Please support THE CITIZEN'S VOICE with a donation HERE!
|
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
| Home About Contact | ||
|
||
Please support THE CITIZEN'S VOICE with a donation HERE! |
||
There is no man-made climate change - They prove it every dayDo you also know these climate change hysterics who never tire of parroting the propaganda about man-made climate change? Yet, the beloved leaders of many prove every day that man-made climate change does not exist. 
You only need to open your eyes and look at the news here and there. If you are also capable of questioning and thinking for yourself, you can only come to one conclusion: Man-made climate change is a lie. This can be seen on both small and large scales. The Mitteldeutsche Zeitung reports under the headline Citizens criticize prohibition sign: Free passage for Nonnewitzers? about the confusion of an elderly couple who are not allowed to use an agricultural path. Before it was paved, anyone could use it to drive to Zeitz. Since the paving, however, it is only permitted for agricultural traffic. Anyone who disregards this risks a fine of 50 euros. From the perspective of the Nonnewitzers, this is incomprehensible if the goal is to save fuel and thus protect the environment. But this is also evident on a larger scale. In the trade dispute, EU President Ursula von der Leyen agreed with US President Donald Trump to import “energy” worth 750 billion US dollars from the USA to the EU – meaning gas and oil. This is likely fracking gas. Its extraction is not unproblematic in terms of environmental protection. During extraction, methane, a potent greenhouse gas, escapes into the atmosphere. To transport the gas to Europe, large tankers are needed, which likely consume significant amounts of fuel. The gas must be liquefied before transport, which requires energy. The liquefied gas must be converted back into gas here, which also requires energy. It would be far more environmentally friendly to source natural gas and oil from Russia via pipelines. But the beloved leaders of many do not want that. And here we come to the second example that shows there is no man-made climate change. War, armaments, and the associated resource consumption can hardly be classified as climate-friendly. Yet, the beloved leaders of many currently know no restraint. They are pushing forward with rearmament, and a war by NATO against Russia has apparently already been simulated. The rhetoric is currently geared toward such a conflict. But if we were all to die tomorrow because of climate change, because the Earth’s atmosphere is heating up due to CO₂, why are the beloved leaders increasing CO₂ emissions through their actions? Shouldn’t the logical consequence of the fear of dying from heat be to reach a peace agreement with Russia and import the fossil fuels needed until the energy transition is complete in a much more climate-friendly way from Russia? Shouldn’t the Greens, above all, favor this approach? Or is the solution to the puzzle this: The beloved leaders, who jet around the world in airplanes and are chauffeured in large, heavy combustion-engine limousines, do not themselves believe in man-made climate change. They consume many times more resources than the citizen, the sovereign, which is in complete contrast to what they propagate daily. And no: They haven’t earned this because they are politicians. Politicians are the employees of the citizens, the sovereign. But if these politicians tell the sovereign that they must restrict themselves, must be legally restricted, must pay taxes and levies to protect the climate, must drink water while they themselves guzzle wine, then it is more than proven that these politicians do not believe in man-made climate change. If it were otherwise, these politicians would have to live climate protection themselves – in asceticism, aligning their entire behavior to avoid causing even one extra CO₂ molecule. The question is: How much longer will the sovereign put up with this? And where are the daily demonstrations by the climate change hysterics for peace? For world peace? Doesn’t it matter who “wins” in the end – as long as the climate is protected? Where are the mass protests for disarmament, against rearmament, in front of the Chancellery, the federal and state ministries? Why aren’t these climate activists out on the streets at every opportunity when the beloved high leaders appear somewhere – with signs, banners, loud and unmistakable? If war, the military, and armaments contribute so massively to CO₂ emissions, wouldn’t it be consistent to stand up for climate protection through peace out of conviction? Or do these climate change hysterics not really believe in man-made climate change themselves? And why do you get a fine if you take a shorter route to protect the environment and the climate? Author: AI-Translation - Maximus Polemikus | |
|
| Other articles: |
 | Residents of Zeitz Want to Pressure the Federal Railway and Launch Petition for S-BahnAnd not just Deutsche Bahn – also the Federal Ministry for Digital and Transport!... zum Artikel |
 | Scandal in the District Council - "Time for the Homeward Journey" motion, asking the district administrator to address Syrians, was rejectedThe AfD faction in the Saalekreis district council had requested to discuss an agenda item titled "Time for the Homeward Journey" on March 5, 2025. At the beginning of the meeting,... zum Artikel |
 | The State Acts Unconstitutionally – Ralph Boes in ConversationIn an intense discussion with Jasmin Kosubek, constitutional activist Ralph Boes voices a fundamental critique of the state of the Federal Republic. For Boes, it is certain: the st... zum Artikel |
|
Support the operation of this website with voluntary contributions: via PayPal: https://www.paypal.me/evovi/12 or via bank transfer IBAN: IE55SUMU99036510275719 BIC: SUMUIE22XXX Account holder: Michael Thurm Shorts / Reels / Kurz-Clips Imprint / Disclaimer |