Environment - Page 3 of 4

EU–Mercosur Agreement – benefit or threat?

How do you assess the plan to ratify the EU–Mercosur trade agreement, taking into account economic gains and controversies around agriculture and pesticides?

The EU–Mercosur trade deal has divided public opinion and politicians for years. On the one hand, opening the market to 260 million consumers from South America would mean huge opportunities for European exporters, especially in the automotive and technology industries. On the other hand, farmers warn of a flood of cheap meat and soybeans produced with pesticides banned in Europe. Critics even speak of “double standards” and a betrayal of European agriculture, while environmentalists warn that the agreement will accelerate the destruction of the Amazon. Free trade supporters counter that the EU economy cannot afford isolation. So is this deal a strategic opportunity, or an ecological and social trap?

04/09/2025

Rockefellers and Gates – philanthropy for the good of humanity or a hidden health agenda?

How do you assess the influence of the Rockefeller family, and currently the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, on modern medicine and global health policy?

The influence of the Rockefeller family and today’s Gates Foundation on global health has been sparking debate for decades. On one hand, their philanthropy led to the creation of research institutes, global epidemic control programs, and the founding of the WHO, which many see as the foundation of modern medicine. On the other hand, critics argue that this philanthropy is not selfless – it is tied to the interests of pharmaceutical corporations, the promotion of selected therapies at the expense of natural methods, and the centralization of control over health policy. Conspiracy theories even claim that they are behind the monopolization of public health, allegedly proven by the billions in vaccine profits. Is this genuine philanthropy or an agenda hidden under the mask of charity?

03/09/2025

Forced global warming – is it worth reducing emissions?

Do you think reducing greenhouse gas emissions makes sense, given that even after a complete halt in emissions, Earth’s temperature will remain elevated for hundreds of years (the so-called “forced global warming”)?

Forced global warming is a concept fueling debate about whether fighting greenhouse gas emissions makes sense. Since even a total stop in emissions won’t halt rising temperatures for centuries, many wonder if reductions are meaningful or merely tools for politicians and corporations. Some argue that every cut lowers the risk of irreversible climate disasters and glacier melt, others point to the need for CO₂ removal technologies. Conspiracy theories increasingly claim the emissions narrative is only about imposing new taxes and global control. Are we really fighting for the climate, or for power over people?

30/08/2025

Antarctica and its resources after 2048

Which scenario do you consider most likely after 2048, when the Madrid Protocol banning resource extraction will be revised?

After 2048, Antarctica may become the stage of the greatest geopolitical game of the 21st century. The Madrid Protocol protects it from exploitation, but soon world powers will be tempted by its riches: oil, gas, coal, and above all nearly 70% of the planet’s fresh water locked in ice. For some, it is a treasure that must remain untouched; for others – the key to humanity’s survival. Advocates of extraction argue the world cannot afford the luxury of “frozen resources,” while opponents warn of ecological apocalypse. Conspiracy theories claim corporations and armies have already divided the continent’s map. Will Antarctica remain protected, or become the spoils of a global race?

30/08/2025

Renewable energy – salvation, illusion, or control?

Do you think renewable energy is the future of global energy?

Renewable energy is a topic that heats up global debates like burning coal. Some see it as the only chance to stop the climate crisis and break free from oil and gas dependency, while others warn it’s an illusion – panels and turbines will never replace stable sources like nuclear or gas. Critics point out that the green transition increasingly smells of corporate interests, where under the banner of “saving the planet,” new markets are conquered, and control over citizens grows. In the background, conspiracy theories emerge – about deliberately steering the energy crisis to force societies into “green dependence.” Is it real salvation, or a grand deception? Take part in the poll and decide!

26/08/2025

Should Ukraine attack targets deep inside Russia?

Do you think that Ukraine, defending itself against Russian aggression, should carry out attacks deep into Russian territory?

Ukraine’s attacks on targets deep inside Russia are one of the most controversial issues of the war, dividing public opinion and experts. Supporters of this strategy argue that it is not only a natural right to self-defense, but also the only real way to weaken the Russian war machine. Critics warn, however, that crossing this line could lead to uncontrollable escalation and even trigger World War III. There is also an economic aspect – striking oil and gas pipelines would harm not only Russia, but also Europe, which depends on these supplies. Some voices also claim that it is not Ukraine making the decisions, but the West dictating the course of the war. So is Kyiv fighting for its own survival, or is it carrying out someone else’s plan? Cast your vote in the poll and decide where the boundary of self-defense lies.

26/08/2025