Climate Change

[IlIlIlIlI]

A small history of recent climate related to instilling fear:

1970th ice age forecast:

What were climate scientists predicting in the 1970s?

<p>1970s ice age predictions were predominantly media based. The majority of peer reviewed research at the time predicted warming due to increasing CO2.</p>

skepticalscience.com

1980th ozone hole forecast:

Ozone depletion - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

since 1990th the so called "climate change", but "the markets are where the money is, politicians followed":

Climate Change Became Politicized in the 1990s. It Didn't Have To Be That Way.

To understand why the world didn't act faster on climate change, we have to understand what changed in the 1990s

time.com

"climate protection" is a much more funny combination of words as it also does not explain what climate is aand what is to protect.

Maybe it will turn out as a myth as the ice age assumptions of the 70th:

Climate myths: They predicted global cooling in the 1970s

In reality, a handful of scientific papers discussed the possibility of an ice age at some point in the future, prompting some pretty sensational media coverage

www.newscientist.com

"In October 1982, David told a global warming conference financed by Exxon: “Few people doubt that the world has entered an energy transition, away from dependence upon fossil fuels and toward some mix of renewable resources that will not pose problems of CO2 accumulation"

Sixty years of climate change warnings: the signs that were missed (and ignored)

The long read: The effects of ‘weird weather’ were already being felt in the 1960s, but scientists linking fossil fuels with climate change were dismissed as prophets of doom

www.theguardian.com

(and they didn't reduce their own emissions AFAIK since then)

IMO man made global warming is just a theory without fundamental evidence - as there are a lot of other factors ignored:
- photosynthesis
- solar winds
- deforestation

Deforestation and Forest Loss

Explore long-term changes in deforestation, and deforestation rates across the world today.

ourworldindata.org

See also page 104 here for a better view of climate relations

https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/03/ar4-wg1-chapter1.pdf

As oxygen concentration drops while C02 concentration raises, this looks more like an effect of continuing deforestation reducing photosynthesis activities.

Historical Global Atmospheric Oxygen Levels Graph

See how global oxygen levels are dropping with this fully interactive graph. A project by the 2 Degrees Institute.

www.oxygenlevels.org

I'm still waiting for any effect on the C02 concentration of all the measures taken to reduce C02 emissions.
Maybe there is none -and it ends like the regeneration of the ozone hole by self-healing processes of the system which were not included in the original fear generating forecasts.

 

[timsk]

This btl comment from 'Zebra66' neatly encapsulates the lies we're being sold. . .

"I have come to realize that, when an emergency is real, you don't need to persuade anyone. When people [governments, big business and MSM] go to extraordinary measures to promote a supposed 'emergency'... censoring opposing opinions... destroying people's reputations... calling you names like "denier"... it's because they are lying."

 

[timsk]

If we can't trust organizations like NASA, then who can we trust?

Massive Retrospective Adjustments Made to Temperature Databases Used to Promote Net Zero​

"Massive retrospective alterations have been made to surface air temperatures by GISS, one of the main global databases run by the U.S. space agency NASA. Professor Ole Humlum has discovered that in the period January 1915 to January 2000, GISS changed past warming from 0.45°C to 0.67°C. This was a massive increase of 49%, which meant that almost half of the apparent warming in most of the 20th century was due to administrative changes made years after the initial measurements. On such evidence is the need for a global Net Zero collectivisation being promoted."

 

[Iconoclast1978]

While I think we should treat the planet and nature with the utmost care and respect; climate change, IMO, is a large pile of horse s***.

And no we should not trust NASA. I trust NASA about as much as I trust TicTok which aint a lot.

 

[timsk]

. . . I trust NASA about as much as I trust TicTok which aint a lot.

That much - wow!

 

[timsk]

The Astrophysicist Warning About the Coming Little Ice Age: “It’s Already Started
“CO2 is not a bad gas,” says Valentina Zharkova, a Professor at the Northumbria University in Newcastle, U.K. On the contrary, she points out, every garden centre uses it in its greenhouses to make plants lush and green. “We actually have a CO2 deficit in the world, and it’s three to four times less than the plants would like,” she notes, adding that the proportion of CO2 in the atmosphere has been at much higher levels throughout our planet’s history than it is now. . .

 

[timsk]

Climate Change is Class Warfare​

by Martin Durkin, maker of 'Climate: The Movie'

". . . The climate alarm is not supported by scientific evidence. It is supported by bullyng, intimidation and the censorship of anyone who dares to question it. Climate catastrophism is politics, shamelessly dressed up as science. . .It would be nice to think that politely pointing to the actual scientific data might put an end to all the climate chaos nonsense. Sadly it won’t. Because this ain’t about science."

A couple of very insightful btl comments. . .
'Stewart' writes:
"And most people are so abused and gaslit by this point that they cannot conceive a world taxes and regulation. The moment you even suggest it, they get defensive and nervous, a bit like a battered woman when you ask her about her husband.
“Well, he can get angry sometimes. Often it’s my fault though. He means well really, he just struggles to control his temper…”
“Yes, taxes are a bit too high, and government can be very wasteful. But you need some form of regulation, you need someone to be in charge, otherwise you’d just have chaos. And I think most people in the public sector are trying to do good.”

'RTSC' writes:
It’s about control, the reduction of “the peasants'” living standards in the west and transferring whatever money they have left to the 2nd/3rd world and Big Business.
Me: Small c conservative; Brexit voter; anti-Covid tyranny and un-jabbed; climate change realist. Never watch the BBC.
My older sister: LibDem; Remain voter; supports the Covid tyranny and jabbed to the max; loud-mouth climate change proselytiser. Gets all her “news” from the BBC.
We don’t get on. 🙂

 

[timsk]

How Many Billions of People Would Die Under Net Zero?​

Whatever the number, the graphic below shows how the lives of those who survive will be greatly immiserated under net zero . . .

 

[timsk]

New Scientific Evidence That CO2 Emissions Can’t Warm Atmosphere Because it is “Saturated” Published in Peer-Reviewed Journal​

Further scientific evidence has emerged to suggest that the Earth’s atmosphere is ‘saturated’ with carbon dioxide, meaning that at higher levels the ‘greenhouse’ gas will not cause temperatures to rise. A group of Polish scientists led by Dr. Jan Kubicki have published three papers recently, and according to the science site No Tricks Zone they summarise their evidence by noting that as a result of saturation, “emitted CO2 does not directly cause an increase in global temperature”. Current levels of CO2 in the atmosphere are around 418 parts per million (ppm) but the scientists state that past 400 ppm, “the CO2 concentration can no longer cause any increase in temperature”.

 

[timsk]

BBC Uses Corrupted Airport Data to Circulate Scares About “Extreme Heat” and Climate Change​

“London seeing more days above 30°C, experts say”, ran a BBC headline, with a reported suggestion that London must adapt to the “new reality”. But it turns out that the ‘experts’ have used “airport data for consistency across worldwide cities, including City Airport in London”. It is difficult to think of a more unsuitable dataset to promote notions of “extreme heat”, other than perhaps to take measurements next to the door of a blast furnace.

 

[timsk]

Climate Fear Plummets Among Americans​

Oh dear oh dear, it appears the young are starting to see through the narrative of the globalist liberal elites; whether it's 'the vaccines are safe and effective', 'Putin is a psychopath intent on conquering Europe' or, as in this case, 'climate change is going to kill us all'. If they keep lying to people repeatedly and then the truth comes out (which it always does in the end), then it's no surprise when people stop believing in anything they say. What's extraordinary, IMO, is the sheer hubris and arrogance of these people, combined with the utter contempt they must hold for us plebs - such that that they believe they can keep on lying to us and that we'll keep on believing them. Simply unbelievable!

 

[timsk]

Climate Change is Driven by Changes in Orientation of Earth to Sun, Not Carbon Emissions, New Analysis of Berkeley Earth Data Shows​

Good btl comment by 'varmint':
"Very extensive and well researched article. I have realised for a very long time though that trying to argue with people about “science” as regards the climate issue is going to end right up a cul-de-sac. Mainly because this issue isn’t really about science. We can have a Punch and Judy Show and activists can say black and I can say white and in the end nothing is achieved, because while we are bickering about what we think is “science”, the Politicians and Bureaucrats are busy getting on with what it is really about ——POLITICS. ——-The Politics of Sustainable Development. That Political Agenda which is about a world run by technocrats controlling the world’s wealth and resources, requires that there be a “climate emergency”, and with most of the mainstream media dancing to that tune the general public are mostly convinced there is one. Even when you point out to them there is no increase in the frequency or intensity of any type of weather event, they still remain convinced that this is only temporary and that the climate apocalypse is only around the corner, and that scientists know what they are talking about. ——-Yes they do, but it is also true that Who Pays the Piper calls the tune, and almost all so called science regarding climate change is funded by —–GOVERNMENT. The very same government that want to impose the Political Agenda called Sustainable Development on the world. ——-So when we are arguing about science we are arguing about the wrong thing. This is not about science. It is the hijacking of science in support of POLITICS."

 

[timsk]

Climate alarmists are fond of referencing 'The Science' which almost always means GIGO computer models to promote the illusion of imminent climate catastrophe. Meanwhile, the actual science - as in empirical real world data - shows there is no climate catastrophe . . .

NOAA’s Latest Temperature Climate Data Establishes There is NO CLIMATE EMERGENCY​

The National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration's temperature data as addressed in detail in this essay do not support and clearly refute climate alarmist hype that we are experiencing a ‘climate emergency’, says Larry Hamlin in Watts Up With That?

 

[timsk]

“Twelve reasons I don’t believe there’s a climate emergency”
In Mad World, Russell David explains why he’s a climate change sceptic. I concur with all twelve - he's spot on, IMO!

"I’m not a scientist. But I have reasons why I don’t fully trust the ‘climate emergency’ narrative. Here they are:
1. Looking back through history, there have always been doomsday prophets, folk who say the world is coming to an end. Are modern-day activists not just the current version of this?

2. I look at some of the facts – CO2 is 0.04% of the atmosphere; humans are responsible for just 3% of CO2; Britain is responsible for just 1% of the world’s CO2 output – and I think ‘really’? Will us de-carbonising really make a difference to the Earth’s climate?

3. I have listened to some top scientists who say CO2 does not drive global warming; that CO2 in the atmosphere is a good/vital thing; that many other things, like the sun and the clouds and the oceans, are more responsible for the Earth’s temperature.

4. I note that most of the loudest climate activists are socialists and on the Left. Are they not just using this movement to push their dreams of a deindustrialised socialist utopia? And I also note the crossover between green activists and BLM ones, gender ones, pro-Hamas ones, none of whom I like or agree with.

5. As an amateur psychologist, I know that humans are susceptible to manias. I also know that humans tend to focus on tiny slivers of time and on tiny slivers of geographical place when forming ideas and opinions. We are also extremely malleable and easily fooled, as was demonstrated in 2020 and 2021. [i.e. lockdowns, masks and the ‘vaccines']

6. I have looked into the implications of net zero. It is incredibly expensive. It will vastly reduce living standards and hinder economic growth. I don’t think that’s a good thing. I know that economic growth has led to higher living standards, which has made people both safer and more environmentally aware.

7. Net zero will also lead to significant diminishment of personal freedom, and it even threatens democracy, as people are told they MUST do certain things and they must not do other things, and they may even be restricted in speaking out on climate matters.

8. What will be the worst things that will happen if the doomsayers are correct? A rise in temperature? Where? Siberia? Singapore? Stockholm? What is the ideal temperature? For how long? Will this utopia be forever maintained? I’m suspicious of utopias; the communists sought utopias.

9. If one consequence of climate change is rising sea levels, would it not be better to spend money building more sea defences to protect our land? Like the Dutch did?

10. It’s a narrative heavily pushed by The Guardian. I dislike The Guardian. I believe it’s been wrong on most issues through my life – socialism, immigration, race, the EU, gender, lockdowns, and so on. Probably it’s wrong about climate issues too?"

11. I am suspicious of the amount of money that green activists and subsidised green industries make. And 40 years ago the greenies were saying the Earth was going to get too cold. Much of what they said would happen by now has not happened. Also, I trust ‘experts’ much less now, after they lied about the efficacy of lockdowns, masks and the ‘vaccines’.

12. I like sunshine. I prefer being warm to being cold. It makes me feel better. It’s more fun. It saves on heating bills. It saves on clothes. It makes people happier. Far fewer people die of the heat than they do the cold.

 

[IlIlIlIlI]

Why Apocalyptic Claims About Climate Change Are Wrong

Climate change is real but it's not the end of the world. And increasingly extreme statements by activists undermine environmental progress, say climate scientists.

www.forbes.com