Posts by wiredrider9

Matthew Young35 said:Bees are dying off on a massive scale across the globe.
It’s becoming increasingly obvious to everyone that pesticides and pollution are the culprits behind it.
Hardly anyone actually buys the idea that this is just some natural planetary cycle.

Matthew Young35 said:Probably not for every single one, but for most? Absolutely.

Unless you're suggesting some common culprit we missed—like a supervolcano burying half the planet in lava, an asteroid impact, or something equally catastrophic that slipped under our radar.

Matthew Young35 said:Here is a small contribution to our discussion regarding endangered wildlife:

https://www.iucnredlist.org

Over 28,000 species currently face the threat of extinction.
That represents 27% of all assessed species.

I can already see it coming: you'll likely question my source, hunt for a more "relevant" one, and we'll just keep this cycle going indefinitely.

Matthew Young35 said:You're just being stubborn.

Why did dinosaurs and a thousand other species go extinct? Humans? 🤦

It was meteors or supervolcanoes.
I haven't exactly seen a massive meteor smash into the Country lately, and I'm fairly certain lava hasn't swallowed all of Siberia.
People would have noticed.

This mass extinction is solely and exclusively the responsibility of humans.
You know it too, but it's just uncomfortable for you to admit you were wrong.

Noah Roberts46 said:Look, people definitely introduced them, but they didn't breed them; the population exploded because of a natural disaster. It's the same deal with mountain lions becoming a huge issue across the US—they need to be managed because they disrupt the rest of the population. Hunting certain predators is completely justified, and if you don't see how vital that is for maintaining an ecosystem, then fine, do you honestly think nature is just perfectly self-sustaining? The question of how many species humans have actually saved is a fascinating one that nobody ever bothers to ask.

Why did dinosaurs and thousands of other species go extinct? Humans? 🤦

bluebison47 said:I mean, that would have to be some sort of absolute, goddamn coincidence, right? Like, just perfectly timed to look like the truth when it actually isn't. I guess.👍

It’s honestly like saying, oh, there was corruption at LA Galaxy forty years ago too, so how do you know it’s specifically Mamić at fault and not just the usual suspects being thieves and frauds? Maybe.🤣

Peter Thompson4 said:I mean, it’s honestly insane to try and deny how much humans influence everything, but look, if we hit a mass extinction, what then? You might have survived a few close calls—maybe three, I don't know—but so what? Species die out, new ones take over, and eventually, some other group is just going to step in and replace us too.

Look, if we actually want to be smart about this, we need to unite as a single human race and actually build something meaningful, because if we don't, the planet is just going to hit the reset button on all of us. It’s that simple. We aren't special, and we certainly weren't "chosen by God." Plus, it would be pretty stupid not to use our resources, it's just that people are incredibly arrogant and lazy. Most people are just "dirty"—I'm talking about those people who steal little bags of fruit at the grocery store and all that crap.

But unfortunately, the problem isn't just us, though again, how can we even judge anyone else when nobody ever steps up to clean up after themselves? 🤷

And honestly, humanity is just pathetic.

bluebison47 said:I mean, there’s a massive difference between natural fluctuations and growth caused directly by humans, I suppose. 🙏

Why didn't this spike happen five hundred years ago, but instead happened right in the last century? 🤷

It’s almost too obvious... you have this direct cause-and-effect link that lines up perfectly with the timeline, but no—apparently, those wicked scientists just made it all up because they want to throttle American progress and industry. 🙏

Matthew Young35 said:And the best part? We actually understand the mechanism by which greenhouse gases drive up the temperature.
We even have a clear example within our own solar system (Mars).
We've measured the rise in temperature ourselves.

But no, according to the skeptics, this is all just a conspiracy cooked up by scientists with their own secret agendas—and apparently, almost all of them are lying.

Wildlife is struggling, countless species have already vanished, and many more are teetering on the edge. But again, that’s just something scientists made up to serve their hidden motives.

The bison in the USA disappeared because of natural Earth cycles, not humans. Tigers, mammoths, certain whale species, rhinos... it’s all just part of the Earth's natural rhythm. Human activity has nothing to do with it.

bluebison47 said:Man doesn't really drive pollution, yet somehow temperatures just start skyrocketing right after the Industrial Revolution—especially once the whole car craze took off, I suppose.🙏🙏

Someone made a good point once... it’s such a shame CO2 is colorless. If it were purple or green or something, maybe we'd actually see how much of it is hovering all around us.👍

Jessica Gonzalez said:There are roughly 7.5 billion people on Earth right now, and that number might climb past 9 billion by 2050. I guess there isn't really one shared goal here; collective human behavior doesn't seem to have any long-term purpose, nor has such an undertaking ever been clearly defined. Maybe what all societies share is this obsession with constant growth. We chase growth in consumption, population, productivity, manufacturing, stock indices, life expectancy—just growth in everything. Even FIFA seems to be pushing for more expansion with the World Cup, probably until they eventually invent 500 different countries just so everyone can play. But I wonder, growth toward what? Is there actually a numerical target for anything? How much should the average person consume, and for what reason? They say it’s for pleasure or happiness, but science suggests that happiness doesn't actually scale with more spending. It seems happiness is just how the brain interprets incoming data through certain hormone activations. It feels physically impossible to be a million times happier than someone else; the body just doesn't have that kind of capacity. Plus, that chemical high fades so quickly. Chasing infinite growth doesn't seem to make logical sense because if the goal is infinity, you can never actually reach it. It sounds a bit philosophical, I know, but looking at how we live, it feels like we're chasing something that doesn't exist since everyone eventually passes away without ever catching that ultimate state of bliss.

It might be difficult for people to voluntarily give up the high-tech versions of their lives because we're so hooked on them. Things like recycling, electric cars, biking, taking trains instead of planes, LED bulbs, cutting out plastic, or energy-efficient appliances—those are all good things in themselves, I suppose. They aren't bad. But they also create massive new industries that, in their own way, consume resources, energy, and land. So, we're just back to seeking more growth. I think true change would have to be radical. Real change wouldn't be electric cars; it would be having no cars at all. No planes, no massive cargo ships. Imagine if travel only happened on foot or by carriage. Or if plastic simply didn't exist. If lightbulbs or pesticides weren't part of the equation. If we didn't produce inorganic waste or need international shipping for goods and services. That kind of world would feel like living on another planet compared to today. Maybe it's possible in the far future, but I doubt people today would choose it voluntarily because it's just not what they want. Perhaps we could start with small behavioral shifts that might eventually evolve into radical changes. As for me, I drive a car, I fly, I buy products made all over the world, and I use electricity, water, gas, and generate plenty of waste. We all do it, and I guess it's just an integral part of our modern lives.

Ashley Bailey6 said:Climate change is a natural phenomenon that has existed as long as the planet itself.

I believe human influence is minimal right now, if it even exists at all.

No sane person wants to pollute nature or destroy the resources that sustain us, but I'm not worried about it.
Humans evolve just like everything else. Technology will follow suit, giving us more while causing less pollution.

If mass pollution ever actually happens, people will start dying off. The strongest and most capable will survive, the Earth will reset itself, and everything will start over.

Paul Sanders5 said:Nothing hits harder than watching some celebrity whine about how we need to "save Amazon" while they’re busy signing checks to fund Chap's monthly legal defense fund.

She probably needs to be home on some meds, honestly, but she’s a perfect little snapshot of modern Sweden. All you need to know about her is that she's "against nuclear energy." She gives a damn, right? Won't fly on a plane because of the emissions, so she takes a boat to America instead. And then, of course, the crew hops on a plane from Europe to sail the boat back. 🙏

Look, we definitely impact the planet—just by existing, we do. But are we really such a massive factor that we can trigger its total destruction? I think we're overestimating ourselves.

And frankly, I don't give a damn. I'm not buying into this whole "collective responsibility" thing, especially when it's aimed squarely at us—and by "us," I mean white people, Europeans, the West. The biggest polluter on the planet is China, and I'm pretty sure India is right on their heels. Overpopulation, water shortages, resource scarcity... those are issues for the countries in Asia and even Africa, which is seeing a massive population boom. But somehow, we in Europe are the ones who need to change everything? Who, us Americans? Are we short on water? Maybe the Finns should handle it?

Listen, folks, if you breed like rats, you're gonna die like rats. Nature doesn't care about your little man-made moral codes.

Noah Roberts46 said:Globalists are weaponizing climate change, and I honestly don't know how anyone falls for it. All these celebrities and self-proclaimed "activists" preach about saving the planet while flying private jets and cruising on massive yachts—it’s pure hypocrisy. Then they have the nerve to lecture the rest of us. Give me a break. It's just as hard for us laypeople to weigh in because the science keeps shifting; you have scientists making grand claims one day only to be proven wrong the next. Yet, some things are just common sense. Why are the people backing Greta busy shaming Americans when China is dumping fifty times more plastic into the ocean? Or look at India's emissions levels. This whole movement is just about chasing headlines through sick, performative politics.

Matthew Young35 said:🤦

Charles Roberts33 said:

It’s been a few days since I’ve seen anything quite this wild. This little girl actually has the mannerisms of William Shatner in his veteran years 🤣🤣

Larry Fox5 said:Scientists have been talking for years and absolutely nothing changes. Basically, nobody listens to them while this bright little girl is being used as the face for our kids' generation. Even just her showing up and saying those "pathetic" things—as you put it—should at least shake us up enough to think about what kind of mess we're leaving behind.

Tracking has always been overrated...