Questions on a climate argument

Faith & Science Conversation
,
1

I don’t know much about Eric Moutsos, but I keep getting sent arguments from him by a friend. This most recent one I was sent,

https://x.com/realericmoutsos/status/2094114997177901358

has hit a bit of a nerve in myself. As you may know, there has been recent catastrophic flooding in Nepal. The Prime Minister has asked for more action on climate change, as the flooding was attributed to a melting glacier. Eric Moutsos starts his argument with several inflammatory statements on climate change. He mocks requests to cut back on emissions on a personal level, saying (sarcastically) how he “felt bad” about using oil to power his AC or to eat beef later that night because “the cow farted 20,000 times in its lifetime.” After this, he claims that the news agencies are “all pushing climate change at the same time” as evidence to say that a conspiracy is occurring. The major point in his argument is that the different news outlets reported a 33 missing person statistic in different ways (such as saying that 33 British folks were missing, or 33 missing Americans, or missing people from 33 countries), which he says is obvious proof that climate change is a scam and that forced climate lockdowns are coming. He seems to have a lot of unstated assumptions involved, as he mentions a “predator Satanic master class that controls almost everything and wants 95% of the population dead” casually and with no evidence and/or explanation as to what he meant.

I try to be a good friend and will occasionally view what my friend sends me, but this one particular guy always strikes a nerve in me. He seems to expect that his audience already has a great deal of the background context arguments in mind when watching his videos (in one video he shows clips on the flooding in Idaho with the caption “There’s no weather warfare in little old Idaho!” and essentially says nothing but stare at the camera as he just shows people’s reporting of the weather).

I guess my question is, how does the 33 value prove anything? Does anyone have any more context on these arguments than I do?

2

Sounds you are fed serious conspiracy stuff. I would let this kind of claims be without investing time to correcting false claims because such conspiracy people seldom listen to sound facts.

It is of course worse if the person is a friend that you want to keep as a friend. Trying to correct false claims may lead to loosing the friendship. If that is the consequence, you might ask the question if the friendship was ever true friendship.

2 Likes
3

Well, I say “friend” but they are actually a relative of mine. I didn’t want to reveal too much of their information but generally we get along very well except on grounds of conspiracy stuff (which I try to avoid to the best of my abilities).