SARM is an embrassment with CO2 resolution!

[fjlip]

Another real tough question Chuck...show us the difference depending on where C02 came from!


Geologist, Prof. Ian Plimer, exposes the monumental fraud that is "man-made global warming"—upon which Net Zero is built—in just two minutes.

"No one has ever shown that human emissions of CO2 drive global warming…

And if it could be shown, then you would have to show that the 97% of emissions which are natural, do not drive global warming." Or climate change of course.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1767899175620944039

[sumdumguy]

wow ! its getting to be an embarassment living in Sask.

Pack her up and move to BC, much warmer there too.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Do you know what else is embarrassing?
Chuck keeps using the anti scientific argument that the majority of elected officials who are not doctors or scientists support covid vaccines, mandates and climate change initiatives, therefore they must be right and anyone who disagrees with that is wrong.
So here we have a 95% consensus of equally qualified members taking the other side, and somehow they don't want to apply the same logic.
No hypocrisy whatsoever.

[kANOLA]

wow ! its getting to be an embarassment living in Sask.

I am wintering in Panama and it’s full of earth muffins here. It’s not the locals but expats all over the world. I think you would fit in ,let me know if you like to move in with your people.

[WiltonRanch]

wow ! its getting to be an embarassment living in Sask.

Then gtfo and don’t let the door hit you in the butt. Good God!

[chuckChuck]

Well at least SARM didn't vote to say human caused climate change is not real and is a commie plot!

Not like the Conservative party! Then when pressed, Pierre Poilievre had to tell them and the media it is real. Just so they don't look like a bunch of fools.

But give them another chance and SARM will probably start saying human caused climate change is not real and more CO2 and a warming planet will be good for us! Is that just like more hotter and dryers summers will be good for us too?

Of course SARM wouldn't want to admit that modern agriculture is completely dependent on science! But any science that they disagree with they ignore and is wrong?

And no one is only targeting "natural" CO2 emissions. And to suggest that is ridiculous.

And if you learned any science in school at all you would know that there is a natural carbon cycle that was more or less in equilibrium for the last few thousand years.

But SARM ignores the fact that the fossil fuels have contribute massive amounts of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere that warms the planet.

But SARM doesn't make any mention of the plans to reduce nitrous oxide and methane emissions, both of which are significant greenhouse gases in agriculture?

It was just another case of political SARM nonsense and distraction from rural councilors who don't know the science.

SARM should stick to running good local governments and providing good roads and services, instead of embarrassing SARM with resolutions in areas that they don't understand.

[sumdumguy]

We know Chuck, you understand, everyone else is a moron. You are mentally inept.

[WiltonRanch]

Well at least SARM didn't vote to say human caused climate change is not real and is a commie plot!

Not like the Conservative party! Then when pressed, Pierre Poilievre had to tell them and the media it is real. Just so they don't look like a bunch of fools.

But give them another chance and SARM will probably start saying human caused climate change is not real and more CO2 and a warming planet will be good for us! Is that just like more hotter and dryers summers will be good for us too?

Of course SARM wouldn't want to admit that modern agriculture is completely dependent on science! But any science that they disagree with they ignore and is wrong?

And no one is only targeting "natural" CO2 emissions. And to suggest that is ridiculous.

And if you learned any science in school at all you would know that there is a natural carbon cycle that was more or less in equilibrium for the last few thousand years.

But SARM ignores the fact that the fossil fuels have contribute massive amounts of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere that warms the planet.

But SARM doesn't make any mention of the plans to reduce nitrous oxide and methane emissions, both of which are significant greenhouse gases in agriculture?

It was just another case of political SARM nonsense and distraction from rural councilors who don't know the science.

SARM should stick to running good local governments and providing good roads and services, instead of embarrassing SARM with resolutions in areas that they don't understand.

You gotta take a step back and take a break sometimes before you spiral out into oblivion.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

You gotta take a step back and take a break sometimes before you spiral out into oblivion.

Are you sure this event hasn't already occurred?

[chuckChuck]

Take a step back? When are you going to take a step back?

I just don't agree with the flat earth anti science bull shitters on agrisilly and SARM who aren't far behind!