“If enough people like, share or choose to believe something, others will accept it as true,” - Richard Baron, American Board of Internal Medicine Let's put a few facts on the table: Fact: Fossil fuels have given us a high standard of living for the past 100 years, which we take for granted.
Global warming....er ah.....climate change is such a colossal lie. It reminds me of the book Animal Farm. All the global warming elites flying around in jets while lecturing us about carbon footprint. Most of the people who are rabid about this topic are making money from it, either directly or indirectly.
Well if you can get hold of people like climatologist and atmospheric physicist like Richard Lindzen.
Or Astrophysicist, Garth Paltridge, who was Chief research scientist at the Institute of Antarctic and Southern Ocean Studies. I actually sat next to him on a flight to the U.S. a few years ago when he was retiring. He said that he would not dare speak out until he retired. He was actually going to a Climate Skeptics conference in Chicago.
Then there is geologist, Professor Ian Plimer who has been on the media a lot and has written a number of books on the subject. Plimer will definitely take on anyone. He is a very sharp and articulate fellow.
Slightly off subject, but are they really fossil fuels as opposed to simply hydrocarbons?
https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/cassini/media/cassini-20080213.html The moon Titan is covered with the stuff. Enter Colonel Fletcher Prouty, (a very interesting guy who was in the center of the halls of power during some of the more 'colorful' days in US history. The JFK character Mr. X was based off of Prouty. You'll remember he was on his way back from the South Pole when JFK was shot.) According to Prouty, 'fossil fuels' was an invented term by petroleum companies to promote the idea of scarcity for an abundant resource, all so they could get a better price for their product, much like De Beers does by controlling the supply of diamonds. Found the Prouty interview - https://youtu.be/zSff0pwc1Xc
First comment off that video. "23 years I drilled for oil all over and not once did any geologist ever call it a fossil fuel. It’s a mineral and there is so much of it. We did core samples in southern Saskatchewan in Canada and had tens of meters of oil soaked cores. I’m talking sweet light crude. Think of that to drill 4000 meters straight down and for 100’s of meters it’s nothing but oil. That’s a lot. But nothing was said they boxed it up and we cemented the well moved the rig off they cut the casing and buried it. Makes you wonder why…cause there is more oil than you can possibly imagine under our feet."
More off topic, the series of interviews of Prouty are very interesting. One sticks out. He was in Okinawa the day the armistice was signed with Japan. Before the atomic bombs were dropped, we had invaded and defeated Japan in Okinawa. And we were staging tons and tons of munitions and supplies for the coming invasion of the home islands. Okinawa was a nightmare. Imagine the tonnage of military supplies necessary to invade the rest of the country. War's over, now what? Prouty found out that day, September 2, 1945 while the Japanese were up in Tokyo signing the armistice on the Missouri. Back in Okinawa, they were already loading the supplies; half being shipped to Ho Chi Minh in Vietnam, the other half went to Korea.
A millenarian cult based on the lie of human-caused global warming based on the never proven hypothesis that CO2 directly causes warming in the troposphere. Just looking at historic ice cores it can be seen that warming comes before the increase of CO2! Solar activity runs in 11 year cycles and ramps up and down over many decades or longer is just one contributing factor. The complexity of a planetary climate is astounding, yet hydras such as the WEF and UN push the conceit that puny humans can control the temperature like a thermostat on an AC unit! Braindead governments just go along with that and here we are...
Australia is so backward when it comes to nuclear power - block something which would enable cheap and always-on electricity with no CO2 emissions to appease the communist Greens at the same time. Couldn't have that now could we?
"But he is concerned that human activities could be “tipping the climate into an intermediate period of climate changes…. We can face a climate change that happens just as fast as the financial crisis,” Steffensen says. In that case, agricultural activity worldwide could be adversely affected … “the weather will change, and it will not change back” quickly."
I see there is a sea level rise shill down below. Sea level has been rising for a long time. If the planet warms the 2.5mm per year rise will possibly continue. It was 1.25mm until 100 years or so ago. Even at the current rate it will only amount to ten inches by 2121. We also have the ban methane activists in the media to consider. They obviously prefer GMO plants to well raised grass fed critters. The former causes women to become less fertile but that is the aim of the UN Agenda 21 (now 2030). Population reduction is popular amongst the elite. Fewer people means easier to control and more fossil fuel left for them to use. Replacing all the current ICE vehicles will require more energy likely from coal fired power stations. I wonder which countries are building more coal fired stations? Solar panels cover good land for minimal output and wind farms only work when there is wind and miles of copper to link them to the mains. Neither work 24/7 and both will require replacement in the short term. Both have a negative effect on wild life and the poorest peoples. All of us must oppose this craziness by becoming squeaky wheels. Make a noise to drown out the idiots' lies and have our leaders replaced asap by followers of facts with some brain power to understand the world.
The trolls have turned up I see Ely. With familiar follow profiles. Starting to get more like Twitter here every day.
I agree that C02 is good for plants. And that the current mess is manufactured. And that there's a lot of bullshit around electric cars.
But warmer temperatures imply less ice and that implies sea level rise. I doubt that the coastal cities of the world would like that so much. And many places would not handle another few degrees of temperature either, there is a limit for both humans and plants.
Also the guys graph was going up somewhat alarmingly after 1850. But it seems the video cut out at that bit.
I see the problem as being one of overpopulation, and products not being manufactured close to the area of end use. Just moving product consumes a massive amount of energy. I drive to a tennis court that is not the closest to my house. On the other hand, I probably couldn't find a game close by. I drive a Honda FIT, on average I get 34 MPG around mile high Denver. Many people have long commutes to work. Even buses consume a lot of fuel. It's hard to figure the mileage on a per person basis. Airplanes consume a massive amount of fuel, but apparently they allow for affordable travel to great distances. My father used to ride a horse to his one room school house which was about a mile or two from the farm house. I asked him, "What did you do when a blizzard came in?" He said, "No problem, the horse knew the way home in the most blinding snow storm."
As an aside, the original 1925 Iditarod trail serum run to Nome, Alaska used dog sleds in lieu of airplanes, because the dogs were more reliable. I highly recommend the 'The Cruelest Miles," a chronicle of the original serum run. I wrote a review of it that compares that run to the modern race:
Global warming....er ah.....climate change is such a colossal lie. It reminds me of the book Animal Farm. All the global warming elites flying around in jets while lecturing us about carbon footprint. Most of the people who are rabid about this topic are making money from it, either directly or indirectly.
Well if you can get hold of people like climatologist and atmospheric physicist like Richard Lindzen.
Or Astrophysicist, Garth Paltridge, who was Chief research scientist at the Institute of Antarctic and Southern Ocean Studies. I actually sat next to him on a flight to the U.S. a few years ago when he was retiring. He said that he would not dare speak out until he retired. He was actually going to a Climate Skeptics conference in Chicago.
Then there is geologist, Professor Ian Plimer who has been on the media a lot and has written a number of books on the subject. Plimer will definitely take on anyone. He is a very sharp and articulate fellow.
Slightly off subject, but are they really fossil fuels as opposed to simply hydrocarbons?
https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/cassini/media/cassini-20080213.html The moon Titan is covered with the stuff. Enter Colonel Fletcher Prouty, (a very interesting guy who was in the center of the halls of power during some of the more 'colorful' days in US history. The JFK character Mr. X was based off of Prouty. You'll remember he was on his way back from the South Pole when JFK was shot.) According to Prouty, 'fossil fuels' was an invented term by petroleum companies to promote the idea of scarcity for an abundant resource, all so they could get a better price for their product, much like De Beers does by controlling the supply of diamonds. Found the Prouty interview - https://youtu.be/zSff0pwc1Xc
First comment off that video. "23 years I drilled for oil all over and not once did any geologist ever call it a fossil fuel. It’s a mineral and there is so much of it. We did core samples in southern Saskatchewan in Canada and had tens of meters of oil soaked cores. I’m talking sweet light crude. Think of that to drill 4000 meters straight down and for 100’s of meters it’s nothing but oil. That’s a lot. But nothing was said they boxed it up and we cemented the well moved the rig off they cut the casing and buried it. Makes you wonder why…cause there is more oil than you can possibly imagine under our feet."
More off topic, the series of interviews of Prouty are very interesting. One sticks out. He was in Okinawa the day the armistice was signed with Japan. Before the atomic bombs were dropped, we had invaded and defeated Japan in Okinawa. And we were staging tons and tons of munitions and supplies for the coming invasion of the home islands. Okinawa was a nightmare. Imagine the tonnage of military supplies necessary to invade the rest of the country. War's over, now what? Prouty found out that day, September 2, 1945 while the Japanese were up in Tokyo signing the armistice on the Missouri. Back in Okinawa, they were already loading the supplies; half being shipped to Ho Chi Minh in Vietnam, the other half went to Korea.
A millenarian cult based on the lie of human-caused global warming based on the never proven hypothesis that CO2 directly causes warming in the troposphere. Just looking at historic ice cores it can be seen that warming comes before the increase of CO2! Solar activity runs in 11 year cycles and ramps up and down over many decades or longer is just one contributing factor. The complexity of a planetary climate is astounding, yet hydras such as the WEF and UN push the conceit that puny humans can control the temperature like a thermostat on an AC unit! Braindead governments just go along with that and here we are...
Australia is so backward when it comes to nuclear power - block something which would enable cheap and always-on electricity with no CO2 emissions to appease the communist Greens at the same time. Couldn't have that now could we?
Re Steffensen, he did qualify his statements.
"But he is concerned that human activities could be “tipping the climate into an intermediate period of climate changes…. We can face a climate change that happens just as fast as the financial crisis,” Steffensen says. In that case, agricultural activity worldwide could be adversely affected … “the weather will change, and it will not change back” quickly."
https://yaleclimateconnections.org/2017/10/humans-experimenting-with-climates-playing-nice/
I see there is a sea level rise shill down below. Sea level has been rising for a long time. If the planet warms the 2.5mm per year rise will possibly continue. It was 1.25mm until 100 years or so ago. Even at the current rate it will only amount to ten inches by 2121. We also have the ban methane activists in the media to consider. They obviously prefer GMO plants to well raised grass fed critters. The former causes women to become less fertile but that is the aim of the UN Agenda 21 (now 2030). Population reduction is popular amongst the elite. Fewer people means easier to control and more fossil fuel left for them to use. Replacing all the current ICE vehicles will require more energy likely from coal fired power stations. I wonder which countries are building more coal fired stations? Solar panels cover good land for minimal output and wind farms only work when there is wind and miles of copper to link them to the mains. Neither work 24/7 and both will require replacement in the short term. Both have a negative effect on wild life and the poorest peoples. All of us must oppose this craziness by becoming squeaky wheels. Make a noise to drown out the idiots' lies and have our leaders replaced asap by followers of facts with some brain power to understand the world.
The trolls have turned up I see Ely. With familiar follow profiles. Starting to get more like Twitter here every day.
I agree that C02 is good for plants. And that the current mess is manufactured. And that there's a lot of bullshit around electric cars.
But warmer temperatures imply less ice and that implies sea level rise. I doubt that the coastal cities of the world would like that so much. And many places would not handle another few degrees of temperature either, there is a limit for both humans and plants.
Also the guys graph was going up somewhat alarmingly after 1850. But it seems the video cut out at that bit.
I see the problem as being one of overpopulation, and products not being manufactured close to the area of end use. Just moving product consumes a massive amount of energy. I drive to a tennis court that is not the closest to my house. On the other hand, I probably couldn't find a game close by. I drive a Honda FIT, on average I get 34 MPG around mile high Denver. Many people have long commutes to work. Even buses consume a lot of fuel. It's hard to figure the mileage on a per person basis. Airplanes consume a massive amount of fuel, but apparently they allow for affordable travel to great distances. My father used to ride a horse to his one room school house which was about a mile or two from the farm house. I asked him, "What did you do when a blizzard came in?" He said, "No problem, the horse knew the way home in the most blinding snow storm."
As an aside, the original 1925 Iditarod trail serum run to Nome, Alaska used dog sleds in lieu of airplanes, because the dogs were more reliable. I highly recommend the 'The Cruelest Miles," a chronicle of the original serum run. I wrote a review of it that compares that run to the modern race:
https://smile.amazon.com/gp/customer-reviews/RZEFWMNCLSQ7C/ref=cm_cr_getr_d_rvw_ttl?ie=UTF8&ASIN=B00014WS3C