Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2025 Poal.co

967

Inconvenient

Inconvenient

(post is archived)

[–] • 1 pt

It's kinda funny when the title answers it's own question like that.

Climate alarmists would probably say something about how it's in Greenland instead of the north/south pole proving that climate change is happening.

[–] • 1 pt

The title also answers itself: Why aren't they talking about something that is against their propaganda? Because it's against their propaganda.

Why aren't we talking about it? Because I have no control over climate change, the governments/corporations are almost all of it, if and whatever way it may be happening.

[–] • 0 pt

Kinda makes you wonder how bad it would be to just start chucking all the garbage in a volcano.

[–] [deleted] • 0 pt

There are retards on both sides of the global warming skank fight and this is one of those arguments where the skanks who deny global warming prove their skankiness.

The inland glaciers in Greenland are sub-zero . Even if the temperature rose 1 or 2 degrees, it still wouldn't be enough to melt the glaciers and ice would still gain in those areas.

So, when you say "But muh Greenland glaciers!"... No fuck retard. Nobody but the skanks are talking about the Greenland glaciers. Go find Gretta Asberger and argue with her. That's where the skank fight is and that's where you belong.

The real argument involves sea ice and the ice shelves. And, as much as I hate the whole "Global Warming" thing, there is a real argument there which is worth while.

[–] • 0 pt

It's all deception

[–] • 0 pt

Because it's against the jew narrative.