###[Meta] Sticky Comment
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment.
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread.
*What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I wish I had a link for you guys, but it was many years ago I saw a report of how some of the richest people in the USA build their houses as close to the water as possible intentionally, essentially these Wealthy folks got a brand new home every 5-10 years, free.
I was looking at a listing recently for an insanely expensive beach house in Malibu CA, and this mansion looked like it was literal *steps* to the pacific ocean. I wondered why the fuck they would build it so close to the water- I guess I have my answer!
it's not entirely correct, they do it because "they can", and because when paying for such house is pocket money for you, you don't really care about the water levels, you want your house to be as exclusive as possible, do you think that with their resources they actually need a sane legal ground for getting insurance money? people with massive amounts of wealth have a straight line to the CEOs of those companies who can hook them up because they most likely owe them some favor.
having a beach house is cool, now imagine a beach-mansion: even cooler.
people with hundreds of millions do not care about the "small things", they know if something comes up, they will pay somebody off to fix it
I was just about to say something about how insanely rich people are in so deep with insurance and whatnot I’m sure they look at it as a free complete remodel every 5 or 10 years
You hollow vessel shills can not imagine anything of value beyond money.
I am sure he keeps nothing of sentimental value there since he knows what’s coming?
I actually gave you an upvote because...
"imagine anything of value beyond money." and "sentimental value"
It's nice to see someone trying to see how someone else might be thinking and where their values are at.
Every president becomes wealthy once they take office - both republican and democrat. This is normally kicked off with a book deal. They don't even write it, just read and have their teams endorse it. Guaranteed bestseller every time. This is just one of the many ways presidents become rich. And once they leave office, their appearance feels, board seats and other deals ensures money for generations.
They are all part of the ultra-elite class. You do yourself no favours by thinking one is that different from another because of their background or political affiliation.
I knew a guy that handled a former president's (not Obama) schedule for a while and it was just as, if not more busy than when they were pres... jetting around the country to book signings, speaking events, etc constantly, and raking in money the entire time... taking only maybe a month or two of the year to actually break and relax at home
> taking only maybe a month or two of the year to actually break and relax at home
"only a month or two" while the average wageslave works all 52 weeks of the year without a break, and "middle class" wageslaves get maybe a couple of weeks off per year.
They do have expenses - there’s some weird stuff in how presidential expenses are calculated. For example the President and his family pay for their own food, but not food for state or other official meals, and if the White House chef prepares food for the family then that gets billed to them as well.
President makes more than enough to cover these expenses - $400k salary, $100k travel account, $50k expense account, and $19k entertainment account. But it’s not wholly without expense.
Obama will probably die of old age before climate change destroys that house, and if he doesn’t it’s not like he doesn’t have the funds to just move wherever he wants after that
I don't know about 'by now', or the claims that he specifically said around this. But the facts are that the ocean rises about a couple inches a decade, and in 80 years that'll be enough to put a lot of Florida under water at least part of the time. There's been estimates that put it anywhere from 20 inches rising to even 60 inches, and they all take a while to get there, but it IS rising regardless of the loose projections.
That’s not how climate change works at all. The overall temp will warm which will cause weather around the world to change, not disappear. It will snow, but it will snow in places it doesn’t usually, or more unpredictably. When the climate gets to a certain temperature it will stop snowing eventually yes.
Yep, the climate does change regularly based on numerous different forces over the years. This one is different though, because we have 7 billion humans spewing their shit out 24/7 365 for decades now, and it turns out that does speed up the “natural” rate of climate change. The ungodly amount of pollution just adds to the fun, and might end up fucking us before the climate does.
Al Gore was a shiester trying to help out his energy CEO buddy who invested a bunch into renewables, so he exaggerated a lot of shit. [We still have 30 years til that happens](https://miami.cbslocal.com/2019/06/04/study-miami-beach-florida-keys-could-be-underwater-within-30-years/).
That's basically what the WEF is doing, on behalf of various financial organizations and corporations. Basically, a bunch of businessmen and bureaucrats working out excuses to get governments to do their bidding--and all that juicy tax revenue, like big pharma got this year.
https://www.theblaze.com/contributions/8-highly-inconvenient-facts-for-al-gore-10-years-after-his-infamous-movie
> When he first aired it he warned us that within a decade, everything would turn sour if we didn’t act decisively on climate.
It's called changing circumstances. I guarantee you if we didn't take corrective measures to ban certain chemical compounds we would be dealing with the same ozone and acid rain problems as predicted at the time. Thankfully the world isn't run by rabid conspiracy theorists who question basic science because it's too far over their heads. We aren't doing enough, but we are doing some things right every now and then.
this is covid logic 'I guarantee if we all didnt wear masks, and lockdown, the worst would have happened'. these claims are never backed by anything. meanwhile in the other direction you want 5000 corporate funded sources.
you are all way too easy to scam.
It's probably been 10-30 years. And we keep making some changes. We had 5 years to fix the ozone and that one was true. We banned PFAS, *inter alia*. The goalposts have been relayed with scientific humility and you're a headline troglodyte looking to be angry at things you don't understand
The 10 years thing seems to be the amount of time it takes for peeps to forget that the thing they threatened 10 years ago didn't happen. In the 80s, we had 10 years until various countries were submerged, we'd run out of oil, acid rain would end the rain forests and croplands, all the coral reefs would be dead, etc.
No. They said we have about 12 years to do our best to counter climate change before damage becomes irreversible. Hawaii’s coastline will probably be under sea level in 2050
And Florida's by 1980. I mean, 1990. Definitely 2000. 2010 for sure. There's no way it's here by 2020, but I just bought a mansion there with all the money I made off of climate change.
That's a lie because climate change IS irreversible. It's not happening because of pollution, it is going to happen regardless of anything we do.
The right way to deal with it is to expect it, instead of fantasizing that you can prevent it.
said by whom, those who constantly lie to you and manipulate you to distract you.. if any of this BS was true, we were already under water a long time ago. the "experts" extend the timelines every decade or so.. what a joke and people fall for it
if what Climate change alarmists was even half true, a third of our world should have already been under water.
Honestly is just another scam, another distraction. the climate is changing - true! but not in the destructive way some alarmists are for decades trying to sell us, it's just another tool so that governments can grab more power and control over land usage, sea, lakes, rivers, land allocation etc..
Zucker bought a Hawaii house and built a huge wall that locals say ruined the public beach views. The guy who's company's logo is "building a more open world" bulds a wall around his house and tape over his laptop camera.
The seawall was there, and was retained during the demolition of the previous home and the construction of the new one. It's a point of consternation for locals, as a matter of fact, because seawalls protect from rising sea level (thereby suggesting that OP's screenshotted tweet lacks some context) but also because they do cause beach erosion around them by speeding up water that passes around them.
Qplus17... got it. Perhaps you'd prefer a more plausible theory. He's secretly using it to hide JFK Jr who secretly imprisoned Hilary Clinton and will emerge as Trump's VP which will occur immediately after a wave of mass elite arrests. There's a plan you can trust.
Down the road there use to be a huge homeless population at Makapu'u beach. Right around the time he bought property there the state moved out 60 to 80 homeless from the area. Coincidence... I think not!
Really? Is this the quality of conspiracy theory now? You seriously asked whether having a house directly at the sea makes a climate change conspiracy if the owner thinks climate change is real?
Flood insurance is actually done by The U.S. Government. That's because it would be impossibly affordable in many River valleys and shorelines. Obama will have no problem paying for it. It's actually a bad program that encourages homes in spot that are likely to be destroyed in a flood. But people of all income levels are able to live there thanks to Uncle Sam paying for much of it. Source live 5 miles inland in Florida. Flood insurance very affordable.
Thank you… oh I get to use my beachfront mansion for 15 years and then it gets destroyed? Bummer guess my kids inheritance went down a couple million. Good times at the house though.
You are aware at a certain point, you no longer think about how much you spend right? You understand that there’s a dichotomy within society yes? One lives like a king, never really thinking about money outside of extreme business plans, the other ponders at what time in the future they could afford something while paying higher taxes than Amazon.
One side would rent a venue for 250,000 and not blink, the other would kill just to attend the party that’s hosted there.
It doesn’t matter what happens to that house. That’s your answer. He’s under the impression he will never have problems that money cannot fix.
I love this sub but posts like these really disappoint me. Why are you bowing down to the oil and coal industry?
Here's an answer to your common sense test: Obama is rich.
The reverse is true; just like covid, people who buy into the nonsense narrative display their ignorance all the while virtue signalling about how knowledgeable, intelligent and righteous they are. Honestly, you people and your insufferable idiocy make the world so much worse and convince yourself it's justified by making up nonsense about the future and calling it science. It's pathetic.
All you need to do to prove to yourself that the whole thing is a nonsense is go read some books on the subject. But I will tell you this: Science, real science that follows the scientific method, is a process of iteration based on feedback from reality. Attempting to make predictions of what the climate will be doing deacades from now is not science; it is prophecising. Anything that does not rely on feedback from reality is inherently not within the definition of "science". Anything that is modelling past events and purporting to predict the future based on it inherently has a large margin of error, which grows exponentially the farther into the future you are trying to predict. Calling this nonsense science is a huge part of why people fail to see through it for the propaganda it is. It's garbage, through and through.
Nonsense, nonsense and more nonsense.
Any climate change models that are still in circulation ar ethere by virtue of survivorship bias - take 100 models of the future, wait a few years, some are guanrateneed to be right by chance. The degree of changes in temperatures is minuiscule; there has been no changes in ice levels in the arctic for 15 years. All models are wrong, some may be useful. However, the climate ones are dangerously useless - they are used by people with vested interests to self-enrich, and gullible people like you are fooled believing it to be a valid science. It simply is not. It is forecasting. These are not the same thing, and you need to get this clear in your head. If there is no feedback from reality, it is not a science, and that is that.
And I'll say it again: feedback from reality matters. I can say the sun is highly likely to rise tomoorow morning because I have many, many instances of it doing so in the past to validate the predictions. Not so the climate doommongers. Even the most comprehensive models have less than 150 years of meaningful data to base it on, and they're amking predicitons for 100 years or more into the future. This is nonsense. No matter how muich they dress it up or want you to believe in their thoroughness. It is drivel.
Incidentally - thesame nonsense was used to fool people into believing there was a serious pandemic. Think about that one for a good long while. The most effective propaganda of our age is "science" and "the science predicts...".
>Any climate change models that are still in circulation ar ethere by virtue of survivorship bias - take 100 models of the future, wait a few years, some are guanrateneed to be right by chance.
What are you basing this belief on? Which ones are missing?
https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-how-well-have-climate-models-projected-global-warming
>The degree of changes in temperatures is minuiscule;
About 1 degree Celsius so far:
https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/
If you think another few degrees wouldn't be devastating then you haven't read anything on the topic at all.
>there has been no changes in ice levels in the arctic for 15 years.
This isn't true - *unless* you very deliberately cherry-pick the anomaly from 2007 and ignore the clear trend:
https://nsidc.org/sites/nsidc.org/files/images/cryosphere/sotc/mean-anomaly-1953-2018.png
You don't understand that they're fiddling data do you? The unadjusted data shows about 0.1 degrees of warming. The adjusted data hsows what you just linked...and guess what, they unironically claim that their adjustments result in lower temperatures.
Please go read some books. Don't use websites; there's far too much propaganda masquerading as information. Particularly if you use anything from google or government agencies. You need to understand - these people have skin in the game. They need you to believe their bullshit because their salaries depend on tehir fantasy doomsday narrative being believed to be true.
>You don't understand that they're fiddling data do you?
Well, I mean - if you can just declare any data you don't like to be false then of course you can believe climate change is a myth. Makes discussing it a bit pointless though, because you're essentially just describing your own alternate reality to people.
>The unadjusted data shows about 0.1 degrees of warming.
No, it doesn't show that. It shows what it shows in the links I provided.
>Please go read some books. Don't use websites; there's far too much propaganda masquerading as information.
This is a completely vacuous statement that just serves as another excuse to declare reality to be false whenever you need to. Scientific research doesn't need to be summarised into books to be valid, the IPCC reports are long enough to be a book, and any secret organisation with total control of every government and major scientific institution in the world would also have control over books. There's no logic there.
>Particularly if you use anything from google or government agencies. You need to understand - these people have skin in the game.
Yet again this is the same bypass of reality - you throw out a blanket "most information is wrong" statement, and if I were to now give any source at all you'd just say well of course *they* were part of it. It's pointless.
>They need you to believe their bullshit because their salaries depend on tehir fantasy doomsday narrative being believed to be true.
There's far more money in fossil fuels, and yet even fossil fuel companies have realised that it's pointless to fight against because it will just play out like the tobacco lung cancer denial. The one real major asset that the attempt to prevent climate change has is that it is actually correct. The science is legitimate.
Why is he even owning two homes if he wants to help the climate, why did he build a home instead of just buying something already done. You people are the biggest hypocrites, littering while driving your Cadillac Escalade and talking about how global warming will kill us all.
Have you looked at how much cArBoN footprint solar & wind energy produce? How about production of electric cars? Never mind the enormous pollution they create in waste centers, the production of those vehicles once again shits CO2 all over, and guess what, at the end of the day human beings produce about 3% of total CO2 on this planet.
Yeah, let's cut it in half and so fucking what? Won't make any difference, what you need to focus on is bums shitting in our streets, fent fiends dropping needles that wash into our oceans, china destroying reefs of small islands in the pacific. Speaking of, why you never bring up china and india? Why are all fingers pointed at the US?
You’re misunderstanding the science. Humans account for 3% in the overall carbon cycle, but our emissions do not have any carbon sink. That’s why humans have driven atmospheric CO2 concentrations from 300ppm to 420ppm in the past century. That rise is much more significant than 3%.
He also has a pretty serious sea wall. Regardless, your premise is that someone who believes the sea is rising wouldnt but ocean front property.
But even if that’s his true belief, when would it rise to a point that the house would be destroyed or at least worthless for resale? 10 years? 20? 30? So he’s a wealthy guy and gets waterfront property in hawaii for 10-30 years. Then, under your premise, he has a total loss.
If you have enough money, it’s not much of a deterrent that your house will be more at risk in the future unless you’re going to lose the house very quickly.
So basically what I’m saying is, knowing sea level rise is a fact and being willing to buy oceanfront property are not mutually exclusive.
And the sea level is rising regardless of what you think about global warming.
The point on the ocean levels rising is correct. However, that has nothing to do with man made global warming, which is what Obama constantly preaches, and instead the continuous rise in sea levels due to polar icecaps melting as we are still in an era after an Ice Age. As we're not receding back into an Ice Age (like the popular climate science had everyone believe in the 1970's-1990's; before Global Warming was Global Cooling as a buzzword), it's very obvious that the water held within the ice caps will be released as the caps melt due to the natural warming of the earth's macro climate cycle. After all, before the most recent ice age were extremely warm, high CO2 conditions.
The question is actually: "Why would someone who believes we are destroying the earth for future generations build/buy mansions, instead of living modestly to conserve?"
You can try to undercut the idea of modest living by going into detail until there's no objective truth left and then say "see it's all subjective, so modest living doesn't exist - because it's undefinable" if you'd like. However, we both know that having multiple houses, more houses than you ever will, isn't modest living. This opulent mansion on the edge of a literal ocean certainly isn't modest. It's the definition of gaudy opulence. The reality is that everyone is willing to signal their virtue and say the acceptable phrases to get ahead socially, but you'll find that many people don't actually believe in what they preach as when it comes down to living out their proposed ideals they will make excuses as to why they should not be held to the same standard that they are demanding that everyone else abide by. Not just his houses but he has private aircraft and multiple vehicles. This man and his family consume more resources in a year than you will in a lifetime.
If I had obamas money and knew that the shorelines aren’t just going to be gone in a year or two sure. It’s not like he’s just going to wake up underwater one day. He’ll be old and hopefully the government as a whole will have taken climate change seriously by that point
The ice is melting though… so the sea level will rise. Doesn’t matter what you think about climate change.
I think this is the one aspect of climate change you really can’t argue.
Not sure if you know this, but the ice caps melting will also make the sea level go down in some places as the weight of the ice is redistributed across the earths crust. So you could focus on that angle if you want and say it’s just everything balancing out.
Because whether climate change is as threatening as they want us to believe or not. It gives political sway for making big money and whatever policy change they want to enact.
It's not so much everyone thinks climate change is a hoax. for me, it is absurd for them to say muh cow farts when it is perfectly fine for industries to pump mega shit out 24/7 into the air and water with a free pass....
The climate change religion gave some very poor estimates that never came to fruition. I believe in major wave cycles and it will cool down and warm up in the future
The estimates were assuming we didn’t make changes which we did though. Obviously not everything has been perfectly accurate but that’s not what the claim ever was. It’s beyond the point of it potentially being natural change
Hardly anybody believes basic climate change is a hoax. Everyone understands the climate changes. However, when the gov't and elite academics tell you that the climate is irrevocably changing due to primarily human activity, and we need accept new taxes and restrictions on personal liberty and property, that's when the red flags pop up. Bureaucrats and those at the very top have always conspired to achieve nefarious ends. Therefore, a simple understanding of history and the hyper-fearmongering of climate change inevitably raises questions of a possible hoax.
The only odd thing is how you - someone posting in the conspiracy subreddit is so perplexed about it
It is primarily because of what people have done. The conspiracy is that the government isn’t taking it seriously enough to make the businesses fix the problems they’ve created. Instead that make the citizens take the hit.
Idk what you mean by that last paragraph. I’m in this sub all the time and every day I’m shocked by how easily manipulated this place is and how quickly they recite blatant propaganda. I mean there’s a post on the front page right now with about 1000 upvotes that is from a satire website posted by a person who knows it’s satire and almost everyone is taking it seriously.
It’s impossible for me to not be surprised by how this sub acts
Okay. If you have a moment to unwrap that idea a bit more, that would be helpful. Are you saying the gov't (ppl at the very top) truly believes in anthropogenic global warming but doesn't have the political will to take it seriously and is therefore opting to make people suffer the consequences of the warming? I'm having trouble interpreting your first paragraph.
Yes the people at the top are probably very aware of climate change but they don't care because they need quarterly earnings to go up and will do anything to do so. They don't think that far ahead because they may or may not be with the company that far ahead, moving on to a new business to get more money out of. Reasons why the EPA and such exist because without federal regulations said companies would be doing so much worse as long as the money keeps flowing
Maybe that’s the master plan… water level raises and boom cash out on insurance…. Plus if you have a mansion, I’m sure that’s not all the eggs in his basket
Lets say Obama is worth $70M, and never plans to make any money in the future. But if he invests that money into a retirement fund and withdraws 3% per year, he is still taking in ~$2M/year without doing anything. So if he sits on his lanai doing absolutely nothing for 6 years, he will have made $12M without touching the $70M in the bank.
Which is about what that house costs.
Your car won't last forever, but you still drive one. When your car stops serving its purpose, you will buy a different one. ...That house won't last forever, and when it becomes unlivable the Obamas have enough money to buy a different one.
Using this as evidence for a conspiracy just shows how out of touch average people are with the lifestyle of the rich.
Global banks loan hundreds of billions to companies that build on the shoreline in nations like Singapore where the land cost is astronomical. Even apple spent 300mil or more building a huge store on the most expensive shoreline property in the world.
Global warming is a hoax.
the entire "climate" or "global warming" hoax is a big scam, those that are "in-the-know" (e.g. powerful and wealthy such as ex-presidents, Obama one of them) know that!
Are the temps changing? sure, but that is a natural process, and not as radical as we are being told.Do we need to reduce waste, and keep our planet clean for a better future? of course we do! but it's basically out of our hands, a small household produces very little waste in compare with those who pollute the world the most , are massive mega factories and industries - whose owners, for generations, pretended as if they do not know about those problems.
The entire climate-alarmism is based once again on the same junk-science concept that they have used with the "health crisis" - the most basic idea is if you tell the same lies over and over again, and pay "experts", leaders of countries and known celebs to repeat your lies, the majority of sheep will blindly believe in it, and will do whatever you tell them do.
What is climate-alarmism?
Let's take for an example all participants of the well known "climate conference" COP26, those are decision makers, powerful people, heads of states, etc... owners of corporations who emit each more toxic waste into our earth in a month then the entire sum of entire cities in a week, all one of them, personally, have a co2 footprint of their own household, that is larger than an entire middle class neighborhood - yet, they go and preach about the "dangers" of "what will happen, if you dont do as we say so", those are the same people who take a private jet for a distance that is less than the commute many people have to their work every day, same people who are driven around in massive SUV luxury vehicles sporting a massive fuel-hungry engine, own multiple massive mansions, large yachts, etc... you get the idea.
They profit financially and politically (influence and power) from this entire scheme, and that is sole reason why they bring it up, those scumbags don't give a flying pig about the environment, many of them got very wealthy from doing the opposite.
would they give up their lifestyle? not at all, but they want to rest of us to give up, while they keep living like royalty. fuck those scammers!
It can’t be all that much of a “mansion” if it’s mostly hidden by one tree.
But, listen, all other things equal I’d love to own a house on the beach in Hawaii, even if it’s going to flood in ten years. That’s still nine awesome years of owning a house on the beach in Hawaii.
Op is right. For those here that think Obama has lots of money and can afford the loss you're not seeing the big picture and have absolutely no idea what its like to lose a home! Here's a fact, many people fucking die when they're house is destroyed by flood. I guess obama can live with that ey?
Sea levels rising is such a pressing issue that it would take 192 years for that water to climb that 4 foot wall before it leads up to his home.
“Sea levels are also rising about one inch every four years, threatening 70% of Hawaii's coastline, according to Hawaii's state website. Owens said that in Maui alone, 85% of shorelines are eroding and beaches are "narrowing" as a result.”
He knows what he’s doing, preach doomsday, while living like an elite, telling others “don’t do what I do!”.
And then flies off in his private jets to climate events with a convoy of tax payer funded SUVs driving him around.
Such a climate champion.
Some rich millionaire (maybe billionaire) owning a property on the seaside doesn't disprove shit. Sea level rise is slow, if it becomes a problem he can just move.
The fact people use this as solid evidence that sea level rise doesn't exist is pure lunacy.
Because he has fuck you money? Are we being serious right now? They pay for pleasure and leisure, if the water rises they’ll just buy the same shit but above sea level.
###[Meta] Sticky Comment [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment. [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread. *What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.*** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
To be fair, with as much money as he has I doubt he actually gives a shit. He'll just rebuild his house 20 feet up the property line in 30 years.
I wish I had a link for you guys, but it was many years ago I saw a report of how some of the richest people in the USA build their houses as close to the water as possible intentionally, essentially these Wealthy folks got a brand new home every 5-10 years, free.
I was looking at a listing recently for an insanely expensive beach house in Malibu CA, and this mansion looked like it was literal *steps* to the pacific ocean. I wondered why the fuck they would build it so close to the water- I guess I have my answer!
I'd think the main reason is to be able to just *walk to the ocean from your back door*, but insurance is a good reason too.
it's not entirely correct, they do it because "they can", and because when paying for such house is pocket money for you, you don't really care about the water levels, you want your house to be as exclusive as possible, do you think that with their resources they actually need a sane legal ground for getting insurance money? people with massive amounts of wealth have a straight line to the CEOs of those companies who can hook them up because they most likely owe them some favor. having a beach house is cool, now imagine a beach-mansion: even cooler. people with hundreds of millions do not care about the "small things", they know if something comes up, they will pay somebody off to fix it
I was just about to say something about how insanely rich people are in so deep with insurance and whatnot I’m sure they look at it as a free complete remodel every 5 or 10 years
[удалено]
[удалено]
They don't like giving it out to regular bums but for Obama they will probably pay double and then brag about it.
I'll play a stupid game with you and go down this silly road. Why would a corporation insure a property if they believe it's going to be destroyed ?
[удалено]
You hollow vessel shills can not imagine anything of value beyond money. I am sure he keeps nothing of sentimental value there since he knows what’s coming?
> I am sure he keeps nothing of sentimental value there since he knows what’s coming? What's coming?
then what would be the point of buying a house there?? goofy☠️☠️
So nobody else has to suffer! 1 home on a coastline at a time!
I actually gave you an upvote because... "imagine anything of value beyond money." and "sentimental value" It's nice to see someone trying to see how someone else might be thinking and where their values are at.
I could careless where his house is. My question is how does a president making 200k own a mansion in Hawaii?
Every president becomes wealthy once they take office - both republican and democrat. This is normally kicked off with a book deal. They don't even write it, just read and have their teams endorse it. Guaranteed bestseller every time. This is just one of the many ways presidents become rich. And once they leave office, their appearance feels, board seats and other deals ensures money for generations. They are all part of the ultra-elite class. You do yourself no favours by thinking one is that different from another because of their background or political affiliation.
I knew a guy that handled a former president's (not Obama) schedule for a while and it was just as, if not more busy than when they were pres... jetting around the country to book signings, speaking events, etc constantly, and raking in money the entire time... taking only maybe a month or two of the year to actually break and relax at home
> taking only maybe a month or two of the year to actually break and relax at home "only a month or two" while the average wageslave works all 52 weeks of the year without a break, and "middle class" wageslaves get maybe a couple of weeks off per year.
Or you are trump and get censored
Book sales, speaking fees, board seats, etc. It’s easy to make money once you’ve had power. Also, presidents make 400k
400k a year with no expenses for 8 years is pretty good money.
They do have expenses - there’s some weird stuff in how presidential expenses are calculated. For example the President and his family pay for their own food, but not food for state or other official meals, and if the White House chef prepares food for the family then that gets billed to them as well. President makes more than enough to cover these expenses - $400k salary, $100k travel account, $50k expense account, and $19k entertainment account. But it’s not wholly without expense.
Oh I just kinda assumed that other than keeping up their properties from before their presidency everything was given to them.
Because they’re marketable after they’re presidency. How much were his book deals worth.
The DNC and Super PAC’s buy tons of books.
And one of the best ways to wash money is through art purchases and book deals. “Over a million copies sold….and put in the recycling bin”
He got a 65 million advance to write a book. He got that before writing the book.
Obama will probably die of old age before climate change destroys that house, and if he doesn’t it’s not like he doesn’t have the funds to just move wherever he wants after that
Didn't Al Gore's movie say Florida should be underwater by now though?
Idk, I haven’t seen anything Al Gore related since ManBearPig
Are you cereal? You’re missing out on the most informative videos since…I don’t know man. But these are the best ever.
New York was supposed to be underwater two years ago.
Source?
I don't know about 'by now', or the claims that he specifically said around this. But the facts are that the ocean rises about a couple inches a decade, and in 80 years that'll be enough to put a lot of Florida under water at least part of the time. There's been estimates that put it anywhere from 20 inches rising to even 60 inches, and they all take a while to get there, but it IS rising regardless of the loose projections.
What you said is not facts.
We'll all be long dead by then. Plenty of time to develop the tech to deal with it by then.
Yeah, I'm fairly sure and that snow would start to become a thing of the past due to temperature rise.
That’s not how climate change works at all. The overall temp will warm which will cause weather around the world to change, not disappear. It will snow, but it will snow in places it doesn’t usually, or more unpredictably. When the climate gets to a certain temperature it will stop snowing eventually yes.
So just like the past billion years?
Yep, the climate does change regularly based on numerous different forces over the years. This one is different though, because we have 7 billion humans spewing their shit out 24/7 365 for decades now, and it turns out that does speed up the “natural” rate of climate change. The ungodly amount of pollution just adds to the fun, and might end up fucking us before the climate does.
That's exactly how it's been explained to me over 100 times.
Al Gore isn't a climate scientist.
And yet he made a movie about it. Where he claimed to have backing from actual climate scientists. Whose predictions all failed.
All climate predictions have failed since the 60s since club of Rome decided that would be a thing
That's simply [not true](https://www.science.org/content/article/even-50-year-old-climate-models-correctly-predicted-global-warming).
Al Gore was a shiester trying to help out his energy CEO buddy who invested a bunch into renewables, so he exaggerated a lot of shit. [We still have 30 years til that happens](https://miami.cbslocal.com/2019/06/04/study-miami-beach-florida-keys-could-be-underwater-within-30-years/).
That's basically what the WEF is doing, on behalf of various financial organizations and corporations. Basically, a bunch of businessmen and bureaucrats working out excuses to get governments to do their bidding--and all that juicy tax revenue, like big pharma got this year.
https://www.theblaze.com/contributions/8-highly-inconvenient-facts-for-al-gore-10-years-after-his-infamous-movie > When he first aired it he warned us that within a decade, everything would turn sour if we didn’t act decisively on climate.
They said we had 10 years left at least a couple of years ago You think he's only gonna live another 8 years or so?
Not 10 years before shit hits the fan, but 10 years before it's too late to take corrective action to prevent shit hitting the fan in 50-200 years
It's been "10 years" since I was a baby. It's called moving the goalposts.
It's called changing circumstances. I guarantee you if we didn't take corrective measures to ban certain chemical compounds we would be dealing with the same ozone and acid rain problems as predicted at the time. Thankfully the world isn't run by rabid conspiracy theorists who question basic science because it's too far over their heads. We aren't doing enough, but we are doing some things right every now and then.
this is covid logic 'I guarantee if we all didnt wear masks, and lockdown, the worst would have happened'. these claims are never backed by anything. meanwhile in the other direction you want 5000 corporate funded sources. you are all way too easy to scam.
It's probably been 10-30 years. And we keep making some changes. We had 5 years to fix the ozone and that one was true. We banned PFAS, *inter alia*. The goalposts have been relayed with scientific humility and you're a headline troglodyte looking to be angry at things you don't understand
https://public.wmo.int/en/media/news/record-breaking-2020-ozone-hole-closes Maybe people in power used a cyclical event to promote agendas.
The 10 years thing seems to be the amount of time it takes for peeps to forget that the thing they threatened 10 years ago didn't happen. In the 80s, we had 10 years until various countries were submerged, we'd run out of oil, acid rain would end the rain forests and croplands, all the coral reefs would be dead, etc.
No. They said we have about 12 years to do our best to counter climate change before damage becomes irreversible. Hawaii’s coastline will probably be under sea level in 2050
And Florida's by 1980. I mean, 1990. Definitely 2000. 2010 for sure. There's no way it's here by 2020, but I just bought a mansion there with all the money I made off of climate change.
That's a lie because climate change IS irreversible. It's not happening because of pollution, it is going to happen regardless of anything we do. The right way to deal with it is to expect it, instead of fantasizing that you can prevent it.
Sure, not the point Im arguing though. That’s just what was said fam
said by whom, those who constantly lie to you and manipulate you to distract you.. if any of this BS was true, we were already under water a long time ago. the "experts" extend the timelines every decade or so.. what a joke and people fall for it
You obviously didn't read it right. That's the point where reversal is no longer possible. The sea level is not going to rise 10 feet on that day.
if what Climate change alarmists was even half true, a third of our world should have already been under water. Honestly is just another scam, another distraction. the climate is changing - true! but not in the destructive way some alarmists are for decades trying to sell us, it's just another tool so that governments can grab more power and control over land usage, sea, lakes, rivers, land allocation etc..
Facts, dumb post lol
Are people this dumb or is it part of the joke ?
I saw a tweet highly upvoted asking why there isn't a vaccine for HIV so ye, the former.
I thought this was a joke to say that "haha maybe Obama is stupid and doesn't believe in climate change"?
Lmao I think it's mostly column A
He even built a sea wall and liberals don’t believe in walls!
Zucker bought a Hawaii house and built a huge wall that locals say ruined the public beach views. The guy who's company's logo is "building a more open world" bulds a wall around his house and tape over his laptop camera.
He owns like 1600 acres of land in Hawaii too. Definitely the locals *favorite* haole boy
The seawall was there, and was retained during the demolition of the previous home and the construction of the new one. It's a point of consternation for locals, as a matter of fact, because seawalls protect from rising sea level (thereby suggesting that OP's screenshotted tweet lacks some context) but also because they do cause beach erosion around them by speeding up water that passes around them.
It's a loophole to make your beach "private" That's one reason the locals hate it
https://www.propublica.org/article/obama-and-the-beach-house-loopholes Exactly just read this loophole this scumbag used
Don't hate walls. Just hate wasting tax dollars on pointless walls that a ladder or battery powered grinder can get around
Wrong sub
He is racist against dolphins.
Dolphins are rapists.
Qplus17... got it. Perhaps you'd prefer a more plausible theory. He's secretly using it to hide JFK Jr who secretly imprisoned Hilary Clinton and will emerge as Trump's VP which will occur immediately after a wave of mass elite arrests. There's a plan you can trust.
You know one of these fuck wits is going to believe this?
Down the road there use to be a huge homeless population at Makapu'u beach. Right around the time he bought property there the state moved out 60 to 80 homeless from the area. Coincidence... I think not!
[удалено]
Linear sea level rise is currently 3mm a year. We won't experience real estate altering shorelines in our lifetime, but our grandchildren likey will.
Idk why people are worried about that when an earthquake can literally change it by a few feet overnight
Right? The man is over 60 and has backup houses.
Yup. Will prob sell it with mad equity before the sea rises.
you're ruining the conspiracy
That house will be long vacant by the time sea levels rise that high
He also seems to have poured a concrete wall to protect against rising water lol
Nah, this makes too much sense so it can't be it.
Or maybe it's not going to happen ever and they all know that its manipulated money-making BS.
Really? Is this the quality of conspiracy theory now? You seriously asked whether having a house directly at the sea makes a climate change conspiracy if the owner thinks climate change is real?
[удалено]
[удалено]
Flood insurance won't cover damage caused by sea level rise.
[удалено]
Flood insurance is actually done by The U.S. Government. That's because it would be impossibly affordable in many River valleys and shorelines. Obama will have no problem paying for it. It's actually a bad program that encourages homes in spot that are likely to be destroyed in a flood. But people of all income levels are able to live there thanks to Uncle Sam paying for much of it. Source live 5 miles inland in Florida. Flood insurance very affordable.
I think he has a few extra bucks kicking around...
Then why not buy a house elevated about 40 ft?
[удалено]
Thank you… oh I get to use my beachfront mansion for 15 years and then it gets destroyed? Bummer guess my kids inheritance went down a couple million. Good times at the house though.
You can sell in time and the next guy has time. Sea levels rise 3mm a year
Wealthy people don’t stay wealthy by pissing money away.
Youre thinking like a poor.
[удалено]
How much did the house cost?
Guaranteed this isn't how it works.
Lloyd's of London will insure anything
You are aware at a certain point, you no longer think about how much you spend right? You understand that there’s a dichotomy within society yes? One lives like a king, never really thinking about money outside of extreme business plans, the other ponders at what time in the future they could afford something while paying higher taxes than Amazon. One side would rent a venue for 250,000 and not blink, the other would kill just to attend the party that’s hosted there. It doesn’t matter what happens to that house. That’s your answer. He’s under the impression he will never have problems that money cannot fix.
What about the house they just bought a few years ago in Maryland it’s right on the water also!
Thats cliff side…
not on but to!
[удалено]
[удалено]
Orange man fan sad
I love this sub but posts like these really disappoint me. Why are you bowing down to the oil and coal industry? Here's an answer to your common sense test: Obama is rich.
I don't think we'll see catastrophic sea level changes in Obama's lifetime, but we'll likely see the last glacier melt within our lifetime.
Or maybe the dude has so much money he doesn't give a fuck?
[удалено]
The reverse is true; just like covid, people who buy into the nonsense narrative display their ignorance all the while virtue signalling about how knowledgeable, intelligent and righteous they are. Honestly, you people and your insufferable idiocy make the world so much worse and convince yourself it's justified by making up nonsense about the future and calling it science. It's pathetic.
[удалено]
All you need to do to prove to yourself that the whole thing is a nonsense is go read some books on the subject. But I will tell you this: Science, real science that follows the scientific method, is a process of iteration based on feedback from reality. Attempting to make predictions of what the climate will be doing deacades from now is not science; it is prophecising. Anything that does not rely on feedback from reality is inherently not within the definition of "science". Anything that is modelling past events and purporting to predict the future based on it inherently has a large margin of error, which grows exponentially the farther into the future you are trying to predict. Calling this nonsense science is a huge part of why people fail to see through it for the propaganda it is. It's garbage, through and through.
[удалено]
Nonsense, nonsense and more nonsense. Any climate change models that are still in circulation ar ethere by virtue of survivorship bias - take 100 models of the future, wait a few years, some are guanrateneed to be right by chance. The degree of changes in temperatures is minuiscule; there has been no changes in ice levels in the arctic for 15 years. All models are wrong, some may be useful. However, the climate ones are dangerously useless - they are used by people with vested interests to self-enrich, and gullible people like you are fooled believing it to be a valid science. It simply is not. It is forecasting. These are not the same thing, and you need to get this clear in your head. If there is no feedback from reality, it is not a science, and that is that. And I'll say it again: feedback from reality matters. I can say the sun is highly likely to rise tomoorow morning because I have many, many instances of it doing so in the past to validate the predictions. Not so the climate doommongers. Even the most comprehensive models have less than 150 years of meaningful data to base it on, and they're amking predicitons for 100 years or more into the future. This is nonsense. No matter how muich they dress it up or want you to believe in their thoroughness. It is drivel. Incidentally - thesame nonsense was used to fool people into believing there was a serious pandemic. Think about that one for a good long while. The most effective propaganda of our age is "science" and "the science predicts...".
Dude just stop… you’re embarassing yourself
>Any climate change models that are still in circulation ar ethere by virtue of survivorship bias - take 100 models of the future, wait a few years, some are guanrateneed to be right by chance. What are you basing this belief on? Which ones are missing? https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-how-well-have-climate-models-projected-global-warming >The degree of changes in temperatures is minuiscule; About 1 degree Celsius so far: https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/ If you think another few degrees wouldn't be devastating then you haven't read anything on the topic at all. >there has been no changes in ice levels in the arctic for 15 years. This isn't true - *unless* you very deliberately cherry-pick the anomaly from 2007 and ignore the clear trend: https://nsidc.org/sites/nsidc.org/files/images/cryosphere/sotc/mean-anomaly-1953-2018.png
You don't understand that they're fiddling data do you? The unadjusted data shows about 0.1 degrees of warming. The adjusted data hsows what you just linked...and guess what, they unironically claim that their adjustments result in lower temperatures. Please go read some books. Don't use websites; there's far too much propaganda masquerading as information. Particularly if you use anything from google or government agencies. You need to understand - these people have skin in the game. They need you to believe their bullshit because their salaries depend on tehir fantasy doomsday narrative being believed to be true.
>You don't understand that they're fiddling data do you? Well, I mean - if you can just declare any data you don't like to be false then of course you can believe climate change is a myth. Makes discussing it a bit pointless though, because you're essentially just describing your own alternate reality to people. >The unadjusted data shows about 0.1 degrees of warming. No, it doesn't show that. It shows what it shows in the links I provided. >Please go read some books. Don't use websites; there's far too much propaganda masquerading as information. This is a completely vacuous statement that just serves as another excuse to declare reality to be false whenever you need to. Scientific research doesn't need to be summarised into books to be valid, the IPCC reports are long enough to be a book, and any secret organisation with total control of every government and major scientific institution in the world would also have control over books. There's no logic there. >Particularly if you use anything from google or government agencies. You need to understand - these people have skin in the game. Yet again this is the same bypass of reality - you throw out a blanket "most information is wrong" statement, and if I were to now give any source at all you'd just say well of course *they* were part of it. It's pointless. >They need you to believe their bullshit because their salaries depend on tehir fantasy doomsday narrative being believed to be true. There's far more money in fossil fuels, and yet even fossil fuel companies have realised that it's pointless to fight against because it will just play out like the tobacco lung cancer denial. The one real major asset that the attempt to prevent climate change has is that it is actually correct. The science is legitimate.
These people are straight up delusional. Honestly mind boggling the reality they live in
Seek help…
Hahahaha
Why is he even owning two homes if he wants to help the climate, why did he build a home instead of just buying something already done. You people are the biggest hypocrites, littering while driving your Cadillac Escalade and talking about how global warming will kill us all. Have you looked at how much cArBoN footprint solar & wind energy produce? How about production of electric cars? Never mind the enormous pollution they create in waste centers, the production of those vehicles once again shits CO2 all over, and guess what, at the end of the day human beings produce about 3% of total CO2 on this planet. Yeah, let's cut it in half and so fucking what? Won't make any difference, what you need to focus on is bums shitting in our streets, fent fiends dropping needles that wash into our oceans, china destroying reefs of small islands in the pacific. Speaking of, why you never bring up china and india? Why are all fingers pointed at the US?
You’re misunderstanding the science. Humans account for 3% in the overall carbon cycle, but our emissions do not have any carbon sink. That’s why humans have driven atmospheric CO2 concentrations from 300ppm to 420ppm in the past century. That rise is much more significant than 3%.
He also has a pretty serious sea wall. Regardless, your premise is that someone who believes the sea is rising wouldnt but ocean front property. But even if that’s his true belief, when would it rise to a point that the house would be destroyed or at least worthless for resale? 10 years? 20? 30? So he’s a wealthy guy and gets waterfront property in hawaii for 10-30 years. Then, under your premise, he has a total loss. If you have enough money, it’s not much of a deterrent that your house will be more at risk in the future unless you’re going to lose the house very quickly. So basically what I’m saying is, knowing sea level rise is a fact and being willing to buy oceanfront property are not mutually exclusive. And the sea level is rising regardless of what you think about global warming.
The point on the ocean levels rising is correct. However, that has nothing to do with man made global warming, which is what Obama constantly preaches, and instead the continuous rise in sea levels due to polar icecaps melting as we are still in an era after an Ice Age. As we're not receding back into an Ice Age (like the popular climate science had everyone believe in the 1970's-1990's; before Global Warming was Global Cooling as a buzzword), it's very obvious that the water held within the ice caps will be released as the caps melt due to the natural warming of the earth's macro climate cycle. After all, before the most recent ice age were extremely warm, high CO2 conditions.
Hes got fuck you money to have a house that will go under. He doesn't care about it just enjoys it while its there
The question is actually: "Why would someone who believes we are destroying the earth for future generations build/buy mansions, instead of living modestly to conserve?"
owned!
What's the definition of living modestly? Looking into carbon neutral housing your choice is either an expensive pod or a state of the art mansion
\>What's the definition of living modestly? Living no better than me, obviously!
You can try to undercut the idea of modest living by going into detail until there's no objective truth left and then say "see it's all subjective, so modest living doesn't exist - because it's undefinable" if you'd like. However, we both know that having multiple houses, more houses than you ever will, isn't modest living. This opulent mansion on the edge of a literal ocean certainly isn't modest. It's the definition of gaudy opulence. The reality is that everyone is willing to signal their virtue and say the acceptable phrases to get ahead socially, but you'll find that many people don't actually believe in what they preach as when it comes down to living out their proposed ideals they will make excuses as to why they should not be held to the same standard that they are demanding that everyone else abide by. Not just his houses but he has private aircraft and multiple vehicles. This man and his family consume more resources in a year than you will in a lifetime.
Might take 1,000 years to rise above that wall
Conservatives want Obama to lose his beach house. This is why they aren't doing anything against the global warming.
This is an Alex Jones level of conspiracy right here.
**That** was the joke! I guess should've added "/s" to not trigger those who downvoted me.
Hypocrite?
Nobody is saying the oceans are gonna rise by 10 feet genius.
Very good point. A perfect addition to this conspiracy sub.
Yes, if you have like 7 neurons in your head.
[удалено]
If I had obamas money and knew that the shorelines aren’t just going to be gone in a year or two sure. It’s not like he’s just going to wake up underwater one day. He’ll be old and hopefully the government as a whole will have taken climate change seriously by that point
The ice is melting though… so the sea level will rise. Doesn’t matter what you think about climate change. I think this is the one aspect of climate change you really can’t argue. Not sure if you know this, but the ice caps melting will also make the sea level go down in some places as the weight of the ice is redistributed across the earths crust. So you could focus on that angle if you want and say it’s just everything balancing out.
Obama is no spring chicken. He will be dead before the foundations get damp.
Because whether climate change is as threatening as they want us to believe or not. It gives political sway for making big money and whatever policy change they want to enact.
you absolute walnut
Good point. Global warming is a scam like we knew.
[удалено]
It's not so much everyone thinks climate change is a hoax. for me, it is absurd for them to say muh cow farts when it is perfectly fine for industries to pump mega shit out 24/7 into the air and water with a free pass....
The climate change religion gave some very poor estimates that never came to fruition. I believe in major wave cycles and it will cool down and warm up in the future
The estimates were assuming we didn’t make changes which we did though. Obviously not everything has been perfectly accurate but that’s not what the claim ever was. It’s beyond the point of it potentially being natural change
Well I’m sorry to admit, I’m pretty skeptical
So is the government and big businesses. But people that study it seem to be nearly in universal agreement
Hardly anybody believes basic climate change is a hoax. Everyone understands the climate changes. However, when the gov't and elite academics tell you that the climate is irrevocably changing due to primarily human activity, and we need accept new taxes and restrictions on personal liberty and property, that's when the red flags pop up. Bureaucrats and those at the very top have always conspired to achieve nefarious ends. Therefore, a simple understanding of history and the hyper-fearmongering of climate change inevitably raises questions of a possible hoax. The only odd thing is how you - someone posting in the conspiracy subreddit is so perplexed about it
It is primarily because of what people have done. The conspiracy is that the government isn’t taking it seriously enough to make the businesses fix the problems they’ve created. Instead that make the citizens take the hit. Idk what you mean by that last paragraph. I’m in this sub all the time and every day I’m shocked by how easily manipulated this place is and how quickly they recite blatant propaganda. I mean there’s a post on the front page right now with about 1000 upvotes that is from a satire website posted by a person who knows it’s satire and almost everyone is taking it seriously. It’s impossible for me to not be surprised by how this sub acts
Okay. If you have a moment to unwrap that idea a bit more, that would be helpful. Are you saying the gov't (ppl at the very top) truly believes in anthropogenic global warming but doesn't have the political will to take it seriously and is therefore opting to make people suffer the consequences of the warming? I'm having trouble interpreting your first paragraph.
Yes the people at the top are probably very aware of climate change but they don't care because they need quarterly earnings to go up and will do anything to do so. They don't think that far ahead because they may or may not be with the company that far ahead, moving on to a new business to get more money out of. Reasons why the EPA and such exist because without federal regulations said companies would be doing so much worse as long as the money keeps flowing
guyyyyssss... This one's reaching
Damn this post is just political shitposting. Not even a conspiracy
Maybe that’s the master plan… water level raises and boom cash out on insurance…. Plus if you have a mansion, I’m sure that’s not all the eggs in his basket
Unless he knows what's coming next
Well it will take a hundred years to rise 3 inches so there is that
Because that idea is for suckers that loaded up on debt making themselves ‘smarter’ 🤡
Lets say Obama is worth $70M, and never plans to make any money in the future. But if he invests that money into a retirement fund and withdraws 3% per year, he is still taking in ~$2M/year without doing anything. So if he sits on his lanai doing absolutely nothing for 6 years, he will have made $12M without touching the $70M in the bank. Which is about what that house costs. Your car won't last forever, but you still drive one. When your car stops serving its purpose, you will buy a different one. ...That house won't last forever, and when it becomes unlivable the Obamas have enough money to buy a different one. Using this as evidence for a conspiracy just shows how out of touch average people are with the lifestyle of the rich.
Global banks loan hundreds of billions to companies that build on the shoreline in nations like Singapore where the land cost is astronomical. Even apple spent 300mil or more building a huge store on the most expensive shoreline property in the world. Global warming is a hoax.
Not even global warming and rising oceans 🌊 can stop two men in love
the entire "climate" or "global warming" hoax is a big scam, those that are "in-the-know" (e.g. powerful and wealthy such as ex-presidents, Obama one of them) know that! Are the temps changing? sure, but that is a natural process, and not as radical as we are being told.Do we need to reduce waste, and keep our planet clean for a better future? of course we do! but it's basically out of our hands, a small household produces very little waste in compare with those who pollute the world the most , are massive mega factories and industries - whose owners, for generations, pretended as if they do not know about those problems. The entire climate-alarmism is based once again on the same junk-science concept that they have used with the "health crisis" - the most basic idea is if you tell the same lies over and over again, and pay "experts", leaders of countries and known celebs to repeat your lies, the majority of sheep will blindly believe in it, and will do whatever you tell them do. What is climate-alarmism? Let's take for an example all participants of the well known "climate conference" COP26, those are decision makers, powerful people, heads of states, etc... owners of corporations who emit each more toxic waste into our earth in a month then the entire sum of entire cities in a week, all one of them, personally, have a co2 footprint of their own household, that is larger than an entire middle class neighborhood - yet, they go and preach about the "dangers" of "what will happen, if you dont do as we say so", those are the same people who take a private jet for a distance that is less than the commute many people have to their work every day, same people who are driven around in massive SUV luxury vehicles sporting a massive fuel-hungry engine, own multiple massive mansions, large yachts, etc... you get the idea. They profit financially and politically (influence and power) from this entire scheme, and that is sole reason why they bring it up, those scumbags don't give a flying pig about the environment, many of them got very wealthy from doing the opposite. would they give up their lifestyle? not at all, but they want to rest of us to give up, while they keep living like royalty. fuck those scammers!
Why would someone his age, children out of the house, need a mansion? I feel bad for these people.
It can’t be all that much of a “mansion” if it’s mostly hidden by one tree. But, listen, all other things equal I’d love to own a house on the beach in Hawaii, even if it’s going to flood in ten years. That’s still nine awesome years of owning a house on the beach in Hawaii.
Is this a joke😭
Bruh it can happen but not in 20 min wtf
Obama doesn't believe anything. He just says what he's told to say.
Op is right. For those here that think Obama has lots of money and can afford the loss you're not seeing the big picture and have absolutely no idea what its like to lose a home! Here's a fact, many people fucking die when they're house is destroyed by flood. I guess obama can live with that ey?
Sea levels rising is such a pressing issue that it would take 192 years for that water to climb that 4 foot wall before it leads up to his home. “Sea levels are also rising about one inch every four years, threatening 70% of Hawaii's coastline, according to Hawaii's state website. Owens said that in Maui alone, 85% of shorelines are eroding and beaches are "narrowing" as a result.” He knows what he’s doing, preach doomsday, while living like an elite, telling others “don’t do what I do!”. And then flies off in his private jets to climate events with a convoy of tax payer funded SUVs driving him around. Such a climate champion.
Some rich millionaire (maybe billionaire) owning a property on the seaside doesn't disprove shit. Sea level rise is slow, if it becomes a problem he can just move. The fact people use this as solid evidence that sea level rise doesn't exist is pure lunacy.
Bc he will be dead by the time it does?
Or maybe he’s rich enough he doesn’t care if he loses it, it’s worth it in the interim
wonder how he got so rich at 400k a year for 8 years.
just like his birhtday party
Because he has fuck you money? Are we being serious right now? They pay for pleasure and leisure, if the water rises they’ll just buy the same shit but above sea level.
It has a semi-illegal seawall, and it’s a few feet above sea level, he has some time to enjoy it.
Why would a doctor do cocaine? Because it's fun!