It's clearer now that "#FollowTheScience can be code for "Follow corrupt & captured "experts" on a trail of bullshit that's not about the nice-sounding stuff we pretend it is". *But*, the fossil fuel industry has been poisonous and corrupt also, and manipulates "science", and lies, and captures regulators, and gaslights people sick from…
It's clearer now that "#FollowTheScience can be code for "Follow corrupt & captured "experts" on a trail of bullshit that's not about the nice-sounding stuff we pretend it is". *But*, the fossil fuel industry has been poisonous and corrupt also, and manipulates "science", and lies, and captures regulators, and gaslights people sick from nearby drilling by pointing to familiar sounding ingredients in fracking fluid "We use guar gum - it's in Ice Cream. Shut up!".
I think it's important to acknowledge there is a problem of industrial pollution on a finite planet, which has sacred value in its own right. Doesn't mean the people flying private jets to climate conferences have the solutions - or that "the science" they cite doesn't need more scrutiny.
I think it's important to acknowledge that if there was actually "clean energy" that could be "transitioned to" realistically at scale, that would be a good thing. And then explain the difference between what we're told and what actually is.
And the good people (and there are many, many good people in grassroots environmental movements), who are working for solar / wind / geothermal to replace fossil fuels would be wise to acknowledge it's a huge and complex system, and these "clean energy" sources aren't as innocent as they sound, And are being used as pretext for an agenda that (like covid), is more about controlling the people and consolidating power than controlling the problem they point to.
But the cords of "responsibility to protect" are manipulated, successfully. And the narrative is on automatic, where any questions are derided as " ----- Deniers!".
The mass formation of climate and covid are hard to break through .. I hope there can be, which may reach that ~40% in the middle, meeting on the grounds that humans' impact on this planet (in many ways, pollution on all levels, not just climate, and not just via carbon metrics), needs to be addressed, but with skepticism of those in powerful places claiming certain of solutions ...
(Meant with respect and appreciation of your work ...)
It's clearer now that "#FollowTheScience can be code for "Follow corrupt & captured "experts" on a trail of bullshit that's not about the nice-sounding stuff we pretend it is". *But*, the fossil fuel industry has been poisonous and corrupt also, and manipulates "science", and lies, and captures regulators, and gaslights people sick from nearby drilling by pointing to familiar sounding ingredients in fracking fluid "We use guar gum - it's in Ice Cream. Shut up!".
I think it's important to acknowledge there is a problem of industrial pollution on a finite planet, which has sacred value in its own right. Doesn't mean the people flying private jets to climate conferences have the solutions - or that "the science" they cite doesn't need more scrutiny.
I think it's important to acknowledge that if there was actually "clean energy" that could be "transitioned to" realistically at scale, that would be a good thing. And then explain the difference between what we're told and what actually is.
And the good people (and there are many, many good people in grassroots environmental movements), who are working for solar / wind / geothermal to replace fossil fuels would be wise to acknowledge it's a huge and complex system, and these "clean energy" sources aren't as innocent as they sound, And are being used as pretext for an agenda that (like covid), is more about controlling the people and consolidating power than controlling the problem they point to.
But the cords of "responsibility to protect" are manipulated, successfully. And the narrative is on automatic, where any questions are derided as " ----- Deniers!".
The mass formation of climate and covid are hard to break through .. I hope there can be, which may reach that ~40% in the middle, meeting on the grounds that humans' impact on this planet (in many ways, pollution on all levels, not just climate, and not just via carbon metrics), needs to be addressed, but with skepticism of those in powerful places claiming certain of solutions ...
(Meant with respect and appreciation of your work ...)