The Salt Lake and Church News - August 26th, 2026

[The Nehor]

On 9/18/2026 at 4:12 PM, Stargazer said:

No, it wouldn't. But it is virtue signaling to reprimand someone for failing to mention climate change. Which is what he did. He could simply have added a comment stating that the problem described in the OP is due to climate change. That adds to the discussion. But reprimanding Pyreaux for failing to say the proper incantation? Virtue signaling: "See how virtuous I am making sure everyone is thinking about climate change?" 

But it was likely the very first thing everyone thought of, anyway, simply because it's been done to death. 

Correction: I wasn’t reprimanding Pyreaux. I was reprimanding the Church leadership for not mentioning climate change in their statement.

I apologize for not being clear there.

[longview]

11 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Correction: I wasn’t reprimanding Pyreaux. I was reprimanding the Church leadership for not mentioning climate change in their statement.

I apologize for not being clear there.

The Church does not engage in glow-bull warming hysteria like you do. So enough with the mindless incantations.

[The Nehor]

6 hours ago, longview said:

The Church does not engage in glow-bull warming hysteria like you do. So enough with the mindless incantations.

“Glow-bull” as an insult? Are you 12?

[longview]

5 hours ago, The Nehor said:

“Glow-bull” as an insult? Are you 12?

Al Gore was plenty insulting.

[Stargazer]

On 10/3/2026 at 5:09 AM, The Nehor said:

Correction: I wasn’t reprimanding Pyreaux. I was reprimanding the Church leadership for not mentioning climate change in their statement.

I apologize for not being clear there.

Apology accepted.

But you think this fixes it. It doesn't. Mentioning climate change has become nothing more than a meaningless incantation. It's like Cato the Elder ending every speech he gave in the Roman senate with: "Furthermore, I believe that Carthage must be destroyed." Or Billie Eilish: "No-one is illegal on stolen land."

Nothing has changed, and Billie Eilish's mansion still sits on land taken from the Tongva people. And although Carthage was finally destroyed and its people enslaved, it wasn't because of Cato's incantation.  By the same token, what would mentioning climate change in the article have accomplished? It would only have prevented the climate-obsessed from complaining about its omission. Nothing more.

[The Nehor]

On 10/3/2026 at 9:42 PM, longview said:

Al Gore was plenty insulting.

Whataboutism about how childish you are?

Le sigh.

[The Nehor]

4 hours ago, Stargazer said:

Apology accepted.

But you think this fixes it. It doesn't. Mentioning climate change has become nothing more than a meaningless incantation. It's like Cato the Elder ending every speech he gave in the Roman senate with: "Furthermore, I believe that Carthage must be destroyed." Or Billie Eilish: "No-one is illegal on stolen land."

Nothing has changed, and Billie Eilish's mansion still sits on land taken from the Tongva people. And although Carthage was finally destroyed and its people enslaved, it wasn't because of Cato's incantation.  By the same token, what would mentioning climate change in the article have accomplished? It would only have prevented the climate-obsessed from complaining about its omission. Nothing more.

Correction: Clearly it also really annoys you so it accomplishes more.

I suspect the Church left it out because the Church knows that acknowledging climate change is real irks a disturbingly large portion of their membership and forces them to choose between two things they have made a large part of their identity and it hurts to deal with that kind of thing. So publishing it that way could have pushed people towards a decision point.

I have no idea how you imagine Cato’s comments were worthless. Keeping Carthage in the public’s mind was part of the reason the Third Punic War happened. I am not saying Cato’s comments were vital to that happening but it was part of a larger effort to keep that potential threat in mind.

And Billie Eilish? The conservative callout of quasi-legitimate hypocrisy to discredit her and ignore the more important “F—- ICE!” element of her message as Native Americans are being swept up and detained in ICE raids because ICE goons are so stupid and badly trained that they don’t know what tribal IDs are or they are so racist they just don’t care. ‘This person isn’t perfectly consistent in everything and is therefore bad’ while you are an apologist for government goons rounding people up without due process.

Oh, and F—- ICE. May they all end up in the gulags they built for others. Reprehensible trash humans led by reprehensible trash humans and supported and cheered on by reprehensible trash humans.

Edited October 8 by The Nehor

[longview]

On 10/8/2026 at 10:49 AM, The Nehor said:

On 10/3/2026 at 8:42 PM, longview said:

Al Gore was plenty insulting.

Whataboutism about how childish you are?

Al Gore's shenanigans was ON POINT showing how ridiculous his fake predictions were as every one of them fell flat. Even over decades his hysteria became tiresome.

[Calm]

1 hour ago, longview said:

Al Gore's shenanigans was ON POINT showing how ridiculous his fake predictions were as every one of them fell flat. Even over decades his hysteria became tiresome.

I assume you are just expressing your own opinion, but if you are making a factual claim, I would be interested in you showing what his predictions were and where they fell flat so we can judge if your claim is falling flat or not.   

Edited October 10 by Calm

[longview]

16 hours ago, Calm said:

I assume you are just expressing your own opinion, but if you are making a factual claim, I would be interested in you showing what his predictions were and where they fell flat so we can judge if your claim is falling flat or not.   

This poor girl was used in a massive propaganda offensive designed to stampede the proles into voting for a totalitarian one world dictatorship  - - - 

 

[Pyreaux]

On 10/8/2026 at 12:06 PM, The Nehor said:

I suspect the Church left it out because the Church knows that acknowledging climate change is real irks a disturbingly large portion of their membership and forces them to choose between two things they have made a large part of their identity and it hurts to deal with that kind of thing. So publishing it that way could have pushed people towards a decision point.

I might agree there is an intentional dynamic in how the Church approaches public messaging around environmental issues. Church leadership rarely uses any political phrasing or explicitly name terms like "climate change." However, the Church seems to emphasize action over rhetoric. It will ground its environmental messaging under terms like "stewardship" (like in D&C 104), framing things like wasting resources or degrading the land as a breach of a spiritual duty. Conservation resonates across all members without triggering pushback. Instead of arguing over these multi-decade causes of climate trends does less immediate good than proceeding to change how water, energy, and land are actually managed today. Enacting real, large-scale environmental action.

[The Nehor]

On 10/9/2026 at 7:00 PM, longview said:

Al Gore's shenanigans was ON POINT showing how ridiculous his fake predictions were as every one of them fell flat. Even over decades his hysteria became tiresome.

I assume you mean the New York will be underwater by 2010 prediction as that is the most common one. Which he didn’t make.

6 hours ago, longview said:

This poor girl was used in a massive propaganda offensive designed to stampede the proles into voting for a totalitarian one world dictatorship  - - - 

 

So their cunning plan was to have this girl call out the UN for failing the future in order to create a global totalitarian dictatorship that *checks notes* no one is seriously agitating for, has no support, and the UN doesn’t have the authority to create.

This is conspiracy nonsense. Only the stupidest of fundamentalist evangelical rapture enthusiasts think that all nations are eager to lay down their sovereignty. Why are you doing this?

[The Nehor]

43 minutes ago, Pyreaux said:

I might agree there is an intentional dynamic in how the Church approaches public messaging around environmental issues. Church leadership rarely uses any political phrasing or explicitly name terms like "climate change." However, the Church seems to emphasize action over rhetoric. It will ground its environmental messaging under terms like "stewardship" (like in D&C 104), framing things like wasting resources or degrading the land as a breach of a spiritual duty. Conservation resonates across all members without triggering pushback. Instead of arguing over these multi-decade causes of climate trends does less immediate good than proceeding to change how water, energy, and land are actually managed today. Enacting real, large-scale environmental action.

I think they need to be more blunt. They are worried about offending climate change deniers in their own body. Do they really need this level of coddling?

[The Nehor]

On 10/3/2026 at 9:42 PM, longview said:

Al Gore was plenty insulting.

A little. He wasn’t very good at it. He was better at it then this kind of really dumb playground insult level. What you said is Trump-level nicknaming. Sleepy Joe Biden. Lying Hillary. Childish and dumb. I mean, if you are going to insult someone put some wit into it. This is just sad.

[Calm]

23 hours ago, longview said:

This poor girl was used in a massive propaganda offensive designed to stampede the proles into voting for a totalitarian one world dictatorship  - - - 

 

And you shift again instead of demonstrating your claim. Okay, never mind. 

[longview]

On 10/10/2026 at 6:34 PM, The Nehor said:

So their cunning plan was to have this girl call out the UN for failing the future in order to create a global totalitarian dictatorship that *checks notes* no one is seriously agitating for, has no support, and the UN doesn’t have the authority to create.

On 10/11/2026 at 11:58 AM, Calm said:

And you shift again instead of demonstrating your claim. Okay, never mind. 

This is how obvious - - -

[The Nehor]

On 10/16/2026 at 11:20 AM, longview said:

This is how obvious - - -

Dr. Judith Curry? The Dr. Judith Curry who has said the Earth is warming and that human produced CO2 is the primary cause? She says it is all a hoax?

You’ve been lied to again. Stop believing the people feeding you this swill.

Oh, and she is being ignored? She has testified before Congress at least six times now, is quoted (usually in a misleading way) regularly by people in power to justify doing nothing to mitigate climate change when she does advocate for climate change mitigation measures. The measures she suggests are more moderate but she does suggest that mitigation measures should be taken.

So that is another lie from your lying friends.

She is a contrarian about how severe climate change’s effect will be but in no way suggests that it is a hoax. She is also somehow ignored while being called before Congress repeatedly and used as a source to justify not doing anything about climate change? Do you realize how stupid that makes your silly little meme created by idiots who are either willfully and deliberately stupid or are malicious deceiving those that listen to them. And you just slurp up that misinformation and pass it along like a good little drone? Why do you do this?

Do you not have any sense of dignity? Why aren’t you livid with these people who are lying to you repeatedly? I would be. Do you prefer comforting lies to reality? What is the problem here?

Edited Tuesday at 12:53 AM by The Nehor

[longview]

17 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Dr. Judith Curry? The Dr. Judith Curry who has said the Earth is warming and that human produced CO2 is the primary cause? She says it is all a hoax?

Yes. Her perspectives are MUCH higher than yours. She has been interacting with many sides and knows the whole story. Here is her review of her career (9 minutes and 25 secs) - - -

Here is an article from six years ago on California legislature attempt to control the narrative - - - https://www.frontpagemag.com/proposed-ca-legislation-would-mandate-climate-sara-dogan/

Quote

Dr. James Enstrom, an epidemiologist and researcher at UCLA, called the bill “dangerous” and “an effort to brainwash the kids.”

And Adam Houser, a staffer at the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow, argued that “this bill will only teach students a biased, one-sided view on the climate change issue: that the world is ending in 10 to 30 years because of human-made CO2.”

Houser also questioned whether the science behind Democrats’ radical plans to halt climate change is sound. “There’s a whole lot more to the story, and research from scientists like Dr. Roy Spencer, Dr. Judith Curry, Dr. William Happer, Dr. Richard Lindzen, and Dr. David Legates, who question how much of climate change is really driven by CO2 from human activity, should have just as much of a say in the curriculum as climate alarmist studies,” he told The College Fix.
 
Assemblywoman Rivas so far has not responded publicly to the criticisms of her bill. 

 

[Calm]

Quote

Here is an article from six years ago on California legislature attempt to control the narrative - - -

Politicians trying to control the narrative….where have I heard that before 

[The Nehor]

On 10/20/2026 at 1:26 PM, longview said:

Yes. Her perspectives are MUCH higher than yours. She has been interacting with many sides and knows the whole story. Here is her review of her career (9 minutes and 25 secs) - - -

Here is an article from six years ago on California legislature attempt to control the narrative - - - https://www.frontpagemag.com/proposed-ca-legislation-would-mandate-climate-sara-dogan/

 

Her perspectives are much HIGHER than mine? What does that even mean? I am in conformity with the general scientific consensus which consist of lots of people that have perspectives that are presumably HIGHER than mine and disagree with Judith Curry. So if you are appealing to her authority I can appeal to over ten times as much authority to say you are wrong. So why would you make this an appeal to authority? That is really a dumb move. Especially when the things she said don’t match with what you said she said. Are you having a stroke?

Also, nice pivot to avoid engaging what I said. Probably wise. What you said about Judith Curry saying climate change was a hoax was indefensibly wrong and stupid so you are now pretending you were actually just saying that this one person has credentials. Galaxy brained move. Does it work well in your neck of the woods? Just tell outrageously ignorant falsehoods and then when called out start talking about something else?

And another pivot to a right-wing rag that thinks teaching science in a *checks notes* science class is “indoctrination”.

More whataboutism. The chosen defense of people who do bad things and want you to instead focus on the (often imagined) bad things that other people are doing. The special favorite of Soviet propagandists. Good job Comrade!

Edited Wednesday at 08:10 PM by The Nehor

[Calm]

5 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Her perspectives are much HIGHER than mine?

She is on a mountaintop somewhere and you are not?  

[longview]

5 hours ago, The Nehor said:

And another pivot to a right-wing rag that thinks teaching science in a *checks notes* science class is “indoctrination”.

I guess you do not quite grasp the fact that she did "rub shoulders" with many scientists on all sides. She definitely has the most profound perspectives than you do. If you had sat still for 9 minutes and focused on the video you would have obtained a faint glimmer of understanding. IF you have room in your brain that is overflowing with trash.

5 hours ago, Calm said:

She is on a mountaintop somewhere and you are not?  

On 10/20/2026 at 2:49 PM, Calm said:

Politicians trying to control the narrative….where have I heard that before 

You missed the point that it was the California legislature that was forcing lock-step adherence by public schools to "teach" the glow-bull warming hysteria. All part of the effort to make as many school children into drones of the socialist state as possible.

[The Nehor]

2 hours ago, longview said:

I guess you do not quite grasp the fact that she did "rub shoulders" with many scientists on all sides. She definitely has the most profound perspectives than you do. If you had sat still for 9 minutes and focused on the video you would have obtained a faint glimmer of understanding. IF you have room in your brain that is overflowing with trash.

She did interact with many scientists She still did not say what you originally said she said. You are holding her up as an exemplar while completely misrepresenting her. That is just really really screwed up. You don’t respect her. You just use her (incorrectly) as support for your weird cultural agenda.

I respect her more than you do. I read up on her and understand her. I think she is wrong. You just lie about what she says. That is awful and you should feel bad about doing it.

2 hours ago, longview said:

You missed the point that it was the California legislature that was forcing lock-step adherence by public schools to "teach" the glow-bull warming hysteria. All part of the effort to make as many school children into drones of the socialist state as possible.

Conspiracy nonsense.

[Calm]

2 hours ago, longview said:

You missed the point that it was the California legislature that was forcing lock-step adherence by public schools to "teach" the glow-bull warming hysteria. All part of the effort to make as many school children into drones of the socialist state as possible.

Are you suggesting the California legislature is not composed of politicians?

Have you ever lived in an actual socialist state?

Quote

You missed the point that it was the California legislature that was forcing lock-step adherence by public schools to "teach" the glow-bull warming hysteria. 

Is the California legislature banning books now that differ from this agenda you say they have? (Rhetorical question, I know the answer)

Also it is more accurate to speak of the majority party or even supermajority if you want to be picky, as there are parts of California that are conservative and they do manage to elect conservative representatives.  Grew up there.  It makes for an interesting mix.

by the way, the bill didn’t pass. Odd given the legislature was so eager to get those drones up and running.  And that dang super majority.

Edited Thursday at 05:03 AM by Calm