Jeffrey Epstein and his vast network of elite figures routinely traded in myths that undermine climate progress. Experts say it’s not an accident

Archived copies of the article

  • D_C@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    3 hours ago

    “we’ve got two basic options. Stop killing the world and become ecological whilst feeding everyone orrrr we kill people.

    Haha, just kidding. So, how are we going to kill all these poors in the ‘overpopulated’ areas?”

  • Tollana1234567@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    6 hours ago

    also funding “reduce your carbon footprint” advocacy or companies so they dont reduce thier emissions, plus funding the "eco-protestors that deface public property to get the public to turn on them as well.

    • Tiresia@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 hours ago

      That’s not in the article, are you making shit up to suit your political agenda?

      Especially the last one is wild - yeah, they sneakily funded the single most historically effective form of protest short of attempted murder (see Luigi bopping goombas) in order to *checks notes* reduce support for climate change activism.

      In the Netherlands, the biggest climate movement spike was when activists repeatedly blocked a highway and defaced its surface. The biggest protests in 50 years happened after a year-long campaign of vandalism, defacement of public property, and fighting police.

      I don’t know if billionaires had a hand in making the 20th century climate movement anti-nuclear pacifists, but that was literally the best values they could have had to support the fossil fuel industry. Get well-meaning scientists to submit to public pressure allowing imperialism to continue its reign of terror without competition.

      Go read “The Failure of Nonviolence” by Gelderloos.

  • CreamyJalapenoSauce@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    12 hours ago

    “if the brain discards unused neurons, why [should] society keep their equivalent”

    A shitty argument by shitty people. The appeal to nature would probably be less of a problem if we didn’t abandon nature by creating society.