Co-opt the left's Angle of Attack

CO-OPT THE LEFT'S NEW MESSAGE

We've all seen it, the post suggesting the left is reorganizing to gain support amongst blue collar and rural populations.

While this is …ahem… unlikely to say the least, a good proactive offensive is in order. The blitz must be carefully prepared so that any half-baked leftist attempt to follow this line of thought will immediately be spun around and neutralized.

Let's address it point by point.

The Unions - Leadership is pozzed, but there are certainly a lot of Trump sympathizers on board, and I think with his ambitious projects for the nation they'd be crazy to support anyone else. Talking point. It would be in the best to repurpose this great mass toward the natsoc right, people to be targeted/investigated to make this happen need to be elucidated. Perhaps some incumbents could/are being swayed. What are the weaknesses here? What remains unseen? That's the major question.

The rural areas, something I myself have great experience in, stand to be a really sore spot for Trump. If he embraces Monsanto and the good 'ol boys of ag, that's going to cause a problem. While much of his base may subscribe to that paradigm, many don't. We want organic. We want permaculture, we want alternative food paradigms - ethical treatment of planet, plants, genetics, and animals - blood and soil. Were the administration to grant some kind of pilot status to these technologies, he could placate these people and make a lot of allies out of former enemies. He could be seen as even more progressive than I feel he already is. I'm sure some farmers here will disagree, but frankly, you're fucking idiots. No amount of topsoil loss is acceptable. No deadzones in our seas are acceptable. No CAFOs are acceptable. The more people see these ugly sides of agriculture, and as the trend of local boutique foods move forward; this brief paradigm will be relegated to the historical trash can where it belongs. America was made prosperous by her small farms, and Uncle Addy was wise enough to realize the nation had to be built on the like - small and medium sized farms, not large corporate slaves working machines and planting abominations of unknown ecological and dubious biological consequences.

Retain the former and pivot on the latter, President Trump, or you'll be sorry.

While the permaculture movement isn't exclusively leftist, the people on the right either lack any kind of spiritual, land-based movement; or refuse to engage. The works of Alan Savory, former Rhodesian SF, a guy anyone on Holla Forums ought to get along, and some contemporaries like Mark Shepard should be talked about here. This is the future of agriculture, and is currently a nascent science practiced by starving amateurs. Holla Forums could channel autism here and really get things rolling. Farms are just programming in the physical realm.

The agriculture issue is not tangential to the issue of 'climate change'. While many here can agree with me that humans aren't the problem, there is certainly solar activity that affects our magnetic field and influences events here on earth from temperature to earthquakes. This science needs to be drastically expanded, and will lend credibility to our government. The first major step away from living in a modified 1940's paradigm - understanding of EM resonance, fields, and their relationships.

Mark Shepard: Restoration Agriculture
https:/ /www.youtube.com/watch?v=kb_t-sVVzF0

Suspicious 0bservers, space weather and solar activity/climate change intro video, check out their channel too:
https:/ /www.youtube.com/watch?v=7whL9jvdL5s&spfreload=10

Savory may have drank the climate change kool-aid, but if you watch his talk you'll see it wasn't his first massive mistake - plus he's right about animal remediation:
https:/ /www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpTHi7O66pI&spfreload=10

their new angle will be the reach around because they are btfo so much

The Dems' message to the working class has always been "we'll give you free shit."
The working class response to this has always been "just stay the fuck out of our way and we'll earn our shit ourselves."

Frankly, there isn't much opportunity for the Dems to gain working class support without fundamentally changing their economic policies. The best counter to any of their attempts to garner such support should be met with the mantra of self reliance that has defined the working class for ages.

Dubs and double dubs. This thread is blessed. Agree with the message of American self-reliance - as instilled as multikulti is, it's no match for timeless American values.

The white working class has tended to be, the non-white has been consistently 'gibs me more, massah'. Trump has already shifted the RP to being a workers party, now he just needs to consolidate and reinforce. And deport all non-whites.

I love permaculture, I just need to find one other permaculture fan who isn't the lovechild of a hippie and a wiccan.

In my experience, this is not the case. Jobless shitskins ask for gibs, sure, but actual WORKING class browns are content with the pittance they get.

Many English have this attitude towards nature and aren't retarded hippies. Parks, estates, allotments etc.

Then why do they overwhelmingly vote democratic like the rest of their racial kin?

Who do you think made this thread?


Societies with a truly pastoralist history remember. America seems to have been born into the modern paradigm, sadly.

Because republicans are raycis.

Tbh, I have met some quite right leaning niggers. I'm in a mostly right wing area though

I am so fucking sick of this meme. I don't want to derail, so everybody please ignore me the way everybody on the right always ignores the sciencefag, but you're gravely misinformed. Please don't get your science from YouTube and blogs with "real truth" in their titles.

Well, don't leave us hanging. I'm interested.

where do you get your science from? jew approved outlets? or are you a scientist?

Their 'new' angle is the same as always: WaPo or Jew York Times runs a shit article attack, 5000 other outlets pick it up slowly while their bot accounts attack Twitter, kikebook, plebbit, etc pushing the exact same narrative. They get an extra push from the NormalFag social media owning kikes always, Plebbit censors/bans, Kikebook trends a story to the masses, Twitter runs a hashtag. It's quite easy to counter every time because we're more technically adept and we use facts and logic. That's not even including the power of memetic warfare. Twitter is a prime example, because they're an army of (cough) Civic Nationalists and a decent sized force of National Socialists and when the NatSocs run a campaign our useful idiots begin retweeting it like clockwork. Then the dominoes fall and the normalfag maga supporters do the same on kikebook and plebbit and then destroy the comments sections of the articles. Every. Single. Time.

Okay, but first: Mods please don't ban for shitposting again. I'm answering a question.

The magnetic field hypothesis is that the Earth's magnetic field is currently waning. This allows more cosmic rays to reach low altitudes and somehow seed clouds to rain more, which precipitates more heat into the environment and simulates global warming. Another – even less credible – model is that the particles themselves carry enough energy to heat the air directly, as if Earth was under a sun lamp.

Here's why that's not credible – First, the magnetic field is waning, but so far it isn't more severe than at any other time in the last few tens of thousands of years. What we know of the world's past climate suggests that fluctuations in temperature are unrelated to the measured strength and orientation of the magnetosphere. Also, the physics don't line up. There isn't space here for the math, but cosmic ray particles, for all their vast energy, are very small and do not significantly affect the energy budget of the environment.

Here's what we do know:
1) The Sun puts out a certain amount of energy. This is directly measured.
2) We know the size of the Earth and its distance from the Sun, so we know the amount of energy we get from the Sun per unit area.
3) High school-tier physics lets us calculate the black body radiation from Earth – when our planet is saturated with solar energy, it radiates an exactly equal amount back into space. This is true, or our understanding of thermodynamics is radically wrong.
4) The energy Earth radiates out is at much lower infrared frequencies (again, this has been directly measured), which are preferentially absorbed by certain gases in the atmosphere (which we know from laboratory experiments and basic chemistry theory)
5) These "greenhouse gases" are mostly CO, CO2, nitrous oxide, water vapor, and methane. They all absorb different parts of the IR spectrum, but together they cover nearly all of it.
6) Therefore: As the concentration of these gases increases, so also will the heat capacity of the atmosphere, causing planet-scale warming.

None of the above is controversial. Neither is this below, though there's an effort to make it seem so:
7) Except for CFCs, greenhouse gases are all naturally emitted by biological activity on Earth. They are also all scrubbed by normal processes such as weathering and photosynthesis.
8) The natural emission and absorption have had hundreds of thousands of years to fall into equilibrium. About as much greenhouse gas gets scrubbed each year as is emitted, creating the current (former?) Holocene Climate Optimum.
9) Humans have been barfing out extra carbon in relatively small amounts (relative to natural sources) for around 150 to 300 years, depending on when you place the beginning of the modern age.
10) This excess carbon has no natural sequestration mechanism, and so it accumulates in the environment.

That was the theoretical model. If it's accurate, we should see:
A) Elevated carbon concentrations in air samples from old ice cores and volcanic rocks.
B) Increased growth rings and thinner ice layers, indicative of warmer seasons.
C) Altered isotope ratios for oxygen in evaporated water. Oxygen 18 i a heavy isotope of O2, and so it evaporates less readily than the lighter O16. The climate has to be warmer for more O18 to evaporate and fall as rain. So we look for the O16/18 ratio in hot periods versus cold ones, and we find that this tracks exactly with the carbon concentration in the atmosphere.
D) The Northern Hemisphere was cooling until the early Industrial Age. Around the 1870s, the climate began a sawtooth warming trend that hasn't slowed down.
E) Sea level has risen. Spring tides used to stop a foot or so under the breastworks on San Francisco's Presidio, but now the Pacific Coast Highway is washed out twice a year. There are many, many other examples of this sort of thing.

Here's what we don't know:
I) We don't know whether this is reversible, or whether we've crossed a threshold and will now run away to a new climate optimum.
II) We don't know how bad it will be, though in the past (natural) global warming has been associated with the collapse of civilizations such as the Olmec and the Anasazi.
III) We don't know whether there's a trigger lurking somewhere, such as methane traps in permafrost, that will trip if things keep warming up and potentially release enough extra greenhouse gas to ruin the climate for us basically forever (on human timescales).

The takeaway is this: We know the greenhouse effect is real, it's caused by carbon emissions, and we're causing the increase. We aren't sure how the whole system self-regulates, though we probably aren't helping. We have no idea what the consequences are.

And that's why climate Chicken Littles like me seem so hysterical. We know we're on a road, and we're going way too fucking fast, but we're not ure how many turns there are before we hit the wall.

Where the fuck do you live? Because that isn't any rural area I have ever heard off. Those systems are inefficient as fuck. I also like that you think anybody gives a shit in support of Monsanto. Their products are mediocare and they are slowly going under, or would be if they didn't also manufacture component chemicals. They haven't been a leader in the industry for over 8 years. All they have is size, they're poor business practices and legal kikery fucked them over and people switched to other corporate suppliers.

As a geologist I will tell you that any tilled land will lose soil, which can be suplimented or even replaced at a higher rate with organic input each year, ie manure or other detritus. Permaculture doesn't lose soil grains not due to some magic quality it possess but simply because their is no tilling of the soil. It also has shit production per man-hour spent. And when you clear cover for permaculture some soil will be lost albeit at a slower rate. Only certain types of long grass create rapid net increases in top soil. We already use these in rotation to restore topsoil to overworked land, which takes 10-15 years. Then you rotate the land and work the fresh soil while building up that of the used land.

Eutrophication of any sort will create "dead zones" more accurately described as anoxic zones. These even occur naturally in any delta or bay which has high organic input, see certain Amazonian distributaries as an example. So unless you aren't going to apply new organic material to your permaculture systems or hydroponic systems or whatever and you are going to produce no organic or mineral rich industrial waste which can encourage the growth of bacteria in the water column which will consume the oxygen. Ammonia-nitrate fetilizers are the largest single contributor to the effluents which create eutrophication, but they still account for less than 7% of the total. Even if you completely eliminated agriculture which involves soil turning you will not significantly reduce the number of coastal anoxic zones. Humans eat and humans shit, that processed effluent eventually makes it to the coast, especially if the cities are coastal themselves.

How about fuck you. The arguments against this are once again: effluent concerns and we can empound this particular effluent quite easily, concerns about disease which turns about to be unfounded as no anti-biotic resistant strains have emerged from the industry and instead appear to emerge entirely from human populations which have poor hygenie and high rates of infection namely faggots and shitskins, and finally there is an "ethical" concern which makes be laugh because I've seen pigs and chickens which are well fed and have plenty of room eat each other alive. I don't have a problem with factory farms.

Look the solution to "environmental problems" is killing shitskins lets be clear about that, I don't think that can be a political platform at the moment but eliminating 100 million muds from America would contribute more than any other act or combinations of acts to reduce pollution of all types.

Exactly right. Any talk of environmentalism that disincludes talk of genocide is just blowing hot air. Needs to be at least a couple billion killed in Asia and Africa, and population controls introduced.

Didn't that Icelandic volcano release more greenhouse gases than the entirety of human output since the industrial revolution by a couple magnitudes?

I'll say that the models have been continuously revised for 30 years and the calculated anthropogenic component has decreased each time it has been revised, from 60% back in 2007 to about 30% today. The models I'm speaking of come from Oceanography Quarterly, SEPM, and Oceans and Atmospheres. I'll address each point.

Well no what they measure is surface temperature of the earth in their models, total solar emmitance cycles last about 14 years on the sort term perodicity. There is also an 17 and 24 year periodicity sunspot cycle which also effects how much energy we recieve. The issue is of course that many of the climate models, including the libtard NASA one, don't take this into account so if they draw a trendline from data collected over a short enough time these oscillations which effect the steepness and direction of the trendline. There is also a larger solar cycle which appears as Milanchovitch Rythms in the geologic record but its nature is contentious, with some refuting its existence.

Actually we've been contributing some since agriculture developed, but people overestimate both ancient and modern contributions because they calculate the methane component incorrectly. We should have far more methane in the atmosphere than we do, however methosynthetic bacteria in the atmosphere fix methane into CO2 very quickly so the component is about 300 times smaller than would be expected. The older or libtarded climate models didn't account for this and simply added anthropogenic methane to the total atmosphere component when calculating the contribution. That methane should be counted as a purely carbon dioxide contribution since the methane which remains is negligible.

That's actually not correct. Increased carbon dioxide content in the atmosphere reduces the metabolic cost of C3 and C4 photosynthesis. Which makes photosynthesizing organisms grow more rapidly and of course when they die some of that increased mass is sequestered. It's difficult to determine who much more is sequestered since it depends on the depositional environment the organic material ends up in. For example increaed red algae growth might not mean increased carbon sequestration if soft material and calcium carbonate is left on the continental shelf but if it falls into the ocean basin it will end up sequestered indefinitely.

Actually that was a small cooling trend embedded in a larger warming trend which had been ongoing for over 5,000 years. There are always small trends embedded in larger ones, don't read to much into it. Remember that our resolution for geologic events increases as those events become more recent as more soil, ice, and sedimentary rock which contains a record of the events becomes more common. We know that a transgression(sea level rise) of about 0.3m per 100 years has been occurring for that long because we have barrier islands that old which can only form under certain rates of transgression.

Actually the models I've seen indicate of 1.0C increase in mean global temperature and .75m sea level by 2150.
more strife that made us exterminate other races and nations to take their land, good we need that impetus.

Actually this has been largely disproven. As I mentioned methane is rapidly fixed into CO2 and water by methosynthetic bateria in the lower atmosphere. There is no indication of a "tipping" point mechanism at work in the geologic record unless you follow the snowball earth hypothesis, but that is a misnomer since the earth wasn't actually covered by glaciation and there were still reefs being formed during those epochs. There has never been a period after the late Cambrian when we didn't have large reef complexes of some form, so there can be no total glaciation. Also even under the bullshit total glaciation hypothesis the air would be nearly abiotic due to the low temperatures, which would inhibit the action of methosynthetic bacteria which is necessary for the hypothesis to work at all. But like I said it is probably bullshit.

Actually no the Olmec just seemed to have fucked up their soil, possibly because of a drought in the region. And the Anasazi just plain cut down all the trees within easy transport distance. The same thing happened in Greece and the Levant actually. But unlike shitskins whites aren't retarded and so quickly adapted to changing conditions.

Frankly I scoff at this dire shit because we(whites) can maintain a civilization under nearly any conditions and could quickly invade a land, exterminate the local muds, and build and empire there if need be. And right now the changes seem to be effecting mostly muddy regions of the world. And more that that we cannot hold the world in stasis, the geologic record shows us that there are far more rapid and drastic changes in climate than any we could create. These things happen, but luckily for us humans 20 years is a long time, we can quickly adapt to the changing conditions. There is nothing to fear that I can see. And if there was some

Do you have even a single source to back that up?

It may be youtube, but the guy has some pretty impressive credentials backing up what he says. You, on the other hand, are completely full of shit.

CO2 was never proven to causative of Global warming. Prove me fucking wrong.

Grow up fag. The whole planet used working models of this system for millenia. Your paradigm shows up and we're in full fledged panic mode over the problems you've caused in just a couple generations. The planet is literally reeling from this system and its hideous and toxic supply chain. Really fucking mature. You're the reason the left could ever leverage this against the Emperor.

YOU ARE THE FUCKING PROBLEM

Not to mention the reason that we have such a huge shitskin problem in the first place. Jesus you're fucking dumb. Read Mein Kampf, read anything but the fucking manual on your sprayer for your GMO corn.

And, assuming you're a farmer, why don't you share with the class how well this model is working for you?

Fucking idiot. I make 5x what you do per acre on worse land with 21st century ideas. It's not even hard to beat your shitty paradigm financially and ""especially nutritionally"" What a pompous ass. Go on doing what the Jewish corporations and Jewish universities tell you. What a waste.