I’m not usually one to partake of conspiracy theories. I consider them mental crutches for people too intellectually lazy to learn simple facts and piece them together. I mean, basically they come down to one of two positions: either the information “supplied” as the “truth” is so simple the real truth must be more complicated, or it’s so complicated the truth must be more simple. Either way, there’s no winning a debate with some one who follows that kind of circular logic.
However, something did catch my eye this morning that makes me wonder. NASA attempted to launch a satellite whose mission was specifically to measure carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. It crashed into the ocean.
Now I fully appreciate how complicated space travel is. And there are definitely accidents, just ask Iran or North Korea. The US space has had its own share of tragedies. But this is different. When we put a human into space, the task becomes infinitely more complicated, for the obvious reason that you have to worry about keeping them alive and bringing them back down. This was a simple, one-way trip, the kind the US routinely puts into orbit. Why did this one have a problem?
With the wheels rapidly coming off the global warming bus, might it be, that maybe, just maybe, the powers that be don’t want to find scientific evidence proving they’ve had their heads up their asses on global warming for the last fifteen or twenty years?
Enquiring minds want to know.