by Peter Koenig for The Saker Blog
Today, Monday 23 September, the UN in New York is hosting a special meeting on Climate Change. There were massive predominantly youth demonstrations of tens of thousands around the globe, many of them in New York, one of them led by Greta Thunberg, the Swedish 16-year-old climate activist, who is sponsored mostly by Soros and his clan to travel around the world and address world leaders to act on climate chance – preventing climate change, stop climate change. Others with the same objective, called “Friday’s for the Future”, originated in Germany, students striking every Friday – meaning literally not going to school, on behalf of stopping climate change.
The worldwide spill-over is apparently enormous. On Saturday some youth groups met with UN Secretary General, António Guterres, telling him that Climate Change is the world’s political issue number ONE. Mr. Guterres did not contradict, yes, it was a key problem and had to be addressed and world leaders needed to commit to take actions. The UN General assembly will further dedicate part of its program to Climate Change.
Wait a minute – Climate Change number ONE? – How about PEACE? – Nobody thought about that? Not even Guterres, whose mandate it is to lead the world body towards conflict solutions that bring PEACE – this is the very mandate that the UN has been founded on. Not climate, but PEACE.
Have these western kids, mostly from elite ranks, been brainwashed to the extent that they do not realize that the world has other priorities, namely stop the indiscriminate killing, by never ending US-launched and instigated wars around the globe?
Do they not realize that their brothers and sisters in Syria, Yemen, Palestine, Iraq, Sudan, Afghanistan, and in many more places of conflict and extreme poverty, are being killed left and right by the US-NATO killing machine, by famine, by war-related diseases, and by US vassal states, the very nations from where they, the rich kids kids, come to protest against climate change, but NOT against war? When do they wake up to reality? Maybe never, or when it’s too late – when even they are being bombed by the never-ending neoliberal greed-driven wars.
Do they know that these wars and conflicts, carried out directly or through proxies by US-NATO forces have killed between 20 and 25 million people since WWII alone, and between 12 and 15 million since 9/11? – Isn’t stopping this killing more important than vouching for a cause that arrogant human kind cannot stop – simply because climate change has been part of nature of the last 4 billion years of Mother Earth’s existence.
But it’s typical for mankind’s arrogance to believe and especially make believe to the masses that we, they, have the power to influence Mother Earth’s climate, and who says Mother Earth, say Universe, because all is connected, and if we want to look very close we have to look at our sun which has enormous influence on our climate, much more than we want to admit; our sun, the source of live on earth together with water resources – that’s what we have to protect – and work for PEACE.
Screaming and hollering for something where mankind is important to do anything about is a waste of energy, but also a deviation from the real issue: How to stop ward and achieve world PEACE. And even if we could influence climate, let’s just assume for a moment we could change the course of climate – do you, Greta and the Friday kids – and perhaps you too, Mr. Guterres – know that these wars that kill millions of people, are the largest Co2 / greenhouse gas producers by far – and this is pointing the finger straight to the US – NATO military complex – more than half! – And do you know, that up to now, none of the climate conferences – of these international glamour events, where politicians talk, promise but never follow their promises – that the military / war-caused Co2 pollution is never allowed to be addressed in these conferences? – So, what good do they do?
Do you also know, that the half a dozen or so huge climate conferences that cost a fortune for zilch, have brought absolutely no change to climate whatsoever? – First, because they can’t, since we are not the masters over Mother Earth – thanks god! And second, because the politicians, especially in the western world, those that we call our leaders, are in bed with the corporate and finance key polluters? They are bought by them, the huge profit-making industries; profits they would not be able to make without the almost indiscriminate use of hydrocarbons. Our politicians, “leaders” (sic) would never even dare talking seriously about legislation that would prevent them from contaminating our atmosphere with greenhouse gases. No. Never. Not in the turbo-capitalist private sector dominated west.
At every one of these conferences Armageddon is being painted on the wall – in 5 years, 10 years, in 30 years in the best of cases – well, more than 20 years have passed since the first UN-sponsored Conference on Climate Change in Kyoto, Japan, in December 1997 – and we are still ticking, still propagating the same slogans – still spreading he same fear mongering – temps will rise by 3 degrees, by 5 degrees, but they are allowed only to rise by 2.5 degrees C – says WE, the masters of the universe. WOW! – Doesn’t that sound a bit arrogant, when you think about it?
But, in case you didn’t know, dear Greta crowd and Friday kids, and you Mr. Guterres too, PEACE is more important, frankly, than climate change. PEACE is and ought to be number ONE of our political agenda, of the UN agenda. Climate will happen with or without us; yes, it changes, it changes all the time. But get this, we humans, can’t stop it from changing. What this climate hype does, is allowing and prompting a plethora of new taxes, polluter taxes to be collected from the common people, from you and me.
Corporations will be exempt from them. This means shuffling again trillions of dollars up the ladder from the poor to the rich, as always happens when the corporate finance dominated west wants to milk some more accumulated social capital from the working class to the upper echelons. – and climate is an excellent tool for it. Mr. Soros, you got it once again right. But you, Mr. Guterres, have been elected to lead the world through the UN system to PEACE, not to stop the climate from changing.
Trillions are being collected; they will end up in the banks, will become yet another derivative to be blown into a balloon that is predestined to burst one day – and the system collapses again. We know about these bubbles – but keep creating new ones. Does anybody dare to ask, or want to know what will be done with these newly collected trillions? How are they going to be applied to stop the climate from changing?
Nobody really cares. Once we guilt-driven Judeo-Christians have paid our dues, our conscience goes to rest – and we sleep well again, while nothing changes. Not climate change, nothing.
There may be better ideas, Mr. Guterres, if you want to do something for PREACE and for the environment, why not a special conference on banning plastic, the production of useless plastic – plastic as in plastic bottles – billions being used per day and less than 5% are recycled, the rest ends up in the sea, in stomachs of fish and birds, – in our own bodies in the form of microplastic. Stop plastic for packaging food and all sorts of consumables – packaged in plastic – unnecessarily so. Why? Because you would have to convert a whole plastic packaging industry, bottling industry – and you would have to convince the Nestlés and Coca Colas of this world to change their concept – perhaps going as far as abandoning their chief business, selling water in bottles. In addition to the use of plastic bottler, this has become, as we know, in many countries, including in the USA a socioenvironmental calamity.
You, Mr. Guterres, could request the western world to stop wasting 30% or more of our food. Yes, wasting, as in throwing it away, even though it would be perfectly fine to be used, But throwing it away brings more profit. – You could also launch a motion to prohibit all speculation with food stuff, grains – which would make food more affordable and could prevent many famines. Saving food for redistribution to those that need it, might – would – also contrite to peace.
How about this kind of an approach – an approach towards Peace and a protected environment. This would be something extraordinary – youth for PEACE and youth for a better distribution of food, and youth for a serious protection of our environment. Mr. Soros and his allies may not like it, because demonstrating against Climate Change, making a publicity hype of Climate Change – is clearly a deviation from ongoing wars that kill – millions and millions – in the name of profit and dominance – and eventually hegemony over the world’s resources and people.
Kids, ask the UN for achievable goals – for PEACE. It’s not easy, but it’s a worthwhile goal which we, mankind with a conscience are able to achieve.
Peter Koenig is an economist and geopolitical analyst. He is also a water resources and environmental specialist. He worked for over 30 years with the World Bank and the World Health Organization around the world in the fields of environment and water. He lectures at universities in the US, Europe and South America. He writes regularly for Global Research; ICH; RT; Sputnik; PressTV; The 21st Century; Greanville Post; TeleSUR; The Saker Blog, the New Eastern Outlook (NEO); and other internet sites. He is the author of Implosion – An Economic Thriller about War, Environmental Destruction and Corporate Greed – fiction based on facts and on 30 years of World Bank experience around the globe. He is also a co-author of The World Order and Revolution! – Essays from the Resistance. Peter Koenig is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization.
Global cooling (Margaret Mead & followers long ago) plus ZPG, plus Global Warming have all been about reducing human population. So why should such (Satanic?) movements be against war?
Global cooling will occur at some stage, but has never been considered by science to be imminent. ZPG and HUMANELY reducing global population, gradually, is the only way we will escape the generalised ecological collapse now occurring and which you, no doubt, deny. If you want to see something truly Satanic, come back to Earth in fifty years and see what is left if the denialists continue to prevail.
Actually, I read an article from the Atlantic Monthly maybe 60 years ago, warning of a new ice age coming in 100 years. So there has been that theory as well.
I think Koenig is basically correct. Rather than couch the issue only as Climate Change, the whole issue of environmental degradation through chemicals, soil degradation, deforestation, pollution, plastics, and use of all extracted materials be they fossil fuels or various mineral all degrade the environment.
And the threat of war, especially nuclear war and even cyber or bio warfare are present. Looking at the people running things especially in the West, there is a war on sanity, and the nuthouse administrators need to be in straight jackets and tranquilized.
It’s been known for many years that the Earth is currently in an interglacial period. However, there is no scientific consensus on the timing of the onset of the next glacial period. It’s not an inconsistency, just a confusion of timescales. The time scale for human induced climate change is on the order of tens or hundreds of years. One hundred years is almost instantaneous in geological time. A better estimate would be on the order of several thousand years before the next glacial period.
You are right.
They’ll try anything to get their one world government.
Man made global warming is a hoax and not even a particularly new one. The IPCC were told to ignore the effects of the Sun which is the main factor in cyclical climate change which takes place over hundreds of years.
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-09-09/armstrong-climate-change-has-been-routine-scare-tactic-1930s
“Anyone who dares to argue that climate change is NOT caused by humans is ridiculed because this is a political issue being used to raise taxes and to regulate human activity by removing ever-greater proportions of our human rights and freedom. Those who attack anyone who denies human-induced climate change are either brainwashed or have a self-interest in the entire scam.”
And Mulga – I know from your posts that you care deeply about the state of the planet. Over exploitation of resources, industrial pollution and the plastics nightmare are all concerns we should share but human activity warming the climate is not something we need to consider because it isn’t happening.
Tomsk you are correct that anthropogenic climate destabilisation is just one aspect of the generalised planetary ecological Holocaust. There are scores of cataclysms occurring, most synergistic in one way or other with the rest. The basic reason for this hideous situation is the global dominance of the Western capitalist psychopath overclass, and its cancerous death-cult capitalism. We have a choice, right now, of Life on Earth, or Free Market capitalism-the two cannot co-exist.
@Mulga Mumblebrain
As much as I admire your precise succinct comments on most topics, you obviously have some rests of ‘parasite programming’ remaining.
You suggest that those Crooks who are running the show now for a few centuries and which run the climate-change hysteria on heavy rotation around the globe are now on this specific topic right on your side ?????
Who is responsible according to them ? They in the first place ?
No ! Of course not, but all of humanity (minus them, because they are so few and important aren’t they ?), which under their benevolent stewardship will be reduced humanly (like cows in the slaughterhouse of course) to a level acceptable to their desired profit-margins which will be fueled by the taxes incurred on climate.
Again they pull the old white rabbit our from the hat trick sorcery and you full and flat fall for it.
Get awake ! Pull yourself together ! ;)
Dan, anthropogenic climate destabilisation is a proven reality that is occurring with frightening rapidity. The opposition to forced omnicide is mostly coming from below, and the ‘Crooks’ that run the End-Stage capitalist show, as you correctly identify, are in fact, the patrons and financiers of the denialist industry that is obstructing humanity from saving itself, and protecting the ‘greatest material prize in history’, the fossil fuel trillions.
So, if you’ll forgive me, I believe that you have been conned by the very ‘Crooks’ you so correctly identify as villains. Their oceans of lies and disinformation amount to the greatest and most destructive propaganda brainwashing in history, and the most destructive.
Actually crucially important financiers of “Global Warming” doctrine and policies are financial houses and allied corporations. Here’s the plan: with fiat money growing toward Weimar ratios, money people are trying to ransom their and their corporation’s ‘buying powers in 3 interrelated ways: 1) get governments to increase taxes (and thus help cover their deficits (e.g., increase their balance sheets, repay certain preferred social sectors; 2) make new or larger loans to certain plausible enterprises –those huge ones in danger of defaulting on loans– under the guise of those corporations fighting “global warming”; Notice that Mark Carney, the Governor of the Bank of England, said as much in his key address to the UN Climate Action Summit on Sept. 23, where he unveiled a “compact” by the 130 top banks to channel all investment into speculative “green” boondoggles, reduce the population of the poor (i.e., useless eaters”) and use monies available and credit on behalf of the “correct” sectors. [MEFO bills anyone?] As the American movie “All the President’s Men” advises: “Follow the money!”
Plus about scholarship: During a lunch one noontime I was sitting at a table right next to a young Zoology Professor {squirrels is his speciality} and a young man (new hire? new grad student) in which the Prof gave this advice: “I can’t get anything published unless I relate it to Climate Change–something he really thought extraneous to his very particular field of interest.
Roman, I agree that the global parasite class will seek to exploit anthropogenic climate destabilisation. That is in their individual and group DNA. But that does not refute the hard science and the irrefutable observations from reality. Moreover one disgruntled Zoologist does not refute the science either, and, in any case, nothing since the mass extinction of the dinosaurs etc will affect the zoology of the planet like a climate destabilisation Holocaust. Already 60% of large, non-domesticated, land animals have disappeared in just the last forty years.
@Mulga Mumblebrain
There is no science in the IPCC no matter how large the heap of data output of their climate models is, because science can only be science IF scientific method is followed which depends on the correct setup and the falsification of results and conclusions where the negative result is always to be considered.
In the case of the IPCC – in the newest available summary reports (not the one for policy leaders, which are total junk anyway) there are exactly zero scientific results published, only projections, estimates and so called ‘findings’ in a swirling carneval of red graphs, world maps and dark prophecies.
All this in the face of fundamental critique which is out there (but not in the IPCC of course where only the novelty – climate researcher – a category which does NOT exist in the scientific realm operate, fumbling input parameters of models until the desired result is attained) from Paleo-Climatologists, Climatologists and Meteorologists not a few but very many.
CO2 alone CANNOT increase the temperature more than 1.3° K when doubling the CO2 content from 280 ppm to 560 ppm in the laboratory in a closed system based on Boltzmann law of radiation, THAT is settled science since over 150 years and teached that way.
In an open system as Earth is toward the Cosmos the difference MUST be lower, partly due to masking effects of water vapor and of course because of the increased radiation going out (one cannot surround the measuring space in the laboratory by the necess. insulating thickness and a 6°K empty space….).
Not one single scientist would deny that, what the climate researchers (which are paid for by that political entity IPCC) then came up (and in fact a valid idea) is that their could be a feedback loop into water vapor.
But global measurements from 1970 – 2005 in parallel by different sources (weather balloon monitoring, satellites) show no significant increase in water vapor of the yearly averages. Therefore there is no such feedback, good fur us, bad for the IPCC.
But it is not surprising the climate on earth is stable regarding it’s maximum and minimum average world temperatures in dynamic cycles since over 200 Million years (mind you it’s avg. maxima and minima are quite outside of human’s comfort zone)- if it’s CO2 sensitivity would be as is predicted by the hysterics we simply would not exist because it would then be inherently unstable in a very wide range. In fact water vapor AND clouds (which are not a subject at all, because their dynamics are very far from being understood) succesfully dampen large changes in CO2 levels – GOD is not a fool. Water vapor besides has a nice absorption hole almost at the peak of the backward radiation spectrum of the earth – another irregularity of water…..life and water, CO2 and O2 since a billion years a proven installment.
As I said mankind CANNOT kill the planet they can only kill themselves – which nonetheless would be a novelty in the kingdom of animals…none other so far has pulled that stunt.
The problem is they very succesfully mask the problem because a thorough analysis shows without a doubt that it is indeed the ruling class who is responsible and will always be responsible – it’s them who killed Socrates, it’s them who don’t want to listen, it’s them who Christ chastised and they cruzified, THEY are the ignorant and have always been, because that’s how society came about, tribes fighting against each other – by any means – to kill their gods and take over. They are outdated, what is to come is the knowing man by the grace of god becoming son of man – no way leads around this – THAT will be explicated in the now unfolding implosion of the west’s gang culture (which it wasn’t until the mid 18th century, but on the way right into it…), it’s a history of backward movement into savagery. According to Voegelin’s speculation the drive West in the US finally destroyed the last remnants of civility which then took over the old Europe and destroyed it succesfully in two world wars. However there is no way back, because what was is gone forever, if one goes back it will be a new nonetheless.
And it is the capitalist ruling classes who fund the denialist industry, to protect their tens of trillions invested in fossil fuels. That some people have fallen for the pseudo-scientific gibberish, the outright lies and disinformation, and thus become dupes of those who they think they are opposing, is the greatest and most destructive propaganda victory in history.
It is a Sisyphean task, Dave.
Yes but one does have to try. How you get your energy and persistence I will never know.
Mulga Mumlebrain
Yes, we are getting global cooling. We have heard lot’s of talk about global warming, making people believe that this is indeed what we are getting. Not so. Global warming was invented so that a global carbon tax, an international con job, could be introduced. However, I have known since 2001 that we are slowly getting global cooling. Before it arrives, we shall get a brief period of global warming, after which global cooling arrives, a mini ice age. This has been confirmed by Russian scientists years ago. If somebody needs proof, look at the summers these past few years in Europe. Yes, we had high temperatures during day time. However, during night time we had a drop in temperatures (this summer being the exception). During night hours in July and August of 2017 and 2018 I drank hot tea, something I never did before.
The last five years have been the five hottest in recorded history. It’s a long bet to wager the future of Life on Earth on the say-so of ‘Russian scientists’ (who, precisely?)when the world scientific community, plus plenty of Russian scientists, say otherwise. The only thing that could provoke a cooling now is a drop in solar radiance far beyond the Dalton or Maunder Minima.
@BF: “Global warming was invented so that a global carbon tax, an international con job, could be introduced.”
I think you will find it’s the other way around: the usual Anglo Zio Capitalist spivs invented Carbon Tax as an opportunity to squeeze even more money out of people by exploiting a crisis. They would impose the same Carbon Tax on fuel if the crisis were global cooling.
“The best time to make money is when there is blood on the streets”. — Rotschild partner Rockafella
Well, then… it seems that we’re all going to get very rich.
It’s called wealth redistribution, the basic condition for ending terminal Free Market Absolutist capitalism.
@Mulga Mumblebrain
Yeah, merry christmas…petty socialism (on loans from the 0.001 %, how nice they are, aren’t they) for the 99.999 % a rich buffet of zero-tax profits directly siphoned into the empire of evil’s very exclusive tax-havens which in fact is it’s main occupation (City of London), and perfectly constructed to be impervious to any outsider who is not part of the gang.
All just a huge farming complex – where as has been said the blood always flows somewhere (War on (the back) Terror) to keep profits at their theoretical maxima. If, if only there weren’t these damn Russians and Chinese….hmmm, might have to wait a tad, they might shatter our nice little ranch otherwise.
True, Dan, but those parasites have you and the other lumpen denialists under their control, inadvertently aiding the blood-suckers they have been conned into thinking they are opposing, in protecting the global parasites’ greatest pile of wealth-fossil fuels.
@Mulda Mumblebrain
That is not the point, the denial of the Climat-hysteria is just another fight against the same enemy, there aren’t two or some, it’s ONE.
What we fight is the political Agenda which is at the core to get consent from the people for their own incarceration, IT IS A SCAM, a lie got it ???!!
There is nothing which could excuse it, unless one is thoroughly corrupted as well.
It is wholly irrelevant when we play into the arms of some OIl giants – that is what it is – and has been for a long time, and a long to come, climate hysteria or not !
It’s like as if when we would have perfect knowledge in advance of a big crime to come which kills several millions. We then fight over the possible death which will occur when the crime is not committed because some really bad guys will die in the crime.
Your argument is ludicrous, and I cannot understand how a man of your capacity can be trapped so deep in a hole.
Nope, Dan-it’s NOT a ‘lie’. It is science proved by reality. The way in which the capitalists’ denialist industry has conned people like you is truly tragic, and the greatest propaganda coup in history, and one that ends in omnicide.
WW, on the contrary, a lot of suckers are going to lose money buying junk Green Bonds from rich spivs like Al Gore and the Goldman Sachs mob. I believe that Global Warming is real and caused by burning too much carbon, but there are wise guys ready to cash in on a crisis. Invest in genuine fuel saving environmental projects like insulation and solar — excellent! — but watch out for junk Packaged in Green. Above all, do not expect to make money out of repairing our damaged Ecosystem. The beauty of what we restore to its natural state will be reward enough.
Firstly, some advice given with tongue in cheek: Green Bonds. Buy into Green Bonds early, get in on the ground floor, unload them onto the suckers before Green Bonds go bust and you might become very rich. It worked for Clinton.com when Al Gore was VP. Be smart, and Green Bonds might make you as rich as they are. Now a quote from the Link below:
https://journal-neo.org/2019/09/25/climate-and-the-money-trail/
“In 2013 a Swedish real estate company, Vasakronan, issued the first corporate Green Bond. The creators of the bond idea state their aim is to win over a major share of the $45 trillion of assets under management globally which have made nominal commitment to invest in climate friendly projects.
Goldman Sachs unveiled the first global index of top-ranking environmental stocks, along with London-based CDP, formerly the Carbon Disclosure Project, financed by investors such as HSBC, JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Merrill Lynch, Goldman Sachs.
The new index _aims to lure state pension systems_ to invest. Top rated companies on the index include Alphabet which owns Google, Microsoft, Philips, Danone and, conveniently, Goldman Sachs.
Enter Greta, AOC and Co.”
[Let me repeat, I myself believe that Global Warming is real and due to CO2. But this is a warning against Soros “Attack from the Left”: rich bloodsuckers warming up the sheeple with ethical slogans in order to parasitize them. Remember: Right to Protect, No Fly Zone, Moderate Rebels, and War on Terror; all those fine sounding slogans succeeded in transferring state wealth into deep private pockets].
@B.F. Ahh another who is still connected with reality…I experienced the same, three or four years ago I could literally sleep on the balcony in shorts and shirt (fell asleep and woke up when it become day), this year I would have frozen to death we had 8°C in July when during the day we were at over 30° C !!! But I also noticed that we had a very nice summer with relatively dry air which makes it nice (hating the humid hot partly overcast days…they always seem to be lost time).
There were almost no wasps around because of the long freezing period we had during winter.
According to new closer examination of new ice cores the change of a warm-phase into an ice age can occur very fast less than 100 years or within a single life, will be quite impressive, and it’s certain the next phase will be a cold one (and it being about time +/ a few hundreds), not a warm one, my beloved country will freeze over and resemble Mars in the process (the soil’s color becomes indistinguishible from the one on Mars below freezing).
Paleo-climate studies have shown several degrees Celsius changes, and rises in sea-level (I imagine the opposite ie a drop in sea-levels must be a slower process)in as little as a decade or so, at times when the forcing of increased atmospheric greenhouse gases was much less than today. Of course other factors, such as positive feedbacks like massive ebullitions of methane from frozen submarine clathrates, almost certainly were involved. One study, published recently in Nature showed that, with the ‘insulation’ of Arctic sea ice melted, Greenland has experienced increases in temperature of up to an unbelievable 16 degrees Celsius in a matter of a few years.
Global cooling is currently happening. Very evident in Nort America and elsewhere.
A simple personal observation can prove that easily. Take a note of when body of water freezes and thaws in your neighborhood, talk to farmers who are closely connected and depending on weather, compare heating bills from year ago and so on.
Question is, is it a long term? 1816 was called year without summer possibly caused by volcano eruption. The chill was dramatic as it caused severe food shortages and so on.
Today we might be looking at something more permanent, such reduced solar activities. From my experience Aurora Borealis is not so frequent and short wave solar interferences not so noticeable.
Just saying
The vast majority of farmers in Austfailia openly admit that climate destabilisation is happening. It being a destabilisation from the Holocene’s relative stability, and proceeding at break-neck speed, there will be occasional episodes of cooling, as when Arctic cold air escapes the polar regions thanks to the unprecedented derangement of the jet-streams. But the spread of deep and long droughts, huge deluges, mega-floods, Category Five cyclonic storms and megafires tells us unambiguously that climate destabilisation has begun, and is proceeding rapidly. This will hit agriculture soon, as will the spread of pest diseases and animals, plant weeds etc.
The science of studying changes in plant habits and animal behaviour is known as phenology, and the records go back centuries, often thanks to enthusiastic amateurs. And they show, once again unarguably, that timing for bud burst, fruit set, fruit ripening, leaf fall in autumn and numerous other signs in plants, and the behaviour of animals eg bird migration, nesting behaviour, rutting season etc, has been changing rapidly in the last few decades. Moreover, of course, solar activity is closely monitored by Earth observatories and satellites, and no great perturbation has been recorded, save the modest reduction around the turn of the millennia that was probably the cause of the brief slow-down in warming that denialists incorrectly labeled an ‘hiatus’.
Observation over-rides theory every time.
Five decades of farming in the same Australasian location tell me that the climate has changed very little , and in my case the slight change, since the PDO phase switch around 1999, has been entirely beneficial to the soil , the plants , and to me.
However few would disagree with Flannery that Australia has exceeded its sustainable population level.
So your, alleged, experience trumps the experiences of others, everywhere. An odd worldview. The numbers of farmers openly stating that they are observing climate change in their work, from the drought ravaged east to the flooded north where 700,000 cattle were drowned in a massive inundation, is rapidly growing. Even the farmers’ organisations, bastions of bone-headed Rightwing conservatism, admit it. PS Just where do you farm?
Australia was never a place entirely fit for the type of agriculture introduced by the Europeans, whose practices did more damage to the environment than the ‘climate change’.
More damage in the past, Anon. But what of the present and future?
In fact Mead et al changed their tune very quickly because they came to the idea that if there were global cooling people would demand *more* industrialization.
I wasn’t referencing her and her group as prescient but as ideologues seeking fewer humans on Earth.
The planet is clearly massively over-populated with human beings, although the greatest problem is consumption and the massive over-consumption of the rich. The population will not be sustained. So the choice is between a catastrophic, Malthusian collapse, very soon, or a long-term, humane, reduction to a couple of billion, who could live decently amid an ecologically restored and healthy global diversity of Life. The global parasites want collapse and the elimination of the ‘useless eaters’, which is exactly why they have spent tens of billions on the global denialist industry.
Sigh. Even here the red herring of climate-change-or-not.
russgeorge.net, fisherycrisis.com indicate CO2 is easily resolved by iron-dusting the ocean phytoplankton pastures of the world; literally, we could remove as much CO2 as we want by converting it to marine life, a living carbon sink that eventually settles to the deepest ocean floor as stored carbon.
This is the most open secret on the internet and the greatest betrayal of the partisan Greens, to suppress this super-cheap, super easy technology with the memory hole treatment, and as ‘geoengineering’. All geoengineering tech was made illegal by the UN in 2010 shortly after Woods Hole concluded John Martin’s iron hypothesis was valid in 2008.
The Globalist plan is to thaw the poles by poisoning the planet with CO2 despite risking catastrophic depleted oxygen levels in massive eco-disaster capitalist play. The oceans are acidfying and growing warmer and depleted of life.
The false-dichotomy fallacy of is-global warming/climate change-happening-or-not is tiresome. Life as we enjoy it today did not evolve under massive CO2 conditions. High CO2 may happen naturally, but only over the span of millennia giving nature tie to adapt, not centuries or decades with no time to adapt.
While I appreciate Dr. Koenig’s argument here, there’s no need to deny anthropogenic climate disruption in order to make it. The scientific consensus is that we can (theoretically) do something to halt or at least slow down climate change, but we certainly cannot do it while we insist on spending over a trillion dollars a year on the military, the world’s largest polluter. The global climate strike, like so many of these worldwide well-organized spontaneous outcries, is not designed to induce world leaders to do something about climate change. It is designed to dissipate the time, energy and enthusiasm of young people concerned about their future into a worthless exercise that will make them feel better but have no effect whatever on political leaders.
The Anglo-Zionist Empire has no intention of setting aside its lust for world domination just to save the human race from extinction.
There is always need to deny a lie.
https://jonova.s3.amazonaws.com/graphs/lappi/gisp-last-10000-new-a.gif
So, ALL the Academies of Science and scientific societies on Earth, and 99% of active climate scientists are not merely mistaken, but LYING??!! Really? And how do they get the ice-sheets, glaciers, permafrost and sea ice to ‘pretend’ to be melting, or the global average temperature to ‘fake’ rising?
@mulga
It would be LYING if they knew that there is a whole body of knowledge on climate change from another source and yet like the Jews vehemtly denied and tried to suppress it completely. Fox’s argument is that there is a huge amount of information on this subject within the bible. Further science have themselves said and I quote:
“We do not understand certain abrupt meteorological events that pop and now and then.”
Take Bravo Company for example when they were 25 miles from Baghdad. They were hit by a storm that came up from nowhere. First a severe windstorm, then a thunder hailstorm that swamped their vehicles and forced them to move otherwise they would have gotten bogged down in the sand.
Can you imagine there is a sentence within the bible that says this:
“Have you entered the storehouses of the snow,
or have you seen the storehouses of the hail,
which I have reserved for the time of trouble,
for the day of battle and war? Job 38:22-23
ignorance is hardly LYING
LOL in any case poor Gerry Fox of the 7 plus billion on earth he is the only one going in the opposite direction?
When are you going to acknowledge the SUN’S effect on environment on the planet – Grand Solar Minimum in motion which affects are conditions you listed and by the way the Moons gravitational pull makes tides go up and down every 12 hours but you should ignore that as well
The Scientists / Academics are whores – ALL science and quasi science Academics have twoo Majors – Specific Science and Prostitution
over the course of their career they focus exclusively on Prostitution – GIVE ME A GRANT – tell me where you want to go and I will provide the “selective” facts rather than ALL the facts and the “subjective” interpretation of the selective facts that will yield the desired conclusion and then pay me enough and I will spread the wealth to the echo chamber of allied academic whores for the megaphone
I cannot disagree with anything you mentioned, science is rotten to the core. Courtesy of mighty buck. The highest appreciation of scientist is Nobel price for science, probably same swindle as Nobel Peace prize.
However there are few respected scientist who adhere to ethics but those are not heard much.
Mulga: The issue here is not Global Warming, Climate change or whatever you want to call our current climate phenomena. The issue is the totally unsupported claim that CO2 is the culprit and reducing it can solve the climate problems. The IPCC theoretical model was insufficient to model the climate of the past 100 years or so, so they added “fudge factors” to correct the model for presumed unaccounted for influences. This is a legitimate method in engineering to reconcile a theoretical model with the real, highly complex, world; but only if the model continues to be predictive as time goes by, without adding a new fudge factor every year. The IPCC model stopped being predictive the year after it was introduced, and continues to be non-predictive to the present day (17-18 years later). This model is not what we should be basing our plans for the future on.
The accademies and scientific societies you refer to are bureaucracies and are subject to errors based on “follow the leader/crowd” mentality, as we should all recognize now that the Alaska university study has irrefutably shown that controlled demolition, not fire, brought down WTC-7. This in spite of the scorn and ridicule shown by the academies and scientific societies to any one who would dare to suggest any such thing 5 years ago. These groups often behave like herds of sheep, just like the rest of us do.
The data extracted from the Siberian ice cores revealed that periods of Global warming over vast periods of geologic time have always preceded increases in atmospheric CO2 increase, never the reverse. Warming causes atmospheric CO2 increase by releasing CO2 from the oceans. CO2 has never been the cause of (i.e., preceded) global warming. Some climate scientists who have done the math have pointed out that CO2 is a trace-level component of the air, and cannot be a significant contributor to the climate changes we are experiencing.
The leaders of the CO2 hysteria are also advocates globalism, agenda 21, removal of humans from rural areas (return the land to nature) and concentrating them in high density 5G radiation-saturated smart cities, depopulation, removal of humans from rural areas (return the land to nature), special taxes, carbon credits and other opaque financial schemes, and extreme regulation/restriction/surveillance of virtually all human activity. Call me paranoid if you like, but this all sounds to me like just another scheme concocted by oligarchs to contain, control and enslave the masses.
Monte, you are a victim of a long, and often and easily, refuted denialist canard. CO2 levels rise AFTER temperature increases at the end of glaciations. The ice-cores record the changes that happened long before human ‘civilization’ pumped the greatest forcing of greenhouse gases for tens of millions of years into the atmosphere over the last 200 years. So the situation now is utterly different. This is not the end of an inter-glacial period and the onset of a new glaciation when conditions are dictated by the Milankovitch Cycles, and positive feed-backs such as rising albedo hasten and reinforce the glaciation, or, more to the point, the end of a glaciation where the changes cause increased CO2 release which reinforces the warming change from the glacial period.
Here and now it is the increase in greenhouse gases, not just CO2 but also methane, nitrous oxide, novel chemicals such as HCFCs etc, and, in a positive feed-back driven by warming, water vapour, that is causing the rapid warming and climate destabilisation. That is why this climate change is ‘anthropogenic’ ie caused by man, unlike those changes recorded in ice-cores.
Spot on.
How about reading this?
http://jonova.s3.amazonaws.com/sh1/the_skeptics_handbook_2-3_lq.pdf
Climate is changing all the time, just like the diagram in the previous post shows. During the Eocene, 50mil yrs ago, there were tropical forests in Europe, with temperatures 10+ degrees higher than now. Would it be humans that caused it? Have human emissions caused much higher temperatures than today some 3300 yrs ago?
The Greenland ice record shows CO2 level lags 800 yrs behind the temperature rises! How about that?
How about falsifying temperature readings in ground stations by mounting thermometers above concrete studded with hot-air exausts, like the photos on the above link show? The termometers are to be placed above grass surfaces in an appropriate shaded housing, even a meteorological idiot should know that.
So yes, my friend, they are lying. And they live very well on account of those lies.
If you quote Joanna Nova you loose ALL credibility, but not credulity.
Mulga Mumblebrain
I should better quote Rajendra Pachauri, then, I suppose?
How about a diagram from the Wikipedia article on younger Dryas. Same GISP-2 Greenland data you ll find in a number of diagrams in the net, including one on the Mrs. Nova’s page:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Younger_Dryas#/media/File:Younger_Dryas_and_Air_Temperature_Changes.jpg
Mrs Nova didn’t make up this one, surely?
And I ‘ll be glad if you show me she made up this one:
https://climategate.nl/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/climate-scare-machine.pdf
Nova is a denialist ultra and no doubt is richly rewarded for it. The Younger Dryas is an example of a catastrophic change, caused, it is now believed, by a meteor or comet impact in Canada that caused a massive influx of cold melt-water from the ice-sheet into the North Atlantic, that shut down the AMOC section of the global thermohaline circulation, causing a rapid cooling, but one that lasted relatively briefly. This situation now is utterly different, and is occurring on a ravaged planet with 7.6 billion inhabitants, not the few million of the time of Younger Dryas. If she doesn’t know that then she is stunningly ignorant, but, as I suspect, she does, it makes her a deliberate disinformer.
Mulga Mumblebrain
So it is people you call ‘deniers’ who get Nobel prizes etcetera, not the Pachauris ?
Instead of wriggling around and calling names the small number of journalists who still have the balls to say that AGW is BS, and that includes both the author of this article and the Australian lady , how about giving some straight answers?
1. How did the temperatures peak at least 3 times to the levels much higher than today in the last 3500 years, without any help from the modern industry?
2. The CO2 levels and the temperatures of the last 100 years are in a NEGATIVE correlation, meaning they mostly change in the opposite direction to each other! They hump when they should bump, and vice versa. What is the cause of the temperature changes then, carbon, or is it something else?
3. Paleoclimatic record shows carbon 800 years late behind the rise of temperatures. What causes what here, then?
I could ask you a lot more, but let us be humane. I not going to ask about retired experts documenting the revision of temperature data by IPCC et all, or scandals surrounding the whole BS which you are buying.
But I am going yo ask you, why have you bought the affrontery as well, to call someone a ‘denier’ of an alleged ‘truth’ you think is in your possession? It should be obvious that the AGW/carbon thesis is unproven to say the least, and it is up you name-callers to prove it instead. Or should the sceptics do it, so that they don’t get called names!?
Point 1-simply false. Temperatures today are the highest for 800,000 years. Point 2-false and simplistic. Greenhouse gas levels in the atmosphere are NOT the only factor producing climate and weather changes and patterns, and no climate scientist says so, no matter how much denialist propaganda says otherwise. Fluctuations in solar radiance, global circulation patterns like the ENSO and Pacific Decadal Oscillation, the effects of ‘global dimming’ from volcanoes like Pinatubo, and from particulate smogs etc, all effect the weather and climate. Point 3-as I observed above, that is the situation at the beginnings and ends of glaciations, changes driven principally by the Milankovitch Cycles, and totally different from today’s massive and rapid anthropogenic greenhouse gas forcing. I hope that cleared those up for you. Now go out and plant a few trees, and pray.
You first show something false, and then you can say it, other way around only shows your prejudice.
I already posted this wikipedia diagram. Before telling us about the last 800 000 years, could you please start with the last 800 for example. Where do you see the temps today are highest in the last millenium:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fb/Younger_Dryas_and_Air_Temperature_Changes.jpg
Kindly point it out for us, would you.
The correlation between carbon. And temperature in the last century is not only lacking, that would be bad enough for your thesis. It is even negative, meaning the temperatures mostly fall when the carbon is rising. That certainly does not point to the carbon as the climate governing factor, does it?
Nevertheless, you pronounce the carbon hypothesis proven truth, and find the audacity of calling the sceptics deniers of the ‘truth’!
To find the correlation one needs the longer time scales, thousands of years. And here it is, but God forbid, the carbon is lagging 800 years behind the temperatures! But no, that is completely different from the carbon ‘forcing’ we ‘ve got today. Which forcing? The correlation seen in the frame of the last century is negative!
Wake up!
Not only are the temperatures measured over air conditioner exhausts, but the past records are being tampered with:
https://principia-scientific.org/nasa-exposed-in-massive-new-climate-data-fraud/
Using the old, true, untampered data the temperatures have fallen for 1.1 degree from 1940 to 2015, and 0.4 deg. since 2000.
So if it once comes to your mind that you are being lied to by a bunch of the globalist smart guys, you are not going to feel nice about it.
In the meantime you are going to stay impervious to any argument, that is how people work.
Regarding the tree, I planted one 3 months ago. Reasons nothing yo do with AGW. And when did you plant pne last time, btw.?
Mulga Mumberlain
Among your 99% of the scientists, the leading expert. For the climate. Not only on the railways.
http://jonova.s3.amazonaws.com/sh2/web/pachauri-bishiop-2.gif
Rajendra Kumar Pachauri was the chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and was replaced by Hoesung Lee. He held the post from 2002 until his resignation in February 2015, due to sexual harassment allegations. The IPCC was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize during his tenure. Wikipedia
Born: August 20, 1940 (age 79 years), Nainital, India
Spouse: Saroj Pachauri
Education: Indian Railway Institute of Mechanical & Electrical Engineering (IRIMEE)
Awards: Padma Vibhushan, Padma Bhushan, NDTV Indian of the Year
Humanity as a whole is a natural force and through our competitive biological imperatives and collective actions, including war, we influence our environment in certain inevitable ways, and while we seem to be heading in the same way as the dinosaurs, there is not an awful lot of good that hand wringing will do.
My concern is that when the climate continues on its inexorable course despite whatever whatever cosmetic changes the movement succeeds in achieving, or worse if a backlash by the people being squeezed to pay for this (and make no mistake: if the purported solutions cost more money which is not made up for by subsequent saving or relies heavily on subsidies, it indicates that more energy is being dedicated to it than would have been necessary without it) results in another Trump being elected, who are these young people going to blame? What sorts of things will they begin advocating?
This is very cynical of Mr. Soros.
We need more than ‘cosmetic’ changes, Patricia. We need a completely new human civilization, one dedicated not to greed, ego and brutal thuggery, but to the sustainable continuation of humanity on a planet whose biodiversity has been restored to something like its richness before the Industrial evolution set the ball rolling towards self-destruction.
Mulga, if I thought it would make those changes happen, I’d go have a cryfest in front of the UN assembly too. I suppose I can’t blame Greta for trying. I think she is finding a lot of sympathy as a matter of fact.
@Mulga Mumblebrain
Yes, but then climate change is a very platform to ride on because it provides perfect cover for the few – one – they steer it – second the nature of the change puts the blame on the many – whomever that might be – but certianly not them – they are the 0.001% which don’t need visa or the like within their realm they can be everywhere and nowhere.
Furthermore what one needs to understand – we ouselves are completly alienated from reality through a long and elaborate process of history. Without a thorough investigation and critical analysis and changing our relation to reality there is nothing to be gained. We have to go back to Socrates – not as Socrates but in a now and reconnect to the divine truth. All the isms are poisonous because they themselves are expressions of counsciousness in a state of alienation towards reality.
For instance as long one cannot handle the problem of Death, Truth, Justice on a universal level (it is a revelatory process) correctly (not on the gang level, there it is as it has always been) we will go nowhere at all.
If we are able to cope with it there is nothing which can resist it as soon the majority of people have learned it – that’s the problem and has been 2500 years ago.
There is NO time left for a ‘.thorough investigation..’of our relationship with Life on Earth. We have been the enemies of Life on Earth for most of settled civilization. The earlier human group behaviours and ways of life, were more closely aligned with Nature, and our Gods were Nature-figures, but once we created a monolithic, patriarchal, God in our image, we became Nature’s enemy-and now we are paying the price.
@Mulga Mumblebrain
Fear and anxiety are bad advisers, and no, we have not been enemies of Life for almost the whole timespan there are humans on the planet.
The problem arose with the development of Techne – mostly driven in a deadly feedback loop – by war and it’s requirements, same goes for capitalism which in it’s essence is a weapon.
In the process anything inimical to this process which more and more served fewer and fewer, was the total lack of development in the fields of philosophy – building a just society – which in fact was destroyed in the 18th century, making way for conforming theories, and their weaponizsation as with Marxism.
As things stand now amidst the implosion of Empire which is a given to happen within the next 20-40 years, with or without a thorough investigation by the forces who want to resist within. But there will be an after of it very certainly.
Even if humanity perishes because of it, any action toward truth is not for naught, because God’s kingdom finally operates outside of time as we it experience here. The Soul’s existence is eternal and all actions count, especially those which add to the eternal dance of things.
There can never be a reason sufficient to do the wrong thing, never !
If you feel there is no time left, then you are clearly caught within the matrix, there is always time. This planet will go on in it’s full glory for another two billion years and so will everything else.
amarynth has proven beyond any doubt that the climae hysteria is a production (The Heller vid) – this single thing is enough to disprove the IPCC and thus the whole concept.
Your fears are that if the climate hysteria bonanza dies, your agenda (which should be our’s) to save the ecosphere from destruction is postponed.
It is not, but you won’t get prime time coverage for the right action, THAT is as certain as 1 + 1 = 2. It is only possible after the total collapse of the evil Empire absolutly certain.
There is no right in the wrong, no good in evil and no truth in the lie !
We will have to reconstruct everything ! The best thing one can do is bury the essential books and teach the kids. It’s a struggle which will never end !
Keep on mate the last battle has not yet been fought !
Climate change? If and when our climate stops changing that is when we need to start worrying. Just imagine if lets say tomorrow it stopped raining and it never rained again for O lets say 200 hundred years. Do you think then that something serious is going on and did this in fact ever happen? According to some scientists indeed yes it did: From Yale
“In the Middle East, a ~200-year drought forced the abandonment of agricultural settlements in the Levant and northern Mesopotamia. The subsequent return to moister conditions in Mesopotamia promoted settlement of the Tigris-Euphrates alluvial plain and delta, where breachable river levees and seasonal basins may have encouraged early Mesopotamia irrigation agriculture. By 3500 B.C. urban Late Urak society flourished in southern Mesopotamia, sustained by a system of high yield cereal irrigation agriculture with efficient canal transport. Late Urak “colony” settlements were founded across the dry-farming portions of the Near East. But these colonies and the expansion of Late Urak society collapsed suddenly at about 3200 to 3500 B.C. Archaeologists have puzzled over this collapse for the past 30 years. Now there are hints in the paleoclimatic record that it may be related to a short (less than 200 years) but severe drought… Following the return to wetter conditions politically centralized and class-based urban societies emerged and expanded across the riverine and dry-farming landscapes of the Mediterranean, Egypt, and West Africa. The Akkadian empire of Mesopotamia, the pyramid constructing Old Kingdom civilization of Egypt, the Harrapan C3 civilization of the Indus valley, and the Early Bronze III civilization of Palestine, Greece, and Crete all reached their economic peak at about 2300 B.C. This period was abruptly terminated before 2200 B.C. by catastrophic drought and cooling that generated regional abandonment, collapse, and habitat-tracking. Paleo-climatic data from numerous sites document changes in the Mediterranean westerlies and monsoon rainfall during this event, with precipitation reductions of up to 30% that diminished agricultural production from the Aegean to the Indus.”
“That perspective is now changing with the accumulation of high-resolution paleo climatologic data that provide an independent measure of the timing, amplitude, and duration of past climatic events. These climatic events were abrupt, involved new conditions that were unfamiliar to the inhabitants of the time, and persisted for decades to centuries. They were therefore highly disruptive, leading to societal collapse—an adaptive response to otherwise insurmountable stresses…
Climate during the past 11,000 years was long believed to have been uneventful, but paleo climatic records increasingly demonstrate climatic instability. Mulitdecadel- to multicentury-length droughts started abruptly, were unprecedented in the experience of the existing societies, and were highly disruptive to their agricultural foundations because social and technological innovations were not available to counter the rapidity, amplitude, and duration of changing climatic conditions.”
So imagine this no industrialization and yet these societies paid the price why? Is it maybe because of something someone said:
“The word of the Lord came to me: “Son of man, if a country sins against me by being unfaithful and I stretch out my hand against it to cut off its food supply and send famine upon it and kill its people and their animals, even if these three men—Noah, Daniel and Job—were in it, they could save only themselves by their righteousness, declares the Sovereign Lord.” (Ezekiel 14:12–14)
“When I shoot at you with my deadly and destructive arrows of famine, I will shoot to destroy you. I will bring more and more famine upon you and cut off your supply of food. I will send famine and wild beasts against you, and they will leave you childless. Plague and bloodshed will sweep through you, and I will bring the sword against you. I the Lord have spoken.” (Ezekiel 5:16)
A simple reading of the bible and one quickly learns droughts were a promise from God to not only the Israelites but one and all and archaeology as usual is bringing us the proof of it all.
It is certainly strange how the bible offers up a tremendous amount of history surrounding climate change. indeed it covers it all droughts, tornado’s, windstorms, hailstorms, thunder lightning everything in practically every book of the Old Testament and yet most people think its only about Noah and they discard it accordingly. Big mistake I figure especially with a word like this:
“See, the storm of the Lord will burst out in wrath, a whirlwind swirling down on the heads of the wicked. The anger of the Lord will not turn back until he fully accomplishes the purposes of his heart. In days to come you will fully understand it clearly.” (Jeremiah 23:19–20)
It the bible even provides the solution to our climatological problems but the only one apparently who is writing and trying to get that across is Gerry Fox in his book climate change the work of God.
As for the real pollution behind it all go here and watch
https://youtu.be/gK_0Yo-0r08
especially the 13 minute mark!!!!!
All pseudo-religious mambo-jambo in comparison to the science and paleo-climate records like ice-cores. And the world’s population at the time that Biblical fairy stories were composed was a tiny fraction of what it is today, meaning that any experience then is totally irrelevant to today.
yes – the comment by Milan goes along with the comment by Peter Koenig about Judeo-Christians…how come the Judeo part gets to be there when they killed Him and they are the worst perpetrators against Christian values (think Israel) on the planet.
Moslems venerate Jesus as a great teacher, while Talmudic Jews revile him, and imagine, in their familiar manner, to be in Hell, up to his neck in boiling faeces. Funny old world, ain’t it.
@ Mulga
“During the summer of 1853 Oberlin was struck with a severe drought. The hay fields were dried up so there was no feed for the cattle. The cattle soon must die and the harvest fail unless rain comes. Crops had withered, wells dried up, and the parched earth became powdery.
On Sunday morning the church was filled. Not a cloud was in sight and no one expected a drop of water to fall from the skies that day. The situation was desperate. Finney arose from his chair walked to the pulpit and lifted his voice in prayer.
“O Lord! Send us rain. We pray for rain. Our harvests perish. There is not a drop for the thirsting birds. The ground is parched. The choking cattle lift their voices toward a brassy heaven and lowing, cry ‘Lord give us water… We do not presume to dictate to Thee what is best for us, yet Thou dost invite us to come to Thee as children to a father and tell Thee all our wants. We want rain! Even the squirrels in the woods are suffering for want of it. Unless Thou givest us rain our cattle must die… O Lord, send us rain! and send it now! For Jesus sake!’ Amen.”
“In the preacher’s voice,” reports the California minister, “was the plaintiveness of a creature’s cry. I do not know whether any pencil caught more of this wonderful prayer, but all who heard it had to tell of its bold importunity. It had the pathos and power of an Isaiah.”
Then the pastor-revivalist poured out his soul in a searching sermon, “hewing close to the line,” from the text, “I have somewhat against thee because thou hast left thy first love.”
“Not many minutes did the sermon go on before a cloud about the size of a man’s hand came athwart the summer sky,” says the California preacher. “It grew fast. The wind rattled the shutters of the old church. Darkness came on the air, joy aroused our anxious hearts as great raindrops pattered on the sun-scorched shingles of the monumental old church. Finney’s lithe figure, tall as a Sioux warrior, ruddy as a David, trembled. His clarion voice choked. God had heard his cry. The sermon was never finished, for torrents of water poured from the prayer-unlocked heavens. The preacher bowed over the pulpit and said, Let us thank the Lord for the rain.”
He gave out the hymn, When all they mercies, O my God my rising soul surveys, Transported with the view, I’m lost in wonder, love and praise.
The congregation could not sing for weeping. Then Finney lifted heavenward a prayer of thanksgiving and praise. “I can remember not a word of the closing prayer, but the reverent and relaxed figure, the pathetic voice, the pallid and awe-struck countenance, are vivid as if it was yesterday; the plank sidewalks of the dear old town splashed our garments as we walked home from a short service, of which life’s memory must be lasting.” This is the testimony of the student who sat in the gallery and saw and heard Finney that morning.”
Greta Thuneberg’s father should be brought up on charges of child abuse for coddling, enabling and using his daughter in a manner that is harmful to his autistic daughter. That’s right.. in a BBC interview, Thuneberg admitted she had Asperger’s syndrome, did not like to be around people (because, she explained, she has difficulty understanding people and social situations and finds the presence strangers and crowds to be extremely stressful). Yet, despite this, almost plee for help,. the jerk that is her father, has allowed/forced/manipulated his daughter to be turned into a disposable mascot for the liberal elites.
How times have we seen the politically motivated media use a young person for their latest cause-celebre, then cast them aside when they’re purpose is fullfilled, and ultimately destroy them due to them being exposed to pressure beyond their capacity, to suddenly being isolated and without purpose and due to realizing that they were being used and now are left without moorings.
How is she going to react later on, when she realizes that she nothing more than Soros’ and the media’s useful idiot of the year?
Mr keonig has a point, while these fools in liberal circles of the West mislead the young of West into following this pied piper of environmental fraud, that keeps the same young from becoming focused on the much more important band immediate threat to life and the biosphere, that threat bring war. Where are the protests in Scandinavia against their own murder flogging “offense” industries that sell weapons to Saudis and to countries in geopolitical hotspots? They’ve been deflected away to a BS climate hysteria mothlight.
Thunberg plainly does what she, correctly, sees as necessary to her and her generation, and the next’s, survival. And she represents millions of children not yet brainwashed into rejecting science, rationality and humanity. She is a hero of our decrepit species.
Thank you Mulga,
I fear this anti science thinking, it honestly doesn’t take 99% of the scientist in the world to figure this out.
All it takes is reality based observation, that humans are using up the planet. In my life time I have watched consumerism explode, forests be decimated for the obscene houses that people think they need to have.
I have watched as lobsters have been over fished, and salmon, sharks, tuna and crabs. I have watched the waters across the Midwest be decimated by cattle and pig farms. I watched the gulf destroyed by the oil industry.
Across Africa the timber oil and mineral industries have killed off so much, not to mention poaching and heat.
In Malaysia and Indonesia the palm industry is killing everything in it’s way. From miniature elephants and a huge variety of primates. These are the things that large corporations and individuals do. Lets take it up a notch, the United States military, is the largest contributor of green house gasses in the world, the largest purchaser of crude oil in the world. The US military has more super found sites then any country in the world! Home to places where some animals are born with 2 heads.
Why does anyone think we are not altering the planet? When we literally slaughter people around the world for more shit! That is what humans have always done, but the reality is earth is finite. Those that choose to think this is just another conspiracy theory do not want to face up to the responsibility they hold or fight against the powers that hold even more of the responsibility. It is much easier to blame Greta and the families of kids around the world who choose to try.
It is much easier to pontificate over the keyboards then actually try to change behavior.
Precisely, Suann. Here in Austfailia denialism is truly virulent, even as the fragile biospheres in this, the driest populated continent, collapse around us. The Right are fanatic haters of Life on Earth, for pathopsychological reasons that amount, in the end, to spiritual Evil. And right at the head of the gigantic Rightwing denialist machine in this country is Satan Murdoch itself, and his hordes of fanatic Rightwing minions, who have the audacity to call themselves ‘journalists’.
Dear Susan,
What would you know about science? I’m an actual scientist, I know how to look at data and I
am unswayed by the hysteria. You are trying stifle legitimate debate by the typical modus operandi of the Anglo empire liberals: to delegitimize your interlocutor by attacking them as unscientific (like a meme as opposed the real scientific method) instead of proving with logic and analysis your point.
Yes the biosphere has been polluted (mainly by the OECD). For sure these pollutants are very harmful and on global scale . They are damaging food chains and biodiversity. What is infinitely worse, and definitely climate affecting is the mass destruction of forests (jungle etc) (buy not from a CO2 perspective) also the destruction and alteration of oceanic algae profiles (again not because of CO2 but because of crashing ecosystem chains in the ocean)
Your derisive attitude towards people who understand the lying Anglo empire has been cooking the data to suit their own agenda is unhelpful. You seem to forget when Russia hacked into UK universities and exposed how British scientists were openly laughing amongst each other via email about how they were cooking climate data. You seem to give a pass to that scandal, how unscientific of you.
Thankfully you haven’t resorted to the irrational arrogance of claiming you know definitely why Greta Thuneberg does what she does, to do so would be ridiculous and imply omniscient abilities: only a caricature would attempt that, to your credit you have not.
Regards,
Which branch of ‘science’ are you educated in, old boy?
One of the keys to science is observation with out it you are not much of a scientist.
fyi, i have no clue if you are a scientist. I will tell you that when I started fighting the mono culture growth of the shellfish industry the growers were the ones always saying “we are biologists we know we care”while destroying puget sound for every species that needed those tidelands. Why so the Chinese could get their aphrodisiacs, and the industry could get rich. They made sure to buy off every politician, every government organization, and of course both parties.
So no I do not buy the word of just any scientist. I do believe my observations. Having climbed all over the world, lived all over the world, spent time in pristine environments. I have observed the unchecked population growth and watched cities expand beyond earths capacity. I have seen most countries destroy there wild place for profit.
I have watched the glaciers in my country disappear, as well as most of the glaciers in the world. I have witnessed fires that have been like nothing we have ever seen. Talked to fire fighters who tell of these new kind of fires that they can’t get near.
You can choose to make your world all about conspiracies, that is your choice. I don’t believe we have time for that, I don’t actually care if Greta is being sponsored by the rich, what she is saying is getting people putting pressure on governments to change their behavior or get the f out of the way.
I don’t really believe it will work, but I cant help but try myself because I have kids that will live in the mess we the human virus have created.
The theory this is all made up by the US and the rest of its cohorts is a waist of time. The US is the largest contributor to this disaster and the people of this country are becoming victims of it in many ways. Collapsing infrastructure, horrible health care system, horrible educational systems. Massively polluted water systems. A university system that serves only the wealthy. The US will destroy itself, but it may very well try and take everyone with it. The fact they never tell you who the largest contributor of climate change is tells you everything you need to know about climate change. The US government and the UK and Israel would prefer the theory it is a conspiracy because they do not want us going after their bloody money pit. Well over 60 percent of the dod budget goes to the military. Most of that to contractors that build crap that doesn’t work. That means everything else that keeps a country going gets nothing! Science gets 3 percent of the budget! So no I do not buy your theory and I question your credentials
Once again Susan you exhibit your complete lack of understanding of science. What matters is data and hard evidence and not your emotion based opinions or your anecdotal observations. In addition, to your selective lack of observation that the UK and EU have been caught red handed cooking the data. Your anecdotal observations are the antithesis of system collection of data from proving or disproving a hypothesis according to the scientific method: your premise is CO2 is the main factor. It is not.
You and mulga have lost the argument. The informed comments on this article clearly show that. Another thing you failed to observe.
Fortunately, neither Russia, nor India, nor China are going to be swayed by this hysteria (because they have real qualified people, ie scientists, and intelligence assets to make that determination). And if Trump wins the next election you can even add the United States to that list: that represents over 50% of the planet and over 80% of global productive output (actual real products and services not based on fiat exchange rates).
The global carbon tax is dead: suck it up.
However, the fight against pollution is not dead, nor are real efforts by the 2 behemoths China and India to reduce reliance on oil imports as much as possible (not because of the fake carbon bogeyman but because of national security and economic independence from energy imports).
Stop having yourself on, old boy. The hard evidence for rapid and global anthropogenic climate destabilisation is massive, and attested to by every Academy of Science on Earth and every scientific society. and all you have to claim your supposed ‘victory’ is denialism in its most primitive and banal form. And what, again, is your field of scientific expertise?
That’s news to me as all three countries recognize the the climate issues that you think are a fantasy.
Explain away your lack of any science knowledge to your kids who will have to deal with you complete lack of values, or common sense. My children will be faced with this future disaster but they will know that I at least cared about their future and fought hard against my failed countries love affair with the military.
You Trump and Macron can all squander what is left of the environment on your own
You have referred to the human race as a virus and you think you’re in position to moralize?
You know nothing about India and China they are increasing their build out of coal fired power plants, they are also increasing solar and wind but coal will be vast majority of the build out. Those are the facts. Piyush Goyal, Power and energy Minister for India 2014-2017, who set energy policy for India has hugely expanded coal power build out while also setting goals of making renewables at least 15% of India’s energy mix. His primary driver is autonomy and sovereignty not ecology (India has the 4th largest coal reserves on the planet, most of that coal is high sulfur and poor quality, but they are still plowing ahead – too bad!) In addition, both India and China are engaged in a massive build out of nuclear power plants, aw I guess that’s heresy amongst the eco-wahabists!
The amusing thing is that both countries are using the hysteria to gain support for easy access to financing, technology and sales for renewable energy components (China dominates the solar panel market). Renewables help reduce dependence on energy imports. That’s why they make all the right rhetoric in international forums.
India’s push for coal will help sentence the country to near term uninhabitability, but I’m sure Adani et al will make generous bribes available to the corrupt Hindutva fascists currently misgoverning the country. How very sad it is to see people denying basic science such as the fact that CO2 is a greenhouse gas, in pursuit of self-destruction. Have you recollected what type of ‘scientist’ you are, yet?
No mulga, Adani Corp., is busy colonizing your corrupt cap-in-hand corrupt country. Given how greedy shameless and perverted the Anglo empire politicians of Australia are, it’s a foregone conclusion that the greedy and débauche local Australian crony politicians will have sucked Adani’s Bribe-Budget dry, so they won’t have any money left to pay any corrupt crony local socialist/Marxist state politician in India: I’m afraid the corrupt Socialist and Marxist parties in India will have to shake down other companies for bribes because Adani will have already been spoken for by the real masters of corruption: the moralizing self righteous politicians of the Anglo empire (even junior Anglo empire thieves like Australian politicians are an order of magnitude more corrupt and expensive than their corrupt Indian socialist rupee-accepting understudies).
Perhaps the above paragraph can help form a framework for your introspection.
Anaam, you don’t need to tell me how corrupt life is in Austfailia. Adani are multi-national bribers, corruptors and Life-destroyers. In other words-capitalists.
@Susan
“One of the keys to science is observation with out it you are not much of a scientist.”
Although not wrong, the same goes for a painter or a shepherd, in fact in closer inspection to anybody.
What is unique about the scientific method is a whole complex, any one element left out, and it has nothing in
common with science, instead it becomes a lie, a forgery when still being labelled as science and not some type of alchemy where invocations are spoken before, during or after – the IPCC obviously is able to utter very strong invocations.
First observing something possibly very general – like ‘this is a stone’ – , a stone is a stone goes the saying nothing special really.
What now strikes is a pulling and an idea and a wondering, what could it be composed of, what is it’s true natur ?.
So we have an idea in the form of a wondering.
Then an introspective dialog has to take place about how to proceed to get answers to the wondering possibly first to formulate a specific question.
One could say a setup for the further proceeding is thought out
Up to now ALLof it has taken place in a place far removed from phyiscal reality. This phase is absolutly crucial since it narrows the range of possible results, because anything can have a number of almost infinite ‘facts’.
The scope is set, everything else shold be eliminiated (itself part of the preparation).
And then comes the action for instance to weigh the stone against another by the use of a specific installation.
The result is an artefact of the action and commonly called a fact, in this case a measurement (relating one to another in quantity).
That is all at first.
Others or he may repeat the measurement at different times to see whether influences are there which show themselves and thus calibrate the whole process.
After a certain number of repitition when the sampling is stable, he can then postulate that the measured fact occurs under certain circumstances using given installation.
If now another using the same installation measures different results, the postulate given before must taken under critical examination and both series of installment to either find an error in the installment or a new influence, at any rate the postulate initially given is to be revised.
The revision of the postulate is an absolutly necessary element and one specific characteristic of the scientific method. If it is shortend out either prior or posterior – there is zero science left, the whole construction is then worthless more even, it becomes a lie.
Post-Modern science is for the most dissolving itself because the first step is twisted by wickedry, the eye only looks what money dictates – and thus science becomes blind, and finally lost and stupidity like those Chimps playing like possessed with a heap of stones.But also this tower must fall to lay desolate the fortress in which the King without clothes resides on his mountain of marbles.
Good God-what cobblers! Climate science is tested by the usual means ie theorising, taking observations, publishing results, peer review, conferences, exchange of information and opinions, and the rejection of erroneous theories. Slow progress with occasional ‘paradigm shifts’ and leaps in the consensus. Contrary theories are always welcome, but require observation, reproducability, peer review and confirmation, all areas where denialist pseudo-science FAILS calamitously. Yet on and on goes the Crusade, to throw out science, rationality, gigantic consensuses, mountains of evidence from reality and increasingly accurate computer modeling (used everywhere in modern life). The only question left is-Why? And all that is at stake is human existence.
@Mulga
When you refer to the human species as decrepit, do limit your self projection condemnation to yourself and the locust-like predatory God-less destructive Anglo-capitalist “consume and monetize” everything in sight culture that created and educated you. Don’t project the crimes of your culture onto the entire world.
Russia’s taiga forests are still virgin and intact, India still has 17- 20% forest cover despite 1.4 Billion people living there (and despite the British being responsible for the majority of the destruction by monetizing the jungle), both India and China have been credited with increasing global greening by a huge 2-5% (thru reforestation and increased agricultural planting) while Europe, Brasil and the US keep cutting destroying forests aka “carbon sinks”.
The various forest/desert/arctic/etc peoples of the world lived in ecological balance with their environment for all of human existence, they didn’t destroy the environment, they are human and part of our species they are not decrepit.
Try to be more scientific and precise in the future.
Yes, Anaam, some parts of humanity are far more decrepit than others, and I certainly agree that the West are the worst. I rather fear that you have been far too Panglossian re. India. When the climate destabilisation that you deny has proceeded for a few more decades, much of India will be uninhabitable in the hot season because the wet bulb temperature will exceed 35 degrees Celsius, the limit of human endurance before death by hyperthermia occurs. Before that there will be crops failures due to monsoon derangement and too hot summers, cyclones etc.
Obviously you haven’t read my post for you to make the snap assumption you just made. Another attempt, like Susan earlier, to ignorantly denigrate and cubbyhole the interlocutor when you don’t have an argument. You claim you despise the Anglo empire, yet you exhibit all of their behaviors.
Again, regarding your absurd statement regarding the imminent destruction of India, you need to stop portraying your wishful thinking as if it is fact or reality.
Oh, Anaam, it is a low blow to assert that my observation regarding India’s grim future is ‘wishful thinking’. I love India and Indians and see the coming ecological apocalypse there, caused in part by morally decrepit denialism, to be a tragedy of gargantuan proportions, but only, tragically, one of many to come. Denialism has won a final and Pyrrhic victory over science, rationality, truth and humanity.
Mulga, just because you claim you love the Indian people does not make it true. Your actions speak louder than your claims: on the comments you posted here on this blog You have demonstrated utter contempt for their culture and core Hindu religion as well as their judgment, their sovereignty, their values, their intelligence their own expertise regarding their own nation, their democratic decision, their choice of leader. You put yourself on a pedestal and think, that somehow, you know better than them and you clearly state it.
You’ve grudgingly admitted that your point of view (what I have described as climate hysteria) has not prevailed here. Now would be a good time for you to engage in introspection.
Now, now, Anaam, don’t go making stuff up. I oppose Hindutva, the fascist doctrine of certain Hindus, not Hinduism itself, a great boon to humanity over the ages, although, like all systems, it has had its faults and errors. I take it you yourself are an advocate of Hindutva.
Mulga,
Do get back on topic, the fact that your misguided and unscientific views on “global warming” have been discredited on this board may be upsetting to, but it would be more useful if you used this experience to as motivation for introspection.
I remain unconvinced that you have any respect for Hindus or Hinduism, how can you? I got the impression, from your comments over the years, that you are an “cock-sure” atheist who ridicules anyone of faith, and certainly you have exhibited open hostility and contempt towards Hindus the most. If I am wrong then go ahead and clarify: what exactly do admire about Hinduism? Why has Hinduism been a great boon to humanity? Specify. Or is that statement of yours just a slogan to avert criticism. What are Hinduism’s faults and errors? (Who are you judge?). Do you apply the same level of self-criticism and scrutiny to your own socialist Marxist ideology?
For once, you might contribute to a productive discussion, …. although I’m doubtful. Surprise us.
You have that old Dunning-Kruger magic to an awesome degree. I’m being generous there, because to be a knowing denialist, ie one who knows that his bombast is pure garbage, at this late stage, would be that old sin for which there is no forgiveness. Your assertion that I have ‘lost’ the argument reminds me of the knight in Monty Python’s Holy Grail, sans arms and legs, but still fighting on and claiming victory.
Hi Peter – excellent issue. It blows my mind that you can get the schools to close over some abstract Climate Change anxiety – and not nuclear war…its very worrying and if you bring it up with CC advocates – they don’t see the logic of your argument. They throw back overpopulation as the big problem. Its serious brainwash/disconnect.
There is NOTHING ‘abstract’ about the anthropogenic climate destabilisation cataclysm. It is happening, right now, right around the world. The last five years were the hottest recorded, and there is NOTHING abstract about that concrete cold fact.
@ mulga
From the journal of John Wesley:
“Monday, 17. As we were walking toward Wapping, the rain poured down with such violence that we were obliged to take shelter till it abated. We then held on to Gravel Lane, in many parts of which the waters were like a river. However, we got on pretty well till the rain put out the candle in our lantern. We then were obliged to wade through all, till we came to the chapel yard. Just as we entered, a little streak of lightning appeared in the southwest. There was likewise a small clap of thunder and a vehement burst of rain, which rushed so plentifully through our shattered tiles that the vestry was all in a float. Soon after I began reading prayers, the lightning flamed all around it, and the thunder rolled over our heads. When it grew louder and louder, perceiving many of the strangers to be much affrighted, I broke off the prayers after the collect, “Lighten our darkness, we beseech thee, O Lord,” and began applying, “The Lord sitteth above the water flood; the Lord remaineth a king forever” (Ps. 29:10) Presently the lightning, thunder, and rain ceased, and we had a remarkably calm evening. It was observed that exactly at this hour they were acting Mac Beth in Drury Lane, and just as the mock thunder began, the Lord began to thunder out of heaven. For a while it put them to a stand; but they soon took courage and went on. Otherwise it might have been suspected that the fear of God had crept into the very theater!”
the Hottest recorded since there is precise record methods… which is about 200 years.
and absolutely inside the margin of variation and error of all models and predictions.
to say we are 1 °C Hottest, acording to our predictions and models (that have a margin of error of 3°C)
it is not that precise.
but you have to analise and read al those boring scientific data to realise that.
And ALL the Academies of Science and scientific societies an 99% of active climate scientists DON’T analyse all that boring data? Are you asserting that?
Anthropogenic climate destabilisation is by far the greatest threat to humanity, save a full-blown thermo-nuclear and biological war, or some cosmic disaster well beyond our control. And climate destabilisation is but one, although perhaps the worst, of a series of calamities that amount to a generalised ecological Holocaust across the planet. I wonder if the author denies or ridicules those as well.
And climate destabilisation makes the threat of war very much greater, as agriculture collapses and refugees flee unlivable conditions. Indeed the US and its allies took advantage of the unprecedented drought in the Near East to foment the war in Syria, a sign of things to come. As for climate destabilisation science not proving true, that is utter rubbish. The rise in global average temperatures in the last 200 years is unprecedented for 55 million years, and the greenhouse gas forcing probably for hundreds of millions of years. To state that humanity cannot affect the planet’s climate is completely incorrect, as any high school science student knows, and the most base form of denialism imaginable. And to imply that those concerned with climate destabilisation do not care about peace, is, in my opinion, simply wrong and slanderous.
I agree it is never a good practice to use ignorance and lies (the talking points of Koch sponsored lobbyists), to defend against other ignorance (talking points of Soros sponsored lobbyists or puppets like the Thunberg girl).
It divides the halfway decent people between the anti-war and the green camps.
We cannot stop global warming, but can slow it down and mitigate it. The very best ways is to promote peace.
All this anthropogenic fear is based on one inescapable fact. NASA is a fraud.
The data is manipulated to fit the model or the hypothesis.
We are not discussing science here. This is politics pure and simple.
This is the One World Government funding model.
This is lawyers and smart arses winning over scientists and common sense.
This is a glaring truth of the world’s takeover by malevolent forces, like 9/11 is.
If people would only see.
True or not, if one discards data as a fraud, all possibilities of a sensible debate disappear. Only subjective opinion and propaganda will remain.
To combat this very serious war on truth, by the merchants of doubt on both sides, Russia and China should think about bringing their own data sets and results of simulations into the public domain. After all, they have good satellites as well.
This whole extinction rebellion thing seems like the (last?) major coup (fake battle) of Soros vs his so-called opponents; it looks like the Anglos vs the zionists: don´t fall for it!!! It is meant to distract and extract…
There are NO anthropogenic climate destabilisation denialists in the ruling circles in the PRC. These are mostly tertiary and post-graduate educated meritocrats, and they can see, read and understand scientific reports.
Which is why they are merrily building new coal -fired power stations as fast as they can.
Wake up!
Absolute GARBAGE. Give us ONE concrete example of NASA ‘manipulating the data’. And NASA is but one organisation, and also supporting the science are ALL the academies of Science and scientific societies on Earth. Are they ALL ‘frauds’, manipulating the data? And the risible inversion of reality, where, in truth, the ‘lawyers and smart-arses’ are on the payroll of the denialist industry, whether fossil fuel or Rightwing financed, and the scientists fully concur with the theory, the observations and the reality, the precise opposite of your assertion, is priceless.
Ok just 1 to get you started
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=T86IIKK9FRg
Little black duck: Here you go again! You use talking points if Koch sponsored lobbyists to argue against Soros talking points. You can only convince true believers from your camp that way.
That is all what is left when one leaves the science out.
Let´s at least agree that the best way to combat pollution and waste is promoting peace.
I thought caps were not allowed.
All the scientific academies and societies do not collect data.
They depend on NASA, who provides them with false data.
I really can’t be bothered trying to prove it to you.
You’ll have to find out for yourself…..or not.
LBD:
Proving it to himself will be as difficult as a Muslim proving to a Zionist that Christ was a great Teacher ….and the Best Jew …………..or Martin the Atheist Communist from Soviet East Berlin proving to Saker ….that there is NO God….or Saker winning the reverse argument—–because Communism…and faith in the self-evident Wonderfulness of the Proletariat …and The Party…..is every bit as much a religion (for many…not all communists…but many) as ones with a far more rational basis than that clear absurdity!
Don’t you get it??
We are dealing with the most hard headed “Man is SIN” religious conviction here!
What is clear is that the Climate Change Takes Preference over EVERYTHING Agenda……………..IS a New World Order EMPIRE Agenda……run by THEM…not Mulga……..and yet this does not cause Mulga to pause……… even momentarily. Not even for a millisecond of doubt!
Amazing!
WHY???
He gives it away himself!
On the most Fundamental of Empire Axioms……NATO’s Club of Rome Limits to Growth …Unscientific .DOGMA…… he agrees with THEM:
Humankind is a curse, a cancer…certainly not The Crown of Creation.
An Enemy of Nature, Gaia, Mother Earth etc….not an inseparable part of it all!
Why?
Because Man CHANGES nature…always……. it is supposed by him…for the worse!
But that’s not true. Modern man can ruin things faster than preindustrial humans…but we can also clean things up…even faster!
Behold the Fusion Torch……………… that shall be capable of converting ordinary trash into a high temperature plasma (gas) out of which its constituent pure elements can be precipitated. Now there’s a slight advance in “recycling”. LOL
Or mining. One cubic mile of the earth’s average crust containing all the metals all of humanity requires in a year….processed through Fusion Torches if you ever ran out of richer veins mined the old way.
But No! That’s the LAST thing the Rothschilds…and the Other Self Appointed Gods of Olympus want any modern scientific Prometheus to make a gift of….To MAN!
They themselves and their Olympian “Above ALL of You Mere Mortals” belief systems become patently absurd and discardable….at that point….coming now…into reach.
But its also against Mulga’s religion of Boundless Pessimism, don’t you see………
So…. never mind that the priesthoods of the Oligarchy that have made people more superstitious and stupid and unrealized in their potential than they might have turned out to be if not bedeviled and tormented by evil elites, fake religions and absurd ideologies and stupid ideas. Never mind that resources ….including all currently “strained” and “scarce” are defined by the level of technology and science known to Man…and therefore NOT fixed…not “Limited”. except by our lack of knowledge…….never mind that space travel and utilization of new resources such as the abundant Helium 3 on the surface of the moon is in reach…and exploitable…. according to China’s space scientists….and by the near term development of Commercial Fusion Energy as called for by Vladimir Putin himself …..NO! None of that matters!
All just “Pie in the Sky”…”nonsense”…meeting the same cynical reaction in Mulga as the bible and religious literature passages that inspire milan…(. in comparison to the fanatical Down to Mother Earth religious conviction of Pessimism and Mankind…The Ultimate Sin Against Nature…..religion some others have….that humankind (except for those very, very few that can be persuaded to adopt their same Religion LOL) is the problem and the Solution = A Lot Fewer of Them, US….or even themselves!
Because some, especially among deluded, despairing, pessimistic youth …practicing in advance at their mock DIE-INS.for Climate Change “Awareness” (sic)…literally rehearse their own suicides….and hope you will join Mulga and Susan in their self-flagellating (but very, very “well-meaning”, mind you!) anti-human despair.
Even if Beelzebub himself was ‘behind’ anthropogenic climate destabisation, it would not change the facts. Of course the global parasite class are attempting to manipulate the crisis to their benefit, but they are putting much more effort into protecting their precious fossil fuels, the greatest repository of material wealth in history, which is why they are spending billions on denialist lies and disinformation.
NASA is NOT the only source of data, and there you go, yet again, accusing them of outright falsification, with NO evidence, just to suit your ideological prejudices. Hardly convincing.
Mulga Mumblebrain
You need one example, is that so. Take a look at the thousands.
https://principia-scientific.org/nasa-exposed-in-massive-new-climate-data-fraud/
I suposse you have been measuring the temperatures in this 55 Billion years…
because if not, what you are saying is based on supositons, interpretations and opinions… or we can say “Scientific Consensus”
temperature variation in the last 300 year or (more or less) precise measurements
show an increment, yes, which is into normal variations and well within margin of error of any posible interpretation or extrapolation of data (if you follow the real scientific data)
just in the last 1000 years there were colder and warmer times,
thinking that the temperature increment is principally caused by us, humans, is quite
arrogant. we have some effect, but the causes of change are well beyond us, related to astronomical cycles and events (position of earth in the orbit, the relation of aphelion and perihelion with the inclination of earth, minkowski cycles, meteorid impacts, and solar activity) and volcanic activity.
lately there have been some research, specially on changes related to meteorid impacts, and volcanic activity, that have much stronger effect on climate that any we humans could made (not even in the wildest capitalistic dreams) that are deliberately ignored or dissmissed just because they contradict the “Scientific Consensus”
when Einstein Published his General Relativity Theory, it was against all “scientific Consensus” of the time, and first dissmissed as a stupid or crazy theory, but he was right.
Consensus doesnt mean right. And its worse when you try to hide or dissmiss real data that contradicts that consensus. We can consensuate or agree that the sun will rise tomorrow on the west, and convince everybody about that. The morning will make us only look like idiots. but hey! so long, so good
Milankovich Cycles-not ‘Minkowski’. Or was it the Minkowski Plane that you were thinking of? The evidence for conditions 55 million years ago is mostly geological and geomorphological, and evidence of floods, desertifications and plant and animal types and distribution gained from fossils. It’s complicated, but it is science, not fanatic obscurantist ideology.
Last year, Jo Rogan had a gentlemen on his podcast who was/is one of the most qualified specialists in regards to the “climate change”. He is a Harvard professor, who is both, astrophysicist and geologist. In short, he simply stated that the very first place to look for any influence on climate changes, is the sun. He also said that there is nothing special with what is happening to our climate, apart from the fact that it is massively politicized. It all happened before, and with a much bigger ferocity and intensity. According to his interpretations of the sun activities, much bigger changes can occur.
On the personal note, I believe that the most harmful activities are created by the military and EMF radiation (cell phone towers etc) that are twisting electromagnetic structure of the earth.
In other words, I’m in absolute agreement with this article. Stop those who are financing all those senseless wars, and everything will go back to normal.
Nicely written and well argued.
Thank you!
That ‘gentleman’ was pretty paleolithic in his denialism. Every climate model and the whole basis of climate science starts with the Sun. Does this ‘gentleman’ think all scientists, other than denialists, are total fools? But the SUN is NOT the only influence on the planet’s climate. Also vital is the atmospheric level of greenhouse gases that trap heat in the Earth system, or did the ‘gentleman’ deny that basic fact? In fact the forcing of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere in the last 200 years is the greatest such forcing, in the shortest time, that we know of from the geological record going back hundreds of millions of years. To say that ‘it has all happened before’, is true, but certainly NOT with greater fury and intensity. In fact we are just in the very earliest stages of a climate destabilisation that is almost certain to be one of the worst in planetary history. If your ‘gentleman’ denies that he is no true scientist. And why do you believe one denier when tens of thousands of non-compromised scientists say that he is dead wrong, and the fate of humanity rests in the balance?
You are just repeating their propaganda.
Notice the threat is always a comfortable distance into the future.
Do you know the real source of the 97% lie?
You’ll be embarrassed when you learn the truth.
The rest of the story is equally laughable when looked at with an open mind.
The concentration of CO2 has leapt from 2 to 4 parts in 10,000 in our industrial history.
So basically nothing…….of a harmless gas.
CO2 that is. You know, the molecule that life on earth depends on.
The denialists are the scientists whose incomes do not depend on them not understanding their subject.
If you want to hear some real science, listen to the denialists.
I was once worried about global warming.
Now I worry about the worriers.
Notice the threat is always a comfortable distance into the future.
Right, super hurricanes in the Caribbean vast swaths of Western Canada and California burning, flooding in the US midwest, heatwaves in Europe. Yep, the future has arrived.
“Right, super hurricanes in the Caribbean vast swaths of Western Canada and California burning, flooding in the US midwest, heatwaves in Europe. Yep, the future has arrived.”
The only thing that has changed is that news reporting has become more insistent. The data shows that hurricanes in the USA are less frequent than they used to be.
100 years ago, when there was a flood in Florida, nobody cared. There were no habitations in these places.
Sadly, simply not so. The records of climate disasters are quite good for the last 100 years, and the ‘news reporting’ is irrelevant. And the opinion of the insurance industry and the reinsurance industry and their meticulous records also refute your assertions.
Here is some evidence which you will doubtless ignore because it is inconvenient to your climate religion. How about stopping your assertions and presenting some data.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/08/29/if-hurricanedorian-hits-as-a-cat4-still-no-long-term-trends-in-florida-major-hurricanes/
“the population of Miami in 1900 was less than 1,700 people. It is now 2.74 million”
Are you now going to say that the population at risk does not affect the insurance payouts?
You have a point, Alf, but the insurance and reinsurance companies bluntly state that it is the number and extremity of weather disasters, not just the numbers of insured, that are driving the crisis in their industry.
“Every climate model and the whole basis of climate science starts with the Sun”
well that is quite preposterous… how do you know? and no matter what, they are simply models… based eon our understanding of the climatic processes, which is not that deep.
about the :
“Also vital is the atmospheric level of greenhouse gases that trap heat in the Earth system…”
you might be right but not in what you think. for example an eruption of a medium size volcano (like that islandic one of impossible name some years ago) do have a very immediate and measurable effect on the atmosphere. A big one like krakatoa in the 18th century, did cause a year without summer, for example.
about the “…geological record of greenhouse gasses going back hundred of millions of years…”
you do not understand the scale of times you are speaking about, nor the exact meaning of what you are
saying, wich is actually pseudoscientifical nonsense, quite close to their pseudoscientifical propaganda
please inform yoursel better.
Ten of thousands of scientist can say whatever they want, the number doesnt mean right. In fact tens of thousands of them might be wrong.
this climate change Nonsense it is absolutely politisized, is being used with an obscure purpose (we might discuss which ones whenever you want) and it is just a distraction and a methode to extract money from the masses
There are none so blind as those who will not see.
There is that word again –“denier”…with a bizarre, artificial, propagandistic meaning attached to it right from the start.
Back in 1950, Bertrand Russell did mention (as a joke) that weather podcasts will be used as tools of manipulation, and that academia will follow the ideological trends no matter how ridiculous those trends are. It appears that these times have arrived. Ever wondered why all “elites” are so obsessed with the “depopulation” agenda? Is it because they’re bighearted, awesome fellows, who’re in love with humanity?
They keep talking about the looming food crisis, even though the absolute majority of food produced in the west is thrown away, yet the prices keep going up.
BTW The use of this child, Greta, as a propaganda tool – is abominable and abusive.
A ‘podcast’ in 1950!! Says it all, really.
Obviously, I meant “forecast”. I know, not a simple puzzle to decipher.
It is unfortunate, but it appears you’re deeply indoctrinated into the Soros driven “1 million scientists” can’t be wrong type of nonsense. These elites always resort to emotional pleas from children when they have nothing of substance to show.
Come on-I agree that Soros is a rogue, but he does not control the Laws of Physics and Thermodynamics, and 200 years of climate science, much of the basis of which was created before he was even born.
Soros is not alone! Those who share his views control vast amounts of wealth. This gang does not have to control the Laws of Physics and Thermodynamics. They don’t have to. They control education, media, skewed, and corrupt scientific community, that in return gets massive exposure, etc, etc. The US government killed 20 million people since WW2, and every single conflict was backed by pure lies. Thinking that these people care for our environment is extremely naïve and irresponsible. Why wouldn’t Soros and his abused, illegitimate granddaughter Greta, direct their indignation against DuPont (the inventors of plastic), or Monsanto (that is turning good land into deserts), or the military….etc, etc. Instead they’re training innocent population to except the guilt for everything they have no say in. All these “philanthropists” are openly eugenicists. That is all we need to know.
Come on, Real. The gang that Soros represents, the global parasites, have more invested in fossil fuels than any other enterprise on Earth. But they are not monolithic. One faction attempts to exploit the ecological crisis for their own benefit, but a greater and more powerful group, led by the likes of the Kochs and other Rightwing billionaire thugs like Murdoch, have vastly more invested in fossil fuels. That is why they have spent billions spreading lies and disinformation to protect their loot, money well spent as it has conned and fooled millions into supporting the very parasites who they falsely imagine they are opposing. It is a brilliant propaganda victory.
One of the best comments ever! Thanks.
“Every climate model and the whole basis of climate science starts with the Sun”
That is an incomplete statement. They assume that the energy of the sun reaching the earth is a constant. But it is not.
The fluctuations of the amount of energy per day reaching the earth are equivalent to 50 times the total energy consumed by humankind – all motor vehicles, planes, power stations and so on.
The models which always produce false predictions and which cannot reproduce the data that we have had in the past all assume that the power (energy per unit of time) reaching us from the sun is fixed.
No they don’t. Who told you that garbage? Solar radiance does fluctuate, over aeons as the Sun warms itself, and over shorter periods producing ‘Minima’ like the Dalton and Maunder episodes. And ‘global dimming’ by pollution or volcanic ejections into the stratosphere, also lessen the amount of energy that reaches the lower regions of the atmosphere and the surface, changing matters. Indeed if global dimming is reduced by the drop in fossil fuel use, there is another one or two degrees Celsius warming ‘baked in’. In the days after 9/11, in the USA, where air travel was banned, and the con-trails disappeared, average temperatures rose by one degree Celsius. That is worrying, wouldn’t you say?
American wars are the largest American contribution to human caused climate change. Ending American wars would reduce the rate of increase in greenhouse gases and reduce the rate of loss of the environments capacity to process greenhouse gases. So, peace and climate change are linked. Al Jazzera more than a dozen years ago published a letter I wrote calling for an end to America’s wars as a way to reduce climate change which I compared to the Black Death of the Middle Ages.
Spot on, the article. Nothing to add.
Save ‘humanity’ from extinction! Do all these spoilt kids believe they would live forever? In a few decades they will all be dead anyway.
How charming. What of future generations? Do you care?
There is no contradiction between campaigning for a healthy environment and campaigning for peace. Both campaigns are reeling under an Anglo Zio Capitalist “attack from the Left”: the billionaire Soros who funds this Climate Circus at the UN also funds the White Helmets Grande Guignole in Syria. In both shows a child was exploited to excite sympathetic knee-jerks among the sheeple: Greta at the UN and Bana in Syria.
PS after writing the above I saw this: U$ army pollutes the very earth in Iraq.
https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2019/09/21/new-study-documents-depleted-uranium-impacts-on-children-in-iraq/
Pictures of children after contamination with Plutonium in a war started by the same Anglo Zio Capitalists who fund the Childrens Climate Crusade and promote Greta and Bana. Not for the squeamish. Photos of what happened to newborn children (and will go on happening there) after NATZO armies polluted Serbia, Iraq, Libya, Syria and Yemen are like something from the lowest reaches of Dante’s Inferno.
To fight for peace we must fight against the very same Anglo Zio Capitalist forces and their armies. Greedy financiers rip up the ecosysystem and their ruthless armies pollute the earth. Two profiles of the same head: a perverted worshipper of Mammon gleefullly sacrificing children to Moloch.
Oh, there will be a lot more of this – soon – when Europe is being transformed into new countries with new languages, those parts of the population which resist, will get the ‘War On Terror’ treatment Full Spectrum package – as has been mentioned there must be blood on the Streets for maximum profit. If the Empire is stifled in it’s pull to expand, it starts to heat up in the core – and blood must flow in order to relieve the pressure, at the end it will be as with the Incas – blood sacrifice to compel the gods to give manna.
All this is in effect already in the peripheral era (Africa for instance) with massively increased intensity since 9/11, it will ‘burn’ through towards the center.
No worries for the Masters – they are everywhere and nowhere every pint of blood will yield profit. Then when the robots come onlince, industrial scale killing will be as normal as anything and nothing of it will enter the mainstream, because at that point the desire to believe the lie will be overwhelming and an existential issue – we can sense it in tone already which has shifted, and the logistics and infrastructure are largely in place.
If one believes he has seen ‘Fascism’ he has seen nothing in comparison to what is to come.
Nothing can stop this implosion unless there will be an overwhelming outside force.
A very good article.
However, by now it should be clear to everybody that any individual can do something for our environment.
Climate change is here however, it comprises of many facts.
Its the summary of it: sun, position within our Milky Way (usually neglected, except by astrophysics, astronomers etc.), industrial aspects (developments), too many wars (pollution of our air, soil and seas – a grave fact), to many meat consumers (methane gas cannot be neglected), plastic pollution etc.
The extreme sad point is that the majority of people waits until governments put some laws into force.
People think usually (foremost in Christianity oriented states, but other countries too) that “our God will help us”, “save us” etc. (still the way of Middle Ages thinking in Europe!!) and thus waiting and waiting.
The point is: each individual should strive for more
Awareness
and
Responsibility
within its own possible circle, environmental space.
A very small example: The week before Easter forsythias are one of those flowers people tend to put into vases. Its an old custom so it’s said. However, beekeepers always point out that those shouldn’t be taken because they are one of the few first flowers for bees in spring (here in my country). There is no secret that shrinking of bees’ populace occurs (whatever the reason). When I do mention it I get usually answers like “Oh, I didn’t think about” ….
That’s the point: individuals don’t think. Its a lack of awareness, consciousness, responsibility taken into our own hands within our living circle.
The climate has always changed. It is cyclical. It was warmer during Roman Times. Why are these historical facts always ignored?
It is a scam. A way to distract the people while the pillaging goes on.
Currently, the global temperature is dropping – because the sun is inactive. In a few years, crops will fail more frequently because of a shorter growing season. Food prices will rise a lot.
In Australia, all the data of their meteorological office is being constantly rehashed in order to pretend that Australia is warming up. They use temperature data for places like Sydney which were completely different 200 years ago. They ignore the urban heat effect.
You should read a little more:
http://joannenova.com.au/
The Great Barrier Reef is thriving. All the nonsense about it dying is just nonsense. It is a natural process that it should bleach in order to replace the organisms that inhabit it.
The climate changes always, but it is the rate and extent of change that counts. At present it is destabilising more rapidly than at any time we know of but after the relatively short-lived effects of meteor or comet strikes. And it will keep changing for millennia so much energy has been trapped in the Earth system in the last 200 years. It was NOT ‘warmer’ during Roman times, even in the small part of the planet where warmer temperatures were experienced. Today the climate destabilisation is global, but worse in certain places like high latitudes and altitudes.
The global temperature is absolutely not ‘dropping’. The last five years are the five hottest ever recorded, this June was the hottest June ever recorded, and July the hottest month at any time of the year, ever recorded. Meteorologists and climate scientists do not ‘ignore’ the Urban Heat Effect. That assertion is categorically false. And the Great Barrier Reef was declared by the scientific body entrusted with its care to be in ‘very poor’ condition just weeks ago. Recruitment of new corals is down 89% and the top third is dead, crumbling, and covered in algae. If you prefer a denialist like Nova, or Bolt, Jones, Monckton or some other such creature to the scientists who have spent their lives studying climate and the Reef then, in my opinion, you have a problem.
Mulga Mumblebrain,
You simply don’t know your history. It was warmer everywhere during Roman times. They had vineyards in Yorkshire, for example.
In parallel with Rome, during this warm period, China flourished.
When the climate turned colder, the Roman Empire and the Chinese Empire collapsed. That is what happens when crops fail.
“Climate change history: Empires fall when warming turns to cooling”
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/nature/climate-change-history-the-fall-of-empires-come-when-warming-turns-of-cooling/
No one can dispute the evidence of the ice-cores that are at the front of that article.
And what happens in the reverse, Alf, when the climate goes from stable and relatively benign, to destabilised and hotter? How much extra heat do you prefer? Are the 150 zettajoules (ten to the 21st power) of heat sequestered in the oceans over the last 200 years enough for you? They GUARANTEE hundreds of millennia of vast and destructive climate instability. Just the mega-floods and mega-cyclones will wreak destruction unknown to human ‘civilization’, at least since the chaos of the Younger Dryas cooling episode.
How do you ever get out of bed Mulga?
Perhaps you haven’t noticed that the climate is still the same more or less since you were baby Mulga.
I cant say I’ve seen a change in my 61 years.
The seasons still change right on queue.
What I have noticed is that politicians have learned off you know who that the climate can be weaponised.
Where I have lived for the last twenty years the climate destabilisation is plain. Years of drought, then a couple very wet, then more drought. Heat, including 46.6 Celsius last summer, the hottest ever in a capital city in Australia. Megafires a few years back that got to one kilometre of our place. Insects disappearing, bird numbers falling and months of dread every summer in case fires strike again. And where I once lived for decades things are just as bad, with, for one thing, Bogong moths disappearing, when they once were so common that they fell in snow-like drifts around external lights, during their annual migration. And, in many other places around the world, the disruption has been far worse. But you’re OK, so quack everybody else.
I remember back when I was a child big swarms of fireflies lighting up the night (there was no electricity then). Now, nothing left. I remember too, frogs singing all night long, now silence. No doubt there is something (nasty) going on.
It is called EXTINCTION, Oscar, and even the ducks will be gone.
Protesting about global warming does not affect zionazian power, working towards peace does.
Anthropogenic climate destabilisation is caused by fossil fuel use. Fossil fuels represent the greatest treasure in all capitalism, valued at tens of trillions, and they underpin the global financial system, global stock-markets and US hegemony through the ‘exorbitant privilege’ of the US petro-dollar being the world’s de facto reserve currency. So curing climate destabilisation must involve the end of US global hegemony, which is why the real power in the USA, the rich, are climate destabilisation deniers. Some pretend otherwise, but they are con-men, like Obama, the saboteur of Copenhagen.
If actual solutions were being proposed, it would threaten their power. Working towards peace, as Mr. Koenig as noted, is probably the most important step in addressing climate change for anyone serious about it. That and simplifying one’s own lifestyle, with anyone serious about this leading the way for others, showing how it can be done.
The very rich do not have to care about this. They just move on. See Trump’s bid to buy Greenland. To them it’s just another chance to profit. The biggest mistake made by the climate change movement in my opinion was to try to harness market forces. I attended the Kyoto conference where I saw why they did that: nothing was going to happen until big business was motivated to get involved. We all saw what happened as a result. They created all sorts of scams and sold them by pumping up hysteria. This backfired the same way crying wolf would. About 90% of the comments in this thread are extremely hostile to the climate change movement.
I’m as firm a believer as Mulga in anthropogenic global warming. I’ve done my own research. Australia, where Mulga is, has a difficult climate already and will be among the first to get hit hard. I differ from Mulga in extreme pessimism that anything we try to do about it will be futile. This is the most epic tragedy humanity has faced, but I also believe a large number of us will scrape through.
Patricia I am optimistic that the ways and means of averting the ecological Holocaust do exist, and we could yet save ourselves, even now, although billions of premature and horrible deaths do seem inevitable. But I am realistic that all these efforts will be opposed with fury, that will amount to homicidal, even genocidal, violence, by the ruling capitalist psychopaths, and the hordes of Rightist ideological fanatics.
We’ll do what we can, Mulga. I admire you for trying.
Powerful article by Peter Koenig that states that preference no. 1 should be peace, and I would suggest to have the text of Sergei Lavrov on this blog as a base.
“What this climate hype does, is allowing and prompting a plethora of new taxes, polluter taxes to be collected from the common people, from you and me.”
And I have such an idea in what direction this wealth transfer will go.
When I was a kid, I remember that ‘the whole science’ was convinced that we were heading towards a new Ice Age.
Just an overview of all the hypes of the last decennia: https://cei.org/blog/wrong-again-50-years-failed-eco-pocalyptic-predictions
I have some trouble in considering this an exact science. And it is rather amusing that Greta Thunberg has visited Obama, in his new mansion directly at the ocean – that would have been submerged by now following the ‘undisputable’ science that he based his policies on.
Greta Thunberg, I feel some sorry for her. She has every right on an opinion and voicing it, but isn’t it also my right to disagree? I already start to frown when somebody claims that she can *see CO2* (maybe go to Saudi Arabia then, tracking inflying stuff?), and I have such an idea that her parents are allowing this to cash in on it.
It is perfectly agreeable to worry and ask attention for our polluting this planet. Plastic waste is a time bomb, and I’m still not favorable of nuclear energy in its present form, and especially not when built on the Ring of Fire. Peter Koenig is of the opinion that peace is more important, and I can only agree on that.
Cheers, Rob
It is a denialist canard that the scientific community believed that an Ice Age was coming, in the 70s. Even while a few scientists did do so, the vast majority of relevant researchers were already convinced that warming was more likely. And the best carbon tax is the ‘tax and dividend’ scheme, where the revenue from carbon taxes is returned to the populace as a dividend. Used wisely it would be a good poverty reduction process, and driver of greater economic equality.
Greta has admitted that she has Aspergers Syndrome.
Aspies, as many of those with the condition call themselves, are, generally speaking, highly focused individuals, with more than average intelligence and powers of concentration.
To dismiss her or belittle her by suggesting she is a pawn of the MSM or multi national corporations, is hubristic.
Many young people have had the scales removed from their eyes on climate change because of Greta.
It won’t take long for many of them to wake up to the other EVILS that beset this planet and its inhabitants.
There are millions like Greta, young and old. The truly brainwashed are the denialists, who refuse to face reality.
Real scientists uncover the climate fraud policies easily but they are demonised, demonetized, and the favourite method is the new policies of not being able to work. In spite of this there is no concensus on climate change, on one side the politized science are run on state financing to control everything and the institutes still fails to make any proof of man made climate change and they fail as well in the scientific system of open debate, that is among scientists. There are many bright minds among scientists that are totally opposed to the AGW agenda by actually knowing it to be false, and they have managed to publish reports.
It is also a fact that AGW by a CO2 theory was refuted by concensus scientifically at the time it was introduced. By that time there were actual science involved in cracking the theory.
Today media is quite totalitarian pushing these ideas as well as the educational system which is now in some countries introduced at the age of 1 (kindergarten). Any real science that actuall can crack the theory have not been carried out by mainstream scientists, it is all centered on supporting AGW because of the dangers it may present in the future. This is a serious part of the propaganda.
While one professor did an acutal scientific method of measurements of temperature in a closed environment with and without CO2, found that the confinement with CO2 created slight cooling.
Gro Harlem Brundtland (UN World Commison on Environment and Development) was a member of the Rockefeller Club of Rome, Club of Madrid (both Rockefeller orgs aligned with Rotschild’s, the hidden british empire ). GHB was headhunted for the job of developing transfer of wealth from the rich countries into the developing countries empowering them to take more loans and pay those loans into the hands of the Rothschild Banking Syndicate that consists among other systems of the World Bank, IMF, BIS and other private banking corporations. Coming from a norwegian national socialism political elite she was perfect for developing dictatorship agenda under one world government that would ” we will find ways to transfer the wealth from the wealthy countries to the developing countries in the South” in her own words. According to the Rockefeller agenda part of developing a one world government was the ultimate goal of any of his policies which would facilitate exploiting everyone and enriching their banking corporations that also include the national banking system of the world , IMF , the World Bank , BIS .
The political elites from the Rockefeller (Rothschild syndicates) organsiations created these systems for totalitarian control of the world of politics and finance through total media control.
The intermediate goal was the IPCC and UNFCCC Climate change being the protocol for achieving these wealth transfers that are ultimately controlled by the IMF and World Bank and other private banks set up to handle transfers into developing countries that are exempted from the carbon protocols of emissions , just set up to receive payments of qotas that are then exploited by private banking. IMF and World Bank are all set up as private owned banks by the Rothschild syndicate as well as the national banking system in that country.
The set up of carbon exchanges are parallell schemes that are now mainstream policies, Al Gore is famous for investing heavily in carbon exchanges both in the USA and in Europe, while he presented his now debunked ” unconveniet truth ” propaganda film.
As usual they give each other prizes along the way also for propaganda reasons, a Nobel Peace prize was awarded to Al Gore and the UN (IPCC) as well, it happened a year after the Nobel Institute’s leader Geir Lundestand took part in the Bilderberger (Rothschild syndicate) conference., In 2007 the Nobel Peace prize was shared by Al Gore and IPCC (UN).
It is unclear how the subsequent climate change policies like massive migration out of Africa, the now private banking, GMO infested, dept ridden and corporate purchased Africa has contributed to world peace, the opposite is very clear however, it is part of economic warfare and outright war.
War is happening as US is involved in massive black operations in Africa and outright war like in Libya, creating massive migration corridors for travel through lawless countries . The Rothschild syndicate exploit this by having people like George Soros invest in the migration business while running the politcal elite in compliance all over the world.
There has been in the past total media control and propaganda to achieve these massive frauds designed to enrich the Rothschild syndicate of Banking and government . And national socialism is now making its way into USA through the democratic party. Fmr pres. Obama is famous for saying that “since the norwegians are so successful, maybe we should let the norwegians should run everything” . George Soros linked people are now involved in national socialism within the democrat’s party and the result is immediate conversion.
Media today are being developed into controlling the internet using tech conglomerates like Google, Facebook, Twitter and outright censorship of people and content across any platform, like the internet itself is a platform that the government want to run and control. The hidden empire has been uncovered and they are running for cover.
That the global parasites are seeking to profit from anthropogenic climate destabilisation does not change or refute the science, and the reality of rapid and global climate destabilisation.
Mulga:
“That the global parasites are seeking to profit from anthropogenic climate destabilisation does not change or refute the science, and the reality of rapid and global climate destabilisation”.
I never implied that it did. The reality are the facts. What causes the reality are very disputed, so are the science attempting to explain it.
When governments run the science it becomes more complicated. The governments established the IPCC to prove that increase in CO2 emission has caused global warming. The governments further assigned the Hadley Center for calculating the climate record to prove it.
There are no real insight into how they select and present the temperature record. A non-scientific approach that should be raising general concern since global climate policies are forced on everyone in opposition to democracy as a way of establish the rights of the politicians over the people, not the other way around as in democracy.
It was very easy to establish that IPCC, in their reports, used statistical projection as proof for an already established fact . In science this is basically a non scientific approach and can not prove anything, it is founded on an established theory. Further they claim they cannot find any other cause of the climatic warming. Another non-scientific approah. So IPCC reports are not scientific in essence they are the government propaganda.
The science is only ‘disputed’ by employees of the fossil fuel and Rightist financed denialist industry, and Rightwing ideologues. The science is firmly supported by ALL the Academies of Science and scientific societies on Earth, and 99% of actively publishing climate scientists. And all that is at stake are the lives of billions of humans and most of the rest of Life on Earth.
Peace, huh? Good idea. And how are we to achieve that exactly? Wait, I know, vote for Donald Trump, right? After all, didn’t he say once that he was going to “end the wars”? But what I didn’t understand at the time that peace would apparently be achieved by “obliterating” any country he happened to find irritating.
At least you seem to have some faith left in ‘voting’. Even in the awfully political correct Germany, voices are already raised that people don’t trust official election results anymore. Behind closed doors, that is.
Election promises are BS. Obama promised the first thing he would do was closing Guantanamo Bay.
The White House and Congress are owned by Israel. Directed ‘opposition’ like Ilhan Omar and AOC are actresses.
At least we can grant Trump that he didn’t start a new kinetic war *yet*. Pulling out troops doesn’t seem to work out so well, one tweet further he’s already on another idea. Pulling out only worked with Stormy so far.
As long as Israel dictates it, there will be no peace I fear. Wanting it is something else.
Cheers, Rob
Sorry, Rob. Only sarcasm, I’m afraid. I do like Bernie Sanders though, I admit. As far as Trump is concerned, it’s been pointed out before that many of his actions and plans for blockades, interdictions, etc. are already technically acts of war. As we all know, he has also been trying to get a war started with Venezuela. He has attacked Syria and has been unprecedentedly subservient to Israel (Golan, embassy move) neither actions are conducive to peace as you point out. Worse than that is his threat to obliterate 80 million Iranians which they have apparently noted and may choose to act on for all we know.
The Evil witch, Clinton, also promised to obliterate Iran. It seems that a New Purim is as popular with the Sabbat Goy stooges as it is with the Zionazis like Bibi et al.
It kind of disgusts me to have to defend Hillary Clinton. However, first of all she was discussing a hypothetical situation assuming an attack on Israel by Iran. Secondly, she was not president at the time so what she said was mere rhetoric. It had no more importance than John McCain’s “Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran”. Thirdly, so what? We are supposed to be pleased that Trump is not the only US politician to have threatened Iran?
Very true. Here in Austfailia, the vilest and most incompetent regime of villainous thugs, in power from 2013, managed ‘somehow’ to win the election in May. This came after six years or so where they lost EVERY opinion poll, results garnered by different methodologies, and where they changed leadership three times, instability that, traditionally, is considered electoral poison. Throughout the election campaign they were always behind, and exit polls all showed them losing c. 52% to 48%. Yet the ‘results’ were the opposite. It really defies credulity. If the regime had benefited from a great campaign of lies and bribery, their traditional tactics, it would, surely, have shown up, at least in the exit polls, but, ‘mysteriously’, it did not.
Tacitus said it all-‘They make a desert and call it peace’. The story of humanity at the end of its tether.
…”climate change”..?
“Just business”, and VERY profitable, but only for a bunch of fraudulent cockroaches.
It´s OVERWHELMING the scientific evidence against this SCAM.
BTW, Peter is right in his highlight about PEACE…
Regards.
It doesn’t mean that we as individuals with a wonderful brain given to us by nature shouldn’t take care within our environment circle just because of the Banking Syndicate (Rockefeller/Rothshield etc.) as well as those big companies together with certain politicians obsessed about money, profit and power only as well as implemented corruption.
Its our earth, our home and we all should care about.
Receipe for those denying climate change: just high school science or the first semesters of natural science at universities or colleges have enough information. Ice cores and stone formations/mountains etc. teach a lot. Its like our earth/universe tells us our earth’ history (includes astrophysics as well as astronomy).
Our species Homo sapiens sapiens isn’t very old to say. Our cells need a certain degree of temperature to function properly. Too hot or too cold isn’t very good for us. If temperatures change drastically (for example average temperature to about 3 to 4 degrees Celsius higher as today) we will all experience difficulties. Maybe the next generations could adapt to it (evolution still works, however behavior as well as phenotypes would change accordingly; enzymes as well as proteins would also have to change in this concern).
Our earth experienced in the past several temperature cycles. However, we Homo sapiens sapiens are still a newly emerged species in the light of evolution. Too cold or too hot will lead to the adaption which the nature of evolution always does – but it would take some time and our species as above mentioned would be replaced.
Climate change. Is it happening? I am not sure. But what I am sure of is that pollution is happening on a truly massive scale.
1. Overuse of renewable and non-renewable resources. Fossil fuels, water resources, clearance of forests.
2. Overburdening of the natural environment ‘sinks’ increasing levels of greenhouses gases in the air and of heavy metals in the soil, and the dumping of all sorts of waste materials, particularly plastics, just about everywhere.
3. Increasing destruction of eco systems to create more space for urban development.
The key point about all of this productions processes is that they enter production in state of low entropy – as useful materials) and leave in a state of high entropy (as useless materials, such as low temperature heat emissions, mixed municipal wastes, etcetera). No material recycling processes can therefore never be a 100% efficient.
Then after all efforts are made to recycle the unused energy and materials involved in production, there are still things left over in the form of residual waste and environmental damage. This is simply because the fundamental laws of thermodynamics cannot be overruled. For every ‘good’ to be produced there is also of necessity a ‘bad’ to be produced. The God of growth must be appeased and given his pound of flesh in the form of un-growth. For the bi-product of growth are what economists call negative externalities. No free lunch at nature’s expense.
So we hide the problem by dumping toxic plastic waste on the hapless inhabitants of Asia and Africa.
Yes, and we do indeed need to stop these stupid wars around the world. Wars happen because certain groups want them to happen – political, military, security and corporate elites.
Well said, Donald. Far better than your cousin, Daffy (LBD), I must say. The Club of Rome predicted a crisis in forty years, in the 70s, but not primarily from resource depletion, but from pollution, and they were spot on.
(This is a somewhat cleaned up and extended version of what I previously posted in the Moveable Feast Cafe)
Peace will do more for climate, not even talking about the wellbeing of the people’s of this world, than any number of kids that are used to push a political and policy message.
The whole climate change effort takes away the focus of what we should be doing and in this, I fully agree with Peter Koenig and kudus to him for saying it straight.
What is being done to children is unconscionable. Because kids believe what adults and their teachers tell them, they, the climate change activists are using children as their message carriers, and scaring them silly in the process, giving them gender re-assignment drugs, creating a gender disphoria questioning the foundations of what they are, young men or women and educating a bunch of future adults to be just little entitled wussies. Please take a look at the piece that Ramin just posted, where he describes the climate change activists.
/back-to-french-tear-gas-in-the-morning-smells-like-liberte-austerite/
Greta, the aspie is too scared to go to school. Ask yourself about the previous times when children were callously used to get everyone to react emotionally – think blond girls with braids. The moment children are used to push a message, that message is no longer reliable, because children are children and not mature enough to make long term adult decisions. And what is happening now, is a clear reach toward emotional decisions, instead of well-thought through policy. And the fear that is used to push this climate change narrative is a dead giveaway that something is seriously wrong somewhere.
Btw, Michael the Hockey Stick Mann – he says anyone that even want to think or research or check out this so-called climate change thing, or ask a question, are Russian bots .. fake identities and Russian troll farms. So, we know where this paragon of virtue stands.
Of course the memetic statistic always quoted, 98% of scientists are in agreement should make us scared, rather than make us buy this story. There is a reason for this number and all of those that are in agreement, are in agreement. Those that are not, are not counted and called denialists. So, cherry picking data is the order of the day as it is easy to count only those that hold a specific view. 98% if singers that sing in our choir, sing in our choir – incredible in its effort to disguise the real situation. You can follow it from here, as only a few dozen really are in agreement. Their paychecks depend on it. https://twitter.com/NIMN2019/status/1174945515370270721
We can only follow the Hockey Stick Mann, and then we realize that he has just been through a 7 or 9 year court case and to today consider his data proprietary and he fought the court and never made his data public. I wonder why – perhaps because it does not stand up, which others have proven and that is why Mann lost in court where he had perfect opportunity to make the numbers and the science stand up. Well, it does not, excepting for one moment in time, and our earth and its climate is ever changing.
This thing is nothing about climate and the change of climate and the oscillations in our physical world. Here are just a few quotes so that you can see what it is about ..
– We seek a centralized transformation that would make life on planet earth very different for everyone.
– Even if we are wrong on the science, we’re doing the right thing by policy.
– We will redistribute wealth by climate policy.
– Global governance, CO2 budgets for every man, woman and child on the planet.
– We need to treat meat eaters same as what we treat smokers and put them in a separate section of a restaurant.
These and pages more I’ve gathered from people like the European climate commissioner. Does it look to you as if they are talking about earth’s climate?
We all saw the crazy horrible stuff about save the climate, eat one another, just lately – as if we are cannibals.
You want these people to decide your policy? These people that want global governance and CO2 budgets for every man, woman or child on this planet? Centrally? The banks are bankrupt again if you’ve paid attention to the economics in the last few weeks, and you and I, my friend must pay for it. Do you want children to decide your policy? I know they are the cutest things there are on this earth, but reliable on the long term? I don’t think so – too much growing up to do.
Thing is – no policy prescribed as yet will have any impact on anything. It is a control thing, from top to bottom under the guise of policy with a political objective. Don’t tell me it is too big to be a ‘fiddle’ from some certain powers that be that prescribe policy that will change nothing, makes the ordinary person pay for that policy and use children for the mascots. 9/11 was a huge fiddle and they got away with that one so far.
And none of the climate change models and their predictions from 1990 has proved to be either accurate or predictive. These people do not want to do good for our earth, they want to control the humans that live on this earth. And because adults have more of a bs meter, they use children. We cannot control our earth as it is part of a much bigger system and the whole influences everything.
Mr. António Guterres must do his job in the UN, and work for the peace. That is why he is there, and that is why the UN is there in essence.
I went through the last IPCC report in detail, the one talking about the earth and agriculture and such subjects. I am sorry to advise that none of those authors ever planted a damn bean, and stuck around long enough to take their harvest from that plant. They are just completely dumb with actually doing the work but then want to tell others how to do it. Bureaucrats, the whole lot of them.
So, to cut this all short, a person who is generally hated, did a good thing. He took all the graphs presented in the IPCC last report, and analyzed them to show the cherry picking of data – I don’t know if we can call it fraud, but it is deliberately misleading if it is presented as science. Of course it is not this simple, but it is a short video that most (as well as kids) can understand. Now be very very scared, he is that hated type, a denialist – he is not counted when the holy number of 98% is computed. You will be surprised to see how many of those, the ones that are not counted, there are.
This non-sense of using children to push policy and political objectives must stop and we must work for the peace. I for one do not need teenagers in the sturm and drang years to decide anything excepting that that they need to decide in order to become functioning adults.
13 minutes – Tony Heller – doing some analysis that is simple to understand.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8455KEDitpU
And more that are not in agreement with the climate extremists. The UN’s world meteorological head who simply said … enough of this fear mongering and co-opting of political and policy goals.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=41&v=m-pvJ00E8ZE
We’ve been talking for a while about this in the Cafe. I’ve said and brought evidence that the Russians at least are not so on the climate change train. Here is another example in addition to the many that was already listed.
https://electroverse.net/top-russian-scientist-we-should-fear-a-deep-temperature-drop-not-global-warming/
With all this I am not advocating doing nothing. We are obviously doing a whole lot wrong on our earth. We can start with bombing it – and my 3 plastics bags do not hold a candle to a real bomb in terms of destructive potential – I’ll tell you what human action will change our climate – the use of nuclear technology as a weapon. It will change our climate in an instant and that is called nuclear winter. What I am saying is that the climate change organization in the UN is very very dirty, their methods and methodology suck as we can see with them using kids for their purpose, their data (they do not research, they invite others to research and choose what they want to use) is cherrypicked to tell a story and push a political and policy agenda, and we should be careful how much attention we pay here. There are other things, like peace, much more important and much more effective in doing what we need to do on our earth.
And always the screeching question : “Do you not care about the continuance of our species on earth?”. No I don’t, as that decision is not in my hands, and if you think it is in yours, the environment itself will teach you that it is not. And now that I am on a roll, those entitled that want the climate of our earth to be stable, for us to move back to a previous supposedly stable age, to not have storms, hurricanes, volcanoes, natural disasters etc., those who want a little soft rain to fall only when it is good for them, and the sun to shine just exactly when they want it – these folks live in unicorn land. There is nothing such as stability in nature long term on our planet and nature is not going to fulfill your entitled wish for a soft cushy life with nothing bad ever happening and not a drop of excess rain ever falling. You gotto live with it cause you cannot change it. By the way, the polar bears are thriving and the onset on winter this year in the Northern hemisphere is about 1 month earlier than average. We should be working on cleaning up (emissions as well because we have to do that anyway otherwise we can’t breathe) and seeking the peace. Positive productive work.
And somebody should tell the kids the truth.
Nice roll, my thoughts exactly, not as well organized as yours, but spot on. Especially the pimping out the kids part, just sick.
Thinking of me Da in boys school, and the other boys pimped out as free farm labour, were today one could sue the PTB for such treatment. Poor Greta, how far would she make it in a Dickinson world? Or a sweat shop in today’s Kualampur? Got her pimping the wrong thing, damn, where’s Bono when you really need him!
Hallelujah, I am not alone!
On the matter of emissions, we do in fact clean them such that the released emissions are water vapour and CO2.
The water is irrelevant and the CO2 is making the plant world more productive increasing earths capacity to sustain life.
We are attaking the use of the very resources that got us out of caves and got us shaking hands.
Wrong, but at least you are 100% consistent. CO2 is plant food, but only when other conditions are stable, Unfortunately rising greenhouse gas levels in the atmosphere are deranging the hydrological cycle, with an added 7-8% of water vapour in the atmosphere for ever one degree Celsius rise in temperatures a positive feed-back to more warming, and to weather disasters. You might, ignorantly, think water vapour is irrelevant, but those suffering record deluges and floods and Category Five cyclones will, I am certain, think otherwise.
Very well put Amarynth.
Mulga, I could’ve and would’ve written much the same posts as you with similar passion just a few years ago.
Now Amarynth echoes my views.
I’m still a desperate environmentalist. We are facing an environmental as well as nuclear Armageddon.
One thing I know for sure – given a pile of related facts – is ‘they’ could dispense with all fossil fuels and nuclear fission within a few years of retooling the world’s factories if ‘they’ simply released zero-point energy technology.
But ‘they’ will never do that unless enough wake up and shed the fear of ‘conspiracy labelling’ used against humanity.
Peter, how do your observations refute the facts of anthropogenic climate destabilisation? The ruling thugs have far more invested in fossil fuels and denying their harms than they ever will in the reality of climate destabilisation.
@amarynth
The Heller Video totally takes EVERYTHING regarding the scientific value of the IPCC to zero, for now, for the past and for the future.
If people act in like manner as with these statistics one knows they follow a strict agenda as far from science as is thinkably possible.
Another crime against humanity unfolds but honestly after 9/11 ANYTHING is possible and should not surprise anyone. What is surprising though is how many they still were able to hook !!
It speeks volumes about the mind’s constitution of the western people, they still are incapable of grasping what has happend to them and is still happening – so they have a deep desire to believe in the good – right at the place of the crime in a sense, a sub-conscious desire to keep the world intact which in reality lies in shreds.
Healing will be a very painfull and frightening experience for all of us !
And no not the WORLD lies in shreds only OUR world, the one we created, the lie ! The real world is out there as beautiful as ever and GOD is as he always was, everything is in order regarding HIS kingdom.
1. No effective human action to deal with climate change can occur until there is peace and cooperation among humans across the planet. Therefore, Peace is the number one priority.
2. The biggest threat to life on the world is nuclear destruction, not climate change. Even if climate change destroys human civilization, life (including human life) will continue, albeit at a reduced level. Nuclear devastation has the capacity to so throughly poison the plant that the extinction event will be even more enormous, with far less ability for life to recover. Couple nuclear devastation with climate change and the world gets a double whammy. Once again, Peace is more important than climate change, if only to avoid a double whammy.
3. Remove the sun and what do you get? A very cold and dead planet. Aside from a small amount of heat generated at the core of the earth, the sun is the only source of energy on which life on Earth can survive. Fluctuations in the amount of energy from the sun must inevitably affect the Earth. However, how much of the change in climate is due to solar fluctuations, or to the overburden of human activity or to any other potential source is not so easy to determine, but is also largely irrelevant, because the only thing we do have contol over is our own actions. To collectively survive, we need to take collective action, both to reduce our impact on the Earth (and CO2 emissions is only a small part of human impact) and to adapt to the changing environment. For collective action to happen, Peace comes first (see point 1).
Remove the sun and you get…….no surface life, core would still be warm, it doesn’t get heat from the sun, and life abounds at 39,000 feet below the ocean surface, no sun required. Life is life, down to the microbe.
Very eloquently and authentically put, thank you Peter! I was saying this as well, how their energy and time should best be put towards reviving the anti war movement, reigning in the out of control MIC. To me that indeed is priority #1. Should a major war break out in the ME, Iran, which the neocons and Zionists seem obsessed with, which no doubt will bring in world powers, esp neighboring China, Pakistan, Russia. Climate change will both least be your biggest concern and yet you may see actual climate change happen within minutes should it go nuclear. I give up on our youth today. I’m one step slower from joining the nihilist camp (which I’m none too happy about). Going to give this a full read this afternoon. Needed to be said. Hope it reaches enough people. I’m going to share it on reddit.
Good luck with that given the current US President. You mention “neocons and Zionists” It’s rather bizarre that the on-line community which is supposedly anti-war, never seems to exhaust their tolerance and patience with Donald Trump himself and remain quick to blame Bolton, Pompeo, Pence, Rubio, Hillary Clinton etc, etc. In fact anyone but Trump himself. Trump is a militarist, a unilateralist and an imperialist. He opposes wars that do not yield imperialist spoils. He was opposed to the Iraq war because the US did not steal Iraq’s oil. Why does so much of the on-line community appear to be oblivious to the fact that Trump himself is the problem? How can any progress be made until that realization is made?
Don’t worry Uncle Meat……there would be an instant Anti-war Movement ……as soon as the draft were reinstituted.
Actually Do worry about it…………. because there is no need for a draft as long as there are millions of warm bodies willing to volunteer for three square meals a day…………since the only skills the inductees have……is playing video games….and half of them can’t even talk…and be comprehended by anyone except their peers.
ALSO: “…………………Trump himself is the problem?”….Anonymous??
Nah. People that don’t want to understand what he is doing and NOT doing …..are more the problem than he is.
People that read the New York Times. People that don’t understand how much worse Hillary was and is. People that are too simpleminded and impatient to work on a really complex, challenging puzzle, namely:
What IS Donald Trump REALLY Up to???
We’ll find out, won’t we……???………unless you get your wish and he is impeached or assassinated.
In the mean time, we already know this much:
1. The witch is pretty much Politically Dead
2. The first Executive Order DJT signed enables the confiscation of ALL the assets of persons proven to have engaged in human trafficking…..the supply chain for pedophilia and child murder ,,,which are the preferred Empire means of Human Compromise and blackmail for discipline within their own globalist ranks and eliminating anyone of any potential great political, cultural or business influence…through “honey traps”
baited with models that are of age……….then switched for minors in their beds………. after drugging the targets of Compromise …by spiking their “refreshments”…. that kind of thing is endemic in this society……if you , the target wish to rise rapidly in your chosen (influential……….otherwise no one will tempt you with ANY bait…)
3. The Kabuki Theater of “militarist, unilateralist, imperialist” Trump is all Doom Trash Talk….and so far no real BOOM!! except for a couple of missiles hitting empty airfields in Syria…..mostly ALL bluff and bluster …..apparently more to deceive domestic hawks than cause Iran, Russia or China to “fold” (none of which is gonna happen…..he knows that!
No, he not THE problem. And he may not be up to being even remotely near 100% of THE solution either.
But partial …tentative steps…he has taken…and….so far so good……without any NEW wars on his watch.
Meanwhile……….. the bigger problem is simple minded people whose emotions are manipulated by The Fake News…..by the DNC….by Soros…..by the British Ruling class and Establishment to the point they can’t even see the obvious….outlined above.
Cosmic rays, Sun activity, cloud formation and climate on Earth are all connected. The amount of cosmic rays that reaches the Earth and causes cloud formation is influenced by Solar activity. The amount of cosmic rays that falls on Earth also depends on where the Solar system is located at any moment on its way around the center of our galaxy.
Svensmark: The Cloud Mystery
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ANMTPF1blpQ
———
First it was global warming. (Well, even before that it was global cooling. And warming.) Because global warming became ridiculously off (remember hockey stick?) compared with reality and compared with their own ever changing predictions when the so called man made global warming will destroy the planet, they admitted there is a ‘pause in global warming’. For a short period there were articles everywhere about a pause in global warming. It was admitted that the temperature stopped increasing two decades ago. A buzz about a pause in global warming happened only a couple of years ago and was soon quieted down. No one remembers that any more, lol, because all the space was taken by a never ending all encompassing Russia Gate.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2740788/Global-warming-pause-19-years-Data-reveals-Earth-s-temperature-remained-CONSTANT-1995.html
After a ‘pause in global warming’ narrative morphed again. The term global warming was replaced with climate changes. Simple facts, for example the one that TEMPERATURE rises BEFORE CO2 raises, which means CO2 levels are a result not a cause of temperature changes, were finally completely ignored. As were ignored all objections to manipulation of the data and objections to manipulative methods used.
Man made climate change and CO2 as the reason for it was then taken for granted. Internet was purged and stifled (in all areas), scientists and reporters also. When Trump was elected and shortly after, the last small attempts to discuss climate in media in a non fanatic manner ended. Since then in the media it is all about Russian meddling and radicalization in all areas.
So now we have only doom and gloom man made global changes predictions and ideologically possessed activists, anything else is considered and treated as evil and should be destroyed. No one even mentions any more in my opinion more valid prediction that a mini ice age is coming. It has nothing to do with human impact on the environment and would happen just the same even on an unpopulated Earth.
Manipulation of the data and groundless suppositions in ‘climate science’ are so convoluted that it is hardly possible to disentangle them. But don’t worry about that because the world will end and we will all die unless the population world wide is taxed based on CO2. Total control and centralized world government will help with implementation.
—–
Just a few examples for data manipulation:
German geologist accuses NASA of altering temperature records to support the global warming myth
https://www.sott.net/article/307614-German-geologist-accuses-NASA-of-altering-temperature-records-to-support-the-global-warming-myth
Brand New Elite Whistleblower Smashes Global Warming Science
http://www.activistpost.com/2017/02/brand-new-elite-whistleblower-smashes-global-warming-science.html
(How botched up a recent fraudulent global warming study was, explained by John Bates a medal-winning climate scientist. Fraudulent study claimed the uncomfortable “pause” in warming was really no pause at all. That study, pretending warming had never stopped, was timed to help negotiating nations at the Climate Summit in Paris in 2015.)
Global warming “hockey stick” data founded on FRAUD… computer models “hacked” to produce warming trend from any data set
http://www.naturalnews.com/2017-06-04-global-warming-hockey-stick-data-founded-fraud-computer-models-hacked-to-produce-warming-trend-from-any-data-set.html
Independent Audit Exposes the Fraud in Global Warming Data
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/world-news/climate/independent-audit-exposes-the-fraud-in-global-warming-data/
(“An independent audit of the key temperature dataset that is being used by climate models has exposed more than 70 problems with the data which render it “unfit for global studies.” Problems include zero degree temperatures in the Caribbean, 82 degree C temperatures in Colombia and ship-based recordings taken 100km inland.“)
The Dark Story Behind ‘Man-Made Global Warming’, Those Who Created it – And Why by F. William Engdahl
https://www.sott.net/article/398476-The-Dark-Story-Behind-Man-Made-Global-Warming-Those-Who-Created-it-And-Why
(“It’s very careless and amateur. About the standard of a first-year university student.” Among the errors, he cites places where temperature “averages were calculated from next to no information. For two years, the temperatures over land in the Southern Hemisphere were estimated from just one site in Indonesia.” In another place he found that for the Caribbean island, St Kitts temperature was recorded at 0 degrees C for a whole month, on two occasions.
… dataset is a joint production of the UK Met Office’s Hadley Centre and the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia. This was the group at East Anglia that was exposed several years ago for the notorious Climategate scandals of faking data and deleting embarrassing emails to hide it. Mainstream media promptly buried the story, turning attention instead on “who illegally hacked East Anglia emails.”)
———
It looks like everything is going according to the plan. In 1993 the Club of Rome in their book The First Global Revolution wrote:
It would seem that humans need a common motivation, namely a common adversary, to organize and act together in the vacuum; such a motivation must be found to bring the divided nations together to face an outside enemy, either a real one or else one invented for the purpose.
New enemies therefore have to be identified.
New strategies imagined, new weapons devised.
The common enemy of humanity is Man.
In searching for a common enemy against whom we can unite, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like, would fit the bill. In their totality and their interactions these phenomena do constitute a common threat which must be confronted by everyone together. All these dangers are caused by human intervention in natural processes, and it is only through changed attitudes and behaviour that they can be overcome.
The real enemy then is humanity itself.
https://archive.org/details/TheFirstGlobalRevolution/page/n85
An interesting video here is
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqF5n2JIFYE&t=511s
‘Global Warming’ is Population Reduction, Not Science
LaRouchePAC Videos
which “documents the actual Nazi origins of the current day environmentalist movement aimed at depopulating the planet”.
In general I think “Orwell” is overrated, but “climate change” seems to fit very well the concept of doublespeak: In a couple of years, when global cooling becomes a reality (sure, this is not sure, but seems quite likely), then they will have always warned about that.
Perhaps doublethink is not yet established in most individuals (in this case), they will still believe in “global warming”, and call it for now “climate change”; we can study the process of doublethink once global cooling becomes a reality. This might be interesting.
And the way the climate-crowd speaks perhaps is related to Newspeak.
Perhaps the switch to “fighting climate change” also reflects the current paralysis of the world: fight every change.
The global population must and will fall. The only matter in dispute is whether the reduction is gradual and humane, driven by a demographic transition empowered by poverty reduction and female empowerment, or rapidly and pitilessly, driven by a Malthusian collapse due to ecological devastation. It’s your choice.
It seems to me that universal peace is extremely unlikely. Except for the Pax Romana from 28 BCE to 211 AD the history of civilization has been rather violent. Moreover, I don’t see any trends in the modern world that might give us hope along those lines. Just the opposite, I’m afraid. Particularly, the Resource Wars seem to be heating up as the next phase of global competition with all the major powers (including China and Russia) struggling to grab up whatever remains of the Earth’s bounty. I believe the exponential growth paradigm would really need to be abandoned before any kind of sustainable world civilization is possible. Abandoning the growth paradigm is itself unlikely while the primary global economic order is neoliberal capitalism. So, that’s a lot of work to do.
Peace v climate change is a legitimate debate and does not deny one over the other. But the threat of nuclear war is more imminent: the threat of irreversible damage from climate change is a matter of decade(s); the trigger that could unleash events leading to nuclear Armageddon could begin at any time.
https://www.ghostsofhistory.wordpress.com/
I believe that what you say is true. Peace is the only condition that will allow the peoples of this world to return to a natural balance with life. It should be job number one. Keeping actual real factual peace should be the only purpose for which military power exists in the first place, and should be the only reason for its use. When peace finally comes to this world it will be a paradise. Take the US military budget for example. 700+ billion dollars every year applied to actually fixing anything in existance at all would be a big step in the right direction, I’d say.
Dear Peter Koenig
Thank you for the most intersting article. I too have been concered about the extraordinary pollution produced by the US and NATO militaries. Please see the following link which you may already be aware of. https://www.forbes.com/sites/niallmccarthy/2019/06/13/report-the-u-s-military-emits-more-co2-than-many-industrialized-nations-infographic/#55b9f4e34372
This refers only to the US Military unrestrained consumption of fossil fuels. I am interested to know or find a way of estimating the CO2 value of the US and Nato military budget that is spent on armaments. The amount of CO2 produced from the daily bombs, missiles, bullets, drones, rockets, ammo dumps blown up, buildings set ablaze etc etc. When the exploded armament emmissions are added to the fossil fuel consumption this would be even more shocking and must be publicised. Are you aware of any such work and if so, please kindly advise and also please start making this a headline issue. Exposing and publicising this this would be a significant step towards peace.
Russia Ratifies Paris Climate Accord
https://sputniknews.com/russia/201909231076868288-russian-prime-minister-signs-cabinet-resolution-on-ratifying-paris-climate-accord/
The Paris Agreement is a deal under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change that focuses on issues related to greenhouse gas emissions. It was signed by 196 states on 22 April 2016.
Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev has signed a Cabinet resolution on ratifying the Paris climate agreement.
Russia signed the agreement on 22 April 2016. 195 nations and the European Union have signed the Agreement by now. However, ten nations are still yet to ratify the deal.
The deal aims to limit global average temperatures to less than 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. The agreement also aims to create more financing for lowering greenhouse gas emissions and support more climate-resilient development.
Notably, the United States announced its intention to withdraw from the accord. It is entitled to leave it not earlier than November 2020.
Thanks for astute article Peter, offered solutions are sound.
Jefferson City Post had an article titled “melting glaciers would flood earth’s big cities” this was in the issue dated May 2nd, 1932.
Recently a term “global warming” was changed to “climate change”, I for intellectual reasons cannot accept either of those terms.
Just saying
Yes-I do not doubt that you deny the settled science for ‘intellectual’ reasons. Sadly.
Settled science would never use such vague and preposterous term as “climate change” and yes it should be insulting to every human with any intelligence and capability to think critically.
Further, Gravity of current situation is beyond collective capability of human to solve, get over it. Future archeologists with 3 eyes will determine that 2 eyed primitive species once inhabiting Earth died off due to meteor impact. Sort of what our modern and settled science determined about dinosaurs.
Their archeological findings won’t produce evidence of geo engineering, ionizing and non-ionizing radiation, collective insanities, flatulent cows, morgellons disease…
Arguing about nomenclature in a strange attempt to refute hard science backed up by observations is really bottom of the barrel stuff. I call it Anthropogenic (because caused by human activities)climate destabilisation (because the stable Holocene climate allowed human civilization to develop). Any problems with that?
Pay better attention to what many commenters are saying to you. I and some others not once expressed any deny of this climate havoc the planet is increasingly throwing at us.
Your excessive defensiveness annulates very valid points you bring to this debate. If you reply in blind disagreement at nearly anything being said here doesn’t serve anybody’s interests but the establishment. They want us to disagree.
This website attract many broad spectrum of high calibre thinkers, so I learn.
You Mulga are using term “climate destabilization” which is more descriptive term and harder to hijack by establishment for their own I’ll purposes. I like that.
S75, I am rather agitated over this disaster because I know, with absolute certainty, that, barring some miracle, the ecological collapse will destroy humanity this century. I rather find denialism, particularly in its most banal yet intransigent form, at this time to be very enraging, with so much, in fact with everything, at stake.
Mulga , I urge you to consider, if that is possible , that you may be wrong .
On this matter, and with no unknown external events interceding, I have as absolute a certainty as I can imagine, but I really hope that I am incorrect.
I have difficulty to respect any scientific evidence of that kind when it’s end of September and tomorrow forecast calls for snow. That’s at least month too early, do you understand!? This is not local, last year agri zones were moved some 100km South, here in North America, it never made corporate news.
Personal observation overrides any Sorros financed science, this is not to deny gravity of the situation.
So called “climate change” scheme is not biggest concern of mine if compared to other compounded disasters humanity is facing.
It’s ‘climate destabilisation’ more correctly, and the few instances of cold excursions and cold records, now outnumbered more than ten to one but hot records, are symptoms of the rapidly destabilising GLOBAL climate, not refutations of it.
I am not a scientist, just mere engineer, graduated about 40 year ago in Eastern Europe. Part of the schooling was data collection, measurements and, of course, interpretation of data. And it happened to be hydrology related and meteorological data. I know a few things about meteorological stations, where to put them, how to read and transfer data to the lab for analyzing and storing. What we always knew was that at least 40% of measuring devices was not functioning properly. At some point technology gave us ability to collect data electronically and transfer it electronically. proportion of unreliable (incorrect, suspect, missing etc) data went up, instead down. Before technology, a human was needed to read what was measured. Then sensors and wireless connections replaced humans. Where we had a simple yardstick to measure depth of a river, we have now an ultrasound device that sends a wave to the water surface, measures travel time of the wave, then stores data in a computer-like device, which is coupled to a modem, which send data seamlessly to the users. We learned quickly that fine and sensitive electronic devices do to work well in harsh weather and environmental conditions – moisture, dust, high/low temperatures, wind, lightning strikes and such… Many times we would learn that sensors went haywire or transmitters polluted data, only after a significant period of time. As a consequence, we let bad data into the system, without knowing when the data went bad. Or, simply, there was no data any more for a while, then technicians go out to check, etc. etc.
The point is, it is almost impossible to collect good data, without gaps and distortions. Further, look at the meaning of phrase “average temperature”. It can mean anything. Average temperature in a copper mill where my grandpa worked was about 40 C, day night, all year long. Average temperature in my room is something very different. If we are talking about average temperature readings on thousands meteo stations, uniformly distributed on earths surface, properly calibrated and in state of statistical control (OK, this is scientific, but never mind), maintained well, in good repair, then we might talk about global average temperature. Only, a station on Antarctica and one in Sahara and one in Sydney AU, may not really be comparable. So we need to group them, based on similar conditions. Then we have to figure out how they all contribute to what we call global average temperature. Different (equally good) grouping will produce different results – sometimes very different – average readings. Since we don’t know the definition of average temperature, with all factors taken into account, we cannot even talk about any average, up or down. Since wars are raging all over the world, many areas are not covered at all, or facilities are out of service. So available raw data pool shrinks significantly.
The, any statistician will tell you that forecasting based on extrapolating even good data leads to at list “open for interpretation” results, not absolute truth.
By the way, what is the quality and quantity of data coming from Middle East (from Turkey to Afghanistan) or Central and South america? So much about uniformly covered Earth’s surface.
I cannot say this or that model is good or not good enough. But I can remind you of “garbage in garbage out” rule. It may well be that we are heading into much warmer future, or colder. If there is no data, it boils down to religious sticking to one or other truth. If we cannot prove anything, then we can not be sure there is the ultimate truth.
No doubt us humans keep destroying the planet, as we always have done. But that is all anecdotal, and Mother Nature can undo anything we did in jiffy. OK, plastic may linger for a while, unless UV degrades it.
No purpose trying to convince each other. This site is about world politics, news that we cannot get anywhere else. I believe there are sites where people can discuss or deny global warming, climate change, and of course, Santa Claus. What will happen to him if all North Pol ice melts off?
Do you ignore ALL observations, or only those which trouble your worldview. Do you really think that the entire global scientific community are so stupid or corrupt as to not take the inconsistencies of measurement into account?
Peace Mr. Koenig?
I have here in my possession a book with some interesting history about the UN:
“Foundations of the United Nations were laid by the United States, the United Kingdom, and the Soviet Union, from August 21 to September28, 1944, in the Dumbarton Oaks conference in Washington. immediately afterward, the Republic of China became one of the five founding nations, and was given lifetime membership in the Security Council. Her population was larger than 3/4 of the nations who held membership in the UN. Even in Taiwan, she maintained diplomatic relationship with 60 countries of the world. In the field of commerce, she exported over a billion dollars worth of merchandise annually, and yet when Albania, with a population half the size of Philadelphia, made a motion that the republic of China be expelled, the smaller nations rallied to the suggestion in a demonstration of emotionalism and bias that left a permanent blemish on the record of the UN. Ambassador Bush said on October 25, 1971, “Never have I seen such hate.”
The late David Lawrence, respected news journalist and editor of the U.S. News and World Report, said , “Can any nation be safe in an atmosphere of such irresponsible and emotional action?”
The Chinese leaders returned to Taiwan in tears. They had carried with them a record free from blot or blemish. Their dues had been paid. Their position had been held with honor. But without a single grievance against them, they were expelled and not even granted the courtesy of being permitted to speak for themselves. Someone dared to suggest before their departure that perhaps Communist China and Nationalist China could each have seat. The pro communist block pounded their desks and shouted down the proposal. A few days later, they were willing to talk about 2 seats being given to both West Germany and Communist East Germany, to sit side by side.” pg. 116-117 Cantelon
The UN is nothing but a failure. Heck on the next pages of this profound little book is a roll call of the wars that have been fought from 1947 to 1974 and the quotes concerning this organization and its early history is astounding really.
They really do espouse communism as the answer?
So, Taiwan, sundered from China by US action in 1949, is the ‘real’ China, is it? Perhaps Rhode Island is the real USA, in your view.
For 15 years or so I was swept up in global warming/climate change anxiety, angst and activism.
But I have an addictive desire to keep following data, evidence, factoids even if they lead down rabbit holes that contradict my views at the time. Stick with hypotheses and never get crusted onto beliefs and the world of knowledge opens up. Life is never boring.
So over the past 3 to 5 years, for a number of reasons I am gradually accepting the likelihood that anthropogenic induced global warming is an elaborate scam involving a few controlled scientists and many well-meaning scientists and activists who have adopted the theory as part of the dominant paradigm which as Thomas Kuhn explained will always warp science towards its governing theories.
Peter Koenig’s brave and excellent article resonates with me.
Why is stopping greenhouse gases so critical when the following are not:
Biodiversity depletion.
Planetary plasticide.
Toxic pollution – including radioactive waste.
Desertification and rain forest destruction.
Peace.
Certainly there is overlap where green technology could clean up the air, reduce toxins and need for nuclear. Or carbon credits could be used to save old growth forests and biodiversity.
But somehow only carbon credits into a globalist tax system seems to be the main agenda. Koenig is right – something smells when the other pressing needs are ‘uncool’ and the MSM focuses only on greenhouse gases.
I could never have imagined holding this level of scepticism a few years ago re anthropogenic global warming- but if you research you find a number of climatologists who go against the prevailing paradigm and talk of intense pressure to conform despite contradictory data. They point to the sun not to CO2.
That doesn’t mean we’re not sliding into an ecological catastrophe – but we need a holistic approach on all levels. That entails taking on powerful monopolies and systems. It might mean releasing clean energy technologies that have been suppressed. Certainly we need natural technologies of 100% biodegradable ecoplastics and best use of organic soil enriching farming.
Turning the world’s soldiers into farmers and park rangers is worth visualising in this quantum universe.
@Peter from Oz
They point to the sun not to CO2
I’m glad to hear you have an open mind and are searching. Keep searching and always ask right questions like for example the two asked by God Himself to a man in the book of Job:
Does the rain have a father?
Who fathers the drops of dew? Job 38:28
Now why pray tell would a God be asking such questions of a man to answer? Why?
Because it goes to the reason for life yes? I mean water is the lifeblood of the planet and for a planet to come equipped with a system that provides this very life sustaining liquid indeed life giving resource surely bespeaks the existence of a Creator. Fox really covers it all amazing.
I like Muggeridge view
Science and faith will come together is one big blessed consummation.
He’s right
As for the sun we use a thermostat to control the heat in our homes correct? Well can a God not control the sun and turn up the heat as He deems necessary? You will find in the book of Revelation God says that at a coming time man will experience a scorching with fire when the sun will burn hotter than ever and why such a punishment? Well the CO2 of the human heart and soul called SIN really!l
The fourth angel poured out his bowl on the sun, and the sun was allowed to scorch people with fire. 9 They were seared by the intense heat and they cursed the name of God, who had control over these plagues, but they refused to repent and glorify him. Revelation 16:5-12
Wow, its amazing how much the bible teaches climate change it really is astonishing!
I guess for me the big question is are we arriving to the end are we the terminal generation? That for me has become the all important question now?
You know the answer to your question about end times Milan “there will be wars and rumors of wars…”
Ps: very motivated debate with lots of great comments
That’s a bogus argument. All the ecological catastrophes you mention are vital, and those who wish to reverse the worst of all, anthropogenic climate destabilisation, are invariably those acting against those cataclysms, too. And the deniers of climate destabilisation, almost all on the ideological Right, generally deny all those, and all other, ecological crises. You have inverted the facts and reality, and lapsed into plain denialist paranoia and conspiracy mongering.
More juicy morsels to chew on where the history of the UN is concerned:
“When the United Nations chose to place its headquarters on the banks of the Hudson river in New York, the American government loaned 65 million tax free toward the center. john D. Rockefeller, Jr, gave 8 million toward the land. The City of New York gave 26.5 million to prepare the site. The Ford foundation gave over 6 million toward a library to contain 400,000 books,. within a quarter of a century, the expenditures of the United Nations reached 9.2 billion. Of this amount, the United states has provided 41%. the financial records in a single year revealed Americans paid 31.8% of the annual UN budget.
The picture grew more discouraging when one gazed at the financial records of a single year and saw that Russia was 66.9 million in the red. Apparently not content to have the United States carry the heavy financial burden of the United Nations, the Russians wanted her to do even more. On Friday, November 17, 1972, the Los angels Times carried an article which read
Russia urges U.S. to increase UN aid. the normally humdrum budgetary committee broke into oratorical fireworks…V.S. Safronchuk speaking to the General Assembly said, ” the U.S. should be assessed 38.4 % of its present 31.52%.” This brought U.S. Ambassador George Bush to his feet; pointing to Safronchuk, Bush asserted that his government pays 40% of the overall costs, those outside as well as inside the regular budget, compared with the Soviet’s contribution of 7%.
A look at the program within the UN that was supposed to be carried on as a humanitarian effort for the needy of the world UNICEF revealed in 1970 that Russia gave 5.2 million compared to America’s 159 million. this meant that Russia gave 1.47% compared to America’s 45%.
Where I asked myself, were the men who said the doctrines of Communism were closest to those of the early church Christians.”
I say money for really nothing yes?
Disappointed at the number of comments that dispute /deny /disregard the irrefutable fact that pumping unimaginable amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere will adversely impact the incredibly delicate climate balance that has allowed our species to flourish.
I agree. However. Dinosaurs are a good parable for humans today. They never technically died out and never went extinct. Dinosaurs evolved into something new: birds. We already know that “the current rate of extinction is 10 to 100 times higher than in any of the previous mass extinctions in the history of Earth”.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocene_extinction
We just lost 75% of insects and 50% of birds in less than 30 years. We have never ever seen anything like it before. Birds are modern-day dinosaurs but even after a big meteoroid and volcanic activities, dinosaurs never vanished as fast as life in earth does today. Will we go extinct is the wrong question. If only a handful of the 7 billion humans remain, we have technically survived. But at what cost? For most animals, including humans, survival alone is not enough for life to be worth living.
The main cause of our 6th extinction event is not climate change by the way. Climate change is ranked as the 3rd leading cause. By far the biggest impact is land use aka meat. Meat requires 77% of all agricultural land but produces only 17% of all calories. Ergo, we also waste more than 80% of all fresh-water for a few calories. https://ourworldindata.org/uploads/2013/10/Land-use-graphic-01-01-01.png
Because of meat & milk, our forests have disappeared. Forrests store more CO2 and produce more water than any geo-engineering tech ever could. We do not count these opportunity costs when we look at CO2 of meat – why? Because of the feed yield requirements of meat&milk, we do not practise organic agriculture anymore and health soil humus is a thing of the past. Again, no geo-engineering tech can do what healthy humus does in terms of CO2 storage, water and food nutrients.
Geo-Engineering stands for the same philosophy that brought us the Green Revolution. The Green Revolution promised more yields and being able to feed the world. As result we now face the biggest mass-extinction in history. Most life on earth lives in concentration camps (factory farms). Now Geo-Engineering promises the same as the Green Revolution did. This is dangerous. Geo-Engineering represents the end of us, not hope for a new beginning. We are too insecure and too pride to accept that we humans depend on wild and natural ecosystem services and not the other way around. Our current thinking about the environment sees us in the center, the sun circling around us. If we want to survive, we need to start using technology to preserve nature, not to replace it. It starts with accepting a simple fact: We humans are far away from being able to replace nature. We humans depend on wild ecosystem services to survive.
Excellent comment Nikolas. My one slight quibble is that I do not think that ranking the causes of the ecological Holocaust is a rewarding way to go. All the causes eg anthropogenic climate destabilisation, deforestation, massive pollution of all types, over-fishing, soil-destroying agriculture etc are synergistic with one another, and all caused or massively worsened by capitalism, that cancerous death-cult.
Synergism is one major factor people overlook. They seem to see one pet peeve as being entirely to blame and resent people bringing up other factors. It’s not only “Yes, A and yes, B.” It’s “B” making the impact of “A” much much worse. One example, I can think of immediately is the fires in California. (I take it you live in Melbourne. I have friends in the hills north of there. They described the fires as unimaginably terrifying.) Climate change is clearly a major factor, maybe the most major factor, but I saw research recently that all the wireless technology that is going up at an exponential pace causes evergreens to release terpenes into the air around them, making them much more flammable, especially under conditions of little wind.
That would not be as much a factor in the Arctic fires, though, which have been notable this year.
That is very disturbing about the microwave stations. At c.50 degrees Celsius, which we will reach ‘ere long, the cloud of volatile vapour that surrounds the canopies of the oil-rich eucalyptus trees will, theoretically, be capable of spontaneous combustion, and, no doubt, a crown fire like the one that traveled at terrifying speed in Victoria in 1939.
“unimaginable amounts”
Could you show your working Bill?
You seem to have that completely wrong. Human additions and removals are miniscule in comparison to the natural flux.
Mulga has all the zeal for scientific consensus that a supporter of the Ptolemaic universe had in the days of Galileo. Such faith!
Science has progressed a little since the days of Galileo.
That is true, but it is vital to remember that the progress was achieved by sticking to the scientific method.
Briefly stated , this requires that all competing explanations or causes be eliminated leaving only one provisional cause which then becomes the theory until such time as further advances in knowledge prove the theory to be false.
All of this requires that there be no unknowns , whether known or unknown. In other words we would have to know (tentatively) exactly how the climate works .
And there’s the rub . . . . we don’t.
And that is why nobody has established the existence of AGW ; neither can the non-existence of AGW be proven.
Philosophy of Science 101
Good point, however the basic scientific principles from which the conclusions of human induced climate change are derived are not new. The literature dates back two hundred years or more. So I would have to conclude that your assertion is not valid.
To assert that two hundred years of literature means that we know all there is to know about climate seems somewhat of a stretch.
We know ENOUGH to know that the denialists are dedicated, for reasons connected to moral ponerology and psychopathology, to exterminating Life on Earth.
You missed the point completely and conceded that we do not know it all.
That means that the existence or non-existence of AGW cannot be established using the scientific method which requires elimination of all possible competing causes .
So you are absolutely welcome to your conjecture , but that is all that it is.
And so it remains the case, there being currently no Unified General Theory of Climate Regulation,(as you admit), that no attribution of causation to one thing or another is possible.
That is axiomatic ; you seem unwilling to accept that.
The willing destruction of one’s own intellect and any adherence to science, rationality, logic and the plain evidence from reality is a phenomenon of truly amazing significance. Chosing self-destruction for some ideological grudge or malformation of one’s moral sensibility and psychological integrity, is very hard to explain. The Death Instinct at the end of the human journey, from Africa to a global Jonestown.
If the day ever comes when we know everything there is to know about everything that would be a very sad day indeed. However, we do know more about the world than we did 1000 years ago or two hundred. We’ll never know everything but we don’t need to. To understand climate change I believe we know enough.
That’s fine David , just don’t call it science because it cannot be science in the absence of that critical knowledge.
Pernicious garbage. You are demanding that we do nothing to avoid a global climate destabilisation Holocaust because it is only 99% certain. I call that deranged.
To prove that AGW exists , we must first know how the climate works. There is no simpler way to say this.
I understand your point. I simply don’t agree. I don’t know of any field in which every conceivable fact is known. Your point reflects an absolutist vision of the scientific process which is not the practical reality. Your point would lead to the conclusion that science itself is simply a meaningless concept. You are free to think that of course and to use whatever definition you happen to prefer, as do I. I suppose we’ll just have to agree to disagree.
Again you are missing the point that there is no certainty from the scientific process, and it is a far cry from your portrayal as absolutism.
Every result is conditional, for exactly the same reason i.e. that we do not have perfect knowledge. Indeed it is not required in order to make progress in science. When we test hypotheses against reality , we soon find out when they are wrong.
Science is a process; how can it possibly be meaningless?
David, it is quite inconsistent to , on the one hand , claim scientific rectitude, and on the other hand, to reject the scientific method.
David isn’t rejecting the scientific method-the verbose ‘Anonymous’ and, I assume, you, are. David is defending it from obscurantist gibberish.
Meanwhile, billions die, and you seem quite happy with that.
Yes-let’s just quibble about niceties of philosophy as humanity is driven to extinction. How intellectually satisfying is that!
From Paradise to Hell: Cataclysm Might Have Turned Venus Uninhabitable Eons Ago, Scientists Claim
https://sputniknews.com/science/201909231076872179-huge-cataclysm-might-have-turned-venus-uninhabitable-eons-ago-scientists-claim/
“Our hypothesis is that Venus may have had a stable climate for billions of years”, said Michael Way, planetary scientist from NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies. “It is possible that the near-global resurfacing event is responsible for its transformation from an Earth-like climate to the hellish hot-house we see today.”
The authors of the research, whose findings were presented at the EPSC-DPS Joint Meeting 2019 in Geneva, postulated that Venus “spent most of its history with surface liquid water, plate tectonics, and subsequently a stable temperate climate akin to that of Earth through much of its own [history],” and this climatic stability might have lasted for up to 3 billion years.
“Something happened on Venus where a huge amount of gas was released into the atmosphere and couldn’t be re-absorbed by the rocks. On Earth we have some examples of large-scale outgassing, for instance the creation of the Siberian Traps 500 million years ago which is linked to a mass extinction, but nothing on this scale. It completely transformed Venus,” Way explained.
“Our models show that there is a real possibility that Venus could have been habitable and radically different from the Venus we see today,” Way added. “This opens up all kinds of implications for exoplanets found in what is called the ‘Venus Zone,’ which may in fact host liquid water and temperate climates.”
Call it terminal global warming. Will Earth follow suit and be absorbed into “the Venus zone”, as well?
The out-gassing cause by human activities in the last 200 years has been greater and more rapid than that which occurred with the Siberian Traps, and it is STILL increasing. Perhaps the inevitable ‘hot-house Earth’ may run out of control this time. We’ll all be long dead before that occurs, or not.
The gas that changed Venus was CO2 (oh, sorry, rightwing climatology “experts”, that’s carbon dioxide ;D).
‘Hellish hot-house’ Venus could have been habitable before major surface devastation – new research
https://www.rt.com/news/469390-venus-once-habitable-study/
Nice work on this subject by you here, MM. Cheers.
Thanks vot-it’s my duty, to the children, if no-one else.
Climate change or global warming is engineered to be the main locomotive of the Global Dictatorship and man made Pride ” Holocaust ” of undesirables. The last world war would stop it,because it will happen before this propaganda affecting the people conscience on a large scale.
Because I had some time to loose I DuckDuckGo the Internet for climate change and found this page for example:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_climate_change_science
There is a graph there ,just at the top : Global Temperature Trends 1880–2017
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_climate_change_science#/media/File:Global_Temperature_Trends.png
It shows a Global Cooling between 1945 and 1980. I have checked the Global population between 1945 and 1980:
It doubled ! ( extra 2 billions )
https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/world-population-by-year/
And the USA economic growth between 1945 to 1980:
https://www.thebalance.com/us-gdp-by-year-3305543
It tripled.
The Summary: Between 1945 to 1980 an increase of the world population of 2 billions and economic growth in USA of 4 trillions generated a Global Cooling instead of Warming.
I doubt that 2 billions of people didn’t breathe for so long ( 35 years ) or the huge economic growth was not sustained by any form of classical energy.
PS: Bookmark that page on Wikipedia before the new updates !
The out-gassing cause by human activities in the last 200 years has been greater and more rapid than that which occurred with the Siberian Traps, and it is STILL increasing. Perhaps the inevitable ‘hot-house Earth’ may run out of control this time. We’ll all be long dead before that occurs, or not.
The global cooling from c. 1940-80 was caused by the particulate smogs caused by Western industrialisation. Once these were more or less eliminated, to combat acid rain among other reasons, the anthropogenic warming recommenced. And now a degree or two Celsius of warming has been masked by another episode of global dimming caused by particulate pollution from East and South Asia mostly. Sorry to pop your bubble. Elementary, actually.
” The global cooling from c. 1940-80 was caused by the particulate smogs caused by Western industrialisation.”
I got it,the industrialization is the main cause of global cooling from 1940-80. We need more then ( East and South ) !
I still believe that the chart is similar to a Mother Duck and her 9 ducklings and 2 piglets on the lake. The global cooling or the explanations ( or both,simultaneously ) don’t fit in the picture. It looks like a fake one.
“I got it,the industrialization is the main cause of global cooling from 1940-80. We need more then ( East and South ) !”
Smog, not industrialization, caused the cooling. You didn’t get it, you just misrepresented what the comment writer wrote to continue trolling. The standard right wing form of “debate”.
Don’t let paranoia cloud your intellect Sherlock. Why would anyone ‘fake’ records such as those, which have been repeated and confirmed so very often?
I have forgotten something important:
Peter,amarynth and the 90% ( around ): Hats off !
“Wait a minute – Climate Change number ONE? – How about PEACE?” Exactly!! I wondered many times about that. Besides the war industry (and war activities) are one of the most polluting in our planet. Take for instance the US dropping uranium depleted ammo to right and left, even right in the heart of Europe (Balkans). Why nobody protests this?. My opinion is that Greta & Co movement main objective is to mislead the real and honest environmentalists.
Cobblers-they are ALL important. I fact it is the denialists who are practising diversion, by asserting that all the other ecological catastrophes are vital, except for anthropogenic climate destabilisation. I wonder why.
@Mulga
The problem is not climate change, it has changed numerous times for eons of time (the Earth even practically became a “snow ball” in its distant past). The issue re climate is that our tech civilization is ill-equipped to go along these changes. We as a species are no longer living in small groups that are able to migrate easily to greener pastures. We have become so comfy in our artificial environment that we can’t fathom drastic changes that would severely compromise the crutches we have created over a rather short span of time.
We should learn to “go with the flow” but it would take a radical collective shift. Hammering the wrong messages is preventing this collective mindset to change. In my opinion, this civilization is toast, it will be utterly done for within the next 100 years (and probably sooner than later).
Mr. Mumblebrain, honorable sir, thank you for taking the time to answer so many arguments on this thread. And this your last comment does you credit. Science is a noble profession, and you have represented it in a dedicated manner without resorting to the extreme frustration that must accompany the attempt. Climate is the ultimate and universal decider for us fragile mortals so there is really no conflict when it comes to the ways in which we attempt to preserve the narrow limits in which we and all living creatures can exist. There’s no mystery to that. Each of us has a part to play, and each must find it. In peace.
I don’t ever suppose that there is conflict between science and faith, but that is just me. Each must face that for him or her self. I am often overcome by thinking about the vast and incomprehensible universe. It simply renews my faith; there is no conflict. I thank you for staying the course here. And, God bless you and all who are dear to you in the coming months.
Thanks, Juliana, and may God or Gaia preserve you and yours.
Greta Thunberg, another freak in the Western Freak Show.
Orbital effects on climate
There are various solar/celestial effects that exist which have an effect on Earth’s climate. These effects
usually occur in cycles, and primarily include how Earth’s obliquity, the eccentricity of Earth’s orbit, and
the precession of the equinoxes and solstices affect Earth’s climate. In addition to these effects, there
are also other factors that have an effect on Earth’s climate. These other factors include how sun activity
affects climate[1] and how celestial phenomena, such as meteors, affect Earth’s climate. Some of these
factors aren’t yet well understood, for instance the ice ages occur on 100,000 year cycles, and it’s not completely understood why the various effects with this periodicity have such a strong effect on glaciation
(see the 100,000-year problem).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbital_effects_on_climate
………………………………………………………………………….
Milankovitch cycles
Milankovitch cycles describe the collective effects of changes in the Earth’s movements on its climate
over thousands of years. The term is named for Serbian geophysicist and astronomer Milutin Milanković.
In the 1920s, he hypothesized that variations in eccentricity, axial tilt, and precession of the Earth’s orbit resulted in cyclical variation in the solar radiation reaching the Earth, and that this orbital forcing strongly influenced climatic patterns on Earth.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milankovitch_cycles
Since the late David Koch was mentioned above I thought it might be useful to make a comment on his approach to address the climate change issue. Mr Koch was an intelligent man and an MIT trained engineer. He has also been called the ultimate climate change denier. This is a bit of an oversimplification though. In fact, he was actually respectful of the science itself. This might seem to be a contradiction since Koch Industries profits are heavily dependent on fossil fuel based production. However, Mr Koch realized that he didn’t really need to care about the science. All he cared about was the public policy prescriptions to deal with it such as carbon tax. That’s what would actually cost him money.
The David H Koch Fund for Science is a major contributor to the PBS science program NOVA. He funded an episode called Decoding the Weather Machine. When one watches this it appears to present a case for climate change and in fact it does. However, what is missing here is any reference to the IPCC, the Paris Climate agreement, carbon tax or any public policy initiatives whatsoever. The show suggest that yes, climate change is real and a problem, however it is a challenge that can be met through free market solutions, adaptation to the changes and other non-governmental solutions.
This is actually a much more sophisticated approach and more difficult to argue against than the simplistic and easily refuted “it’s a hoax” meme.
I suppose no-one else appreciates the fundamental irony of this discussion? This began with a plea and exhortation from Mr. Koenig for us to focus our attention and energy on Peace and not Climate. Nevertheless, essentially all the following commentary and dialog has been on Climate and not Peace. Like the old saw in which we are told to not think of an elephant. Of course all we then think about is an elephant.
It is a pity we have to wade through climate change muck to even get to peace. It is a pity to be derailed by the spittle-flecked believers and hard ideologues on this or that or the other that cannot understand if one cannot discuss peace, and one has to decide between peace and climate change, well … we are lost already. A little further on I tried to give a litmus test that stands in my view – a litmus test for an honest climate activist and a litmus test for an honest climate scientist. We should probably work those until they stand and we can easily throw out the derailing of a peace conversation … and then we can get to peace.
.
In all the comments in this thread, and there were thoroughly ones, I consider this one as one of the most reflecting.
We cannot reach peace, when we are throwing labels at each other and do ‘calling names’. I could give many, many examples but it will bring us not anywhere further for now. It is the reason that I mainly refer from discussions like this. I got bored today looking at the face of an ’emo-bullying’ face of Greta Thunberg, resembling in my associating to that daughter of the Addams family, and still I feel pity for her. She should blame her parents, that are cashing on her, and she deserves a childhood, while her parents were travelling around the whole time. Not even calling others that are simply exploiting her. And yes, I know autistic people, even worse than her, some of them have earned a special place in my heart. Apart from her juggling around, I think she deserves better.
When we can not even listen normally to each other, on any subject at all, we can forget peace. There is still so much work to do. But imho it starts with listening to each other. Call me naive and yes, I’m from time to time quite sarcastic, but that’s exactly where it starts. It starts with understanding. You don’t have to be friends, but at least you can give some notice to what other people want and what is archievable.
Sorry Peter. But still I think your intake is quite genuine.
Cheers, Rob
Greta Thunberg is a child who realises that the world is being destroyed by greedy psychopaths. She, correctly, see that her and her cohort’s lives will be blighted by ecological collapse, and that billions will die prematurely and wretchedly. She has the intelligence and moral courage and clarity to be, like me, outraged by humanity’s self-destruction and the efforts of so many to deny the truth and sabotage efforts to avert the disaster. In my opinion she is a very great hero, and one that her parents, her peers and all sane people can be very proud and admiring of. I imagine that the venom spewed at her is, at least in part, motivated by people’s consciences troubling them.
With the disability she has, she is the perfect victim for propaganda, because she cannot identify it, much less the machinations and manipulations which she is subjected to.
So a handicapped child is targeted for it’s weakness and abused on it.
I have worked with handicapped people, if there had been anyone treating them like this poor child is treated I would have shot that person in front of all (we were armed at that time), taking happily any punishment that would follow from it.
As is my custom I spit out three times in front of evil spirits, so be it here !
She’s not ‘handicapped’. Aspergers people include many notable historical figures who did great things, and here is another.
Well, I’m sick of being called names – right-wing denialist, paid by the petrochemical industry, a horrible species .. and so we go on.
I’m sick of being blamed – it is the fault of people like me that we’re probably in 12 years or so going to have an extinction event because I don’t drink this coolaid. Talk about ginning up fear and scaring everyone. Well, all it does for me, is make me really truly skeptical.
I’m sick of being called dumb – you’re not a climate scientist so you cannot expect to understand – climate scientists are now being given god-like status – thing is, I am able to count, have quite a few years on data and statistics in higher learning, spent quite some time in data analysis labs and can clearly understand where I’m being fed bs. I have a second career in information technology, and can almost sniff out bad data and know what can be done with data in these days of social media and influencing and narrative change aimed at a population that is just unable to withstand these onslaughts. So yes, I can read and I can understand. And if I don’t, there always is some kind of expert somewhere that can be asked – how exactly do you read this graph for example? It is actually not difficult, just tedious and time-consuming.
We know that most of what we receive (scientifically or otherwise through media) is mostly bunkum and we have to research ourselves and stick to people that to the best of their own ability tell the truth. We know that even then, we have to very critically examine a postulate before even thinking of accepting it. We know that we have to wait for long periods without taking a stance, until something becomes clear – kinda hold more than one idea in our heads and accept the cognitive dissonance in such a stance. And this is exactly why I left a first career in a major research field – I was expected to accept crap in the data, or at least enthusiastically endorse it – at the risk (actually a threat) of losing my license. Well, I gave my license back because I like my soul better than my paycheck, truly. The research field is broken. If you do not endorse, you are threatened. With statistics it is said, one can explain away the atom bombs – and it is true – you can deceive many people.
I’m sick of having to listen to young girls melting down on the streets and in the UN because they are not getting their way in their unformed ideas. Please just go and take a look at little Greta at the UN yesterday. A young girl, not mature, standing there crying and abusing the audience, and begging for her life – ignorant, authoritarian and hysterical. The poor poor girl!
Take a look at this girl – I can find no other way to embed this clip on Twitter – it is short, ignore the political snark and just look at the girl – https://twitter.com/RealCandaceO/status/1175871215698960385
This is what we are allowing – these girls, and then we feed them all kinds of hormones because they do not know if they are men or women.
The astrophysicists are not in agreement with warming. There are many. I have picked up an Israeli astrophysicist, a Canadian/Ukrainian astrophysicist, many Russian researchers of all stripes and many in China, of all stripes. I mentioned these over the months in the Cafe – perhaps Mulga missed them. But the usual comeback is that they are not ‘senior’ enough or that they are being paid by the petro-chemical industry or some or other thing such as this. They are not counted because it does not suit the climate alarmist church and religion to count them. This religion prefers their doctored statistics.
I’m sick of being suppressed in this area. Don’t talk to me about ‘settled science’. The sun revolves around the earth idea people were actually killed for in our recent history, when they said … UhOh .. its the other way around and I can prove it.
Settled science? never – just take a look at physics and then later quantum physics, which stands all the physics postulates on their heads. If you come to me with settled science, I want to see at least a number of repeatable experiments with clean data, that meet at least two criteria, repeatable and measures what it sets out to measure – provable in accepted statistical models – and no ‘re-cooking’ of ‘suddenly found’ data from the past. It either stands, or you re-do it – sorry if the icecore started melting and you have to go get a grant to go get a new one. We do not have this in climate science. We have a bunch of models that will measure the number of papayas on my trees if I feed it papaya tree data and a bunch of other scientists that will swear that the payapa tree data is correct. They are echoing one another and this is called peer reviewed. Well, I can tell you that breakthrough scientists never bothered too much of what others thought of them.
It is not that we want different outcomes for our world. We all want a world that flourishes, is healthy, is not polluted, where the possibilities of all.out war are very small and where we can continue on with our lives and in my case, I like to be productive. But, like the old old song said … I never promised you a rose garden! We live on earth and we are not mature, wise or even conscious enough to fix our own sins. Yet, we can try.
We also know that with all the science going on, we cannot trust those folks behind our backs, because we know they write for grants because the scientific system is broken. I can just refer you to the medical and pharmaceutical industries and how research is done in those exalted fields. Search out Jon Rappoport on this, although his site was deplatformed and he is now sticking it together again. It is hard work to seek out those that are honest. The IPCC reports are massive grant writing opportunities.
With the first IPCC report, I was very interested and thought — oh boy, perhaps we have something here that is real. It was the science and the data and the manipulation thereof that made me stand back and say – oh boy, we have a new attempt at a centralized human control system and a real moneymaking ponzi on our hands. Imagine those that set themselves out to be reliable scientists, saying they do what they like, they just buy some carbon credits to offset what they do. Countries are passing carbon credits and purchasing carbon offsets. So is that not a nice way to avoid responsibility and make some money for the carbon gods? Please go and research the economics here and you will soon understand what is going on.
We know that the rich and powerful will make no sacrifices, and they expect what they think of as the sheep, to make sacrifices. We know that we have a problem with water on our planet for example – and we know the Nestle’s of the world buy out fresh water sources and leave the indigenous stranded – and so on – there are many that I can mention here. But in this socalled climate science, we skip these real problems and they tell us stories of having to fight a non-existent enemy – our earth and a possible extinction event – in order to ‘save it’ and to ‘save the next generations’. Jaysus, these people are entitled and have no idea what their own limitations are, but they are not limited into making this a market to buy and sell so-called carbon credits and off-sets. Who benefits?
And the climate alarmists want me to buy into their religion? You must be kidding. Let’s get some peace on our earth and then we have a hope to solve our problems and get real practically.
Thing is, at the end of the day, if the realistic people come together, one bunch can believe it is they that caused this and hate themselves, and another bunch can believe that it is not they and both can work together to solve problems on our earth. But, because of the polarity, and the politics, and the incessant wars, destabilizations and attempts at regime change, this is not happening. We are fighting too much and the kids are screaming at the UN! And here, where we are discussing these things, people are expected to accept the words of a bunch of so-called climate scientists where the people do not have the time, or the ability or training or education, to even statistically understand the data offered. And major claims are made by some, but major and reliable proof is not offered.
There is one litmus test for a honest scientist – if they are willing to expose all of their research (which most are not because it is mostly tied up in non-disclosures and similar legal from their institute), and open up their methodology, their research design, and their initial postulates, then you have an honest scientist. If they hide their work, you are dealing with a paid scientist – who will say mostly exactly what the paycheck depends on. The climate data is continually altered – the history is altered – this is not reliable research design. The presented periods of measurement is cherry picked by starting date. In the long discussion over months in the Cafe, I was given one study by a AGW believer and a contributor to do with heat sequestration in the oceans, and hey ho, it was behind a pay wall. Now this is so serious they say, and have such vast consequences they say, that we have to pay to see the work. There is a rare level of dishonesty in this methodology.
There is another litmus test for an honest climate activist. Do they talk about war? Do they actually know how many bombs are falling, and the destructive nature of that and the destruction of the war making material machine and the destruction on earth of just this one thing? You will find that they do not talk about this but present a ‘false enemy’ in their discourse. They don’t shoot straight. You will also find that they want you to make sacrifices – well, you and I are just simple people. My 3 plastics bags do nothing to destroy our earth and I actually put in as much as what I take out with things like composting and planting trees and growing stuff and not using poisons and insisting on clean food and deeply studying food as medicine. That is within my ability – saving the earth is not and who says the earth has to be saved. Little Greta? Give me a break!
In terms of cleaning up what we do on this earth, I don’t care whether our climate is being affected by human action – that is a most divisionary tactic and a canard. I don’t care, because we have to clean up anyway the deep levels of pollution that we are causing. To date, there is nobody that has the ability to define the natural processes of earth, vs human activities over even one precession cycle of say 25,772 +- earth years. My good god, even Hindu philosophy can tell you that and can measure a precession cycle. But our so-called climate scientist become very quiet when asked any question on this.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precession
Oh they try, and will tell you that they can, but just a few questions and you can already know that they know nothing about climate or even the rain that falls. Nobody can do that, instead they shout slogans such as ‘the hottest summer ever’, and they don’t tell you that this earth is very old, and they do not know what is the ‘hottest summer ever’ and that they are telling you bs. Measurements only started in earnest after the 2ndWW, and satellite measurements started around 1979.
The coldest ever, the hottest ever – that is bunkum. You don’t know. Icecores can only go a certain distance. Let me see some repeatable science, open and clear in research objectives and design. Let me see just one person in this field that understands the age of earth and understand what we know, and what we don’t know, and I might re-look. Show me some positive action that does not depend on buying and selling carbon credits so that all the sins of the rich can be bought off and hidden under money, and I might re-look.
One last one – I’ve lived in various parts of hurricane lands for 30 years. It is complete bunkum that we have ‘more storms’. No, we have fewer storms at the moment and for the last number of years. Does anyone know that we need the weather systems cutting loose from the West Coast of Africa, that travels across the ocean, and that provides for us life-giving rain … and sometimes these develop into destructive hurricanes. Only sometimes. No, it is an outright lie that we have more storms (I can count you know, and we have to remain prepared for hurricane development) What we have is more Named Storms. Do you know why we have more Named Storms and the insurance impact? I can tell you clearly the years that we had more real storms, and the years that storms were quiet. In our area storms are quiet, and our water aquifers show it. We need these storms but we hope they don’t turn into destructive storms.
In years past, we did not have names for for tropical storms … only those that developed into hurricanes did we have names for. Now, they all have names even lowly tropical storms which happen with monotonous regularity where we live, and it looks as if we have more storms. Good heavens, we sail around tropical storms if we happen to be out. A tropical storm is not climate change but a desperately needed weather phenomenon during our wet season. If we don’t have them, we have no water. They are not effing climate change puleeze .. get real on a practical level.
So anyone that tells you there are more storms in hurricane area, you can tell them clearly that they do not understand what is happening and that their more storms meme is just bs and they suck up every bit of data given them without seriously looking at it. Naming hurricanes in the past only, and now naming all tropical storms and there is a huge difference between a hurricane and a tropical storm, does not make more storms, it only makes more names of storms. And the relation between tropical storms forming into hurricanes I don’t know, but I do know relatively few tropical storms make it to hurricane status. And so I can go on.
Mulga, you are just plain wrong on saying there are more storms or hurricanes. There are only more names. And if you are plain wrong as far as this is concerned, what else might you be plain wrong on?
We gotto get real savvy on a real practical level soon now. A drought may be just a drought and we’ve had droughts in biblical times already. It may be that we have to migrate. Where I studied, we still had migrating tribes – that would migrate with their animals should there be drought conditions – because in a few years, the cycle changes.
Let me put my money where my mouth is in terms of numbers of storms. This page we kinda live by during hurricane season.
https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/gtwo.php?basin=atlc&fdays=5
Go take a quick look because it will change in the next number of hours. You will see tropical storm Jerry, Karin and Lorenzo. Named tropical storms. In the past, these would have been Invest, i.e., area of investigation – invest number x or invest number xx, with potential to change into hurricanes over open and warm waters in summer. Now, they are Tropical Storms Jerry, Karin and Lorenzo. So, 3 more storms are created and now counted than in the past by naming them. Yet we are used to getting at least 3 tropical storms per month – that is normal and no-one is scared. But in the past they were called invests. It is the same number of storms, and in the last few years, fewer overall.
At times when we were sailing the Caribbean waters a lot, and would be off-shore, we would get our daily weatherfax with synoptic charts. These storms were not even indicated as storms, and you had to figure it out from the synoptic charts. In sailing off-shore, you have to be able to read and analise the synoptic charts. We simply sailed around these systems, tack a little, perhaps shorten some sail depending how close. In fact, these were actually quite good sailing weather if you like sailing close to the wind and you can see them coming clearly, because the little telltails on the sails would start telling you the story of the weather around you. So, now they have names and hey presto, we’ve invented more storms than in the past, because they have given names to more storms than in the past, and the IPCC can tell us how climate change is causing more storms.
BS, from the beginning to the end, at least with tropical storms.
In addition, little Greta is not getting too much of a good feedback.
‘Radical’ Greta Thunberg ‘antagonizes our societies’, Macron says after her UN speech
‘Mass hysteria’: German lawmakers warn Greta Thunberg’s climate activism threatens rational debate
And now the climate change activists are going to jump all over this and say it is just that those countries want to protect their destructive actions. It does not mean that they don’t want to do that, it may mean that both situations are true.
Excellent series of posts, Amarynth. Well thought out, erudite, thought provoking and I’m sure argument provoking.
The prospective mass hysteria of ‘climate change’ etc etc etc ad nausim is surely both a political and an economic agenda. Using a child who should be in school at this date to pontificate in UN as if she is some kind of ‘expurt’ ranks right up there with putting that Ortez woman on a pedestal as a fount of political wisdom. I don’t listen to children who are spouting what they are programmed to spout, just as I don’t listen to children who attempt to spout political wisdom when they don’t have a clue.
Climate changes through history and little insignificant ‘man’ has little, if anything, to do with it. If our upper echelons of ‘power’ really believed in this foolishness then they would be the first to set an example of ‘environmental consciousness’, stop jet setting all over the world, cut back their heat in winter and cooling system in summer, stop turning their lawns in water starved California to green wonderlands whilst the ordinary workers and peasants are forbidden to water their patches of grass, stop getting squired around in a Lincoln Stretch….you get the idea. It’s all bovine scatology and we, the ordinary workers and peasants, will pay the price if, and only if, we let them get away with this scam, and a scam it is.
If one really wants to have an affect, even an avalanche starts with but one flake of snow. Do what you can how you can but be sensible, it’s the little things that make a difference. I smoke, not much, but I smoke. I love the stares I get when I field strip the butt, grind out the fire and wet finger the butt before I put it in the trash tin. We leave nothing but our footprints when we go somewhere. Not a scrap of paper, not a single candy wrapper, nary a bottle cap, not a singe dog dropping, nothing shows we’ve been there. That’s a start.
As for ‘carbon credits’ and all the other tricks used to get around current laws and regulations, most of said laws and regulations being exercises in idiocy, these tricks will not stop. Ever. Just as forcing we ordinary workers and peasants to be ‘environmentally conscious’ will not work,either. Ever. Unless and until we see algore driving his own minuscule electric clod hopper with the hand crank windows down and sweltering in the 95 degree heat like they want the rest of us to do.
Auslander
Exactly! More fool those who believe otherwise.
You are arguing as if the North Atlantic is the only place on Earth that gets cyclonic storms. In fact in the Pacific and Indian Oceans the numbers and intensity of Category 4 or 5 cyclonic storms is increasing, as is the number of Category 5 storms in the North Atlantic, as well,and these are the ones that devastated Puerto Rico and the Bahamas, not to forget the unprecedented deluges from lower category storms like Harvey.
What I don’t ‘believe’ Mulga, but what I know, is that if we together analyze these ‘North Atlantic’ storms, which I’ve done, your statement stands to be corrected. First, its the Caribbean basin and Lorenzo is sitting at 15N just a little off the coast of West Africa right at the moment travelling fast, westnorthwest and that one I will watch, both for myself and for The Saker as this one will tend to develop into a major storm. The Saker will watch it as well but days later than for us.
And screaming about more storms, will not change facts because I think that you do not even know how many storms systems we deal with on the average. You see a storm, and shout climate change. We prepare for storms, and we know exactly how many times we prepare. You are not taking cognizance of more named storms. I know how many storms come by – and I check it daily during hurricane season. We count ’em, and stay up to date and have done so for most of 30 years. We have not had to prepare for one storm in 4 years now. We also sail these waters and I can tell you first hand that you are incorrect because if one sails these waters, you actually know and understand what is happening around you in terms of weather and you remember what happened the previous and the previous years.
You argue as if every storm is climate change. It is not. The same naming convention has been accepted for all other cyclones. I have not studied those in other areas. But these around my area, I have, for many years. Even before ‘climate change’ told us there are more storms and we know there are not.
You are just plain wrong – and if you go count ’em, and you know what you are counting, you will have to give way on this point. Numbers have this property that they don’t always lie. In our area, we always have hurricanes – it is not climate change – without tropical storms which hopefully do not develop into hurricanes, we will have no water in our underground aquifers. They are necessary and life giving, and not climate change and there are now fewer of them. Besides being able to count and analyze, I can tell you that we are a little short of water, because we are a little short of storms, because of the real practical behavior of our well. We have two – one into the first aquifer and another into the 2nd aquifer So, we regularly test the well water and we actually know what the situation is with water around us. We are not guessing or ‘believing’.
Storms have different characteristics. Sometimes they pass fast, and sometimes they stick and with much rain, just simple devastate an area. I saw a similar one like in the Bahamas a few years ago on one of the Caribbean islands. Two of those ‘sticky’ ones did I observe in 30 years. I have great respect for these storms, I am a ‘scaredy cat sailor’ and have studied these storms upside and downside so that I know how to handle them under sail on the water, if just by mistake we go out and a storm develops.
In fact, I’m breaking a cardinal rule – I should not even discuss these things with someone that does not accept at least the possibility of weather modification. In these last 30 years, I’ve seen strange storms.
But, please go and count yourself. Start with 2018 and look back over 100 years or so. I would offer to give you the data, but I have no hope that you will look at it, so, if you do it yourself, I will give you honor and credit. If you go and pull out the data, I will check over it, and give you many stories for many storms even ones that I’ve gathered from the oldies on various Caribbean islands. One can also mitigate against these storms. Please go and verify what Cuba does vs other places in our hurricane season.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_Atlantic_hurricane_season
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1990_Atlantic_hurricane_season
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1980_Atlantic_hurricane_season
The 1980 Atlantic hurricane season was tied with 1932, 1969, and 1994 for having the most named storms form in the Atlantic Ocean during the month of November
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1933_Atlantic_hurricane_season
This one is interesting, as this was the 2nd most active ever – please note the date … 1933 … And on this one, you can note that tropical storms were not named.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_Atlantic_hurricane_season
The most active ever – The 2005 season was the first to observe more tropical storms and cyclones in the Atlantic than in the West Pacific; on average, the latter experiences 26 tropical storms per year while the Atlantic only averages 12. This event was repeated in the 2010 season; however, the 2010 typhoon season broke the record for the fewest storms observed in a single year, while the 2005 typhoon season featured near-average activity.
It is actually quite foolish to discuss ‘more storms’ with somebody that actually knows and is quite up to date with the situation on the ground, or on the water, should I say.
Next, I can discuss farmers, because we actually do have a farm you know. And from another country and another hemisphere, we’re actually watching the farming situation keenly – where family farms were located. But enough for now.
Mulga, like an acolyte you repeat IPCC information but you are not looking at the data yourself. You just repeat like a mantra. In our area, a very very big area, you are wrong. With respect, where else are you wrong?
Also, I have not seen you talk about the peace, but only to take this opportunity to almost rant and rave about climate change without being able to put data on the table that stands clean and clear.
Finally the issue for me here is that the systemic corruption in the whole climate change narrative is too much to take. I hold that we can talk together, even those that are mantrically repeating with self-hatred to their own species that ‘we did it’. But first we must be willing to examine what is given to us, and we must be willing to talk about the peace. And on cannot talk about the peace, or even take one little step, if one is in self-hatred.
Over and out on this issue.
A litany of hysterical deflection. The numbers of sever cyclonic storms is increasing worldwide, as is near inevitable when you introduce so much extra energy into the Earth system, the oceans in particular. The added 7-8% of water vapour for every extra degree Celsius in global average temperatures worsens the deluges and floods, too. Tamam shud.
You struggle with reading too much eh? You’re the one that is hysterical and tries to deflect because there is no way that you can stand against real longitudinal experience, and real analysis. There is also no way that you want to look at this, because it will break your climate change beliefset. I would have expected you to ask … is there a database or is this data anywhere in a collection so I can verify what you are saying? That would be the starting point of a ‘scientific’ approach. That would be the approach of a scientist that is inquisitive and interested in the natural world. I can in scientific terms prove every word of what I am saying.
It is up to you to ask the questions. Yet, you’ve stopped doing that – ask the questions.
I have read a few of your denialist canards-very familiar. I’ve seen the same for twenty years emerging from the fossil fuel and Rightwing denialist industry. I’ll take the Academies of Science and scientific societies, the climate science community, and the evidence of my own eyes, thanks.
I grew up on a farm and haven’t been back in over five decades. However, I well remember a time when I was about fifteen and ‘helping’ a neighbor farm with his fencing, read my father loaned me out as free labor.
We eventually took a break, sat on the ancient wagon behind the tractor and had some water. While sitting there, old Mr. Gene, and I mean he was old, at least to me, back then, he had to be at least sixty, neither of us said much, and then out of the blue he said thus:
“See them old gals down at the crik settin’ on them buckets and fishin’?”
“Yup.”
“Well, when them gals stop settin’ on them buckets and plant their (bottoms) on the ground in the grass, means the ground is warm enough to plant.”
Climate science at it’s best. All the rest is bovine scatology.
If you really think that the global climate has not changed in the last 50 years, then, in my opinion, you are closing your eyes to reality. You won’t get many farmers in Austfailia agreeing with you, that’s for sure.
Of course it has changed. Have you not heard of natural variability?
Surely you are aware of ENSO and PDO. The change associated with both of these is quite marked in respect of the occurrence of the ” floods and droughts” which characterise the climate in these parts.
It is quite clear to the rational mind that Greta, along with the rest of the environmental movement are being used for political agenda. Afterall, election time in the U.S. is coming up, and the Democratic party needs an issue for leftists to rally about. This current “climate crisis rally” reminds me of that Occupation Wallstreet movement about four years ago. That really fizzled after their political utility was used up, and so will Greta (poor girl) and the other environmentalists.
Having said that, it may do well if Republicans and the Republican party can become a bit more considerate of envorinmental issues if for nothing else than to preempt the Democratic’s scheme. Global warming aside, real or not, there do exist very real serious enviromental issues, such as air and water quality, which the Republican party is simply dismal on. Environment should become a nonpartisan issue.
Occupy Wall Street was crushed by State and police power. A big fan of Wall Street are you, and fossil fuel stocks? And how can the environment become ‘non-partisan’ when one side denies the science and the universal observations, and is ruthlessly destroying EVERY environmental advance eked out over fifty years?
Chemistry Expert: Carbon Dioxide can’t cause Global Warming
https://principia-scientific.org/chemistry-expert-carbon-dioxide-cant-cause-global-warming/
Let’s put this amount of energy in perspective. If we all turned off all our appliances and went and lived in caves, and then devoted every coal, nuclear, gas, hydro, wind and solar power plant to just heating the ocean, it would take a breathtaking 32,000 years to heat the ocean by just this 1˚C!
In short, our influence on our climate, even if we really tried, is miniscule!
So it makes sense to ask the question – if the ocean were to be heated by ‘greenhouse warming’ of the atmosphere, how hot would the air have to get? If the entire ocean is heated by 1˚C, how much would the air have to be heated by to contain enough heat to do the job?
Well, unfortunately for every ton of water there is only a kilogram of air. Taking into account the relative heat capacities and absolute masses, we arrive at the astonishing figure of 4,000˚C.
That is, if we wanted to heat the entire ocean by 1˚C, and wanted to do it by heating the air above it, we’d have to heat the air to about 4,000˚C hotter than the water.
And another problem is that air sits on top of water – how would hot air heat deep into the ocean? Even if the surface warmed, the warm water would just sit on top of the cold water.
Thus, if the ocean were being heated by ‘greenhouse heating’ of the air, we would see a system with enormous thermal lag – for the ocean to be only slightly warmer, the land would have to be substantially warmer, and the air much, much warmer (to create the temperature gradient that would facilitate the transfer of heat from the air to the water).
Therefore any measurable warmth in the ocean would be accompanied by a huge and obvious anomaly in the air temperatures, and we would not have to bother looking at ocean temperatures at all.
But we are not talking about heating up oceans. When we talk climate change, we are talking about heating up air…….
CO2, but actually much more so added water in the air, also from burning fuels, supposedly causes heat to radiate from the earth back into space more slowly thus causing the earth to warm overall. I’m no expert, and I’m not sure if that is absolutely true, but the quoted chemistry expert is tactfully skirting the issue the environmentalists are trying to state.
All I know is I havn’t been skiing in quite a few years ’cause there has not been any snow on the slope I used to slide down.
Impressive, Robert. A completely lay and intuitive explanation but you put your finger on the essential fallacy here. The earth is heated by the sun. Once it absorbs this heat energy it can in turn radiate the heat back into space or the earth gradually heats up over time. It turns out that most of this heat energy (about 90%) is retained by the oceans. This was suggested by Rossby as early as 1959. Later confirmed by Levitus in 2000 and 2001. The effect of greenhouse gases resulting in warming of the oceans was known since Revelle in 1965. So all this stuff has been known for quite a long time.
But we are not talking about heating up oceans. When we talk climate change, we are talking about heating up air…….
No, when they say climate change they are also talking about oceans warming up, CO2 is supposed to be a cause. Oceans are supposedly absorbing the heat from warmer air and warming up themselves. The article above shows how ridiculous that is. Take into account that calculations in the article are made for an ideal system without losses, in reality the numbers would be even larger.
Here are the first three google search finds:
Ocean warming
https://www.iucn.org/resources/issues-briefs/ocean-warming
The ocean absorbs most of the excess heat from greenhouse gas emissions, leading to rising ocean temperatures.
Achieving the mitigation targets set by the Paris Agreement on climate change and limiting the global average temperature increase to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels is crucial to prevent the massive, irreversible impacts of ocean warming on marine ecosystems and their services.
The ocean and climate change
https://www.iucn.org/resources/issues-briefs/ocean-and-climate-change
The ocean is being disproportionately impacted by increasing carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) from human activities.
Ocean Warming Is Accelerating Faster Than Thought, New Research Finds
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/10/climate/ocean-warming-climate-change.html
A new analysis, published Thursday in the journal Science, found that the world’s oceans are warming far more quickly than previously thought, a finding with dire implications for climate change because almost all the excess heat absorbed by the planet ends up stored in their waters.
Oceans are most likely heated by radiation directly from the sun. The air acts as an insulator to keep the heat from going back into space……
Exactly correct. Only a few percent of the sun’s heat energy is absorbed by the atmosphere itself. The lithosphere (the dry land) absorbs a bit more but the rest ends up in the ocean. The heat transfer occurs by direct radiant heating not some bizarre intermediary process involving the atmosphere. Just take a sunbath sometime. And yes, the composition of the atmosphere (including CO2) affects the ability of the planet to radiate the excess heat back into space. This is the greenhouse effect known since 1824 (Fourier). Herein lies the problem.
I agree the Sun is causing changes of the climate. But it is also true that CO2 rises because temperature raises and is not the cause of higher temperatures therefore warmer climate is not something we caused by CO2 emissions. And we also shouldn’t be talking about warming any more, because the planet for the last two decades is not getting any warmer.
The point is, all man made climate change talk, don’t eat meat, eat human flesh instead to save the planet, as Swedish professor suggested, are insane as are their ‘scientific calculations and models’ which ‘prove’ man made CO2 climate change.
The role the Sun has is not only directly heating the planet.
Sun’s magnetic activity also influences cloud formation. Clouds are obviously very important for the climate. The reason clouds are so important is because they actually reflect a lot of the sunlight back into space thus preventing it to reach the surface of the planet and warm it. This effect surpasses the greenhouse effect clouds also have.
Changes of magnetic activity of the Sun affect the solar winds, which affect how much cosmic rays reaches the atmosphere, which affects the cloud formation, which affects the climate on Earth. When cosmic rays hit the atmosphere, they cause aerosols and cloud formation. All clouds are formed upon aerosol particles that are in the atmosphere and if there are more aerosol particles there will be more clouds.
The more Sun is magnetically active the better the atmosphere of the planet is shielded from cosmic rays. Active Sun with strong magnetic field means that less cosmic rays hit the atmosphere of the planet, less aerosols and less clouds are formed and climate is consequently warmer.
When Sun is less active and its magnetic field is weaker, more cosmic rays reaches the atmosphere, which means more aerosols and clouds are formed and we have a cooler climate.
300 years ago for example the Sun was not very active and we were in the height of the little ice age when it was cold in many places on earth. A thousand years ago the Sun was active and it was warm. Vikings could map all of Greenland because the northern shores of Greenland were not frozen.
The effects of cosmic rays and the solar cycle on the earth’s climate have been fairly extensively studied by real scientists. Their effects don’t change any of the conclusions about human induced climate change. I can dig up references for either of these if you are interested. See for example:
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10712-012-9181-3
And yes, climate scientists are quite familiar with the “Little Ice Age” and other periods of climate variation throughout history. These have also been extensively studied.
Regarding your first paragraph, which you don’t bother to provide a reference for. See here:
https://skepticalscience.com/empirical-evidence-for-co2-enhanced-greenhouse-effect.htm
That will get you started. I admit it’s pretty difficult to find real information online. The noise and nonsense predominates to a huge degree.
You cannot rationally argue with denialists. The Svensmark ‘cosmic rays cause clouds’ tripepothesis was refuted years and years ago, but he still peddles it, no doubt lucratively. The lumpen denialists are a sad lot, doing their best to ensure their own species’ destruction, for obscure ideological and psychological motivations, and, as I always confidently expected, as the End draws nigh and the evidence of catastrophe grows ever greater, they simply become more and more fanatical and defensively hysterical.
We’re all only human, Mulga. Scientists have found that the human thought process is primarily driven by emotion and instinct. Our belief in our own game-theoretic-style rational decision making is largely an affectation and an illusion. Nevertheless, I believe that the scientific process itself is ultimately rational. Perhaps this is some kind of gestalt process where the whole is far more than the some of the parts, as we see in the insect world. Or perhaps it’s due to the fact that physical reality ultimately doesn’t care what we think and we ultimately have to conform to it.
David, it is the Revenge of the Dunning-Krugerites. A species driven to self-destruction by the worst among its individuals. Forced suicide by kakistocracy, a global Jonestown. The worst denialists, the knowing liars, disinformers and exploiters of the fossil fuel financed denialist industry are Evil personified, but we ought to have always known that the Right are Evil, it’s just that this time that Evil has not been manifested as genocidal aggression, economic exploitation and class and social sadism, or in mundane ecological destruction in pursuit of loot, but in a full-blown omnicide of Life on Earth-the sin for which there is no forgiveness.
The lumpen denialists really annoy me, with their ignorance, stupidity and gullibility, but they, too, are victims of the Evil manipulators. All the ordinary denialists will have a tragic day of reckoning when they wake up to how they have been exploited and what horror they have helped cause. Indeed I think that the current excesses of bile and venom being spewed at Greta Thunberg and the children is evidence of some very troubled consciences lashing out wildly, if erroneously and in the wrong direction.
No, no-the snow is only hiding, and it’s on George Soros’s payroll.
The climte change hoax was invented in the seventies as an analogue for physical warfare to create havoc, insert policies against the people (remember it’s humanity which is targeted !) and to make a lot of money out of it.
It is a given that the policies following from it will only enslave more those who are already enslaved, by monetizing the climate, it’s that simple ! Another fantastic act of sorcery and magic right in front of our eyes.
The IPCC is and was always a political project from day one, and nothing else, and in the light of who covers it night and day it becomes abundantly clear it can only be another scam scheme, one doesn’t even need to know what’s it’s content is about, it is really that simple !
Whats even more realistic is the magic going on that isnt seen in front of ones eyes, the fact that the mechanism to control global climate change has gone away for some reason.
And in its place left catchy phrases like, everybody talks about climate change, but nobody can do anything about it.
@Alabama,
Sorry, do I understand you correctly that you suggest that humanity at any time had any form of control (beside spiritual magic) over the climate en large….. if so (which I hope you don’t, and it’s a sardonic sarcastic joke) how and who controlled it, can you name some examples where humanity had direct control over the climate ?
Climate change science begins at least 200 years ago with the work of Fourier, Foote and Tyndall. In 1912 a New Zealand paper predicted rising temperatures because of emissions of carbonic acid gas ie CO2, from coal-burning. From the 50s the big oil corporations well knew of the science. In 1965 LBJ lectured the US Congress on the dangers of the greenhouse effect. So your assertion that it was ‘..invented in the 70s’ is garbage.
Thank you one thousand times for posting this.
From me one last quote about the UN and peace:
“On August 10, 1962 Herbert Hoover said,
I urged the ratification of the United Nations by the Senate, but now we must realize the United Nations has failed to give us even a remote hope of lasting peace. Instead it adds to the dangers of wars, which now surround us.”
As for climate change and the bibles extensive mentioning of it as being truly the work of God a quote
Dr. Julian Huxley, who had served as Director of UNESCO, said,
“While a faint trace of God still broods over the world like the smile of a cosmic Cheshire cat, science and knowledge will soon rub that away.”
Yeah, I call bullcarp on that! God is neither an absentee landlord over His creation nor is faith blind.
My last comment about Peace vs Climate ( irreconcilable ) or how the science is settled!
https://www.dreuz.info/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/635515915669720009-toon1116141.jpg
@ holmes
lol perfect but one is missing
2016
“We don’t understand certain abrupt meteorological events that pop up now and then”
Just can’t or didn’t record from which scientist this came from but it was recorded in a local newspaper
Maybe the scientists need bigger microscopes, better thermometers, better labs, or hey just take God at His word:
“The Lord is slow to anger but great in power; the Lord will not leave the guilty unpunished. His way is in the whirlwind and the storm, and clouds are the dust of his feet.” {Nahum 1:3}
“God’s voice thunders in marvelous ways; he does great things beyond our understanding… He brings the clouds to punish people, or to water his earth and show his love.” (Job 37:5–13)
“When the heavens are shut up and there is no rain because your people have sinned against you, and when they pray toward this place and give praise to your name and turn from their sin because you have afflicted them, then hear from heaven and forgive the sin of your servants, your people Israel. Teach them the right way to live and send rain on the land you gave your people for an inheritance.” (1 Kings 8:35–36)
I like love rather this one the most
“See, the storm of the Lord will burst out in wrath, a whirlwind swirling down on the heads of the wicked. The anger of the Lord will not turn back until he fully accomplishes the purposes of his heart. In days to come you will fully understand it clearly.” (Jeremiah 23:19–20)
A whirlwind in todays vernacular is a tornado. “See” and imagine this holmes written in the 6th Century BC to a bunch of Jews
“In days to come you will understand it clearly!
How so?
I figure more ‘abrupt meteorological events’ like for example Lutherans Endorse Homosexuality God Sends Tornado! begin at 2:45 minute mark:
https://youtu.be/ALk1z5euBxI
Wow, one has to really wonder what Israel looked like in the 6th Century BC when God not only sent them into exile to Babylon but destroyed Jerusalem and well actually the entirety of the Promised Land due to their idolatry. They should never have asked for a king to lead them! Not even Solomon was worth much really in the end. Human leadership what a disaster for one and all. But hey hopefully science will solve their reasons for climate change that is industrial pollution only to be faced with more climate change.
By the way any idea why Palestine is suffering from so much drought? Is it because that is exactly what God promised them would happen way, way back in Deuteronomy if they followed Idols? google droughts and Israel and then read:
Be careful, or you will be enticed to turn away and worship other gods and bow down to them. Then the Lord’s anger will burn against you, and he will shut up the heavens so that it will not rain and the ground will yield no produce, and you will soon perish from the good land the Lord is giving you. Fix these words of mine in your hearts and minds; tie them as symbols on your hands and bind them on your foreheads.” (Deuteronomy 11:8–18)
I don’t know maybe this will make Mulga happy to hear?
Thank God for Fox and his magnum opus Climate Change the Work of God
What we witness at the UNO Climate Change meeting is the accelerated infantilization of the Western world. Rather its descent into second childhood. The performance of the Swedish girl, apart from appallingly bad acting, was of an unbearable ridicule, barred its blatant cynicism. The Swedish girl went to NY in a fuel guzzling jet instead of paddling across the Atlantic in a seal-skin canoe ‘to raise awareness’ by the usual stunts of the Green peace-nicks. ‘Save the planet’ stinks of anti-humanism. Sacrifice the humans to the ‘Mother Goddess Earth’ that the algae and cockroaches may not become ‘extinct’!
‘Climate Change’ is the number one threat because it may destroy our ‘Mother Goddess Earth’ in a few generations, not the thousands of nuclear weapons which can do it in hours now!
At the inception of the environmental movement (in the 60s of last century) the number one problem was plastics pollution and deforestation combined with the scare of the coming of a new Ice Age! Nothing at all was done to reduce the pollution and the deforestation (on the contrary) and the Ice Age was replaced overnight with the ‘warming’ of the planet.
It seems obvious that the ‘reduction of carbon emissions’ is directed at starving China of energy. China announced that it will meet its ‘targets’ ahead of time! I was recently on a trip to China. In the most polluted city in the world (Beijing) the authorities managed to arrange a few days of clear skies to fool the tourists! Of course they were parading (for the tourists?) electrical vehicles (besides the high-speed trains).
Greta was hateful which is a common human condition. I dont think she was acting. I will mention the massive propaganda that she has been exposed to, and then become an actor for the government propaganda herself. It is very close to the Orwellian state scenario. (especially the George Orwell book, 1984)
But after that performance it is clear that everyone are in their right to socalled “hate speech” which is a normal human condition. There have always been truthfullness in expression and by hating, that is voicing the strongest verbal opposition, points are well made and usually given thought.
Governments however have introduced laws, employed agencies, and allowed tech companies to define , censor and prosecute speech. Being aware this means tyranny , dictatorship spanning across the globe, the one world government. The situation at least in Europe has become so that only the government and whoever they choses, are allowed to free speech.
The rewriting of history are taking place under the same banners, governments are usurping the people (democracy) and demand to be the sole rulers, so everyone who opposes this idea must be a danger (to them) therefore a nazi, right wing extremist and so on. Nowhere is this seen more clearly than in the EU law on Xeonophobia, which is now mainstream calling of any people protesting being dictated policies they dont agree with, a nazi , right wing extremist and so on. EU is a dictatorship by design and it is becoming clear for many people by now.
Greta was enraged and terrified, as all sane people, young and old ought to be in the face of human self-destruction. The truly hateful, as ever, are the Rightwing denialists who have been spewing villainous venom and bile at the girl, in their usual, but in this case truly hypertrophied, reaction to Truth and Decency.
Simple to see the fraud when they always talk about climate change and not pollution.
What about all the depleted uranium across Iraq, left over from us saving them from themselves?
What about the massive cargo ships polluting our oceans with no oversight so we can get cheap junk from some other country in the world with nearly non existent environmental and labor laws?
Nah, best solution is to tax me directly while they get waivers.
The number on way to have a real effect on global warming is with peace. Over half of every American’s carbon footprint is the war machine with its disproportionate use of resources and environmental destruction.
Global warming was always a scam to distract dissent to a meaningless, unsolvable and totally fabricated “crisis”.
I love to ask people “Name me a problem that we can’t solve with a trillion+ dollars a year?”. They can’t because it doesn’t exist.
That is how much we spend on weapons to kill each other, I mean protect ourselves (and our interests, how nice and ambigous). Because we are always the good guys.
The 24×7 media and school propaganda has had its effect as desired and being anti-war is viewed as so 1960s but “social justice warrior” or “climate crusader” are just so hip and cool.
Greta Thunberg?
In the early 1980’s I remember watching a commercial on Television of a Native Indian Chief on horseback and wearing full ceremonial clothing and as the camera panned towards him closer you could see his tears. He was crying and as the camera panned out away from him at the scene that was displayed before him, he was standing beside one of those 8 or 10 lane highways in California. It was quite a stark scene and as the camera continued to move away taking in the entire vista and the emotions of the Chief the horse hoofs came into view and it was standing in what? Garbage strewn highway for as far as the eye could see. I don’t remember what the commercial was for or who if anyone really. Just there to make a point I think and it was a point well made.
Jump ahead forty years to New York and the UN and what shows up in the news? A garbage strewn park and a caption about cleaning up after yourselves? Yeah, when I saw that I said too myself if only you Greta Thunberg had stayed behind and cared for the park enough to clean up all of the garbage and imagine if you did that alone you child would have shamed an entire nation and got your message across. Heck, imagine if Trump showed and decided to join you?!
You however, decided to give a tongue lashing to people who in end really can’t be bothered with talk. They like all of us have heard it too many times and know in fact more because we all have children and grandchildren to think of!
Actions always speak louder than words and hey after cleaning up the surroundings maybe go to church and clean up the soul, the heart and conscience. Who knows maybe that will bring peace to the world and solve climate change in the process? Don’t believe me watch this:
https://youtu.be/gK_0Yo-0r08
Turdberg should angry-face the adults who brainwashed her into doing the bidding of the Malthusian oligarchy that wants to depopulate the planet with environmental scares that actual science (i.e., not on the globalist foundations’ gravy train) does not support. “Fairytales of eternal economic growth” are precisely the birthright of humans in the real universe, which we’ve barely begun to explore. Her lobotomizers have stripped her soul of that uniquely human aspiration, only to further their agenda of “controlled disintegration” of the world economy, perpetual war over artificially shrinking resources, bestialization and enslavement to a feudal overlord class. Social control, political power and economic hegemony are the only motivation of the mostly-British ideologues behind this geopolitical scam, going all the way back to Malthus and continued, among others, by Bertrand Russell and the despicable Prince Phillip, who wishes to reincarnate as a deadly virus to wipe out the entire human race (except those of his kind, who aren’t human). She wants to choke civilization for the sake of “the environment,” but the zero-growthers who wrote her script have something completely different in mind. Luckily, Russia and China aren’t buying it.
Russia Ratifies Paris Climate Accord
https://sputniknews.com/russia/201909231076868288-russian-prime-minister-signs-cabinet-resolution-on-ratifying-paris-climate-accord/
S,
Last week, I was watching three videos, posted by N. Lygeros, who is a prof. at the university of Lion, France and Greek Strategist. The videos were from his visit to Australia and Tasmania, where his main subjects were Macedonia, Northern Epirus, Genocide of Pontic Greeks, Armenians and Assyrians, Greek economy and the outlook of recovery because extraction of oil and natural gas. LNG production and transport emphasizing the fact that Greeks basically own LNG shipping transport. Mentioning that LNG transport is one way thing, as those ships cannot be loaded with anything else while returning. He also talked about Norway converting their “vacation cruise fleet” to natural gas and thus creating a green non polluting fleet. While he talked about all that some lady in the audience started to talk in English while occasionally throwing few Greek words about what? Global Warming, which immediately brought Mulga to my mind, as she basically hijacked his lecture. I could not stop the nagging thought that maybe she was the Mulga.
Anyway, it sounds that oil will be used for other things, while Natural Gas will reign supreme. He also talked about Rosneft owning 70% of one of the companies which bought the extraction rights for the Greek fields, he also said that it will be cheaper for Russia to use Greek Gas for shipments to Europe instead of lagging its own from Asia. Russian Asian Gas and Oil can be shipped to customers in Asia which will save Russia transportation costs.
Natural gas is NOT ‘non-polluting’. The methane is worse than CO2 and fugitive emissions from extraction, processing and use make it at least as bad as coal. Now hydrogen would be a different matter.
We’ve had many people telling us many things of how the oceans are warming.
Well my fellow pilgrims, the amateurs and the independents are now into counting and seriously looking at the data. And just like I find major problems, so do others. I’ve been saying for months back in the Cafe that we have different voices speaking up. Now read the language and weep. Their uncertainties were so uncertain, and their systematic errors were taking as random errors .. and this they call good research design. So, their implications for an ‘upward revision of ocean warming and climate sensitivity’ is now wrong 4 times over. Oh boy! But they are sure their method is valid and will try again … People this is not science – it is babbling bull cya.
A major scientific paper, which claimed to have found rapid warming in the oceans as a result of manmade global warming, has been withdrawn after an amateur climate scientist found major errors in its statistical methodology.
The paper, from a team led by Laure Resplandy of Princeton University, had received widespread uncritical publicity in the mainstream media when it was published because of its apparently alarming implications for the planet. However, within days of its publication in October 2018, independent scientist Nic Lewis found several serious flaws.
Yesterday, after nearly a year’s delay, the paper was officially withdrawn.
Retraction Note: Quantification of ocean heat uptake from changes in atmospheric O2 and CO2 composition
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-019-1585-5
So what? Science works scientifically, some minor errors were detected and corrected (it happens all the time-it’s called the scientific method, and is the opposite of ideological fanaticism)and, as the author notes, it does NOT change the basic findings of heating oceans. Clutching at straws.
Mulga, again, go and study the study and you will not use the word minor. I do not consider treating systemic errors as random, a question of minor. This was ‘peer reviewed’ you know by no less than Nature. But, go and study the study and you will find one place where science, setting out to prove a certain outcome instead of remaining absolutely independent, failed miserably. But, you can go and read it and work through the numbers as well as I can. An error of a factor of 4 in ‘certainty’ is not minor. This kind of ‘science’ is par for the course in climate science. You can go and read what it changes and it does change a few things … like how much heat is taken up in the oceans because of changes in O2 and CO2. It is rather basic.
But, on another note, have you found those original hockey stick numbers for me yet? So that one can verify them? Or are they still proprietary and hidden? Sorry for being bitchy for one moment.
There are HUNDREDS pf hockey-stick distributions in existence. All they illustrate is the exponential growth of the global economy, resource use and pollution in the last 200 years. Do you deny them all? There are scores that confirm the hockey-stick of temperature rises, for a start. All wrong? All lies?
And, another climate scientist with impeccable credentials and years of experience breaks ranks. This time from Japan and his name is Dr. Mototaka Nakamura, with a Doctorate of Science from MIT. His specialty is abnormal weather and climate change. He has spoken and published widely – all the goody goody science stuff that one accepts from a scientist – 20 published papers and has worked with Georgia Institute of Technology, NASA, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, JAMSTEC and Duke University.
(No, he has not been paid lately by the petro-chemical industry).
His latest book has a free kindle so, it won’t cost you anything to go and read his data. It contains the English and the Japanese.
https://www.amazon.in/kikoukagakushanokokuhaku-chikyuuonndannkahamikennshounokasetsu-Japanese-Nakamura-Mototaka-ebook/dp/B07FKHF7T2
Here is what is important. He says that the base data that modelling climate change is based on, is just wrong. That is why I mentioned the original hockey stick – because that data used for that, has never been repeated, or never even been seen by anyone else. That data is proprietary. In addition to that: “Global mean temperatures before 1980 are based on untrustworthy data,” writes Nakamura. “Before full planet surface observation by satellite began in 1980, only a small part of the Earth had been observed for temperatures with only a certain amount of accuracy and frequency. Across the globe, only North America and Western Europe have trustworthy temperature data dating back to the 19th century.”
So, Nakamura says that today’s climate scientists simply accepted a base of data and worked on top of it, without verifying the base. So, their starting point invariably was highly questionable and scientifically not trustworthy.
In addition:
– Orthodox scientists has falsified the data by adjusting historical temperature data down to inflate today’s subtle warming trend. “The global surface mean temperature-change data no longer have any scientific value and are nothing except a propaganda tool to the public.”
– The climate models are useful tools for academic studies. However: “The models just become useless pieces of junk or worse (as they can produce gravely misleading output) when they are used for climate forecasting.”
– Climate forecasting is simply not possible, and the impacts of human-caused CO2 can’t be judged with the knowledge and technology we currently possess.
The models grossly simplify the way the climate works.
– they ignore the sun or at least use solar input as a fixed parameter – well, we all know it is not as we all know we are in a period of very low to no solar flaring
– they simplify small-scale ocean dynamics, aerosol changes that generate clouds (cloud cover is one of the key factors determining whether we have global warming or global cooling), the drivers of ice-albedo.
– “Without a reasonably accurate representation, it is impossible to make any meaningful predictions of climate variations and changes in the middle and high latitudes and thus the entire planet.”
The climate forecasts also suffer from arbitrary “tunings” of key parameters that are simply not understood. (What I called ‘fiddling’ before).
There is one more thing. The glacier in Greenland that was supposed to be melting, has changed and over the last 2 years is now thickening in snow and ice cover and getting cold again. Interruption of two decades of Jakobshavn Isbrae acceleration and thinning as regional ocean cools – https://www.nature.com/articles/s41561-019-0329-3
So, I’ve read some initial numbers on that one and the surrounding waters was supposed to warm by 2C. Instead, it is now cooler by 2C.
Again, I am not for one moment saying that we do not have serious cleanup work to do on our planet. But I am saying this climate scare is increasingly questionable as to which way the short term cycle will go.
So, can we talk about the peace now?
That was beautifully written Amarynth.
Let it not be said that those who maintain scepticism lack compassion.
All that we have on our side is logic and science, and our composure under attack.
Working to make a climate destabilisation Holocaust that much more certain, by denying the undeniable is an example of ‘compassion’, is it? What a hideous moral universe you zealots inhabit.
Today is youth protest day across Canada and few other countries. Swedish mascot will be in Toronto to help to fuel it up.
I hope that the participants will dress warmly as there is heavy snow fall warning and subzero temperatures in southern Alberta and unseasonably cold elsewhere. So I must applaud mr gore for his words about bitter cold is exactly what to expect from global warming.
(Sarcasm intended) That was at the tail of globalwarming hysteria and a beginning of new term of conveniently fluid term climate change.
Recorded extreme temperatures on this day are anywhere between -10 (1941) and +32 (1967) for Calgary.
Just saying
I haven’t seen a denialist with the gall to assert that glaciers are not melting but growing since Monbiot made such a fool of poor old David Bellamy, years and years ago. There is nothing that you denialists will not deny, is there?
More lying about data:
https://www.sott.net/article/421205-Latest-Hot-Summer-in-The-Netherlands-is-Not-a-Sign-of-Man-Made-Global-Warming
Besides the example of the hot summer of 1540, there were many heat waves that came and went in the Netherlands in the recent past. However, a large chunk of data about past heat waves were scrapped by the Dutch meteorological institute KNMI.
Dutch researchers presented a study on March 7th this year, in which they conclude that the KNMI “wrongly deleted a large part of the historical heat waves (in the period 1901-1951) from the books.” They note that before the ‘corrections’, there were 23 heat waves in the period of 1901-1951 compared to 19 heat waves in the longer period of 1951-2018, and that heat waves appeared more often in the past.
The corrections that the KNMI made are unjust, and the researchers recommend to reverse this homogenization or correction and to start again with a broader team (including scientists from outside the KNMI). They emphasize that the KNMI should, for the time, being refrain from claims about an alleged increased trend in heat waves in the Netherlands.
As a side-note, it’s not just the Netherlands that has been scrapping inconvenient data, Canada has been caught doing exactly the same thing:
Blacklock’s Reporter, which describes itself as “the only reporter-owned and operated newsroom in Ottawa” focusing on intensive reporting of government documents, notes that in many cases the observed temperatures scrapped by Environment Canada in creating its computer models, were higher in the past than today.
– For example, Vancouver had a higher record temperature in 1910 (30.6C) than in 2017 (29.5C).
– Toronto had a warmer summer in 1852 (32.2C) than in 2017 (31.7C).
– The highest temperature in Moncton in 2017 was four degrees cooler than in 1906.
– Brandon, Man., had 49 days where the average daily temperature was above 20C in 1936, compared to only 16 in 2017, with a high temperature of 43.3C that year compared to 34.3C in 2017.
As Goethe observed, there is nothing more terrifying than ignorance in action.