Terrifying climate propaganda
Irresponsible misuse of models
Science differs from religion because theoretical claims have to be verified with observations. If model results can predict measurements in advance (which is quite different than explaining them afterwards!) then you can say the model validated and then apply it in practice. But if that is not the case, then you cannot sell the model as truth and using it in practice is irresponsible.
Far more complicated than simple, linear CO2 relationship
The current climate model (‘IPCC model’) systematically yields highly overstated predictions compared to measurements and can therefore not be used to form climate policy – especially if that policy results in extremely high costs and destabilises vital parts of the energy infrastructure.
We are not just saying that. Already some of the most renowned scientists have preceded us (e.g. Freeman Dyson, Frederic Seitz, Robert Jastrow, William Nierenberg), including Nobel Prize winners (e.g. Ivar Giaever and Robert Laughlin). They also argue that the earth’s climate is far too complicated to be explained by a simple one-dimensional CO2 relationship.
Modern warming in large part natural
Jeffrey Foss, PhD
Everyone has heard the bad news. Imminent Climate Apocalypse (aka “global warming” and “climate change”) threatens humanity and planet with devastation, unless we abandon the use of fossil fuels.
Far fewer people have heard the good news. The sun has just entered its Grand Minimum phase, and the Earth will gradually cool over the next few decades.
Why should we all hope Earth will cool? Because nobody with any trace of human decency would hope the Earth will actually suffer catastrophic warming.
Many of us believe in the threat of global warming, but live in the hope that we can switch to “renewable energy” before it is too late. But this is a false hope. Despite our best efforts over several decades, renewables such as wind and solar energy still meet only 2% of global energy needs, while hydro adds only 7% or so.
So avoiding the alleged Climate/Global Warming Apocalypse by relying on renewable energy would require surviving on less than 10% of our current energy requirements. But that is impossible. It would also be really catastrophic: billions could die.
Our global economy runs on energy, and over 80% of it is still fossil fuels, with nuclear and other non-renewables providing another 10%. If we switch to renewables tomorrow, 90% of our energy will be lost, and the global economy will sink like the Titanic. Keeping nuclear power would merely add a second lifeboat as the great ship sinks. Even if the energy loss were spread out over decades, the final result would still be the same.
Humankind could not produce enough food, clothing and shelter. Jobs would vanish. Massive starvation, disease and death would result. Hard physical labor would once again become the norm. Even though life could be maintained for some portion of humanity, liberty and happiness would be lost.
Let’s stop pretending. The prescribed cure for Climate Apocalypse is far worse than the purported disease. If we don’t use coal, oil and natural gas for energy, many of the 7 billion of us now alive must die. Those who survive will be impoverished and enslaved, toiling and scavenging for food by day, and fearing the darkness by night – except for the privileged few who still have money, energy and power.
The sudden and dramatic growth of human life, liberty, and happiness since the industrial revolution was achieved by replacing muscle power with coal and oil power. Before that, Hillsdale College professor of history Burt Folsom points out, only the wealthy could afford whale oil and candles. Everyone else had to go to bed early, and often hungry, when the sun went down, sleeping to recover enough energy to work – only to repeat the daily cycle yet again. Freedom of thought and travel had little real worth when we were too tired to think or walk.
The petroleum age saved whales from the brink of extinction – and brought cheap kerosene to the masses, so that they could read at night, bringing light into their lives and their brains.
The premature switch to renewable energy recommended by the false prophets of Climate Apocalypse is really just one step in an industrial counter-revolution devoutly desired by those discontented with modern life in free market democracies – and ready to erase our hard-won prosperity and freedom.
The Climate Apocalypse global warming bad news is rewarded by big money from the government and servile amplification from traditional big news media – while the good news of global cooling is silenced and unheard, stifled by both traditional media and most of today’s social media platforms.
We should all be suspicious of the motives of those who push this bad news, and welcome those who push back. Dr. Willie Soon is one scientist, although by no means the only one, who has the courage to stand up to big money, big government, big (pseudo) science, big media and big environmentalism to spread the good news. It’s high time we all heard it.
The good news from Dr. Soon and his fellow solar scientists is that the increase in global temperatures since 1800 was caused by two centuries of increasing solar output – not by human use of coal and oil.
But then solar output began to fall around 2000, in a repetition of a well-known 200-year cycle of solar activity, and global warming stopped. That’s more good news that too few people know. The purveyors of Climate Apocalypse have no explanation for this two-decade failure of their prophecy, which fortunately for all of humanity shows the superiority of solar science over apocalyptic warming foretold by computer models, hysteria and headlines – but not by real-world evidence.
Finally, solar science says we should expect steady but manageable global cooling until about mid-century, when solar activity will recover and temperatures begin to warm once again. Once again, this will be due to solar activity, and not to fossil fuels or carbon dioxide emissions.
In the best news of all, that means humanity’s successful pursuit of life, liberty, happiness, and better living standards and healthcare needn’t be stopped by Climate Apocalypse – or its prescribed cure. The only thing we have to fear is the fear of Climate Apocalypse itself.
Equally important, a warmer or cooler planet with more atmospheric CO2 and plentiful, reliable, affordable fossil fuel and nuclear energy would be infinitely preferable to a cooler planet with less CO2 and only expensive, intermittent, weather-dependent wind, solar and biofuel energy.
At the very least, humankind has an historic opportunity to witness a crucial test between two scientific hypotheses of enormous consequence. The next decade or two will reveal whether Earth warms or cools.
Surely all right-minded people must hope that it cools – and that the fear-mongering of imminent global warming apocalypse cools as well.
I might add that no one should wish the current severe Chicago-style polar vortex cold on anyone. I extend my sympathies and prayers to all who are now suffering from the cold. But be of good cheer in the knowledge that this cold-snap at least puts the lie to vastly worse climate scare global warming stories.
I also wouldn’t wish on anyone the “Green New Deal” energy reality of February 1, 2019 – when wind power provided 1.5% of the energy that kept lights on and homes warm in America’s Mid-Atlantic region, solar provided zero, and derided and despised coal, natural gas and nuclear power provided a whopping 93% or that energy! Imagine the cold, misery and death toll under 100% pseudo-renewable energy.
There is a point to my last few postings apart from the content itself. As I have said, I could post hundreds of such articles and in fact links to hundreds of scientific papers.
But my point here is that most people would never be aware of this kind of material and the scientific support for it. The mainstream media does not reference it and in fact does everything it can to hide it. The prevailing power establishment players which own the media and governments are propagandizing and deceiving you. You have been and are being played. It is a reach by the power elite for more control of the economy, society and people’s lives and a quest for greater centralization of power.
You have to go off of the mainstream information grid to get away from the gushing onslought of misinformation to have any chance of glimpsing the truth. That applies to more than just climate issues.
I’m uncertain if you understand most of the people who visit this site. Mostly every single one of us questions and/or discounts most mainstream media on most things. But climate science is not on the mainstream media radar - they ignore most climate-related stories - because most of the mainstream media is owned by corporate interests that benefit from the public not knowing the full extent of the multiple crises we are facing. They talk about climate change, yes, but stop short of ever discussing things like ecosystem collapse, or what the future will hold if even half of what is predicted comes to pass.
I’m still fascinated with the “deniers” claim that this is all just a cash cow for scientists…do you know how little the funding is for climate-related science when compared to, say, pharmaceuticals, defense, or BigAg GMO or pesticide research? Yet, as Doug points out, almost every single climate denying scientist is backed in some way or shape by energy industry money. You don’t find that worth questioning, Old Guy? Then you tell us we’re being played?
Dude, mirror. Check it.
And you certainly have a right to be here, and a right to post what you believe. That isn’t in doubt. However, as you seem unwilling to do anything but try to hammer home your own point of view without directly answering or engaging in the valid criticisms/rebuttals others are making to your posts, most members have probably tuned you out by now. You gotta be willing to listen to others if you want them to listen to you. It doesn’t help your case when you make patently untrue statements such as “all the new science supports my point of view,” especially when it takes all of about five minutes of internet research to invalidate such a statement. Maybe use some mitigating words so you don’t paint yourself into a corner?
So, let me ask you directly: What does the future hold in your point of view?
Has a PhD in philosophy, no scientific training or experience as far as I can tell.
Dup
Wikipedia, article on Marohasny:
The Institute [of Public Affairs] received a $40,000 donation from Murray Irrigation Limited at that time.[8] This paper is quoted in the Interim Report of the Inquiry into future water supplies for Australia’s rural industries and communities of the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, March 2004. … Marohasy was instrumental in establishing a joint programme with the Institute of Public Affairs and the University of Queensland, funded by Western Australian philanthropist, Bryant Macfie (A top 20 Shareholder in Strike Resources Limited [1] [2]).[10][11]Res ipsa loquitur.
am steaming fish and brussel sprouts. This year has produced so many sprouts that my Cambodian neighbors kids are shooting them in their sling shots. I am actually tired of ‘em.
We get these irritating white moths that eat away at the leaves of ours. Haven’t had a signle one sprout. =(
Any solutions you’d recommend?
-s
PS- Now this is a conversation worth having.
So you are recommending Wikipedia. Do you know that for years the climate section was controlled by a green party activist working in co-ordination with the IPCC people. He expunged entries, edited and changed entries and excluded entries. He was a gatekeeper that ensured that only “correct” information got in. He was finally outed but I believe the process continues.
His name is William Connolley
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/01/30/wikipedia-climate-fiddler-william…
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/08/21/william-connolley-demonstrates-on…
Are you on the payroll of the Heartland Institute?
Works wonders on those pestilential pests. Don’t use it my self as my fall cole crops grow in raw draft horse manure, ie. they out grow the moths. The spring crops suffer more in my zone 7b. Then…”Katy please bar the door!”
robie,husband,gardener,father,gardener,farmer,gardener,optometrist,gardener
200 plus comments! I have to agree with robie robinson who said
“Good folk here, PPr’s, are wasting time with old guy(might be a fine fellow). Settle your mare, live a rewarding bucolic life and let suburbtopia get it when and “if” it comes”.
You are arguing whether human caused it, when you should be figuring out ways to learn how to survive it. The simple fact is the hottest dozen or more years on record are among the last 15. That the global perma-ice is melting at a record rate.
Its not about stupid “I’m right, you are wrong” arguments anymore. Its about learning the ways we can prepare for a “World Made Harsh”. Our children and our grandchildren aren’t gonna care what we argued about on some silly forum.
Grow up everyone. Refocus on what’s important.
David
http://greenwizards.com/
Excerpts from Hal Lewis’s resignation letter from the American Physical Society
" 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.
This scheming at APS HQ is so bizarre that there cannot be a simple explanation for it. Some have held that the physicists of today are not as smart as they used to be, but I don’t think that is an issue. I think it is the money, exactly what Eisenhower warned about a half-century ago. There are indeed trillions of dollars involved, to say nothing of the fame and glory (and frequent trips to exotic islands) that go with being a member of the club. Your own Physics Department (of which you are chairman) would lose millions a year if the global warming bubble burst. When Penn State absolved Mike Mann of wrongdoing, and the University of East Anglia did the same for Phil Jones, they cannot have been unaware of the financial penalty for doing otherwise. As the old saying goes, you don’t have to be a weatherman to know which way the wind is blowing. Since I am no philosopher, I’m not going to explore at just which point enlightened self-interest crosses the line into corruption, but a careful reading of the ClimateGate releases makes it clear that this is not an academic question."
So most people here think I am full of it. Heh, it’s still a free country so think as you please. I have provided a link to the 31 thousand+ scientist petition. Believe me, a lot more would have signed if they weren’t in a vulnerable position making it risky to do so.
But here is another link. Comments on the issue from credentialed people. Just peruse a few of them.
https://www.c3headlines.com/quotes-from-global-warming-critics-skeptics-…
Am I on the payroll of the heartland institute?
No, I am a libertarian, not a conservative.
on the topic of “government funding corrupts the science”. Yes, it can work that way.
But please step back and take a lookeat the foundational premise of the site: peak energy and EROEI, versus the politics of growth and the economics of debt.
It is from this foundation that the people here are then looking at: how do we survive this upcoming ecopolitical tsunami, and how does humanity and earth life in general survive it?
And it is from that viewpoint that the members here view the environmental destruction, and mourn it.
And it is from that point that the AGW is viewed.
Old Guy, maybe you are even right that the AGW is a conspiracy. But the environmental destruction is real. The crash of sea life is real. The insect crash is real. The honeybees --an invasive species here in America, but naturalized these 400 years – are really in decline.
It is an issue.
Please, take a moment and realize from where this group comes, and then address that.
That said, we are all prone to getting a little off track. Grief and worry are distracting.
Old Guy,
as Michael above is directing you, this is Dr. Chris Martensons site, developed in its formative years from a series of indepth videos he created called, The Crash Course.
He discusses the Three E’s : -
Economy
Energy
Environment
It is the backbone and structure of this forum, for which every member should now be a knowledgeable authority, both chapter and verse.
I suspect that you haven’t seen these as you’ve only been a member for a short time.
Further, I sense it is why you’ve taken such passion to write 50 posts on just one thread in your tenure.
Chaper One
The Six Stages of Awareness by Chris Martenson Wednesday, October 8. 2008 The text below is from a past Crash Course seminar. It is a very loose adaptation of Elisabeth Kübler-Ross' "Five Stages of Grief." Often a broad new awareness results in a series of emotional responses that mimic the grief associated with loss. I call these the Six Stages of Awareness. Each of us here is somewhere along this progression. Most of us will inevitably pass through all six stages, each at a different speed, not always in order, and some will skip stages. While we read or hear each others' comments at this site and elsewhere, my hope is that we can find acceptance and understanding of the fact that each person is naturally at a different stage of acceptance and awareness. Each person needs to process the stage they are currently in (within normal bounds of civility and appropriateness, of course) and deserves the support of others as they progress at their own pace. (The following was spoken at a seminar:) Today is about examining data in a whole new way. I am going to provide you with a new framework for viewing this data, a scaffolding on which to drape this data, that is probably built a little differently than the framework you already have. The information is absolutely vital and critical to your future, but it will be worthless if we examine it in the same way that it has been presented to us by what I’ll term ‘our popular culture.’ So your first opportunity today will be the opportunity to change your thinking. I must warn you, this will not be easy for some. I know this from experience. You may well find yourself progressing through something akin to the five stages of grief throughout the day and throughout the next few months. Awareness can be troubling enough to mirror the process of grief, and knowing this can be important in grounding oneself. So let's now progress through some examples of what you might experience at each of the six stages.FinnThe Six Stages of Awareness
STAGE 1: You might begin with a series of statements to yourself, such as, “No way can this be true. There must be alternative explanations. This simply can’t be; I would have heard about it.” To help speed you through this stage of denial, I offer you access to the source data so that you can check it for yourself. Further, I only draw upon sources that I believe most reasonable people would consider to be highly credible. If you can view all of the data that I will present and find some alternative set of explanations as to why and how all of these things will not matter, I need you to share this with me, pronto. STAGE 2: Next, you might find yourself full of anger, saying to yourself (and possibly your loved ones and anybody else who will listen), “Aaaaarghh!!! Those bastards at the Fed, in the government, in media, have been hiding things from me, lying, and serving their own interests at my expense. How dare they!!!" While anger is a perfectly normal and even healthy stage to pass though, it is also counterproductive, in the sense that anger often serves to inhibit action…and as you’ll see later, we don’t really have a lot of time to spend in the non-solution stage. So for everybody’s sake, you need to move through this phase as rapidly as possible. This is also why you will not find me assigning blame and pointing fingers. Blame leads to anger and often a sense of victimization – both of which serve to inhibit taking action. Further, the "blame game" only serves to polarize people into opposing teams - and we’re all on the same team in the end. STAGE 3: The next stage is bargaining. Here you might find yourself thinking such thoughts as, “If I simply change a few things in my life, perhaps that will be sufficient and I won’t have to really change. I’ll use efficient light bulbs, buy a Prius, and save more each year.” You will find yourself bargaining with the data for more time, a different outcome, perhaps for a miracle to emerge. Perhaps some new technology will arise that will give us abundant and limitless energy, or we'll elect a new president capable of speaking the truth and marshaling the considerable talents and energy of this country. This, too, is a stage, and I’ve assembled a framework for understanding in such a way as to help you understand the critical difference between wishful thinking and realistic solutions. Please understand that I am not going to purposely step on your hopes – I am as hopeful as anybody you will ever meet – it’s just that I want our collective hopes to be placed in the right places, where they can do us some good. My hopes center on the tremendous reservoirs of talent, energy, and problem-solving that reside in this country, this community, and this room. I am confident that we will pull through all of the problems that we are about to discuss and that we can do it with joy, verve, and excitement. Misplaced hopes and defective strategies, on the other hand, will only let us down in the future, as they fail to deliver. STAGE 4: The next stage is fear, and it can take many shapes. “I’m going to die broke. People will come out of the cities and eat all my food and harm my family. The future is going to be unbearably bleak. I might die. I might starve. I’m not built for a world that mirrors the dystopian nightmare of Mad Max.” It is important to name these fears and confront them directly. Trying to ignore or stuff them away is simply a recipe to assure that they linger deep down, infecting your dreams and fostering paralysis. Fears are debilitating. They will prevent you from acting and they will ultimately erode your physical well-being. Most of these fears are grounded in the knowledge that our social, energy, and food networks are, for the most part, unnecessarily complicated and often wafer-thin. How will they operate in a more challenging environment? We don’t really know, and it’s that uncertainty which creates a deep sense of unease. Our food supply is both robust and fragile. If the continuous parade of trucks ever stopped rolling, for any reason, nearly all communities would find their store shelves stripped bare within 2-3 days. In fact, when we peel back the covers and examine each aspect of our various support systems, we find that they are nearly all built upon the implicit assumption that the future will be pretty much exactly like today. But what if it’s not? For myself, the only answer was to actively take steps to address each of my most basic fears. Imagine that you live in a maze made out of some flammable material and you have a fear of being caught in a fire in the maze. How could you reduce your fear? One way would be to familiarize yourself with the way out. Another might be to leave the maze and live somewhere else. Attempting to ignore the fear is not a strategy, because you would still know, on some level, that even though you are ignoring the fear, the risk remains…and so will the fear. The easiest way to reduce fear is to take concrete actions to reduce risk. STAGE 5: The most critical stage to navigate is depression. With a realistic assessment of our predicament, it is extremely common for people to begin to harbor such thoughts as, “Crap, we’re screwed. What’s the point? I am powerless to do anything about this. There’s nothing that any of us can do, anyway.” At this stage, dark fantasies of the future begin to creep into our thoughts, and fear paralyzes our ability to think, let alone act. It is my goal to help you limit this stage to the absolute shortest possible time – perhaps we can find a way to bypass it altogether. STAGE 6: The final stage is acceptance. You will know you are here when you begin to think, “However we got here is unimportant – it is what it is. Let’s figure out how to navigate the future with the tools and advantages we’ve got, not what we wish we had.” With acceptance comes peace, a sense of calm, and the ability to think clearly and take actions. However, acceptance and urgency can co-exist, and I do not mean to imply otherwise. Working through these stages is not a one-way trip. I, myself, cycle through stages #4 (fear) and #6 (acceptance) pretty routinely, but spend less and less time in #4 with every pass. What I hope you take away from this is that wherever you happen to be in these six stages will almost certainly shift over time. If you are uncomfortable with where you are in this process, know that it is temporary. My audacious, gigantic goal is to enable you to move through each of the six stages faster and more smoothly than I did. Lastly, please remember that everybody is somewhere along this curve, and my experience is that the people who are further along tend to catch grief from the people who are not. I ask that you be as respectful as possible of those who are in a slightly different place with all this. Know that where they are is right where they need to be at this moment. We can all benefit tremendously from supporting each other through this process.