Try this, Bill.
Posted on 02/15/2021 1:49:19 PM PST by JV3MRC
Liberal billionaire Bill Gates made a shocking confession that made his climate change activism reek of hypocrisy.
CNN anchor Anderson Cooper surprisingly decided to corner Gates on the extreme amount of “greenhouse gas” emissions that the tech billionaire emits through his private jet usage during a Feb. 14 60 Minutes interview on CBS. The astonishing part came as Gates admitted to Cooper that he had one of the “highest greenhouse gas footprints of anyone on the planet.” Cooper, however, spent most of the interview pushing Gates’s agenda to convince viewers of the need to completely transform the global economy into a green utopia.
Cooper cross-examined Gates, “Are you the right messenger on this? Because you fly private planes a lot, and you’re creating a lot of greenhouse gases yourself.” Then came the shocking admission from Gates: “Yeah, I probably have one of the highest greenhouse gas footprints of anyone on the planet.” Cooper then interjected that this was “kind of ironic.”
Gates — unphased by the apparent dent in his credibility — later made an asinine claim that the green transformation of every aspect of daily human life would be the “most amazing thing mankind has ever done ... an all-out effort — you know — like a world war, but it’s us against greenhouse gases.” But Gates has clearly been playing both sides of the fight in his imaginary “world war.”
(Excerpt) Read more at newsbusters.org ...
Billionaire oligarchs fly all over the planet and see this insect pestilence known as humanity cluttering up their Walden Paradise and they want them gone.
It’s no more complicated than this.
Trey Billygoat Gates of Hell
When conservatives do bad things it’s the fault of conservatives. When liberals do bad things it’s the fault of humanity.
Try this, Bill.
Gates = Hypocrite. He wants everyone else to cut down on their (phony, global-warming-causing) greenhouse gases, but he is so much better than the rest of us in his own mind that he is exempt from the same moronic punishment.
Wake me up when jets are battery powered instead of JP-4.
Those that push the green agenda don’t give a damn about the real science or the obvious solution to de-carbonizing the power grid, which is to go with safe, cheap, clean, and virtually unlimited thorium nuclear power. That technology has been “on the shelf” since it was shut down in the 1960s.
Gates’ faux-piety for green is just a fig-leaf for the real agenda, which has always been and remains to depopulate the planet.
While they continue to fly their private jets and cruise in their yachts
I'm with you on the need for LFTRs.
Why does Gates spend so much of his fortune on nuclear, rather than LFTRs? All he needs is a small course correction. It's not as if he needs to give up his leftist ideas. LFTRs is an easy solution for all stripes.
Luckily manufacturing and maintaining batteries doesn't require energy.
You're assuming his ideas are what you think they are. Again, every aspect of what we see from the left is a facade to mask the actual agenda, which is to get rid of 90% of humanity and enslave the rest. It's the Malthusian Fallacy, which has existed for 200+ years.
The false premise is simple. There's not enough for everyone. There are too many people. The only solution is drastic reduction of the global population. We can't just murder everyone (at least right away) so here's what we do:
Beyond that we have:
This agenda completely explains everything you see that "doesn't make sense". Does it advance the Malthusian agenda? Then support it. If it does not, then oppose and denigrate it, especially among the young, who are the easiest to manipulate.
We agree concerning LFTR technology and its ability to provide cheap plentiful and safe energy to serve the world's needs for hundreds of years. Why then is Gates supporting a less desirable, though no less plentiful option? Specifically, why does he support nuclear, which still has potential dangers and has disposal drawbacks? He'll have power plants, potential Three Mile Islands and Yucca Mountains everywhere, while supporting endless population growth. This doesn't fit within a Malthusian objective. You would need to believe that Gates is throwing away billions of his fortune on ideas that he hopes will be shot done. I can understand a Malthusian promoting solar and wind: they are dead-end wastes of time and money distractions which, like climate change, will economically debilitate us. Nuclear, however, is just feasible enough to provide lots of energy for population growth, yet saddled with intractable problems.
What's going on with Gates and energy and why wouldn't he support LFTRs?
Yep! Typical libs.
Gates’ nuclear initiative—Terrapower. May be a positive aspect, but so far it hasn’t gone very far. The issue is the architecture of energy. You need both distributed generation for redundancy and reliability as well as a base load capacity for consistent availability. As such, the smaller, distributed reactor technology that Terrapower is promoting may be complementary to LFTR, which is an ideal solution for baseload capacity given current technology.
But he still wants a lot fewer people on the planet.
Thanks for your reply.
LFTRs are “smaller, distributed” as well. They are likely one-tenth the capital cost of a nuclear plant, though it will take a few billion dollars to establish feasibility. Gates has directed that kind of money to his concept, so he has a better claim.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
