Comments by "Bo McGillacutty" (@Mrbfgray) on "Jordan Peterson Leaves Audience Speechless on ELON MUSK!" video.

What do you disagree with specifically?
4
@abrahamcornelio3676 They don't know either, seriously, just ask them. I've queried 100's and never got a good reason from any of them. They are NPCs, manipulated by headlines and taught WHO the enemy is not WHY, taught what to think not how.
3
And yet Tesla retains executives far longer than any comparable group of industries. Don't let popular narratives blind you to reality.
1
@andrasbiro3007 First off Elon is over influenced by climate dogma...at least in his words. Have you actually studied climate data and science? I have and the notion that CO2, an essential gas for life on Earth, controls climate, is absurd. It's a bit player, not remotely the driver of climate. It's not trivial but it sure doesn't explain the Little Ice Age, Medieval Warm Period, Roman Warm Period, both peaked higher temps than today, all very recent history,. Let alone the radical temp swings of Younger Dryas, 12C in a matter of a century and only yesterday in geologic terms, 12.5k yrs ago. (geology the origin of climate science) The climate has been horrific for last 2.5 million yrs with more time half the N. Hemisphere devastated by ice sheets than not, next glacial max pending at any time. No one knows bc climate models don't work. Apparently you are controlled by popular propaganda, an NPC.
1
@andrasbiro3007 I'd like to send link to short vid (only 4 minutes) of an actual scientist doing real climate science but it seems to be censored by this evil manipulative platform. I guess Google is spooling up for the elections, nothing like a brain dead president to maintain the status quo.
1
@andrasbiro3007 WOW...this evil platform won't let me say much, just debunked anthropogenic climate hysteria and it disappeared. GFY Google.
1
@andrasbiro3007 I have some issues with his climate rhetoric too. "97% of climate scientists say...." Obviously he knows consensus is irrelevant to science, then if one looks into the 97% mantra they'd find it's fabricated anyway. Or: "It's an experiment we shouldn't be doing." Sounds good except it assumes we know what level of atmospheric carbon is optimal. Nothing magic about arbitrary low 280ppm preindustrial number, it's likely that 600 is better than 300 but know one can say for sure. WE are conducting this experiment no matter what the concentration, if we could wave a wand and set it to any value.
1
@andrasbiro3007 I have some issues with his climate rhetoric too. "97% of climate scientists say...." Obviously he knows consensus is irrelevant to science, then if one looks into the 97% mantra they'd find it's fabricated anyway. Or: "It's an experiment we shouldn't be doing." Sounds good except it assumes we know what level of atmospheric carbon is optimal. Nothing magic about arbitrary low 280ppm preindustrial number, it's likely that 600 is better than 300 but know one can say for sure. WE are conducting this experiment no matter what the concentration, if we could wave a wand and set it to any value.
1
@andrasbiro3007 I have some issues with his climate rhetoric too. "97% of climate scientists say...." Obviously he knows consensus is irrelevant to science, then if one looks into the 97% mantra they'd find it's fabricated anyway. Or: "It's an experiment we shouldn't be doing." Sounds good except it assumes we know what level of atmospheric carbon is optimal. Nothing magic about arbitrary low 280ppm preindustrial number, it's likely that 600 is better than 300 but know one can say for sure. WE are conducting this experiment no matter what the concentration, if we could wave a wand and set it to any value.
1