• "Spreading the ideas of freedom loving people on matters regarding high finance, politics, constructionist Constitution, and mental masturbation of all types"

Climate Change

Cigarlover

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Dec 18, 2011
Messages
6,711
Likes
12,672
#41
Great explanation of how "scientists" pick and choose their data to support their hypotheses...which isn't science. "$84B business"...big money talks, BS walks.
Kinda funny towards the end. They announce they are going to use all the data in the next model and report then change their mind shortly after. Oops, cant use that, that screws up the narrative and blows a hole in global warming.
TBH, I don't understand 1/2 of what he said in the video but still find it interesting to listen to and at least I can understand some of it.
 

GOLDBRIX

God,Donald Trump,most in GIM2 I Trust. OTHERS-meh
Sr Site Supporter
Platinum Bling
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
11,916
Likes
14,975
#43
Great explanation of how "scientists" pick and choose their data to support their hypotheses...which isn't science. "$84B business"...big money talks, BS walks.
Your Tax Dollars at Work...... Against You.
 

engineear

Silver Member
Silver Miner
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 11, 2011
Messages
2,683
Likes
3,431
Location
North of the Wall
#45
But, it IS true! It's in the news and on TV and on the internet, and Al Gore says so and Bill Nut the Science Cuck professes it to be..I mean, I can go on and on.. OAC aka the saviour gives us 12 years...lets git er dun!!

And the hits just keep on comin'.
 

ABC123

Silver Member
Silver Miner
Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 10, 2010
Messages
3,325
Likes
5,993
#47
IPCC Scam


https://www.quora.com/Is-the-latest-UN-report-on-climate-change-by-91-authors-and-citing-over-6-000-scientific-references-finally-going-to-convince-the-sceptics/answer/Dave-Burton-2

Many climate activists seem to think that the climate debate is about whether “we are contributing to global warming.” It’s not, and it never has been.

The argument is over the scale and effects of the human contribution to global warming.

Alarmists insist that the scale is large, and the effects are disastrous. But there’s scant evidence for that. The best evidence is that the scale is modest, the effects are benign, and rising CO2 levels are beneficial rather than harmful.

Unfortunately, the IPCC has very serious credibility issues. I was an IPCC Expert Reviewer for the AR5 Report, so I saw some of the problems first-hand.

**
The fact that climate change businesses are a $1.5 trillion/year parasitic industry, similar in size to the oil industry, and dwarfing the much-maligned coal industry — and many of the people demanding increased “investments” in climate change businesses have pecuniary interests in them.
 

Joe King

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
9,488
Likes
10,643
Location
Instant Gratification Land
#48
Here's the truth about their 97% of scientists BS

BTW, has anyone ever seen one of the mova globes he has on his desk?



How Well Do Scientists Understand Global Warming?
Global warming shapes public policy, taxation, and spending. So how well do scientists really understand global warming and/or climate change? And do 97% of scientists really agree that it's caused by human activity?

 

Joe King

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
9,488
Likes
10,643
Location
Instant Gratification Land
#49
From the above vid:

Ninetysevepercent.jpg



The analysis referred to is the analysis that came up with the 97% number, and they admit that the reason they did it was to shape public policy.
Ie: they have an agenda and they cooked the numbers to get a stat that supports their goals. If the AGW BS was real, they wouldn't need to cook the numbers in order to get you to go along with their plan.

BTW, the "97% of scientists" really means 97% of the one third of the 11,944 climate abstracts submitted between 1991 and 2011 that also took a position on global warming. If a postion as to the cause was not taken, they did not include that report in their stats.
....and they didn't read the reports, but just the abstract on the report.

Ie: out of 11,944 papers, about 4000 of them took a position on AGW. Of those, 97% assigned the blame to human activity. That's hardly a consensus.
.....but they want need you to believe that 97% of all scientists agree as to the cause, because the only way they'll get everyone to go along with new carbon taxes is if people truly believe that they are at fault.
 
Last edited:

engineear

Silver Member
Silver Miner
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 11, 2011
Messages
2,683
Likes
3,431
Location
North of the Wall
#50
The analysis of your analysis is an anal analysis from some anal analyst who suffers from poor analogies from his analy inept asshat assistant, Antonio.
 

Zed

Intergalactic Chart Arse
Midas Member
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 30, 2010
Messages
15,111
Likes
13,888
Location
Just behind you.
#51
Here's the truth about their 97% of scientists BS
I didn't watch the vid... but that number was generated by a Brisbane based Cartoonist, he counted everything that wasn't explicitly anti as pro when most papers where neutral. His work reviewed with a more balanced judgment aka the authors would agree with it, comes out at ~4% odd of papers supported the idea.

It is the ultimate BS number leaving aside the idea that consensus = science and ignoring the fact that no science is ever settled, never ever. Settled science is anti scientific.

Anywhooo...

Will watch later when time permits.
 

Alton

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
5,250
Likes
10,067
Location
Michiana
#52
Perhaps it's time to stop the arguing and apply our collective brain power toward what is REALLY happening. The past 300+ years have been in terms of earth's climate both unusual and extraordinary. Among experienced guitar players who electron tube based amplifiers there is a bit of wisdom that goes like this, " Your amp ALWAYS sounds it's best just before it blows up." Having done this myself a couple of times I can say it is true. Perhaps the earth is on a similar path. History and archeology both show that the past 300+ years of earth's climate are indeed a rare occurrence. Prior to that from the last ice age some 12,000+ years ago until the Maunder Minimum, earth's climate was anything but stable. Extreme cold periods to extreme warm periods and everything in between was the norm. Stability of climate IS a rare occurrence. We have been most fortunate to have lived during this period.

Yet, since Einstein, what was once called science has morphed into "scientism", something much more resembling a religion than the discovery of and building upon the facts of things in the physical universe. This is not to blame Einstein but what governments and men have built upon Einstein's work which Einstein himself named THEORIES and maintained basic doubts about his own work. Some men built a devastating bomb based on Einstein's theories and the corruption of science was complete after cosmology, astrophysics and all of physics was subdued. Prior to that Tavistock, Carnagie and Rockefeller corrupted fully and totally subdued the science and practice of medicine. Humanity has now been totally physically and mentally devastated having been enslaved to these and the so-called science of "economics" by way of central banking Keynesian theory.

Today we have a tool called the internet. In the past 20 years the quantity and availability of knowledge has exploded. The powers that be have tried extremely hard to ward off this expansion and spread of knowledge by labeling those pursuing this knowledge and exposing the truths of this world "conspiracy theorists", a derived term from no man's friend or helper, the main control arm of the deep state, the US CIA who initially coined the term "conspiracy theory". Today they are in the final stage of their battle as they have co-opted the national and local media in all it's forms and are now doing what they can to censor and by policy make illegitimate and even illegal dissemination of the knowledge and truths of their activities against humanity. But the flow of this knowledge is much, much greater than they can effectively stop. It really is too late for them.

Some of this knowledge seems, at least for the moment, quite incredible since it flies in the face of all the lies and misinformation we have been taught since kindergarten from schools, parents, movies, TV shows, news media, government. These lies have made the foundation of knowledge in tis society and throughout the western AND eastern world. Yet many in both the east and west have followed a different track,. Scientists who took science seriously and pursued facts and truths instead of fame and grants. Doctors and medical researchers who trust their own research and results more the than government approved BIG Pharma lies and profit-driven entities who are the motivated drivers of allopathic medicine as practiced in the US.

This has been quite the challenge to us to sift through all of these things that fly in the face of we've been taught and what we have practiced over the course of our lifetimes. In a very direct way we are living through a global revolution. Not one fought with armies and weapons of death but one which challenges all that we have built within our minds and hearts and hands over the course of our lives. We fight with ourselves. And as in ANY revolution there will be winners and losers. Lives will be and have been lost by both weapons and ignorance and recalcitrance. We here at GIM II are, so far, the winners/survivors of this revolution. Still, there are many battles engaged now and more to come in the future. The revolution is NOT over. Neither will it be over when, some say IF, Trump buries the deep state and their lies. Funny how words and ideas so outlive men, remaining alive for centuries and even millenia. Yet it is often these words and ideas that are those rooted in the truths and realities of life on this earth and this earth's part in the galaxy and the universe.

Yes, despite the efforts of NASA and NOAA and the IPCC, much truth has come to light concerning our weather, our climate on earth and the processes and energies powering all of this. Much of what we have been taught and much of what is reinforced by daily weather forecasts, news and "authoritative" agencies and voices whose existence and survival are predicated on the lies supporting the powers that be, is indeed mostly ALL lies. This amounts to systemic and systematized error. Not trying to be a Cassandra here, however, the time is NOW to make a concerted effort to root this stuff OUT of your thinking, practice/believing and conversation. We are entering a time when it is imperative that your thinking and action become rooted in facts and truth. I know some are challenged by current political and legal actions of the messy, dirty US government. Fortunately, this thread and this post IS not about politics. The political role here is as all current political endeavors, to build power and pile up money at someone else's expense. That is precisely what ALL IPCC "climate change" lies are about. Fact: You can only counter lies with facts and truth. So, it's time to load up on these.

If you haven't yet, you REALLY need to spend some time and effort to learn the fundamentals of Electric Universe Theory. Our ancient ancestors left a RECORD of events and built civilization around what they OBSERVED in the skies over this earth. What they saw no longer exists over this earth as this earth in this solar system is blasting around the Milky Way galaxy at ~ 77,000MPH. Yeah buddy! We're haulin' balls! Along this journey this solar system is doing two (2) things; 1) we are NOT moving in a straight line. We are moving UP and DOWN crossing an imaginary straight line extending out from the center of the galactic core and, 2) Along this journey we are passing through "clouds" of plasma and cosmic dust/debris.

Here's an "artist's conception" of what the Milky Way galaxy looks like from a top-down view. Remember this pic is based on ALL data collected from numerous satellitites and space missions from NOT just NASA but also from other space agencies around the world...

EarthGacticPosition.png


The following picture is also an "artist's conception" of our solar system traveling through "the local cloud" of plasma, dust/debris. Much of the data for this pic is from Russia...

sun_position_0.jpg


In the following video NOTHING, including motion, is to scale. It merely shows the travel of our solar system around the galaxy, the planets following the sun and the going UP and DOWN crossing the galactic plane...


This crossing of the galactic plane AND the various clouds we pass through more than ANYTHING else are what causes "climate change" and brings on ice ages, climate minimums and maximums. These things are what changes the "galactic climate" which affect our sun. Our sun, in turn, must deal with these energies as it distributes them through our little solar system. Sometimes the sun heats up with excessive energies and sometimes our sun cools and must "blow off" un-needed cosmic gak. when the sun "blows off" this gak like in coronal mass ejections (CMEs) this gak is spread throughout our little solar system. Sometimes it's good, more often than not it can be bad for power grids, communication systems and anything else we power with electricity. On much more rare occasions these ejections/expulsions from the sun can be quite horrific taking lives perhaps even causing extinction events.

Ben Davidson of Suspicious0bservers.com has put together a series of videos exploring the history of this solar activity. To date there 24 videos all of various lengths. Very, VERY much worth your time and attention. Here's the link to the playlist:
 

gnome

Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Platinum Bling
Joined
Apr 10, 2010
Messages
5,169
Likes
3,818
#54
What's even funnier is that denialists don't have a single research vessel, because they don't do research.
 

Joe King

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
9,488
Likes
10,643
Location
Instant Gratification Land
#55
What's even funnier is that denialists don't have a single research vessel, because they don't do research.
Whatever dude. I remember a that a couple years ago theAGW "research vessel" got trapped in ice where there was supposed to be no sea ice at all. What kind of cockamamie research led to that fiasco? lol
....and what's your opinion about them lying about the long fabled 97% of scientists agreeing that AGW is real? They present it in such a way as to make people believe that 97% of ALL scientists agree, when it's really just 97% of the one third of scientists that told the UN what it wanted to hear over a nearly 20 year period. That's less than 4,000 scientists, and how many scientists are there in total? A heck of a lot more than 4,120 of 'em I'd think.

So why do they lie about it in an effort to shape public policy? They (UN) decided upon a a desired outcome and then set about figuring how to manipulate people and their gov's to start working towards their desired outcome. Ie: lots of new taxes in order to fund World government.
 

Thecrensh

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Joined
Jun 26, 2013
Messages
7,385
Likes
10,190
#56
What's even funnier is that denialists don't have a single research vessel, because they don't do research.
I had two climatologists working directly for me in Germany. Both thought that the climate was changing, but that humans were NOT the cause...we contribute, but aren't the main cause.
 

Zed

Intergalactic Chart Arse
Midas Member
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 30, 2010
Messages
15,111
Likes
13,888
Location
Just behind you.
#57
What's even funnier is that denialists don't have a single research vessel, because they don't do research.
?!

What a stupid statement.
 

Zed

Intergalactic Chart Arse
Midas Member
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 30, 2010
Messages
15,111
Likes
13,888
Location
Just behind you.
#58
when it's really just 97% of the one third of scientists that told the UN what it wanted to hear over a nearly 20 year period.
It's not even that...
 

Oldmansmith

Midas Member
Midas Member
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
4,940
Likes
5,157
Location
Taxachusetts
#59
I try to keep an open mind gnome, but the use of words like "denialist" gets my hackles up and makes me even more sceptical. I dont remember name calling being an accepted part of the scientific method.
 

DodgebyDave

Metal Messiah
Midas Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2010
Messages
11,711
Likes
13,311
#60
I'm more concerned about FL cooling. It's supposed to get down into the 50s this week!
 

Joe King

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
9,488
Likes
10,643
Location
Instant Gratification Land
#61
when it's really just 97% of the one third of scientists that told the UN what it wanted to hear over a nearly 20 year period.
It's not even that...

How so? Heres what the numbers I gave are based upon.

agw.png




It's pretty clear. First row shows exactly what I posted, and this chart is from the article Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature.

Try watching the vid I posted and you'll see what I'm talkin' about.
 

GOLDBRIX

God,Donald Trump,most in GIM2 I Trust. OTHERS-meh
Sr Site Supporter
Platinum Bling
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
11,916
Likes
14,975
#62
Whatever dude. I remember a that a couple years ago theAGW "research vessel" got trapped in ice where there was supposed to be no sea ice at all. What kind of cockamamie research led to that fiasco? lol
Great recall Joe King. I can't believe I forgot that incident.
 

gnome

Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Platinum Bling
Joined
Apr 10, 2010
Messages
5,169
Likes
3,818
#63
Whatever dude. I remember a that a couple years ago theAGW "research vessel" got trapped in ice where there was supposed to be no sea ice at all. What kind of cockamamie research led to that fiasco? lol
....and what's your opinion about them lying about the long fabled 97% of scientists agreeing that AGW is real? They present it in such a way as to make people believe that 97% of ALL scientists agree, when it's really just 97% of the one third of scientists that told the UN what it wanted to hear over a nearly 20 year period. That's less than 4,000 scientists, and how many scientists are there in total? A heck of a lot more than 4,120 of 'em I'd think.

So why do they lie about it in an effort to shape public policy? They (UN) decided upon a a desired outcome and then set about figuring how to manipulate people and their gov's to start working towards their desired outcome. Ie: lots of new taxes in order to fund World government.
Since climate change skeptics don't actually do any research other than cherry-picking data, I'd say it's closer to 100% of the scientists who know anything about climate science.
 

GOLDBRIX

God,Donald Trump,most in GIM2 I Trust. OTHERS-meh
Sr Site Supporter
Platinum Bling
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
11,916
Likes
14,975
#64
Since climate change skeptics don't actually do any research other than cherry-picking data, I'd say it's closer to 100% of the scientists who know anything about climate science.
Opinion and we ALL have opinions.
Most have logic and facts backing their opinion.
Too many have only emotional ties to theirs.
My opinion is the AGW Crowd is the crowd of "Cherry Pickers".
 

gnome

Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Platinum Bling
Joined
Apr 10, 2010
Messages
5,169
Likes
3,818
#65
I try to keep an open mind gnome, but the use of words like "denialist" gets my hackles up and makes me even more sceptical. I dont remember name calling being an accepted part of the scientific method.
Are flat-earthers skeptics? Or in denial?
 

ZZZZZ

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter
Joined
Dec 23, 2017
Messages
3,985
Likes
8,429
Location
Northern Arizona
#66
So exactly how does the fleet of private jets and SUVs and 10,000 sf mansions owned by Al Gore, Leo DiCaprio and all of the other Lunatic Leftist Hypocrites cause "global warming"...

... on Mars?.

Just askin'.
.
.
 

Joe King

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
9,488
Likes
10,643
Location
Instant Gratification Land
#67
Since climate change skeptics don't actually do any research other than cherry-picking data, I'd say it's closer to 100% of the scientists who know anything about climate science.
It's nowhere close to that. I already demonstrated from where the 97% number comes from. Simply put, it's a lie that was intended to shape public policy to a predetermined outcome so that lots of new carbon taxes could be levied.






My opinion is the AGW Crowd is the crowd of "Cherry Pickers".
It's not opinion, but simply the truth. They have a desired outcome and are willing do anything to get it.
 

ZZZZZ

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter
Joined
Dec 23, 2017
Messages
3,985
Likes
8,429
Location
Northern Arizona
#68
They say a picture is worth a thousand words.

A deleted picture is worth even more.

Google goes Orwell, erasing picture of climate dissident founder from history of Greenpeace
By Thomas Lifson

It's starting to look as if Google's executives see George Orwell's 1984 as a how-to manual. One of the most famous citations from that work reads: "Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past."

That helpful hint (for totalitarians) perfectly matches what the tech tyrants have just done to Patrick Moore, one of the founders of Greenpeace, a man who now warns against the dangers of demonizing CO2 and carbon as the source of the purported climate change that shows up only after ground station temperatures have been "adjusted" (always in the direction of indicating warming now):


Oh my! @Google has removed my photo and name from the "Founders of @Greenpeace". It was still there 2 days ago but now I am erased. Tech Tyranny!!​
1st image a few days ago screen shot.​
2nd image this morning.​
Both were Googled "Who are the founders of Greenpeace"​

Google now controls the flow of informtaion to most people in this and many other countries. The generations coming of age now mostly lack the skills to explore non-digital archives. I just used the services of Google, asking the question, "Who are the founders of Greenpeace?," and Moore is still removed:

Sergey Brin, the co-founder of Google and current president of Alphabet, the corporate parent of the entire empire, spent the first six years of his life in the USSR, where he may have been so amazingly precocious that he picked up a trick from that nation's history under Stalin — except that Stalin's henchmen faced the challenge of artistically airbrushing the Kremlin officials out of photographs with Stalin when they fell out of favor with the tyrant.
 

GOLDBRIX

God,Donald Trump,most in GIM2 I Trust. OTHERS-meh
Sr Site Supporter
Platinum Bling
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
11,916
Likes
14,975
#69
So GOOGLE is FAKE INFO .
So they should be sued for providing false narratives, attempting to manipulate history for their agenda(s) whatever they are.
OR
Disassembled.
 

Zed

Intergalactic Chart Arse
Midas Member
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 30, 2010
Messages
15,111
Likes
13,888
Location
Just behind you.
#70
How so? Heres what the numbers I gave are based upon.

View attachment 126427



It's pretty clear. First row shows exactly what I posted, and this chart is from the article Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature.

Try watching the vid I posted and you'll see what I'm talkin' about.
Oh jeez... I'm obviously referring to a different study of the papers, my information came from a report on an extensive interview that Molyneux did with a researcher that I can't even remember the name of right now. It'd take me a while to source it, sorry. Anyway the upshot was that if the papers where reviewed looking for explicit endorsement of AGW being the dominant or critical factor the number fell to about 4%.

As with all these types of things it depends on definitions and interpretations so it is way too easy to get bogged down in hair splitting detail as to what constitutes what. I'm guessing that no two reviews would be the same because no quantifiable objective standard exists so "quantifying" is always going to be subjective based on language used and its "strength".

Safe to say that 97% consensus is a political BS number but that is about it.

… and consensus isn't science. Most significant scientific steps forward have been a consensus of 1 (or very few) in the first instance.

… and models aren't science either.
 

gnome

Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Platinum Bling
Joined
Apr 10, 2010
Messages
5,169
Likes
3,818
#71
This is the guy claiming to be one of the "founders of greenpeace"

He's a lobbyist for Monsanto and claimed Roundup was safe to drink.

 

ZZZZZ

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter
Joined
Dec 23, 2017
Messages
3,985
Likes
8,429
Location
Northern Arizona
#72
This is the guy claiming to be one of the "founders of greenpeace"

He's a lobbyist for Monsanto and claimed Roundup was safe to drink.

Are you claiming that he wasn't one of the founders of GreenPeace?.
.
.
 

GOLDBRIX

God,Donald Trump,most in GIM2 I Trust. OTHERS-meh
Sr Site Supporter
Platinum Bling
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
11,916
Likes
14,975
#75

Malus

Gold Chaser
Platinum Bling
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
3,391
Likes
2,793
Location
In a world gone mad....
#78

Joe King

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
9,488
Likes
10,643
Location
Instant Gratification Land
#79
We’re in a carbon drought.

That is according to Professor William Happer of Princeton University. The renowned physicist says when it comes to carbon dioxide, there’s more good than bad.

He goes on to say most of carbon dioxide’s effect has already happened. He points to the logarithmic dependence of temperature on carbon dioxide levels. Happer says the unique properties of carbon dioxide mean that current levels would need to double for another one-degree increase in temperature and they’d have to double again for another one degree rise.


 

GOLDBRIX

God,Donald Trump,most in GIM2 I Trust. OTHERS-meh
Sr Site Supporter
Platinum Bling
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
11,916
Likes
14,975
#80
I recall when the alarmists were scared of the timber logging in South America. "The forests create the oxygen we humans need to survive".
They fail to mention the forests take in C02 during the day and release 02 at night.

The alarmists can not get the weather correct. 60s-70s We were told to prepare for the next Ice Age. It Hasn't happen yet but more apt to happen NOW than the Man-made Global Warming they scream about now.

ANY climate change is due to Ol' Sol, that monstrous furnace we see during our daylight cycle.
and
We (man) can not do a damn thing about it but "MOVE" to where we can tolerate it Heat or Cold.