Global Warming Liars

[Mindful]

Consensus in history

We have consensus that the Earth is a flat plane suspended in space on the backs of turtles!

I’ve heard that one too.

lol

 

[ReinyDays]

And there it is... World depopulation. The whole point of this sham is aimed at starving to death millions of people. The Globalist world view, most people are users of resources and worthless.

As populations evolve and become more advanced, they have fewer children. IN the 1800's until about 1930 large families were needed to keep a farm running, to survive the harsh environments. Today, we are focused on careers and have 1 or 2 children, the US birth rate will fall below "replacement" rates in the next 10 years. Democrats are already pulling in replacements as they have aborted their own.

All of this is bull shit in my opinion. As China just exposed, there are regimes that will kill millions for power. World War III has already started and COVID was the first salvo. The "vaccines" that lower human immune function was the second salvo. When they drop the next MOAB, millions will die as the human immune systems will be unable to defeat the next man-made virus.

Everything these elitists do is about power and control.

The next glacial cycle will start in the next 30-200 years. We are already showing signs of the change. Earths "tilt" has already moved to +23.6 degrees (Pole Shift - rotational center) +23.4 is the theoretical point at which glaciation starts. We are already teetering on the point to rapid long-term cooling. One good volcanic eruption will send us over the edge with the suns internal shift in energy output.

I have no idea where you get the notion World Government™ wants less people buying the goods we make ... just baffling ... the rest is more non-sense ...

You never answered my post #30 ... why these confusing mental gymnastics? ...

 

[westwall]

Without technology? ... that's an extraordinary claim ... the world could only support 2 billion with early 20th Century technology ... tractors instead of horses ...

Why do you think populations are reversing? ... I think your extrapolation is going a little too far in the future ... half of us have our reproduction rates down, but the other half doesn't ... (or actually they do, as many kids as they can as fast as they can ... it's the only retirement program they have) ...

There's people in the world without internet access ... how are they to know there's a problem brewing for our great-great-great-great grandchildren? ...

It is a factual claim. What problem is brewing for our great great grandkids?

Be specific.


The growth rate in the 1960's was 2.6 to one. It is now 1.7 to one. We are not replacing the ones who will be dying.

That is called math.

 

[Mindful]

Has anyone been incinerated yet? During two days of heat?

Or did you fall asleep, drinking wine, and sitting under the fan?

 

[ReinyDays]

It is a factual claim. What problem is brewing for our great great grandkids?

Be specific.


The growth rate in the 1960's was 2.6 to one. It is now 1.7 to one. We are not replacing the ones who will be dying.

That is called math.

Wait ... you consider the 1960's "without technology"? ... and world population was half then what it is today ...

I'm using fertility rate ... the average number of children one woman bears ... replacement is considered 2.1 ... and the World Bank gives 2.4 children per average healthy woman world-wide ... the rate is slowing, but not reversing ... but then I grew up without technology apparently ... Moon landings were a hoax right? ...

 

[ChemEngineer]

Manmade Global Climate Warming Change is the greatest scientific fraud in human history

Behind Darwin's Tautology. If it survives, it's fit. If it's fit, it survives, and so A>B>C>D in the words of atheist socialist Richard Dawkins.

 

[ChemEngineer]

This was on the front of the Radio Times in 1974. What happened to that theory?


View attachment 672672

Ghetto Fabulous.

Well deserving of a place in my website, The Global Warming Fraud.

 

[ReinyDays]

Behind Darwin's Tautology. If it survives, it's fit. If it's fit, it survives, and so A>B>C>D in the words of atheist socialist Richard Dawkins.

If it reproduces, the species survives ... do you know nothing of population dynamics? ... absolutely farcical how little you know of science ...

 

[westwall]

Wait ... you consider the 1960's "without technology"? ... and world population was half then what it is today ...

I'm using fertility rate ... the average number of children one woman bears ... replacement is considered 2.1 ... and the World Bank gives 2.4 children per average healthy woman world-wide ... the rate is slowing, but not reversing ... but then I grew up without technology apparently ... Moon landings were a hoax right? ...

By technology I mean beyond what we have now.

Wait ... you consider the 1960's "without technology"? ... and world population was half then what it is today ...

I'm using fertility rate ... the average number of children one woman bears ... replacement is considered 2.1 ... and the World Bank gives 2.4 children per average healthy woman world-wide ... the rate is slowing, but not reversing ... but then I grew up without technology apparently ... Moon landings were a hoax right? ...

So am I. By technology I mean beyond that which we have now, if we really wanted to produce food on a grand scale I have talked with scientists who conservatively estimate the planet could support 40 billion. Demographers are who I pay attention to and they are calculating the Earth's population in 100 years will drop to 6 billion.

Mainly because the third world is slowly disappearing, and even those who still live in the third world are having fewer children. Right now the Earth is barely keeping pace with replacement. That is going to plummet in the next 25 years. Demographers have already pointed out that china is in a world of hurt, their draconian policies have ensured they will drop below a billion people within the the next 20 years. India is still growing, but the rate is slowing. Japan is contracting as is almost all of Europe.

In other words, it is a non issue.

 

[otto105]

http://GlobalWarmingLiars.blogspot.com

THE LIE: An overwhelming consensus of scientists support global warming.

This lie is based on a 2009 article by Maggie Kendall Zimmerman, then a student at the University of Illinois.
As stated in the Wall Street Journal, "The '97 percent' figure in the Zimmerman/Doran survey represents the views of only 79 respondents who listed climate science as an area of expertise and said they published more than half of their recent peer-reviewed papers on climate change. Seventy-nine scientists—of the 3,146 who responded to the survey—does not a consensus make."
The WSJ went on to elaborate further: "The survey's questions don't reveal much of interest. Most scientists who are skeptical of catastrophic global warming nevertheless would answer "yes" to both questions. The survey was silent on whether the human impact is large enough to constitute a problem. Nor did it include solar scientists, space scientists, cosmologists, physicists, meteorologists or astronomers, who are the scientists most likely to be aware of natural causes of climate change."
So much for that lie one hears so often and so loudly.
THE LIE: Humans are causing catastrophic changes in earth's climate by burning fossil fuel and increasing carbon dioxide.
This lie is based on the extremely disingenuous and anti-scientific Keeling Curve, below.

This terribly misleading graph is intended to scare you into immediate action.
Just adding water vapor, which constitutes 1.5% of the atmosphere, or 15,000 parts per million, that graph above becomes this below, far more realistic, more honest, less misleading:


Other greenhouse gases, such as methane and nitrous oxide, are omitted from graphs and discussion.
If in fact humans were the primary, or even major contributor to carbon dioxide production, then the highest concentrations of CO2 would be industrial and population centers around the globe, instead of the rain forests of Africa and South America:

THE LIE: Global catastrophe, "tipping point"! We must do something now!
This incredible lie is preached by Al Gore, the United Nations, bureaucracies beholden to research billions, and by Barack Obama. Obama recently flew on Air Force One from Washington, D.C. to California, to play a round of golf with his friends, the same way he uses Air Force One to fly to Democrat fund-raisers all over the U.S.
Preaching doom and gloom to you little people is what they do, but not what they practice themselves. At the most recent Global Warming Scare-Fest, in Davos, Switzerland, the Scare-Mongers flew 1,700 private jets, rather than videoconference. Don't do as they do, do as they say.
Net global emission of CO2 looks nothing like human production of CO2. Rather, CO2 is the product of temperature and soil moisture.


THE LIE: Big oil billions are driving "deniers"
Budget requests from a few of the U.S. government agencies for global warming "research" money, just in 2011:

NOAA $437 million
NSF $480 million
NASA $438 million
DOE $627 million
DOI $171 million
EPA $169 million
USDA $159 million

ON OCTOBER 6, 2010, UC SANTA BARBARA PHYSICS PROFESSOR EMERITUS, HAROLD LEWIS, RESIGNED FROM THE AMERICAN PHYSICAL SOCIETY IN PROTEST OF THE GLOBAL WARMING FRAUD. HIS LETTER READS IN PART:“FOR REASONS THAT WILL SOON BECOME CLEAR MY FORMER PRIDE AT BEING AN APS FELLOW ALL THESE YEARS HAS BEEN TURNED INTO SHAME, AND I AM FORCED, WITH NO PLEASURE AT ALL, TO OFFER YOU MY RESIGNATION FROM THE SOCIETY. “IT IS OF COURSE, THE GLOBAL WARMING SCAM, WITH THE (LITERALLY) TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS DRIVING IT, THAT HAS CORRUPTED SO MANY SCIENTISTS, AND HAS CARRIED APS BEFORE IT LIKE A ROGUE WAVE. IT IS THE GREATEST AND MOST SUCCESSFUL PSEUDOSCIENTIFIC FRAUD I HAVE SEEN IN MY LONG LIFE AS A PHYSICIST. ANYONE WHO HAS THE FAINTEST DOUBT THAT THIS IS SO SHOULD FORCE HIMSELF TO READ THE CLIMATEGATE DOCUMENTS, WHICH LAY IT BARE. (MONTFORD’S BOOK ORGANIZES THE FACTS VERY WELL.) I DON’T BELIEVE THAT ANY REAL PHYSICIST, NAY SCIENTIST, CAN READ THAT STUFF WITHOUT REVULSION. I WOULD ALMOST MAKE THAT REVULSION A DEFINITION OF THE WORD SCIENTIST. “SO WHAT HAS THE APS, AS AN ORGANIZATION, DONE IN THE FACE OF THIS CHALLENGE? IT HAS ACCEPTED THE CORRUPTION AS THE NORM, AND GONE ALONG WITH IT." - END OF QUOTE BY PROFESSOR LEWIS ​

​

NOBEL LAUREATE IN PHYSICS, IVER GIAIVER LIKEWISE RESIGNED IN DISGUST FROM THE AMERICAN PHYSICAL SOCIETY ON SEPTEMBER 13, 2011 OVER THIS ONGOING SCANDAL PARADING AS "SCIENCE". IT IS ANYTHING BUT.​

THE LIE: Why would scientists lie! For money, and for cowardice. They don't want to be blackballed by other cowards.

Can you provide one scientific organization that supports the belief that human caused AGW is not happening?

 

[otto105]

We've talked about this before ... the IPCC isn't a scientific body ... it may contain science, in an edited form ... but they are a political organization ... and their reports, including AR5 and AR6, are specifically addressed to political policy makers ... not scientists ... you can tell because they don't allow the dissenting scientific opinions ... like from Chris Landsea, one of the world's foremost authorities on hurricane intensive and frequency ... he makes a great case that the IPCC is overstating their cause ...

We make effective arguments using basic physics ... but that's over your head academically ... because you always rely on "104% consensus" without even trying to understand the science ...

Why do you believe in hypercanes? ...

Your trying to politicize science and it’s not working.

 

[ReinyDays]

By technology I mean beyond what we have now.






So am I. By technology I mean beyond that which we have now, if we really wanted to produce food on a grand scale I have talked with scientists who conservatively estimate the planet could support 40 billion. Demographers are who I pay attention to and they are calculating the Earth's population in 100 years will drop to 6 billion.

Mainly because the third world is slowly disappearing, and even those who still live in the third world are having fewer children. Right now the Earth is barely keeping pace with replacement. That is going to plummet in the next 25 years. Demographers have already pointed out that china is in a world of hurt, their draconian policies have ensured they will drop below a billion people within the the next 20 years. India is still growing, but the rate is slowing. Japan is contracting as is almost all of Europe.

In other words, it is a non issue.

We'll see ... the technology you're relying on seems to be transportation technology ... growing food in Russia and Ukraine and transporting it to the hungry ... and the hungry aren't eating better, their having more kids ...

You should look at the demographics yourself ... instead of picking and choosing the demographer that says what you want to hear ... I'm seeing the same numbers as you, but this is really only true for the top half of nations, the ones with electric power and video cameras ... now look at the bottom half, places that doesn't have reliable power and thus no video cameras ...

=====

12 billion you say ... National Geographic says 15 billion so I think we're all in the same place on that ... we can hope and move towards a peaceful settlement ... most population decreases comes with calamity; war, drought, Russians ...

 

[ding]

Well ... you'll certainly have time ... and choices ... is not Scotland currently under isostatic rebound or something? ... otherwise what's going to happen in Scotland is a banner for the good this warming will do ... with the assumption what's good for Scotland is good for everybody ...

A single degree of temperature isn't a disaster ... and then spread out that rise over fifty years ... you got nothing ... use common sense here ...

That's an excellent point.

To use an analogy to illustrate your point... I was arguing they you don't have a bogeyman in your closet. You argued and if they do it's a mouse.

 

[ding]

Your trying to politicize science and it’s not working.

I can't believe you didn't implode when you wrote that.

 

[otto105]

I can't believe you didn't implode when you wrote that.

Why? I have the facts which support a conclusion.

You don't.

 

[mamooth]

Another Billy faceplant:

Solar Cycle 25 has been much more active than predicted. There is no 'cooling sun'.

Yes, other deniers have faceplanted with that, but Billy has faceplanted the hardest.

 

[mamooth]

This was on the front of the Radio Times in 1974. What happened to that theory?

It was bad science spread by global warming deniers. It was never accepted by mainstream science.

Deniers have been sucking with their science for over 40 years now. That's why they're considered to be clowns.

In contrast, the real scientists have been predicting warming since the 1970s. That's why AGW science has such crediblity, because it's always gotten everything right.

 

[mamooth]

Funny how yiu have no empirical evidence to support that claim.

Yeah, I assume people know the basics. I forget how many are like you.

But as I live to educate, here's a good summary, with gobs of references to papers.

Explainer: How the rise and fall of CO2 levels influenced the ice ages

In this explainer, Carbon Brief explores how the last ice age provides strong evidence of the role CO2 plays as a “control knob” for the Earth’s climate. It also acts as a cautionary tale of how the climate can experience large changes from relatively small outside “forcings”.

www.carbonbrief.org

You won't read it, of course. You're too scared you might learn something.

 

[Mindful]

You won't read it, of course. You're too scared you might learn something.

Isn’t that short of.......patronising?

 

[mamooth]

Isn’t that short of.......patronising?

You have no experience with Westwall, obviously. He's not going to pollute the purity of his unsullied cultist mind with anything that TheParty doesn't approve of.