[smart (OP)]

Here are some definitions of eugenics as provided by various dictionaries:

(1) Dictionary.com - "the study of or belief in the possibility of improving the qualities of the human species or a human population, especially by such means as discouraging reproduction by persons having genetic defects or presumed to have inheritable undesirable traits (negative eugenics) or encouraging reproduction by persons presumed to have inheritable desirable traits (positive eugenics)"

(2) Cambridge Dictionary - "The idea that it is possible to improve humans by allowing only some people to produce children."

(3) Oxford Dictionary - "The science of improving a population by controlled breeding to increase the occurrence of desirable heritable characteristics."

(4) Merriam-Webster Dictionary - "A science that deals with the improvement (as by control of human mating) of hereditary qualities of a race or breed."

Not a single one of these definitions includes limiting the total population of the human species as an aspect of eugenics. You don't get to invent your own definition of a word and expect other people to accept it when it contradicts existing definitions of that word.

I disagree.
Depopulation, one way or another, is eugenics. The social neuropolitics of climate change purpose is to limit/reduce the global human population by promoting positive eugenics in our social behavior.

[Bored chemist]

Still, I do think that climate change do promote positive eugenics one way or another.

What do you think that means?

I thought you really didn't care what I think.

I presume you are unable to answer my question.
You know that your post was meaningless.

It's only meaningless to you because I presume you have no idea what the "social neuropolitics of climate change" means.

You are not fooling anyone.
You know that "Still, I do think that climate change do promote positive eugenics one way or another." is meaningless.

[Kryptid]

I disagree.
Depopulation, one way or another, is eugenics.

So where does it say that in the four definitions I posted?

[smart (OP)]

You are not fooling anyone.
You know that "Still, I do think that climate change do promote positive eugenics one way or another." is meaningless.

Please get serious..
It seems nothing can stop you from blowing hot air.
Why can't you investigate about the connection between eugenics and climate change?

[smart (OP)]

I disagree.
Depopulation, one way or another, is eugenics.

So where does it say that in the four definitions I posted?

"The idea that it is possible to improve humans by allowing only some people to produce children."

It is well known that "depopulation" is technically the same as "eugenics".

Do you have problems with reading/analyzing texts?

[Kryptid]

"The idea that it is possible to improve humans by allowing only some people to produce children."

"Some" is indeed the operative word here. Preventing "all" people from reproducing beyond a certain limit is not the same as preventing "some" people from reproducing beyond a certain limit. Unless you think "some" and "all" are synonyms (which they are not). You're also ignoring the part of the definition that says "improve humans", which is not what general depopulation would do: only selective depopulation can do that.

It is well known that "depopulation" is technically the same as "eugenics".

Not according to those dictionary definitions, it isn't. A dictionary is far more authoritative on the definition of a word than you are.

Do you have problems with reading/analyzing texts?

None at all.

[smart (OP)]

You're also ignoring the part of the definition that says "improve humans", which is not what general depopulation would do

Unfortunately, the pseudoscience of eugenics as developed by the Nazis is promoting the improvement of humanity through unilateral depopulation. We need to stop thinking man-made climate change is a natural consequence of climatic variations and investigate the disinformation and propaganda used to promote this junk science.

[Kryptid]

Unfortunately, the pseudoscience of eugenics as developed by the Nazis is promoting the improvement of humanity through unilateral depopulation. We need to stop thinking man-made climate change is a natural consequence of climatic variations and investigate the disinformation and propaganda used to promote this junk science.

You think "unilateral" and "general" are synonyms?

[smart (OP)]

You think "unilateral" and "general" are synonyms?

No. There is no such thing as "general depopulation". What history told us is that the Nazis eugenics promoted the unilateral/selective depopulation of humanity, either by positive or negative methods. Climate change is no different than eugenics by promoting radical solutions to this "problem" of overpopulation leading to excessive CO2 emissions. In reality, overpopulation is not the real issue;The real problem is globalization and the unilateral polarisation of freethinking done by the elites seeking to dominate humanity through hate propaganda and the radicalisation of science. Hence, the true purpose of geoengineering is climate change. The true purpose of man-made "climate change" is eugenics.

[Kryptid]

No. There is no such thing as "general depopulation".

If all of the governments of the world were to put a strict limit on the number of children an individual could have, regardless of their class, ethnicity, race or other traits, that would indeed be "general depopulation" because no one group of people is being singled out.

What history told us is that the Nazis eugenics promoted the unilateral/selective depopulation of humanity, either by positive or negative methods. Climate change is no different than eugenics by promoting radical solutions to this "problem" of overpopulation leading to excessive CO2 emissions. In reality, overpopulation is not the real issue;The real problem is globalization and the unilateral polarisation of freethinking done by the elites seeking to dominate humanity through hate propaganda and the radicalisation of science. Hence, the true purpose of geoengineering is climate change. The true purpose of man-made "climate change" is eugenics.

Disregarding the actual definition of eugenics for a moment, you have zero evidence that climate change is a conspiracy theory in the first place, let alone one intended to reduce the size of the world's population.

[smart (OP)]

Disregarding the actual definition of eugenics for a moment, you have zero evidence that climate change is a conspiracy theory in the first place, let alone one intended to reduce the size of the world's population.

You really have no clue what are the "social neuropolitics of climage change", don't you?

[Kryptid]

You really have no clue what are the "social neuropolitics of climage change", don't you?

Something you made up, if I had to guess. Either that or something somebody else made up.

[Bored chemist]

Why can't you investigate about the connection between eugenics and climate change?

Because it doesn't exist.

[smart (OP)]

Because it doesn't exist.

The connection between eugenics science and climate change is highly controversial and based on historical evidences. All I'm trying to do is to establish the role of scientific radicalisation in the fabrication of the climate change myth.

[Kryptid]

The connection between eugenics science and climate change is highly controversial and based on historical evidences. All I'm trying to do is to establish the role of scientific radicalisation in the fabrication of the climate change myth.

Any time you feel like providing us with the evidence for this, go ahead. You haven't so far.

[Bored chemist]

Because it doesn't exist.

The connection between eugenics science and climate change is highly controversial and based on historical evidences. All I'm trying to do is to establish the role of scientific radicalisation in the fabrication of the climate change myth.

This isn't a myth
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temperature_record
I'm not a liar.
You have not shown any link between climate change and eugenics.

[smart (OP)]

The connection between eugenics science and climate change is highly controversial and based on historical evidences. All I'm trying to do is to establish the role of scientific radicalisation in the fabrication of the climate change myth.

Any time you feel like providing us with the evidence for this, go ahead. You haven't so far.

Hello??

Do I really need to make your education about how the Nazis promoted negative eugenics in hope to "save humanity" ?

[Kryptid]

Hello??

Do I really need to make your education about how the Nazis promoted negative eugenics in hope to "save humanity" ?

I'm well aware of what the Nazis wanted. That's not what I'm asking for. What I'm asking for is evidence that climate change is a conspiracy that was invented to promote eugenics.

[smart (OP)]

I'm well aware of what the Nazis wanted. That's not what I'm asking for. What I'm asking for is evidence that climate change is a conspiracy that was invented to promote eugenics.

Neuropolitics is what the Nazis used to mentally force people to accept that regime. Climate change is no different than eugenics in forcing us to accept this Nazi-like theory and influence our behavior.
 

[Bored chemist]

I'm well aware of what the Nazis wanted. That's not what I'm asking for. What I'm asking for is evidence that climate change is a conspiracy that was invented to promote eugenics.

Neuropolitics is what the Nazis used to mentally force people to accept that regime. Climate change is no different than eugenics in forcing us to accept this Nazi-like theory and influence our behavior.
 

So "Neuropolitics" means persuasion.
The Nazis never "forced" anyone to believe anything- you can't.

Also