World governments are deliberately orchestrating the refugee crisis to normalize Muslim & Western cultures because the Middle East will be inhospitable by 2050. ( conspiracy )

submitted by UnknownCitizen

I consume a significant amount of news from many sources, including a lot on the refugee crisis. For the life of me I couldn't figure out why what has been going on has been going on as long as it has. Then I saw this article earlier this month. Predictions are that even IF the recently agreed upon emissions goals are met, parts the Middle East and Africa (MENA) could be inhospitable by 2050. By 2100, large swaths of the MENA would be inhospitable to humans. Predictions are that by 2050, there could be 80 days averaging 45C (112F) and that by 2100 more than 200 days per year could reach 50C (122F).

Rather than the complete on utter chaos that would erupt from the mass migration of environmental refugees (think massive number of deaths, wars, global economic collapse), world governments are taking an 'it takes a generation' approach. Mind you, everyone has their theories, ideas and possible reasons behind all of this (which could be being used in and of themselves as motivators and catalysts in this), but we will all be dead or on our way out before the environmental crisis peaks. The next generation will find ways to integrate, ways we don't understand or agree with for our own reasons and beliefs, but they will find a way because by that time there won't be any going back. In the end, despite the tragedies occurring, we may be witnessing the coordinated and possibly now unstoppable start of the best possible outcome, given current politics and beliefs. I'd be interested to hear others thoughts on this.

bludream

Lol isreal is the bunt of this whole thing, divide and conquer. They hate Europe cause they have all they want so this is there way of destroying it. They'll eventually take the land of the Arabs and move north.

un1ty

But what if we have the technology to control the weather? What happens to the theory of anthropomorphic global warming?

Put your "weather modification hat on and think about it. There are patents galore. There are secretive frequency stations located all over the place. If we can control the weather, we can make it rain in the desert, cool the hot cities, and freeze the arctic. Alternatively, we can melt the icecaps and flood the coast.

UnknownCitizen

I don't doubt that there is some ability to do so, but the earth is big. Like really really really big. So I'm really doubtful there's a button in a bunker that says "rain" on it. Additionally, given the size of the planet, any ability to alter weather wouldn't be an on off switch. The patterns are complex and drawn out. The consequences are as well. It'd probably take significant planning and resources to coordinate a single weather event, let alone alter the planet as a whole.

un1ty

Think smaller and more localized. It's no different than recreating the super heated air found above large cities after long hot summer days - where the clouds seem to part as the pass over because of the heat. (this is a bad example)

Nazibot13

Idiot.

Kal

So let's hear your theory, genius.

Nazibot13

The middle east won't be uninhabitable by 2050.

George Soros and the Zionist Jews have deliberately orchestrated the refugee crisis to collapse Western civilization and transform European demographics. Basically white genocide.

George Soros is Jewish and he's openly funding the open border activist groups. It was just revealed in Hillary's emails that Zionist Jew Sidney Blumenthal told Hillary to destabilize Libya, and Sidney Blumenthal is on record working for George Soros. Zionist Jews have created the refugees and are openly bringing them into Europe. Every Jewish organization is lobbying in support of the refugees. Literally hundreds, if not thousands if Jewish organizations. 1300 Rabbis in America recently signed a petition in support of admitting Muslims to America... That's just one example. Israel sends African and Muslim refugees to Sweden by plane and has told the Jews of Europe to return to Israel. The Jewish Zionist owned media has been censoring migrant crime. Jewish owned Facebook, Twitter, Google, YouTube have all been censoring anti refugee content. Israel has also been supporting Isis.

Listen, look up the Greater Israel Project. Israel is depopulating Syria of Muslims because they're going to expand their borders and reclaim parts of Syria. It's called the Greater Israel Project.. I could literally go on and on. This is only a few pieces of information and I can source you any of my claims if you don't believe me.

Kal

You should have just led with this.

UnknownCitizen

Exactly! That's something I'd want to read and maybe comment on.

UnknownCitizen

Hear, Hear!

Sciency

I had not considered this, but it makes a great deal of sense. Hell, californians are fleeing north right now because of the heat and lack of water. Only one question comes to mind though: the west does not like the middle east and africa... why wouldn't they just invest in some big walls? Border security would almost certainly be cheaper and less destabilizing to the rest of the world.

UnknownCitizen

Nukes, is the short answer though the probability of things escalating that far is still low. As much as I hate it, I am considering a move myself, though not anytime soon. The fact that El Nino this year was non-existent in SoCal was pretty scary to me. We don't have water, the forests are dying, the air is getting worse again, it's not looking too great. I grew up in SoCal and I have seen the change happen right before my eyes. Though that brings to mind another conspiracy theory: Could the natural gas accident have been intentional to buffer LA from El Nino because the city wasn't prepared to handle that much rain and couldn't capture any of it anyway. The total economic cost of the last severe on in 1997 was 25 billion $.

But anyway, total security is an illusion. Security in general is more about look and pretense than it is about actual security. A man will move a mountain to feed his starving child. Isolationist strategies may work in the short term, but to stop the mass migration of hundreds of millions of people is mind boggling. We'd end up killing some of their people in the environmental migration, they'd kill some of ours, we'd kill more of there's, they'd kill more of ours. Given the proliferation of technology, weapons already in the area, both militia and government, it gets easier and easier to inflict HUGE damage with little cost. I'd venture Saudi Arabia would leverage it's new economic power to its advantage as well. Estimates are that after it's IPO, the state run oil company would be worth 2 trillion $. With control over vast energy resources, and rising economic influence, the geopolitical power of the MENA could provide big leverage to less inclined governments. The world could very well sink into a new dark age, which I think is what is trying to be avoided.

Sciency

Good points all around. Thanks for contributing some interesting conversation around here, it feels a little dead at times.

I had considered the methane leak as an intentional event, but today I actually had an interesting thought. With hordes of californians migrating, there could be some interesting shifts in neighboring states' political balances. I wonder if a more liberal voting base in the surrounding states would perhaps benefit a company/industry, by way of some more favorable canadates. I'm also pretty sure (please correct me if I'm wrong) electoral votes wouldn't change for california alongside their declining population. I haven't dug into this yet, so 'grain of salt' and all that, but it really wouldn't shock me.

One thing that really bugs me about this leak, is the obvious solution that no one seems to bring up. If you light that plume of methane on fire, the only byproducts would be CO2, water, and heat. Methane is a far more potent greenhouse gas than CO2 (86 times greater, per part, iirc). A 200 ft plume of flame would even serve as one hell of a tourist attraction. Might be able to recoup some of the losses, and get a few desalinization plants running to try and keep the local ecosystems on life-support until the atmosphere normalizes. Maybe I'm missing an obvious drawback to this idea, but this whole situation just seems fishy.

UnknownCitizen

Also, most welcome! I love these sorts of conversations, seeing how far out of the box I can go without getting detached from reality. :)

UnknownCitizen

I have actually read comments by conservatives worried that a California exodus would change their conservative states. It would take a lot to change the electoral make up, but, gerrymandering aside, the votes could move along with the people and result in little nationwide change. And yeah, I was wondering about the burn off myself and why it wasn't done. Coupled with the freak bypassing of SoCal by El Nino and the shady investigation going on in Sacramento, it looks super fishy. People don't really know how crucial Los Angeles is to the health of the nation. By numbers, it is the manufacturing hub of the country and has the first and second largest ports by far (by volume). In 2012 California pumped about 198 million barrels of oil. Los Angeles, of oil, gas and water production District 1 accounted for 26.5 million barrels of production. Total US production was around 3 billion barrels. While not a huge chunk of production, it would be a noticeable loss.The refineries have a capacity of about 1.1 million barrels per day of the nation's 18 million barrels per day. LA generates 120 billion $ of 546 billion $ per year in entertainment industry revenue (film, TV and music [including merchandise and touring]. One last fun fact: The 2015 GDP of the US was about 18 trillion dollars. The GMP of Los Angeles was 866 billion dollars. Oh, and that leaking natural gas field contains 5% of the nations natural gas. So yeah, crazy junk amiss, though I suppose there always is in a sense.

Sciency

So, I dont follow CA too closely, have there been a lot of businesses relocating along with the people? I would hate to see LA turn into a massive version of detroit. I wonder how lasting the effects of this leak will be. Anyway, I'm gonna catch some sleep, good chatting!

UnknownCitizen

That is so far off topic I can't even begin to try to draft a response. Thank you for reading the post nonetheless.

Empire_of_the_mind

The MENA region is literally rich enough to buy habitable real estate and move their population there - or build experimental, underground-type cities as has already started. There are huge swaths of land that are more habitable than the MENA region if the people need somewhere to go - adding them to already crowded nations is not a humanitarian effort.

UnknownCitizen

I'd imagine there is work being done on that too, but I haven't looked into it. I would be curious to see what impact the overhaul of Saudi Arabia's may play into that. There would be alot of money moving around and a lot more influences involved. In the end dropping the amount of money to facilitate a move of that scale would for sure cause panic and have a huge negative impact on the global economy. That sort of move would also be a generational project. I think people underestimate the amount of time, money and resources it takes to set up modern infrastructure. We have what we have today because of decades upon decades of aggregate work. I don't think the global economy can provide enough material resources to construct a new country for 400 million people. Plus, the area will still need to be inhabited to some extent due to the energy resources and oil.