This morning after i took my cold shower, had a healthy breakfast with ingredients from a local farm I found this amazing piece of paper in my postbox. Is it even legal to claim that global warming is a good thing and that plants benefit from it?
I know there is a lot of aggressive advertisement when its about voting for something here in CH, but this one is far beyond everything I saw so far. I would put this on the same level with the flat earth theory, or probably not, because they actually try to have some meaningful explanations 😛

27 comments

  3. Saying untruthful things is (unless one of the narrow exceptions like document forgery or fraud applies) not unlawful in Switzerland (or many other countries for that matter). It may however be a cause for a legal challenge to the vote itself (if the media coverage of the vote reaches a certain threshold of untruthfulness, see BGE 138 I 61, E. 7).

  5. Yes it’s legal and scientific. Try to include opinions from different type of scientists and not only the ones that are paid shills. Yes “global warming” is real, there rly isn’t a consensus though on the consequences and the degree of severity we’re currently in. This isn’t some flat earth bullshit. The earth getting too cold is a much worse problem than the other way around. If you just want to believe in it and ride ur bicycle and wear ur Birkenstocks you do you, but don’t think ur opinion is just fact.

  6. It’s the equivalent of Reddit shitposting – the people who write this of course know this is all nonsense, but it is formulated carefully to attracts maximum attention and outrage, and that’s the goal. When called out, they’ll say this is satire and shouldn’t be taken so seriously, freedom of speech, etc.

  9. That’s just some rich idiot putting the aesthetic of “science” on top of a conspiracy driven idiology without moral principles.

  10. “American millionaires making millions by spreading fear.”

    “Do you really want to get poor, have power outages, be cold during the winter?”

  12. Is there anything we could legally do to stop such morons from spreading this shit?
    Well, it would be nice if everybody reports their website at google.

  13. Whatever they can say to safeguard the status quo, they’ll say. Remember who they sided with during the pandemic?

  17. Wait, there are people who didn’t know that? Do you guys not know that rising Co2 levels lead to increased plant growth and that this effect is observable on a global scale?
    And is your ignorance to this fact so great that you can’t even imagine it to be true?

    The rising temperature has its own risks and detrimental effects – but plant growth surely benefits objectively.

    https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/carbon-dioxide-fertilization-greening-earth

    https://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/12222

    https://www.losarbolesmagicos.es/2022/08/22/rising-carbon-dioxide-is-greening-the-earth-but-its-not-all-good-news/

    https://www.carbonbrief.org/rising-co2-has-greened-worlds-plants-and-trees/

    It’s a disputable if this effect is positive for humans or negative for humans – as all evaluations about „positive“ and „negative“ are purely subjective – but that rising Co2 levels actually do increase Plant Growth should be common knowledge and I am surprised by not only how many people here didn’t know this, but even outright call it a „lie“ without so much as a 5 second google search.

  19. My guess is this scientifically true…for normal Climate Change, which is like a few degree in centuries or thousands of years.
    Then they took that Statement about natural Changes in Climate, and have the audacity to use as a reason why our CO2 infused rapid Change is „good“….

    Aren’t there Laws against such misinformation?

  20. Is this the German version of that mailbox spam in French posted a couple days ago? The one that claimed climate change was American propaganda?

    LOL That shit was a riot to read!

  23. I feel like this is so carefully worded to be just not blatantly wrong. Of course, it’s designed that every interpretation leads to wrong conclusions.

    >Die nach fünfhundertjähriger Kaltzeit

    It was like 0.1-0.2°C colder than the 1500 years before that. That’s their definition of Kaltzeit apparently.

    >seit etwa zweihundert Jahren wirkende

    Yes, roughly since the industrialisation

    >allmähliche Erwärmung

    There’s no strict definition of “allmählich”. Okay, we’ve overcompensated the “Kaltzeit” by a factor 10, but let’s call it allmählich

    >fördert den Pflanzenwuchs

    I mean, I guess? Ticino is fighting with some palm trees which suddenly can grow here. Thanks, global warming.

    >und die Nahrungsproduktion.

    So vague that it’s hard to judge

    > Sie stellt überhaupt keine Bedrohung dar.

    That’s wrong, but we could call this a subjective opinion if we are going to play the climate denier’s advocate

    >Und CO2 ist der wichtigste Baustein aller Pflanzen.

    I mean… yes. Heat is fundamental for humans to live, but please don’t throw me into a volcano.

  24. This is just your regular conscious SVP misinformation. Hard to believe I’ve ever liked their opinion. 🤐 And I agree it should be illegal for a political party to spread misinformation to this extent right before a voting period.

  25. Political misinformation needs to become illegal now, otherwise we’ll have a big problem, especially with the advances AI is making ib generating text.

  27. Okay, the part about the plants is actually correct – hence the the term “greenhouse-gases” for CO2. That increased CO2 levels is no problem, is a bit another story though of course.

    After all, it is “climate change” and not “climate destruction”. We don’t destroy the climate with elevated CO2 levels, we change it. Warmer climate means that previously habitable areas could become un-habitable and also previously un-habitable areas could become habitable.

Leave a Reply