[smart (OP)]

The Nazis never "forced" anyone to believe anything- you can't.

Nice one...
You would be surprised by how Obama and Dicaprio globalisation mafia is expecting us to accept climate change in our life.

[Kryptid]

Climate change is no different than eugenics in forcing us to accept this Nazi-like theory and influence our behavior.

You have provided no evidence to back up this statement.

[smart (OP)]

Climate change is no different than eugenics in forcing us to accept this Nazi-like theory and influence our behavior.

You have provided no evidence to back up this statement.

Why do you keep denying the existence of neuropolitics?
Don't you realize that climate change is meant to exist for controlling our social behavior?

[Bored chemist]

Climate change is no different than eugenics in forcing us to accept this Nazi-like theory and influence our behavior.

You have provided no evidence to back up this statement.

Why do you keep denying the existence of neuropolitics?
Don't you realize that climate change is meant to exist for controlling our social behavior?

You have provided no evidence to back up this statement.

[Kryptid]

Why do you keep denying the existence of neuropolitics?
Don't you realize that climate change is meant to exist for controlling our social behavior?

Repeating a claim is not evidence for a claim. Give us evidence or admit that you don't have any.

I seriously do wonder how much more of these conspiracy posts we must endure before a rule is created banning them. There are other discussion boards out there specifically created to deal with fringe subjects like this. Why does it have to be dragged onto a science board?

[Bored chemist]

Why do you keep denying the existence of neuropolitics?
Don't you realize that climate change is meant to exist for controlling our social behavior?

Repeating a claim is not evidence for a claim. Give us evidence or admit that you don't have any.

I seriously do wonder how much more of these conspiracy posts we must endure before a rule is created banning them. There are other discussion boards out there specifically created to deal with fringe subjects like this. Why does it have to be dragged onto a science board?

There are a few "serial offenders" who don't seem to know what evidence is.

[Colin2B]

I seriously do wonder how much more of these conspiracy posts we must endure before a rule is created banning them.

Just Chat and That Can't be True are intended for non-science posts. Whoops, almost said non-sense.

[Bored chemist]

I seriously do wonder how much more of these conspiracy posts we must endure before a rule is created banning them.

Just Chat and That Can't be True are intended for non-science posts. Whoops, almost said non-sense.

True, but a lot of nonsense gets posted in other bits of the forum, notably "New Theories".
It's also often added as a hijack to sensible discussions in other areas.

[smart (OP)]

[Colin2B]

True, but a lot of nonsense gets posted in other bits of the forum, notably "New Theories".
It's also often added as a hijack to sensible discussions in other areas.

If I spot any I try to extract it and move or delete it, just as I did on the magnetism question. I'm treating conspiracy theories in just the same way as new theories, but routing to just Chat or can't be true.

[smart (OP)]

I'm treating conspiracy theories in just the same way as new theories, but routing to just Chat or can't be true.

Sorry, but there's no such thing as a "conspiracy theory". Independent research is meant to be controversial because it challenges the official narratives, that's all. The "conspiracy label" is mainly promoted by mainstream media and the globalisation mafia.

[Bored chemist]

I'm treating conspiracy theories in just the same way as new theories, but routing to just Chat or can't be true.

Sorry, but there's no such thing as a "conspiracy theory". Independent research is meant to be controversial because it challenges the official narratives, that's all. The "conspiracy label" is mainly promoted by mainstream media and the globalisation mafia.

You are right for the wrong reason. Your ramblings here are not a conspiracy theory; they don't make enough sense to be one.
You haven't put forward any sort of link between eugenics and climate change

[smart (OP)]

You haven't put forward any sort of link between eugenics and climate change

I disagree. Apparently, the majority of people are either too lazy or stubborn to accept the reality of the social
neuropolitics of climate change. So my guess is that the propaganda machine is very effective on this forum because of people like you or its just easier to accept magical climate changes without questioning it's very own foundations based on eugenics.

[Bored chemist]

You haven't put forward any sort of link between eugenics and climate change

And this isn't a myth or magic
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temperature_record

[Kryptid]

Sorry, but there's no such thing as a "conspiracy theory". Independent research is meant to be controversial because it challenges the official narratives, that's all. The "conspiracy label" is mainly promoted by mainstream media and the globalisation mafia.

Am I to believe, based on this post, that you accept all claims labelled as "conspiracy theories" to actually be true? You believe that the Earth is both flat and hollow? That there are alien spaceships at Area 51? That both the Moon-landings were a hoax and that astronauts saw UFOs on the Moon?

I disagree.

So in which post of yours did you show us evidence for a link? Before you answer, please do remember that claims are not evidence.

Apparently, the majority of people are either too lazy or stubborn to accept the reality of the social
neuropolitics of climate change.

Or too rational.

So my guess is that the propaganda machine is very effective on this forum because of people like you or its just easier to accept magical climate changes without questioning it's very own foundations based on eugenics.

Why do you expect us to accept your repeated claims if you cannot back them up? All you have done is make assertion after assertion without giving us even the slightest sliver of a reason to accept them as true.

[smart (OP)]

Here's the guy who coined the term "useless eaters" standing with Hillary Clinton.

[smart (OP)]

And here's the evidence that climate change is connected to Kissinger's eugenics philosophy of culling the "useless eaters":

The ultimate challenge is to shape the common concern of most countries and all major ones regarding the economic crisis, together with a common fear of jihadist terrorism, into a common strategy reinforced by the realization that the new issues like proliferation, energy and climate change permit no national or regional solution.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/12/opinion/12iht-edkissinger.1.19281915.html?pagewanted=all

[Bored chemist]

Well, Kissinger is now old enough to be one of the "useless eaters" as he described the elderly.
And the problem with your idea is that climate change isn't a theory (conspiracy or otherwise), it's a fact.
In the interests of balance,
Here he is with Bush
http://nymag.com/news/people/24750/index2.html
and even Carter.
https://pro.magnumphotos.com/C.aspx?VP3=SearchResult&STID=2S5RYDZXT4H7

[Kryptid]

And here's the evidence that climate change is connected to Kissinger's eugenics philosophy of culling the "useless eaters":

That's not evidence that climate change is a conspiracy theory of any kind. When are you going to add in actual evidence? I'm guessing never.

[smart (OP)]

That's not evidence that climate change is a conspiracy theory of any kind. When are you going to add in actual evidence? I'm guessing never.

I'm guessing you will never understand the New World Order.
I give up attempting to discuss this with you.