1 in 6 deaths is caused by fossil fuels




Now this is a damn good reason to ban this shit.
Ban coal
Ban natural gas
Ban oil

Just wind, solar, nuclear, fusion, hydro, and anything besides deathgrime.


Did you read the abstract, it was full of ESTIMATES and no mention of actual clinical deaths by coroners......, a misleading model based study.
 
WHY does the American Taxpayer fund treasonous liars to cook up this bullshit?

CUT CUT CUT!!!
 
Our air is cleaner today than it was 100 years ago, when smog was a real thing that caused untold numbers of deaths and misery.
Fumes Fumigate

A primitive nature-worship superstition is at the root of the little Green men's fantasies. Natural air, which they claim is "clean air," is the most toxic of all atmospheres man can survive in. It is full of viruses, bacteria, and infectious insects. Auto emissions kill those killers.

Your fake opposition meets you halfway in only saying you need to go slower. That's why you fringe freaks have any power at all. The more important question is, what connection does the appeasing Right have with the Trustfundee Treehuggers?
 
Fumes Fumigate

A primitive nature-worship superstition is at the root of the little Green men's fantasies. Natural air, which they claim is "clean air," is the most toxic of all atmospheres man can survive in. It is full of viruses, bacteria, and infectious insects. Auto emissions kill those killers.

Your fake opposition meets you halfway in only saying you need to go slower. That's why you fringe freaks have any power at all. The more important question is, what connection does the appeasing Right have with the Trustfundee Treehuggers?

Auto emissions kill those killers.

Link?
 
Now this is a damn good reason to ban this shit.

Why? It is doing the Left's work of aborting excess people while keeping population down limiting more GHG from being produced. We need MORE fossil fuels.
 



Now this is a damn good reason to ban this shit.
Ban coal
Ban natural gas
Ban oil

Just wind, solar, nuclear, fusion, hydro, and anything besides deathgrime.


How many deaths are caused, in India, from cooking food by burning dung?

Would fewer deaths occur, in India, if they cooked their food with natural gas, instead of dung?

You have any studies on dung?
 
Notice the term “WE ESTIMATE”. That means they have no evidence.

And they say, "premature deaths".

How many died a week early? A year early?

If I freeze to death in a Chicago winter, because these green twats ban fossil fuels, should I be happy that I
won't die "prematurely", decades later, because of fine particle pollution?
 
15th post
The only top-ten cause of death related to fossil fuels is car accidents at #7 ... we should get rid of 90% of passenger vehicles, both gas and electric ... {Citation}
 
The only top-ten cause of death related to fossil fuels is car accidents at #7 ... we should get rid of 90% of passenger vehicles, both gas and electric ... {Citation}
We don't need to get rid of them, we just need to slow them down. Not allowing any motor vehicle to exceed 35 mph, for example, would save tens of thousands of lives every year. We happily accept those deaths just so we can drive fast.

This is what I propose to anyone who says about a loss of freedom, "If it saves one life, it's worth it".
 
Last edited:
We don't need to get rid of them, we just need to slow them down. Not allowing any motor vehicle to exceed 35 mph, for example, would save tens of thousands of lives every year. We happily accept those deaths just so we can drive fast.

This is why I propose to anyone who says about a loss of freedom, "If it saves one life, it's worth it".

There's a First World solution to Third World problems ... you know this doubles the traffic, and doubles the lanes needed ... and it won't saves lives ... if we could limit speed to 55 mph, we would ... but we can't, so we don't ...

See where WHO divides up the two antipartum categories? ... spay and neuter saves more lives ...
 
There's a First World solution to Third World problems ... you know this doubles the traffic, and doubles the lanes needed ... and it won't saves lives ... if we could limit speed to 55 mph, we would ... but we can't, so we don't ...
Right, because, as I said, we happily accept the loss of tens of thousands of lives every year solely because we like to drive fast. If our top priority really was to save as many lives as we can, no vehicle would exceed more than 35 mph.
See where WHO divides up the two antipartum categories? ... spay and neuter saves more lives ...
When were you sterilized? I got snipped 20 years ago, it's been great.
 

New Topics

Back
Top Bottom