Poisoning the minds of young people
14 responses | 0 likes
Started by metmike - Aug. 14, 2023, 8:45 p.m.

Montana judge hands young plaintiffs significant victory in landmark climate trial    


Judge rules in favor of young activists in Montana climate change trial


 ‘Game-changer’: judge rules in favor of young activists in US climate trial

Sixteen young plaintiffs had alleged the Montana state government had violated their right to a healthy environment



As an environmentalist and atmospheric scientist for 42 years, devoted to developing the minds of young people thru the game of chess the past 27 years (coached 4,100 at 5 schools and still there) the saddest thing of all is to see them poison the minds of young people. Scaring them about a completely fake climate crisis being used to empower politicians/governments, enrich crony capitalism and increase media ratings by sensationalizing. 

The solutions, like wind turbines and electric cars are actually whats wrecking the planet. Killing birds/bats/whales. Destroying ecosystems and landscapes. Tearing up the earth for raw materials to get unreliable, diffuse and expensive energy. 

Replacing the only authentic green energy.........fossil fuels that are greening up the planet and increasing crop yields and food production by 26% via authentic science, PHOTOSYNTHESIS. I guess they don't teach that in the classrooms anymore.

Replacing A well developed energy delivery system that has not only rescued the planet from very low levels of essential CO2 but also lifted up billions of people from poverty and blessed us with most of the conveniences that we cherish the most.

7 years ago,  I was talking to a large group of 5th graders at Oak Hill Elementary school who were studying weather in their SCIENCE class. They invited  me to come  to give a presentation about weather and climate.

I told them about how the CO2 emissions from fossil fuels were greening up the planet. Then I explained how photosynthesis works. The SCIENCE teacher said out loud "Wow, I never thought of that!!"

This is a really good school too!

Not much I can do about it except share the authentic science and truth as an atmospheric scientist and practicing environmentalist.

The last 30 years have featured the best weather/climate for most life on this planet in 1,000 years, the last time it was this warm(not the bs warmest in 125,000 years).  And the highest beneficial CO2 levels in over a million years. That one is true

And yes, we caused it and much of the +1 deg. C of warming. 



Therealenvironmental crisis's/insects dying-dead zones-aquifers drying up-plastics in the ocean-landfills/trash-over consumption of natural resources-REAL pollution in the air/soil/water-WIND TURBINES (metmike is a PRACTICING environmentalist): April 2019



Another secret about fossil fuels: Haber Bosch process-fertilizers feeding the planet using natural gas-doubling food production/crop yields. September 2019


                Energy transition is a hoax            

                            Started by metmike - April 15, 2023, 5:50 p.m.  


Charles Payne on the economy and in particular, inflation: Biden's intentional war on fossil fuels energy disaster started by Obama. Why anti environmental and bird/bat killing wind and solar can NEVER come close to replacing fossil fuels. The cost = 433 Trillion!.  Government forcing anti environmental wind/solar on the market. Stifling new investments in crude and natural gas.  2022

Life without petroleum based products: 6,000 products made with petroleum.  Killing Coal. Fossil fuels and fertilizer. Biden praises high gasoline prices.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/84689/     2022


All those articles above (I have 100 more) are based on rock solid principles in physics, science/climate and energy. Sadly, our young people are being taught the complete opposite in many cases......junk science and lies. They are being intentionally scared and used for the agenda of some pretty pathetic people who are exploiting fake climate crisis religion to self enrich. And others that WANT to believe (but should know better) because their fake message is "saving the planet".

Who could be against saving the planet? Gee, anybody for saving the planet has my support. In fact, we must support them because if we don't the human race will be wiped out and we will lose the entire planet!!!

Really? Step back and take a look. The planet has NEVER been greener the past 3,000,000 years. All animals eat plants or something that ate plants and they, including humans have never been doing better during that time. .........with some exceptions, like coral reefs. Which they cherry pick and focus on while completelyu ignoring the other 99% of life forms, especially all plants that prefer it like this or even a bit warmer yet, compared to 100 years ago.

Ironically, the solutions are WRECKING the planet and will destroy our economy as well as cheap, reliable energy for poor people to help lift them out of poverty.

The benefits to replacing fossil fuels(impossible to get close to 50%-half the food in the world comes from fossil fuel made synthetic fertilizer) would go to only around .00001% of the population. The rest of us get hurt, including having our intelligence stolen!

Let me introduce you to one of the fellas/industries that benefits the most:

By metmike - Aug. 14, 2023, 9:34 p.m.
Like Reply

The leader of climate religion for our young people has been Greta. 

She is no doubt sincere but constantly spouts junk science, alarmist nonsense and is completely sponsored by the United Nations that uses her for their ongoing scheme, after they hijacked climate science in the late 1980's. Creating the IPCC which literally REWROTE climate history to wipe out the Medieval Warm Period 1,000 years ago.

 Finally a real expert telling us the truth about Covid19: Greta on CNN. Scaring and converting children into the climate crisis cult.  Eco-anxiety in children. Greta controlled as the United Nation's climate activist puppet. Failed predictions of the UN and past climate crisis religion high priests, like Al Gore. Showing the truth with actual data/observations vs telling people to listen to the fake science. May 2020. https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/52100/

An authentic climate optimum for life on this planet. 



Was the Medieval WARM Period real?

See for yourself below.

For the Medieval Warm Period compared to today below:

Red balloons showed it was warmer.

Blue was colder than today(in that study)

Green was wetter/more precip

Yellow was drier




If you go to the link below, you can hit those individual balloons and get each individual study:





Over 100 studies from the Medieval Warm Period, most of which show the planet was this warm or warmer 1,000 years ago. It was also this warm 2,000 years ago during the Roman Warm Period and also just over 3,000 years ago, during the Minoan Warm period.
Medieval Warm Period Project:

MWP-CWP Qualitative Temperature Differentials - CO2 Science

Figure Description: The distribution of Level 2 Studies that allow one to determine whether peak Medieval Warm Period temperatures were warmer than (red), equivalent ...

Where did the data from the bar graphs above come from so that we know that this is the authentic science vs the one that the MSM and dems describe with the fake climate crisis(where they can't show the data to prove)?
List of Scientists Whose Work We Cite:
List of Research Institutions Associated With the Work We Cite

They've been wrong every year about the absurd, dire predictions and it's extremely annoying to authentic atmospheric scientists, like metmike to witness our field corrupted so badly. 

Melting glaciers reveal lost mountain pass and artifacts used by Vikings    


In recent years, climate change has caused mountain glaciers to melt away, revealing well-preserved markers from different periods in history beneath. This is what happened in Lendbreen, Norway.

They also found evidence of a permanent shelter on the pass. The pass was used for 700 years.“The start around AD 300 was a time when local settlement activity was picking up,” said James H. Barrett, study co-author and program partner, in a statement. “When the use of the pass intensified around AD 1000, during the Viking Age, it was a time of increased mobility, political centralisation and growing trade and urbanisation in Northern Europe.”


It's doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand that evidence of people living for hundreds of years underneath recently melting ice proves that it had to BE WARMER.

Actually, it doesn't take a mainstream climate scientist to apply common sense in order to understand this because mainstream climate science hijacked climate science and REWROTE climate history to wipe out the inconvenient Medieval Warm Period, so guys like Jeff Beradelli can state junk science, like "this is the warmest in 100,000 years.

Here's what they(the IPCC) actually did:


The IPCC writes the fake climate crisis bible with its regular reports and the followers of the climate crisis religion believe every bit of the junk science. 


The Medieval Warm Period WAS global not the absurd defense/claim that it was just one region of northern Europe  and somehow lasted for hundreds of years and didn't impact the rest of the planet.

Ask yourself how the Vikings were living in Greenland and growing some cold season crops for several hundred years in regions under ice right now if it wasn't warmer than this during the Medieval Warm Period?

Did climate kill Viking farmers in Greenland or was it something else?


For about 400 years centered around 1200 AD, Viking farmers lived in two colonies in Greenland, growing a few crops and raising herds of cattle and sheep.  As many as 2500 Vikings may have inhabited the two colonies before they disappeared.

Conventional wisdom says that they died out as the climate got colder after the end of the Medieval Warm Period, capped by a huge eruption in Indonesia on Lombok Island in 1257 AD that is ranked the most powerful in the last 7000 years by geologists, according to a recent article in Smithsonian magazine.  Large volcanic eruptions are known to cause significant cooling of climate over several years due to reflection of sunlight back to space from small sulfuric acid drops lofted high into the atmosphere during the eruption.  You can read more about this fascinating history at


They discovered Greenland during a time known as the Medieval Warm Period, which lasted from about 900 to 1300. Sea ice decreased during those centuries, so sailing from Scandinavia to Greenland became less hazardous. Longer growing seasons made it feasible to graze cattle, sheep and goats in the meadows along sheltered fjords on Greenland’s southwest coast.


Ancient Greenland was much warmer than previously thought

New knowledge helps researchers understand how Greenland's ice sheet responds to warming


Published June 4 in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, the study included contributions from collaborators at Dartmouth College.

People might be surprised to see how today's frigid Greenland looked during the last two interglacial periods. Today, northwest Greenland hovers in the 30s and low 40s Fahrenheit and weathers snowstorms in summer. But average summer temperatures in the early Holocene (8,000 to 11,000 years ago) and Last Interglacial (116,000 to 130,000 years ago) climbed well into the 50s.

During the Last Interglacial, global sea levels increased by 15 to 30 feet, largely due to thinning of Greenland and Antarctica's ice sheets. But now Northwestern's team believes northern Greenland's ice sheet experienced stronger warming than previously thought, which could mean that Greenland is more responsible for that sea-level rise.


They use climate models that have equations that give CO2 42% more forcing than it's really causing.



 "The  IPCC  Fifth  Assessment Report predicted 0.508±0.102 Wm−2RF resulting  from  this  CO2 increase,  42%  more  forcing than actually observed. The lack of quantitative long-term global OLR studies may be permitting inaccu-racies to persist in general circulation model forecasts  of the effects of rising CO2  or other greenhouse gasses."

Claiming that these heat waves that suddenly emerged explain all the missing heat for 30 year is just confirmation bias/wanting to be right because the missing heat has already been found..........the absolute proof above shows that the wrong mathematical equations have been exaggerating the amount of heat from CO2 by 42%.


The complete lack of acknowledging this profound measurement, then using it to adjust the models to reality(which is what the scientific method demands)  shows that the models are truly political tools. 



Sadly, this is not much different than the political divide in the US and belief that Trump won the election by the majority of Rs. People that are convinced in something that isn't so who interpret all information so that it tells them what they want to believe. The ANTI scientific method. 

Instead of recognizing the true amount of contribution from climate change based on authentic science, they cherry pick every extreme and use it to amplify the real amount from climate change.


The GoldenRule

 Considering the substantial confusion in the media about this critical issue, let me provide the GOLDENRULE OF CLIMATE EXTREMES. Here it is:

The more extreme a climate or weather record is, the greater the contribution of natural variability.

Or to put it a different way, the larger or more unusual an extreme, the higher proportion of the extreme is due to natural variability.   






By metmike - Aug. 26, 2023, 6 p.m.
Like Reply

How Science is Done These Days



This is the science that they forced a retraction on because of peer review corruption/agenda.

RETRACTED ARTICLE: A critical assessment of extreme events trends in times of global warming



This is why they did it:

A critical assessment of extreme events trends in times of global warming


This article reviews recent bibliography on time series of some extreme weather events and related response indicators in order to understand whether an increase in intensity and/or frequency is detectable. The most robust global changes in climate extremes are found in yearly values of heatwaves (number of days, maximum duration and cumulated heat), while global trends in heatwave intensity are not significant. Daily precipitation intensity and extreme precipitation frequency are stationary in the main part of the weather stations. Trend analysis of the time series of tropical cyclones show a substantial temporal invariance and the same is true for tornadoes in the USA. At the same time, the impact of warming on surface wind speed remains unclear. The analysis is then extended to some global response indicators of extreme meteorological events, namely natural disasters, floods, droughts, ecosystem productivity and yields of the four main crops (maize, rice, soybean and wheat). None of these response indicators show a clear positive trend of extreme events. In conclusion on the basis of observational data, the climate crisis that, according to many sources, we are experiencing today, is not evident yet. It would be nevertheless extremely important to define mitigation and adaptation strategies that take into account current trends.

By metmike - Aug. 26, 2023, 6:52 p.m.
Like Reply

    Erin Wimera


        August 25, 2023 4:52 pm


Don’t forget that the article was retracted because its asertions were not backed by any evidence. Instead of arguing about the minutiae of climate science, go outside and pay attention.
There are 3 sorts of people in the world;
Those that make things happen(that is the fossil fuel industry)
Those that let things happen (that is you lot)
Those who say, “shit, what happened” (that is you lot when the shit hits the fan)
Then there are those who don’t make things happen, but can’t stop them happening,
but will be prepared when they happen. (and I am not talking about a bunker stacked with cans of baked beans)




    Mike Maguire


                Reply to             Erin Wimera        

        August 26, 2023 3:47 pm


“Those that let things happen (that is you lot)”

Thanks Erin!
These are things that we WANT TO HAPPEN!

You like feeding humans, correct?
You like a booming biosphere and greening planet, correct?
You like less violent tornadoes correct?
You like less drought, correct?
You like climate optimums for most life on this planet, correct?
You would like life to have closer to the optimal level of CO2, correct?

Heat waves are 1 Deg. C warmer but cold still kills 10 times more humans and 200 times more life.
Sea levels are rising at just over 1 inch/decade.

“Those who say, “shit, what happened” (that is you lot when the shit hits the fan)”

The more fake green energy we mandate/impose on society in the form of anti-environmental, shitty wind and batteries to get diffuse, unreliable, bird/bat/whale killing, landscape and ecosystem destroying (and Doppler radar interference) that tear up the earth for raw materials, that end up in the landfill 25 years later the more SHIT hits the fan defined with authentic laws of science, physics, energy and economics.

Your shit and fan are defined using political agenda, crony capitalism, corrupted science, misled, zealot/religious environmentalism and dishonest media.

Step back for a second and put on the critical thinking cap.
If CO2 is killing the planet, then why does it respond by massively greening up?
Observations always beat busted, too warm models using mathematical equations to TRY to project the future(which are political tools).

When models use the law of photosynthesis and observations, looky, looky what they come up with:


You do want that to happen, correct?

"The paper’s authors reviewed more than 250 published articles that have used satellite data, modeling, and field observations, to understand the causes and consequences of global greening. Among the key results, the authors noted that on a global scale greening can be attributed to the increase of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Rising levels of carbon dioxide increase the rate of photosynthesis and growth in plants."


By metmike - Aug. 27, 2023, 5:11 p.m.
Like Reply
By metmike - Aug. 27, 2023, 5:19 p.m.
Like Reply

Climate crisis? There is NO climate crisis@ClimateThere

The warming effect of each molecule of CO2 declines as its concentration increases        


Climate scientists have determined, and both sides agree, that the warming effect of each molecule of CO2 decreases significantly (logarithmically) as its concentration increases. This is one reason why there was no runaway greenhouse warming when the concentration of CO2 was approaching 20 times that of today. This inconvenient fact, important though it is, is kept very well hidden and is rarely mentioned, for it undermines the theory of future catastrophic climate change. Diminishing returns apply.

A more detailed description of the chart for the physics aficionados is provided here by Dr. William Happer:

“The blue curve shows how the thermal radiation flux Z(C) from Earth to space changes with the concentration C of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere.  This example is for a temperate, summertime latitude.   C is measured in parts per million (ppm) of all atmospheric molecules.   At the current value of the CO2 concentration, about C = 400 ppm, the flux is Z(400 ppm) = 277 Watts per square meter (W/m^2).  If all the CO2 could be removed from Earth’s atmosphere, so C = 0, but there were no changes in the concentrations of the remaining greenhouse gases (water vapor, ozone, methane and nitrous oxide) and no changes in the atmospheric temperature profile, the flux would be larger, Z (0 ppm) = 307 Watts (W/m^2), shown by the blue dot on the vertical axis of the graph. Adding the greenhouse gas CO2 diminishes the flux to space, very rapidly for the first few parts per million of CO2, as one can see from the blue curve. But as more CO2 is added a law of diminishing returns comes into play. The blue curve is almost flat for current concentrations of CO2, so the greenhouse effect is very insensitive to changes in CO2 concentrations. In the jargon of radiative transfer, the greenhouse effect is said to be “saturated.”

The vertical red lines show the decrease of flux to space caused by successive increases of the CO2 concentration C by 50 ppm increments. The increments are so small that they need to be multiplied by a factor of 100 to be clearly visible on the graph.  Except for concentrations C that are almost zero, every doubling of CO2 concentrations decreases the radiation to space by 3 W. For example, the first red bar show that increasing C from 50 ppm to 100 ppm decreases the radiation to space by 300/100 W/m^2 = 3 W/m^2.” 

                Source(s): Wijngaarden-Happer 2020, Dependence of Earth's Thermal Radiation on Five Most Abundant Greenhouse Gases

        Source(s): Happer 2021 Personal Communications

By metmike - Aug. 27, 2023, 7:56 p.m.
Like Reply

Tony Heller@TonyClimate

The percent of the US to have reached 95F (35C) this year so far, is eleventh lowest on record since 1895#ClimateScam


By metmike - Aug. 27, 2023, 8:26 p.m.
Like Reply

Experts sound alarm over concerning ‘propaganda’ found in public school curriculum: ‘It’s evil more than it is stupid’


Videos denying climate science approved by Florida as state curriculum

Prager University Foundation’s animations cast doubt over renewable energy and liken climate activists to Nazis



How dare they try to fight indoctrination of young people into the the fake climate crisis religion by showing them authentic science and educate them about energy based on physical laws, instead of fake environmental/green junk science.

How dare they teach children critical thinking and how to stand up for the truth!

"Get back in that classroom and be petrified!"

"There's a climate crisis and we're destroying the planet. You must do everything we say or the planet will be lost."

Never mind that the planet is greening up from beneficial CO2 and most life would like it a bit warmer than this still.  Deniers telling you that, like metmike at at MarketForum are evil.

Big oil must be paying him a lot of money to say these evil things.  He must not care about the planet like we do!

Actually, it's the complete, 180 degree opposite. What they claim is happening here is what THEY have been doing successfully to brainwash young people with junk science for 2 decades. 

We do care about the planet. It's wind turbines and batteries that are wrecking it!!!

Fossil fuels are the ONLY real green energy.


By metmike - Aug. 27, 2023, 8:50 p.m.
Like Reply

Florida schools ‘hijacked by the left’ turn to anti-climate cartoons

Florida’s Department of Education approves classroom use of videos produced by a conservative group that denies climate change.


Truth: “Young kids are being taught climate hysteria,” Streit said in an interview. “They’re hearing that the world is coming to an end, and we think that there needs to be a healthy balance."

PragerU’s videos use talking points common among global warming skeptics to frame climate science and policy. Many of the videos attack renewable energy sources such as solar and wind.

An eight-minute video, “Poland: Ania’s Energy Crisis,” exemplifies how PragerU introduces climate denialism to children by subtly attacking established science and the people concerned about global warming."


Gee, what could be wrong with mainstream climate science, especially wind energy?


                Wind turbines killing whales too

                27 responses |        

                Started by metmike - Jan. 13, 2023, 10:07 p.m.            



"And the solution was to get rid of the sources which were greening up the planet and the  cause for the booming biosphere and massive food increases for all animals.

replace it with anti environmental, anti green, anti science, anti physics, anti economical wind turbines and batteries that are wrecking the planet  and killing birds, bats and whales. Tearing up the earth for raw materials, destroying landscapes/habitats/ecosystems.

The tops of wind turbines close to NWS Doppler radar sites are messing up critical radar signatures.

The monstrosities lasted  20 years then the blades went into landfills and had to be replaced.

All to get diffuse, unreliable, costly energy. Subsidized with our tax dollars and mandated.

Do you know how idiotic we will look for being so easily mislead with convincing sounding junk science?

Bamboozled by crony capitalists, bought and paid for politicians with agendas, biased scientists, dishonest media and misled environmentalists."

By metmike - Aug. 27, 2023, 10:32 p.m.
Like Reply

Speaking of Prager U, they are a wonderful source for authentic science and the truth.


Earlier this year, I featured one of the people that makes videos they show on their site. Look how I described it.

                Re: Re: Re: Energy transition is a hoax            

                            By metmike - April 18, 2023, 2:41 p.m.            


"This might be the best interview/explanations I've ever heard."

The Full Alex Epstein: the Moral Case for Fossil Fuels, Renewable Energy, and Green Deceptions



Great for the state of Florida for fighting against the REAL evil sources who have hijacked climate science and are indoctrinating our young people into fake climate crisis religion!

By metmike - Aug. 27, 2023, 11:47 p.m.
Like Reply

I can't stress enough, that people watch the video's for adults from this source on the fake climate crisis that they claim is evil for stating the truth on authentic science. That is, if you want to be enlightened by speakers with solid credentials.

I don't agree with all their videos on other topics but they nailed almost everything on climate and energy. 

 The Real Climate Crisis

Alex EpsteinAlex Epstein


Fossil Fuels: The Big Picture

Alex EpsteinAlex Epstein


Why You Should Love Fossil Fuel

Alex EpsteinAlex Epstein


Fossil Fuels: Greener than You Think

Alex EpsteinAlex Epstein


Do 97% of Climate Scientists Really Agree?

Alex EpsteinAlex Epstein


What's the Deal with the Green New Deal?

Alex EpsteinAlex Epstein


Can We Rely on Wind and Solar Energy?

Alex EpsteinAlex Epstein


Can Climate Models Predict Climate Change?

Will HapperWill Happer


Climate Change: What Do Scientists Say?

Richard LindzenRichard Lindzen


Climate Change: What's So Alarming?

Bjorn LomborgBjorn Lomborg


Is Climate Change Our Biggest Problem?

Bjorn LomborgBjorn Lomborg


The Paris Climate Agreement Won't Change the Climate

Bjorn LomborgBjorn Lomborg


Are Electric Cars Really Green?

Bjorn LomborgBjorn Lomborg


 Is There Really a Climate Emergency?

Steve KooninSteve Koonin


Confessions of an Environmentalist

Brian GittBrian Gitt


What's Wrong with Wind and Solar?

Mark MillsMark Mills


How Much Energy Will the World Need?

Mark MillsMark Mills


Do We Have to Destroy the Earth to Save It?

Michael ShellenbergerMichael Shellenberger


The Truth about CO2

Patrick MoorePatrick Moore


Why I Left Greenpeace

Patrick MoorePatrick Moore


What They Haven't Told You about Climate Change

Patrick MoorePatrick Moore


Trees Are the Answer

Patrick MoorePatrick Moore


How Dangerous Is Nuclear Waste?

James MeigsJames Meigs


Nuclear Energy: Abundant, Clean, and Safe

Michael ShellenbergerMichael Shellenberger


 The Great Texas Freeze of 2021

Jason IsaacJason Isaac


What is Crony Capitalism?

Jay CostJay Cost


The Best Time to Be Alive

Marian TupyMarian Tupy



Added: The videos below are NOT about climate and demonstrate that this entity is very political. However, that's exactly what I've been saying about climate science.

Climate science was hijacked for political agenda by the left. In THIS case, the right (PragerU) is correcting the left's junk science and fake climate crisis with authentic science and energy principles which are the ones that should be taught to children in schools and used by the world to make it better.

As readers know here, I don't affiliate with the right or the left, just science, truth and authentic facts.


Russian Collusion and the Death of Journalism

Ashley RindsbergAshley Rindsberg


What Happened in Charlottesville?

Steve CortesSteve Cortes


Lying Liars

Tim PoolTim Pool


By metmike - Aug. 28, 2023, 8:28 a.m.
Like Reply

I added an additional thought on PragerU that bears repeating because it defines the entire problem. 

PragerU has many, many more videos besides those on climate that clearly demonstrate a right based political ideology. 

They are VERY political! However, that's exactly what I've been saying about climate science.

Climate science was hijacked for political agenda by the left. In THIS case, the right (PragerU) is correcting the left's junk science and fake climate crisis with authentic science and energy principles which are the ones that should be taught to children in schools and used by the world to make it better.

As readers know here, I don't affiliate with the right or the left, just science, truth and authentic facts.





Neither political party has a franchise on the truth.

If you believe one party all the time......................you will believe in lies some of the time.



"The trick is being able to tell the difference between the truth and the lies, then picking the truth from BOTH parties and rejecting their lies.

What makes that incredibly difficult to do is that the stronger your affiliation to a party is,  the more blindly you embrace all the tenets of their belief system!


                Captured Brains            

                            Started by joj - Aug. 18, 2023, 8:30 a.m. 



By metmike - Aug. 30, 2023, 2:15 a.m.
Like Reply
By metmike - Aug. 31, 2023, 9:29 a.m.
Like Reply

Bjorn Lomborg@BjornLomborg


Study shows that people who possess

By metmike - Sept. 8, 2023, 3:01 p.m.
Like Reply