a clouds in front of it and instant coldness.
No, they just hold the heat more than no clouds.Clouds at night make it warmer though
No, I believe it is an invention from woke politicals to justify their shitty politicals, they can do any shit that fucks the country and people will still accept it because "it's to fight climate change"I'm continuing in my quest to gather as much data about the .is userbase as possible (I'm a fed) and I'll report my findings in one large post when I'm done.
In spite of what the replies say, I'm STILL absolutely a glowie.
Tune in tomorrow to see my follow up to this poll: 'Do you believe Climate Change/Global Warming is a major Existential threat to humanity?'
The aforementioned large post will be released at the end of October, I haven't forgotten.![]()
Total disagreeI do. Doesn’t take much to see the patterns such as hotter summers, worse storms, polar ice melting. Whether humans are the main cause is another debate, but the planet is definitely heating up.
every aspect of the climate change is literally jewish!
Are you going to deny the fact that the world has heated unprecedentedly over the past century, regardless of whether you believe human contribution is significant or not, as that is what total disagreement implies? The rate of about 0.15–0.20 C per decade since 1975 is roughly ten times higher than following the previous ice age.Total disagree
YesAre you going to deny the fact that the world has heated unprecedentedly over the past century, regardless of whether you believe human contribution is significant or not, as that is what total disagreement implies?
So the thermometers, satellites, and ice-core data are all conspiring together, then? At that point anyone can claim skepticism against peer-reviewed empirical data, and that includes the studies we often use to demonstrate the factual basis of the blackpill.
You must know that experts always go with the official version of the things, to serve the system. Why do you think official science media and organizations like OMS say that for example troons are real foids and delusional shit like that? Because they say what the system want them to say. It's the same with climate change.So the thermometers, satellites, and ice-core data are all conspiring together, then? At that point anyone can claim skepticism against peer-reviewed empirical data, and that includes the studies we often use to demonstrate the factual basis of the blackpill.
Climate science isn’t a single “official” story. It’s literally confirmed independently by thousands of researchers worldwide, across dozens of countries, using satellites, ice cores, ocean measurements, and countless peer-reviewed studies. Even if you assume every organization is biased, the data itself simply doesn’t lie.You must know that experts always go with the official version of the things, to serve the system.
Comparing this to tranny ideology seems inaccurate to me. Climate change describes what is, aka measurable, observable reality — while troon ideology, is an ought imposed by culture and institutions, not a natural or empirical fact; actual science demonstrates that a woman cannot be a man and a man cannot be a woman, and the whole idea revolves around the subjective idea that gender is a social construct, which is largely ridiculous.Why do you think official science media and organizations like OMS say that for example troons are real foids and delusional shit like that? Because they say what the system want them to say.
Yes, but temperature records prior to 50 years ago in most areas are lacking or shoddy quality compared to today.Are you going to deny the fact that the world has heated unprecedentedly over the past century, regardless of whether you believe human contribution is significant or not, as that is what total disagreement implies? The rate of about 0.15–0.20 C per decade since 1975 is roughly ten times higher than following the previous ice age.
View attachment 1570965
That's true, but there are plenty of methods scientists use to account for that.Yes, but temperature records prior to 50 years ago in most areas are lacking or shoddy quality compared to today.
Now there's readings every 15 minutes which can make the daily high/low easily have an extra degree of disparity. Whereas back in 1950, there was one reading in the afternoon and one in morning.





