... also from Patrick Moore, co-founder of Greenpeace:
“Carbon is the basis of all life… the whole thing is completely back asswards… CO2 is lower now, even with our additions to it, than it has been during almost the entire the history of the planet… it is certainly not proven that CO2 is too high and we’re all going to fry… the fact is, it is colder now than it has been for almost the entire history of earth… we don’t really know why ice ages happen… the temperature of the earth has been much warmer than it is now… we have been in a 50-year cooling period (the equator remains fairly steady, while the poles get most of the change he notes) it took 10,000 years to come out of the last, most recent glaciation, which peaked about 20,000 years ago… to all knowledge we have, it has been cooling for the last 6,000 years…we’re now beginning the slide into the next major glaciation… (the warmers, ignoring the fact that we are still below the 3,000 year average temperature and below the MWP) don’t care about anything that happened before 1850…the reason they are able to get away with all the scare stories is because CO2 is invisible… carbon dioxide is technically a greenhouse gas, but a fairly weak one and also its effect reduces exponentially logarithmically as you increase it in the atmosphere, so at a certain point, adding more of it makes virtually no effect at all…it’s only at very low levels that it actually has a significant effect but it’s never been down that low (referring to 10 ppm, the lowest it has been in history is 180 ppm, which it got to during the most recent glaciation)… plants can’t survive below 150 ppm (which) would mean the death of life if all the plants died, if CO2 continued to go down… all the CO2 we’re putting back into the air came from the air in the first place…modern life emerged at 5,000 ppm, which more than 10 times what it is now; over the millennia, on average, CO2 has continually declined (down to 180 ppm) which was getting close to threatening the existence of life… (fossil fuels) inadvertently…. started putting CO2 back into the atmosphere where it came from in the first place… all the CO2 we’re putting back in the air came from the air (or water) in the first place… it was in the carbon cycle, life removed it – all fossil fuels are the result of life, from photosynthesis (or what I call ‘ancient stored solar energy), coal is made from trees and oil and gas made from the bodies of sea creatures.. carbohydrates turned into hydrocarbons, but the carbon there came from CO2 either in the sea or in the air and was lost to the carbon cycle, or sequestered… and now we to purposely take the CO2 out of the atmosphere with machines that use a lot of energy.. plants are growing 30% faster in many places due to the increase – it is well documented; warmth is also good for life, cold is the enemy of life… ten to twenty times more people die of cold than heat every year… they are pushing a narrative that is suicidal for civilization, NetZero, the idea that wind and solar can provide all energy, and that there will be batteries – these batteries don’t exist… wind and solar are about 1/3 available, the rest of the time they’re not, the rest of the time you’d have to use batteries, so you’d have to have batteries that would hold twice the amount of electricity the wind and sun can produce… when the wind and solar are working is had to provide the whole grid’s requirement and charge the grid with twice as much energy as the grid requires, so therefore you have to build three times as much capacity as you would with hydro, nuclear or coal and gas… it is not possible technically, never mind financially… these are urban, green fantasy woke people... God help us if the all the people who make electricity from wind and solar win the game for even 10 years – they’ll have us so deep in an economic mess… they (the green wokesters) are lying outright, and don’t seem to care the poorest of the poor seem to suffer the most from their policies – that’s just a straight fact… the entire Arctic Ocean is covered in ice, there is NO open ocean in the Arctic (this was in winter when the discussion occurred, 2022)… (in the summer there is open water in the Arctic), but that’s a good thing because plankton need sunlight and what do seals eat? And polar bears eat seals! And if there’s no plankton there’s no krill, and no krill there’s no fish and if there’s no fish there’s no seals… so it’s good that the ice is not covering the ice in the summer…. polar bears – if it were not for climate change, polar bears would not exist… they are descended from the Eurasian brown bear, and as the earth cooled, the brown bears went out onto the ice and hunt for seals, and from divergent evolution went from one species went into two – polar bears are an evolutionary result of grizzly (Eurasian brown bears) going out onto the ice…the reason CO2 declined over the millennia was because of the marine calcifying species, the clams, the mussels, the barnacles, the shrimp, the coral reefs are about 50% of it. All of those species… learned to protect their soft bodies… to take calcium and carbon dioxide in the sea and make it into calcium carbonate what we call limestone. All the limestone in the earth’s crust came from calcifying marine organisms. It is hundreds of billions of tonnes. All that carbon was in the ocean before those calcifiers made it into shells, so they inadvertently presaged the end of life by continually sucking out of the oceans and turning it into calcium carbonate, which sank the to bottom and was lost to the carbon cycle forever until we came along and started making cement, and in fact about 5% of all the CO2 emissions we emit come from cement manufacturing, because we take calcium carbonate and turn it into calcium oxide and CO2, whereas with fossil fuels we take hydrocarbons and turn the into CO2 and water – the two most important things for life is what we are putting into the atmosphere when we burn fossil fuels. So carbon pollution has become a term – this is a sign of complete scientific illiteracy, so say ‘carbon pollution’; first, it’s not carbon, it’s carbon dioxide.” Moore concludes the motivation is based on “it’s based on striking fear into the hearts of women and men and getting control of them that way; its obviously about control as much as it is about money, but then control gets you money. The underlying problem is that the invisible part of the cycle of fear is the politicians giving the scientists the money to create the scare stories – 80% of all academic research is funded by government today, and that money is being used by the politicians to get what they want, which is something to scare the people with so they’ll vote for them because they’ll save them from that (fear) ... and the media and the activists are just the bullhorn for the scare story the politicians are putting out, but in the final analysis it is the money flowing from the political class to all these universities who just can’t resist the money… and if they resist the story, they’re not going to get any money. So they are afraid to critique any of this fake science… (and re. coral reefs) coral reefs are healthy… the Indonesian archipelago has the highest biodiversity of corals and is the warmest ocean in the world and represents a sanctuary to where corals have shrunk from when the earth was warmer and corals were more widespread. It’s a complete like that they are threatened with heat, absolute complete lie.” Moore concludes that a lot of this is based on pride, which is the worst of sins because “it can be disguised as a virtue, and greed is the second worst sin… and these people are guilty of both… they are smart-ass, greedy people… president Biden is adopting policies that are meant to damage the United States of America and the rest of the western world – there’s no other explanation for them. You wouldn’t do what he is doing unless you were trying to hurt your people – and that’s what they are doing… science should be the basis for (political) policy, knowledge should be the basis for policy, but they have twisted the so-called knowledge to most of it being fake.” Moore also notes that all the greenie cities are heavy on concrete buildings, and discussed forest fires being due to poor land management, noting that there are very few fires on private land, only the greenie public lands (40 min. mark, here, adding the native people in North America and Australia burned off timber and other dead growth in the spring, and clean the forest that way, or use it for fires; fires like in Paradise, CA., are due to pitchy trees, whereas oaks, maples, etc. won’t burn that way) Moore also discusses the draconian laws in Canada about killing a polar bears, but the government of Nunavut passed a law saying it was OK if they were in your house or attacking you, and that population of polar bears now has gone from 6,000 in the 1970s to between 30- 50,000 (some of this due to ending unrestricted hunting). The media ignored this. Polar bears spend much of their time on land, and den there. In fact, there are popular polar bear tours in Churchill, Manitoba during their time on land.
Thanks so much. My dear friend and NASA scientist wrote a book called THE COLD SUN by John Casey. Every 250 years the sun goes into hibernation which causes cooler temps. The sun controls climate and man has zero impact.
Gee, thanks. I hope you have a great Mother's Day too. Truth be known.....the only way to save this country is with God, We The People and Nullification.
“I am a skeptic on climate change. I know the climate is changing, and it always has been. I've studied this intensively over many years. I started what I call the Carbon Project here in British Columbia back in 1989 in order to bring everybody together to discuss this subject and figure out the facts behind it. Since then, I have watched as hysteria has grown, as if the whole world is going to come to an end and civilization is going to die because of humans causing this climate change. I don't buy that, and I certainly know we don't have any proof of it. I'm not denying that we might be playing some role, but the natural factors that have always caused climate change have not suddenly disappeared. I'm very skeptical of the alarmist nature of climate campaigning.”
–Moore later wrote in his book Fake Invisible Catastrophes and Threats of Doom (WattsUpWithThat summary here or Technocracy News summary here) that “A while back it dawned on me that the great majority of scare stories about the present and future state of the planet, and humanity as a whole, are based on subjects that are either invisible, extremely remote, or both. Thus, the vast majority of people have no way of observing and verifying for themselves the truth of these claims predicting these alleged catastrophes and devastating threats. Instead, they must rely on the activists, the media, the politicians, and the scientists – all of whom have a very large financial and/or political stake in the subject – to tell them the truth. This welcomes the opportunity to simply invent narratives such as the claim that “CO2 emissions from burning fossil fuels are causing a climate emergency.”
“Since I am no longer affiliated with any organization nor receiving any funding, I can speak quite frankly….As a scientist I remain skeptical.” - Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Joanne Simpson, the first woman in the world to receive a PhD in meteorology and formerly of NASA who has authored more than 190 studies and has been called “among the most preeminent scientists of the last 100 years.”
“Inevitably in climate science, when data conflicts with models, a small coterie of scientists can be counted upon to modify the data...That the data should always need correcting to agree with models is totally implausible and indicative of a certain corruption within the climate science community.” Dr. Richard Lindzen, professor of atmospheric science, MIT
Claude Allegre, a “founding father of AGW theory,” has now come out against this, stating “The cause of this climate change is unknown.”
“What historians will definitely wonder about in future centuries is how deeply flawed logic, obscured by shrewd and unrelenting propaganda, actually enabled a coalition of powerful special interests to convince nearly everyone in the world that carbon dioxide from human industry was a dangerous, planet-destroying toxin. “It will be remembered as the greatest mass delusion in the history of the world - that carbon dioxide, the life of plants, was considered for a time to be a deadly poison.”— Richard Lindzen, professor emeritus of atmospheric science, MIT. Source https://www.sec.gov/comments/climate-disclosure/cll12-8855233-238421.pdf
Lindzen also wrote “The notion of a static, unchanging climate is foreign to the history of the Earth or any other planet with a fluid envelope. Such hysteria (over global warming) simply represents the scientific illiteracy of much of the public, the susceptibility of the public to the substitution of repetition for truth.”
Dr Roy Spencer, a principal research scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, has indicated that out of the 21 climate models tracked by the IPCC the differences in warming exhibited by those models is mostly the result of different strengths of positive cloud feedback – and that increasing CO2 is insufficient to explain global-average warming in the last 50 to 100 years.
Piers Corbin, astrophysicist, founder of Weather Action, 2002 said that current weather patterns have nothing to do with man-made climate change. Instead, Corbin flatly states that those pushing this narrative are just trying to make money. “Climate has always been changing,” and “this has nothing to do with man.” Weather this year is “caused by circulation patterns… and CO2 does not cause circulation patterns. What causes those is a combination of solar activity and the phases of the moon” ; the only connection with man is that he is “here at the same time the sun and the moon are doing things. A very similar situation happened about 132 years ago where there was the same sun, magnetic, lunar states (and) there was a heat wave in Russia and floods in Pakistan as now. These things are dictated by solar activity and the moon and nothing to do with mankind. Those who say that are just trying to make money… I assure you, this has nothing to do with carbon dioxide” In his words, see here, 2:27 min.
“The climate scare (is) the biggest deception in history…”Dr. Tim Ball, environmental consultant and former climatology professor at the University of Winnipeg in Manitoba
Warming fears are the “worst scientific scandal in the history…When people come to know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists.” - UN IPCC Japanese Scientist Dr. Kiminori Itoh, an award-winning PhD environmental physical chemist.
“The IPCC has actually become a closed circuit; it doesn’t listen to others. It doesn’t have open minds… I am really amazed that the Nobel Peace Prize has been given on scientifically incorrect conclusions by people who are not geologists,” - Indian geologist Dr. Arun D. Ahluwalia at Punjab University and a board member of the UN-supported International Year of the Planet.
“Creating an ideology pegged to carbon dioxide is a dangerous nonsense…The present alarm on climate change is an instrument of social control, a pretext for major businesses and political battle. It became an ideology, which is concerning.” - Environmental Scientist Professor Delgado Domingos of Portugal, the founder of the Numerical Weather Forecast group, has more than 150 published articles.
“The models and forecasts of the UN IPCC "are incorrect because they only are based on mathematical models and presented results at scenarios that do not include, for example, solar activity.” - Victor Manuel Velasco Herrera, a researcher at the Institute of Geophysics of the National Autonomous University of Mexico
“It is a blatant lie put forth in the media that makes it seem there is only a fringe of scientists who don’t buy into anthropogenic global warming.” - U.S Government Atmospheric Scientist Stanley B. Goldenberg of the Hurricane Research Division of NOAA.
“Even doubling or tripling the amount of carbon dioxide will virtually have little impact, as water vapour and water condensed on particles as clouds dominate the worldwide scene and always will.” – . Geoffrey G. Duffy, a professor in the Department of Chemical and Materials Engineering of the University of Auckland, NZ.
“After reading [UN IPCC chairman] Pachauri's asinine comment [comparing skeptics to] Flat Earthers, it's hard to remain quiet.” - Climate statistician Dr. William M. Briggs, who specializes in the statistics of forecast evaluation, serves on the American Meteorological Society's Probability and Statistics Committee and is an Associate Editor of Monthly Weather Review. (Note: there really IS a Flat Earth Society, at http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/cms/, whose president Daniel Shenton, thinks “the evidence suggests fossil fuel usage is contributing to global warming.” (See www.tinyurl.com/ozn2wfe. So much for Obama’s comment that “We don’t have time for a meeting of the Flat Earth Society.”
“For how many years must the planet cool before we begin to understand that the planet is not warming? For how many years must cooling go on?" - Geologist Dr. David Gee the chairman of the science committee of the 2008 International Geological Congress who has authored 130 plus peer reviewed papers, and is currently at Uppsala University in Sweden.
The recent World Climate Declaration signed by around 250 university professors, and led by a Nobel physics laureate, noted that models had many shortcomings, “and are not remotely plausible as global policy tools” This declaration notes that natural as well as anthropogenic factors cause warming, warming is far slower than predicted, climate policy relies on inadequate models, CO2 is plant food, the basis of all life on Earth, global warming has not increased natural disasters, and that climate policy must respect scientific and economic realities. Here are all the PhD signatories.
“The present era is one of the coolest and least carbon-intensive periods of the last 600 million years. Indeed, the geological and paleontological evidence overwhelmingly says that today’s average global temperature of about 15 degrees C and CO2 concentrations of 420 ppm are nothing to fret about, and even if they rise to about 17-18 degrees C and 500-600 ppms by the end of the century, it may well on balance improve the lot of mankind. After all, bursts of civilization during the last 10,000 years uniformly occurred during the red portion of the graph below–the river civilizations, the Minoan, the Greco-Roman era, the Medieval flowering and the industrial and technological revolutions of the present era. At the same time, the several lapses into dark ages happened when the climate turned colder (blue area). And that’s only logical. When its warmer and wetter, growing seasons are longer and crop yields are better—regardless of the agricultural technology and practices of the moment. And it’s better for human and community health, too—most of the deadly plagues of history have occurred under colder climes, such as the Black Death of 1344-1350 … (the warmers narrative) ignores the entirety of the planet’s pre-Holocene (last 10,000 years) history, even though the science shows that more than 50% of the time in the last 600 million years global temperatures were in the range of 25 degrees C or 67% higher than current levels and far beyond anything projected by the most unhinged climate models today. But, crucially, at those temperature peaks planetary climate systems did not go into a doomsday loop of scorching meltdown—warming was always checked and reversed by powerful counter-veiling forces.” David Stockman, former Director of the Office of Management and Budget under President Ronald Reagan
Global warming/climate change were the global boogie men they had to create to sell UN Agenda 21 to the people. This boogie man had to be something that would affect everyone in the world. It had to inject fear in order to drive compliance. Fear is a weapon they have used to convince people to give up their freedom and their God given rights. Anyone that does a deep dive into A21 knows these evil people understood if people knew their plan was for global communism they would face mass rejection. So they had to call their agenda something else. They started with global warming and when their lie was exposed they changed to climate change which is much harder to disprove because after all the climate changes all the time (naturally). The trick was to convince people the change is now devastating to the future of earth and that humans are the cause. Most of the severe weather we experience today is created and controlled by our own government. They gave been fine tuning weather modification since the 1950's.
The truth is, there has been global warming recently – but it started around the time of the Revolutionary war, and today we are still BELOW the average of the past 3,000 years. And this is not just for Europe, Greenland and North America, yet another red herring that has recently been thrown out by the desperate global warmers. The universality of the Viking and Mediaeval climatic optimums is written about by Kegwin, who wrote in Science, 1996:274:1504-1508, https://www.science.org/doi/abs/10.1126/science.274.5292.1504 the mean surface temp of the Sargasso Sea (which lies roughly between the West Indies and the Azores), which was obtained by readings of isotope ratios in marine organism remains in sediment, shows we are, today, below the three thousand year average, and far below the Medieval Climatic Optimum, albeit far above the LIA. Civil Defense Perspectives, Mar. 2007, Vol. 23, #3, p. 1, notes that evidence for this climatic optimum has been found in all but 2 out of 103 locations where it was examined for, including Asia, Africa, South America and the western U.S. The graph at the link above of temperature in the Sargasso Sea tells you all you need to know (note: that big horizontal line running across the page is the 3,000 year average!), Interestingly, the warmer times coincided not only with the best harvests, but also the least amount of major storm activity.
Meanwhile, prominent scientist and IPCC insider Mike Hulme, Professor of Climate Change in the School of Environmental Sciences at the University of East Anglia – where ClimateGate occured — is the founding Director of the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research and considered one England’s most important climate scientists, and is an IPCC insider. Hitting the nail on the head re. lack of consensus, Hulme noted the actual number of scientists who backed that claim was “only a few dozen experts in a 2010 paper, Progress in Physical Geography.. Hulme stated “Claims such as ‘2,500 of the world’s leading scientists have reached a consensus that human activities are having a significant influence on the climate’ are disingenuous,” and added they rendered “the IPCC vulnerable to outside criticism.” Dr. Hulme’s comments are found on pp. 10 – 11, What Do We Know About Climate Change at the IPCC, found at http://www.probeinternational.org/Hulme-Mahony-PiPG%5B1%5D.pdf
Even the British Royal Society in 2010 released a statement that “Any public perception that the science is somehow fully settled is wholly incorrect.” And, as the Financial Post of Canada noted, “… if the science isn’t settled, there can hardly ever have been “consensus” on the issue.” As a matter of fact, there has been a good outcome from the East Anglia scam: Colin Porter (personal correspondence, email) wrote about the East Anglia scam “So where are we 12 months on? Our great learned societies realised just how little there was to the evidence, that it was manipulated along with the peer review process, as was the IPCC AR4 assessment, that there was even evidence of inventing data and further evidence of attempts at thwarting the free dissemination of data and codes in direct contravention of one of the first principles of the scientific method, that of reproducibility and/or falsification. So humiliated were these societies that they had been so utterly hoodwinked as to the veracity of the so called science that enmasse, they withdrew their support for the “consensus” and called for a return to fundamental scientific principles in dealings with climate science and for the restoration of a healthy sceptical scientific community. Heads rolled at the very top of these once great organisations for their direction of policy and political interference.” We can be thankful, then, that East Anglia exposed and eliminated some of the lead frauds behind the AGW scam. Of course, they will soon be replaced in some other fashion by other leftist fanatics, of that we can be sure.
Regarding natural global warming (not caused by man) the survey found that 54 % agreed that "global warming is happening," with 25% disagreeing and 21% were unsure. Almost half said they needed a lot more information before forming "a firm opinion." Study was funded by the National Science Foundation, see www.climatechangecommunications.org.
I am.going to sift through all the great info.you have sent. Thanks so much. You should start a Substack so we could easily share your info. Think about it. You already have created enough material in your comments for several.exvellent articles.
I do have one, called Att Viska (Swedish verb... long story). I actually have a 700 pp paper on the topic. If you would like you can have it and data mine it for any thing you would like. My goal is truth... not worried about making money off this (I'll leave the apotheosis of money to the vile Pfizer phrauds!)
Kind regards, Jim aka "Blaise," to throw off the H8TE-filled somnolent wokesters just a tad.
That is awesome. I will sign up. I do what I do for my fellow man and not for any reward or money. Please do send me your pp. karen.bracken@reagan.com. I will be sure to push your Substack. Thanks
Happy Birthing Persons Day 🙄
From a Birthing Person Impregnator 😂😃
😂😂Good one. From a proud female mother with all the natural God given parts. Mother, grandmother, GREAT grandmother.
... also from Patrick Moore, co-founder of Greenpeace:
“Carbon is the basis of all life… the whole thing is completely back asswards… CO2 is lower now, even with our additions to it, than it has been during almost the entire the history of the planet… it is certainly not proven that CO2 is too high and we’re all going to fry… the fact is, it is colder now than it has been for almost the entire history of earth… we don’t really know why ice ages happen… the temperature of the earth has been much warmer than it is now… we have been in a 50-year cooling period (the equator remains fairly steady, while the poles get most of the change he notes) it took 10,000 years to come out of the last, most recent glaciation, which peaked about 20,000 years ago… to all knowledge we have, it has been cooling for the last 6,000 years…we’re now beginning the slide into the next major glaciation… (the warmers, ignoring the fact that we are still below the 3,000 year average temperature and below the MWP) don’t care about anything that happened before 1850…the reason they are able to get away with all the scare stories is because CO2 is invisible… carbon dioxide is technically a greenhouse gas, but a fairly weak one and also its effect reduces exponentially logarithmically as you increase it in the atmosphere, so at a certain point, adding more of it makes virtually no effect at all…it’s only at very low levels that it actually has a significant effect but it’s never been down that low (referring to 10 ppm, the lowest it has been in history is 180 ppm, which it got to during the most recent glaciation)… plants can’t survive below 150 ppm (which) would mean the death of life if all the plants died, if CO2 continued to go down… all the CO2 we’re putting back into the air came from the air in the first place…modern life emerged at 5,000 ppm, which more than 10 times what it is now; over the millennia, on average, CO2 has continually declined (down to 180 ppm) which was getting close to threatening the existence of life… (fossil fuels) inadvertently…. started putting CO2 back into the atmosphere where it came from in the first place… all the CO2 we’re putting back in the air came from the air (or water) in the first place… it was in the carbon cycle, life removed it – all fossil fuels are the result of life, from photosynthesis (or what I call ‘ancient stored solar energy), coal is made from trees and oil and gas made from the bodies of sea creatures.. carbohydrates turned into hydrocarbons, but the carbon there came from CO2 either in the sea or in the air and was lost to the carbon cycle, or sequestered… and now we to purposely take the CO2 out of the atmosphere with machines that use a lot of energy.. plants are growing 30% faster in many places due to the increase – it is well documented; warmth is also good for life, cold is the enemy of life… ten to twenty times more people die of cold than heat every year… they are pushing a narrative that is suicidal for civilization, NetZero, the idea that wind and solar can provide all energy, and that there will be batteries – these batteries don’t exist… wind and solar are about 1/3 available, the rest of the time they’re not, the rest of the time you’d have to use batteries, so you’d have to have batteries that would hold twice the amount of electricity the wind and sun can produce… when the wind and solar are working is had to provide the whole grid’s requirement and charge the grid with twice as much energy as the grid requires, so therefore you have to build three times as much capacity as you would with hydro, nuclear or coal and gas… it is not possible technically, never mind financially… these are urban, green fantasy woke people... God help us if the all the people who make electricity from wind and solar win the game for even 10 years – they’ll have us so deep in an economic mess… they (the green wokesters) are lying outright, and don’t seem to care the poorest of the poor seem to suffer the most from their policies – that’s just a straight fact… the entire Arctic Ocean is covered in ice, there is NO open ocean in the Arctic (this was in winter when the discussion occurred, 2022)… (in the summer there is open water in the Arctic), but that’s a good thing because plankton need sunlight and what do seals eat? And polar bears eat seals! And if there’s no plankton there’s no krill, and no krill there’s no fish and if there’s no fish there’s no seals… so it’s good that the ice is not covering the ice in the summer…. polar bears – if it were not for climate change, polar bears would not exist… they are descended from the Eurasian brown bear, and as the earth cooled, the brown bears went out onto the ice and hunt for seals, and from divergent evolution went from one species went into two – polar bears are an evolutionary result of grizzly (Eurasian brown bears) going out onto the ice…the reason CO2 declined over the millennia was because of the marine calcifying species, the clams, the mussels, the barnacles, the shrimp, the coral reefs are about 50% of it. All of those species… learned to protect their soft bodies… to take calcium and carbon dioxide in the sea and make it into calcium carbonate what we call limestone. All the limestone in the earth’s crust came from calcifying marine organisms. It is hundreds of billions of tonnes. All that carbon was in the ocean before those calcifiers made it into shells, so they inadvertently presaged the end of life by continually sucking out of the oceans and turning it into calcium carbonate, which sank the to bottom and was lost to the carbon cycle forever until we came along and started making cement, and in fact about 5% of all the CO2 emissions we emit come from cement manufacturing, because we take calcium carbonate and turn it into calcium oxide and CO2, whereas with fossil fuels we take hydrocarbons and turn the into CO2 and water – the two most important things for life is what we are putting into the atmosphere when we burn fossil fuels. So carbon pollution has become a term – this is a sign of complete scientific illiteracy, so say ‘carbon pollution’; first, it’s not carbon, it’s carbon dioxide.” Moore concludes the motivation is based on “it’s based on striking fear into the hearts of women and men and getting control of them that way; its obviously about control as much as it is about money, but then control gets you money. The underlying problem is that the invisible part of the cycle of fear is the politicians giving the scientists the money to create the scare stories – 80% of all academic research is funded by government today, and that money is being used by the politicians to get what they want, which is something to scare the people with so they’ll vote for them because they’ll save them from that (fear) ... and the media and the activists are just the bullhorn for the scare story the politicians are putting out, but in the final analysis it is the money flowing from the political class to all these universities who just can’t resist the money… and if they resist the story, they’re not going to get any money. So they are afraid to critique any of this fake science… (and re. coral reefs) coral reefs are healthy… the Indonesian archipelago has the highest biodiversity of corals and is the warmest ocean in the world and represents a sanctuary to where corals have shrunk from when the earth was warmer and corals were more widespread. It’s a complete like that they are threatened with heat, absolute complete lie.” Moore concludes that a lot of this is based on pride, which is the worst of sins because “it can be disguised as a virtue, and greed is the second worst sin… and these people are guilty of both… they are smart-ass, greedy people… president Biden is adopting policies that are meant to damage the United States of America and the rest of the western world – there’s no other explanation for them. You wouldn’t do what he is doing unless you were trying to hurt your people – and that’s what they are doing… science should be the basis for (political) policy, knowledge should be the basis for policy, but they have twisted the so-called knowledge to most of it being fake.” Moore also notes that all the greenie cities are heavy on concrete buildings, and discussed forest fires being due to poor land management, noting that there are very few fires on private land, only the greenie public lands (40 min. mark, here, adding the native people in North America and Australia burned off timber and other dead growth in the spring, and clean the forest that way, or use it for fires; fires like in Paradise, CA., are due to pitchy trees, whereas oaks, maples, etc. won’t burn that way) Moore also discusses the draconian laws in Canada about killing a polar bears, but the government of Nunavut passed a law saying it was OK if they were in your house or attacking you, and that population of polar bears now has gone from 6,000 in the 1970s to between 30- 50,000 (some of this due to ending unrestricted hunting). The media ignored this. Polar bears spend much of their time on land, and den there. In fact, there are popular polar bear tours in Churchill, Manitoba during their time on land.
Also remember their goal is depopulation. When people realize this fact the war against CO2 makes sense.
Again I ask, and the intellectually stupid can’t figure that out?
That college degree proves they’re worthless
Thanks so much. My dear friend and NASA scientist wrote a book called THE COLD SUN by John Casey. Every 250 years the sun goes into hibernation which causes cooler temps. The sun controls climate and man has zero impact.
“The sun controls climate and man has zero impact.”
And the intellectually stupid can’t figure that out?
When man becomes too much of an aggravation to nature and the earth, the earth will shake us off like a dog shaking off fleas.
💯
Thank you Karen, may we prevail as a people. Happy Mother's Day to you, and thank you again for fighting for us and with us!!
Gee, thanks. I hope you have a great Mother's Day too. Truth be known.....the only way to save this country is with God, We The People and Nullification.
Patrick Moore, co-founder of Greenpeace, cited from http://www.theenergyreport.com/pub/na/11079 and whose boat I have personally been on in Vancouver Harbour.
“I am a skeptic on climate change. I know the climate is changing, and it always has been. I've studied this intensively over many years. I started what I call the Carbon Project here in British Columbia back in 1989 in order to bring everybody together to discuss this subject and figure out the facts behind it. Since then, I have watched as hysteria has grown, as if the whole world is going to come to an end and civilization is going to die because of humans causing this climate change. I don't buy that, and I certainly know we don't have any proof of it. I'm not denying that we might be playing some role, but the natural factors that have always caused climate change have not suddenly disappeared. I'm very skeptical of the alarmist nature of climate campaigning.”
–Moore later wrote in his book Fake Invisible Catastrophes and Threats of Doom (WattsUpWithThat summary here or Technocracy News summary here) that “A while back it dawned on me that the great majority of scare stories about the present and future state of the planet, and humanity as a whole, are based on subjects that are either invisible, extremely remote, or both. Thus, the vast majority of people have no way of observing and verifying for themselves the truth of these claims predicting these alleged catastrophes and devastating threats. Instead, they must rely on the activists, the media, the politicians, and the scientists – all of whom have a very large financial and/or political stake in the subject – to tell them the truth. This welcomes the opportunity to simply invent narratives such as the claim that “CO2 emissions from burning fossil fuels are causing a climate emergency.”
“Since I am no longer affiliated with any organization nor receiving any funding, I can speak quite frankly….As a scientist I remain skeptical.” - Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Joanne Simpson, the first woman in the world to receive a PhD in meteorology and formerly of NASA who has authored more than 190 studies and has been called “among the most preeminent scientists of the last 100 years.”
“Inevitably in climate science, when data conflicts with models, a small coterie of scientists can be counted upon to modify the data...That the data should always need correcting to agree with models is totally implausible and indicative of a certain corruption within the climate science community.” Dr. Richard Lindzen, professor of atmospheric science, MIT
Claude Allegre, a “founding father of AGW theory,” has now come out against this, stating “The cause of this climate change is unknown.”
“What historians will definitely wonder about in future centuries is how deeply flawed logic, obscured by shrewd and unrelenting propaganda, actually enabled a coalition of powerful special interests to convince nearly everyone in the world that carbon dioxide from human industry was a dangerous, planet-destroying toxin. “It will be remembered as the greatest mass delusion in the history of the world - that carbon dioxide, the life of plants, was considered for a time to be a deadly poison.”— Richard Lindzen, professor emeritus of atmospheric science, MIT. Source https://www.sec.gov/comments/climate-disclosure/cll12-8855233-238421.pdf
Lindzen also wrote “The notion of a static, unchanging climate is foreign to the history of the Earth or any other planet with a fluid envelope. Such hysteria (over global warming) simply represents the scientific illiteracy of much of the public, the susceptibility of the public to the substitution of repetition for truth.”
Dr Roy Spencer, a principal research scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, has indicated that out of the 21 climate models tracked by the IPCC the differences in warming exhibited by those models is mostly the result of different strengths of positive cloud feedback – and that increasing CO2 is insufficient to explain global-average warming in the last 50 to 100 years.
Dr. William Happer, professor emeritus of physics at Princeton University, ”There isn’t a climate crisis. There will not be a climate crisis. It is utter nonsense.” https://www.sec.gov/comments/climate-disclosure/cll12-8855233-238421.pdf
Piers Corbin, astrophysicist, founder of Weather Action, 2002 said that current weather patterns have nothing to do with man-made climate change. Instead, Corbin flatly states that those pushing this narrative are just trying to make money. “Climate has always been changing,” and “this has nothing to do with man.” Weather this year is “caused by circulation patterns… and CO2 does not cause circulation patterns. What causes those is a combination of solar activity and the phases of the moon” ; the only connection with man is that he is “here at the same time the sun and the moon are doing things. A very similar situation happened about 132 years ago where there was the same sun, magnetic, lunar states (and) there was a heat wave in Russia and floods in Pakistan as now. These things are dictated by solar activity and the moon and nothing to do with mankind. Those who say that are just trying to make money… I assure you, this has nothing to do with carbon dioxide” In his words, see here, 2:27 min.
“The climate scare (is) the biggest deception in history…”Dr. Tim Ball, environmental consultant and former climatology professor at the University of Winnipeg in Manitoba
Warming fears are the “worst scientific scandal in the history…When people come to know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists.” - UN IPCC Japanese Scientist Dr. Kiminori Itoh, an award-winning PhD environmental physical chemist.
“The IPCC has actually become a closed circuit; it doesn’t listen to others. It doesn’t have open minds… I am really amazed that the Nobel Peace Prize has been given on scientifically incorrect conclusions by people who are not geologists,” - Indian geologist Dr. Arun D. Ahluwalia at Punjab University and a board member of the UN-supported International Year of the Planet.
“Creating an ideology pegged to carbon dioxide is a dangerous nonsense…The present alarm on climate change is an instrument of social control, a pretext for major businesses and political battle. It became an ideology, which is concerning.” - Environmental Scientist Professor Delgado Domingos of Portugal, the founder of the Numerical Weather Forecast group, has more than 150 published articles.
“The models and forecasts of the UN IPCC "are incorrect because they only are based on mathematical models and presented results at scenarios that do not include, for example, solar activity.” - Victor Manuel Velasco Herrera, a researcher at the Institute of Geophysics of the National Autonomous University of Mexico
“It is a blatant lie put forth in the media that makes it seem there is only a fringe of scientists who don’t buy into anthropogenic global warming.” - U.S Government Atmospheric Scientist Stanley B. Goldenberg of the Hurricane Research Division of NOAA.
“Even doubling or tripling the amount of carbon dioxide will virtually have little impact, as water vapour and water condensed on particles as clouds dominate the worldwide scene and always will.” – . Geoffrey G. Duffy, a professor in the Department of Chemical and Materials Engineering of the University of Auckland, NZ.
“After reading [UN IPCC chairman] Pachauri's asinine comment [comparing skeptics to] Flat Earthers, it's hard to remain quiet.” - Climate statistician Dr. William M. Briggs, who specializes in the statistics of forecast evaluation, serves on the American Meteorological Society's Probability and Statistics Committee and is an Associate Editor of Monthly Weather Review. (Note: there really IS a Flat Earth Society, at http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/cms/, whose president Daniel Shenton, thinks “the evidence suggests fossil fuel usage is contributing to global warming.” (See www.tinyurl.com/ozn2wfe. So much for Obama’s comment that “We don’t have time for a meeting of the Flat Earth Society.”
“For how many years must the planet cool before we begin to understand that the planet is not warming? For how many years must cooling go on?" - Geologist Dr. David Gee the chairman of the science committee of the 2008 International Geological Congress who has authored 130 plus peer reviewed papers, and is currently at Uppsala University in Sweden.
The recent World Climate Declaration signed by around 250 university professors, and led by a Nobel physics laureate, noted that models had many shortcomings, “and are not remotely plausible as global policy tools” This declaration notes that natural as well as anthropogenic factors cause warming, warming is far slower than predicted, climate policy relies on inadequate models, CO2 is plant food, the basis of all life on Earth, global warming has not increased natural disasters, and that climate policy must respect scientific and economic realities. Here are all the PhD signatories.
“The present era is one of the coolest and least carbon-intensive periods of the last 600 million years. Indeed, the geological and paleontological evidence overwhelmingly says that today’s average global temperature of about 15 degrees C and CO2 concentrations of 420 ppm are nothing to fret about, and even if they rise to about 17-18 degrees C and 500-600 ppms by the end of the century, it may well on balance improve the lot of mankind. After all, bursts of civilization during the last 10,000 years uniformly occurred during the red portion of the graph below–the river civilizations, the Minoan, the Greco-Roman era, the Medieval flowering and the industrial and technological revolutions of the present era. At the same time, the several lapses into dark ages happened when the climate turned colder (blue area). And that’s only logical. When its warmer and wetter, growing seasons are longer and crop yields are better—regardless of the agricultural technology and practices of the moment. And it’s better for human and community health, too—most of the deadly plagues of history have occurred under colder climes, such as the Black Death of 1344-1350 … (the warmers narrative) ignores the entirety of the planet’s pre-Holocene (last 10,000 years) history, even though the science shows that more than 50% of the time in the last 600 million years global temperatures were in the range of 25 degrees C or 67% higher than current levels and far beyond anything projected by the most unhinged climate models today. But, crucially, at those temperature peaks planetary climate systems did not go into a doomsday loop of scorching meltdown—warming was always checked and reversed by powerful counter-veiling forces.” David Stockman, former Director of the Office of Management and Budget under President Ronald Reagan
Global warming/climate change were the global boogie men they had to create to sell UN Agenda 21 to the people. This boogie man had to be something that would affect everyone in the world. It had to inject fear in order to drive compliance. Fear is a weapon they have used to convince people to give up their freedom and their God given rights. Anyone that does a deep dive into A21 knows these evil people understood if people knew their plan was for global communism they would face mass rejection. So they had to call their agenda something else. They started with global warming and when their lie was exposed they changed to climate change which is much harder to disprove because after all the climate changes all the time (naturally). The trick was to convince people the change is now devastating to the future of earth and that humans are the cause. Most of the severe weather we experience today is created and controlled by our own government. They gave been fine tuning weather modification since the 1950's.
The truth is, there has been global warming recently – but it started around the time of the Revolutionary war, and today we are still BELOW the average of the past 3,000 years. And this is not just for Europe, Greenland and North America, yet another red herring that has recently been thrown out by the desperate global warmers. The universality of the Viking and Mediaeval climatic optimums is written about by Kegwin, who wrote in Science, 1996:274:1504-1508, https://www.science.org/doi/abs/10.1126/science.274.5292.1504 the mean surface temp of the Sargasso Sea (which lies roughly between the West Indies and the Azores), which was obtained by readings of isotope ratios in marine organism remains in sediment, shows we are, today, below the three thousand year average, and far below the Medieval Climatic Optimum, albeit far above the LIA. Civil Defense Perspectives, Mar. 2007, Vol. 23, #3, p. 1, notes that evidence for this climatic optimum has been found in all but 2 out of 103 locations where it was examined for, including Asia, Africa, South America and the western U.S. The graph at the link above of temperature in the Sargasso Sea tells you all you need to know (note: that big horizontal line running across the page is the 3,000 year average!), Interestingly, the warmer times coincided not only with the best harvests, but also the least amount of major storm activity.
Or let’s put it another way, from the Dansgaard & Johnson study, here on ResearchGate: https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Average-near-surface-temperatures-of-the-northern-hemisphere-during-the-past-11000-years_fig5_313127868 says the same thing. Yes, we are warmer than 100 years ago, ** because we are still coming out the the freaking LIA (leftists are too STUPID to even know what that basic meteorological term is, while they yammer on about AGW) but WE ARE STILL COLDER THAN THE 3,000 YEAR AVERAGE
Meanwhile, prominent scientist and IPCC insider Mike Hulme, Professor of Climate Change in the School of Environmental Sciences at the University of East Anglia – where ClimateGate occured — is the founding Director of the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research and considered one England’s most important climate scientists, and is an IPCC insider. Hitting the nail on the head re. lack of consensus, Hulme noted the actual number of scientists who backed that claim was “only a few dozen experts in a 2010 paper, Progress in Physical Geography.. Hulme stated “Claims such as ‘2,500 of the world’s leading scientists have reached a consensus that human activities are having a significant influence on the climate’ are disingenuous,” and added they rendered “the IPCC vulnerable to outside criticism.” Dr. Hulme’s comments are found on pp. 10 – 11, What Do We Know About Climate Change at the IPCC, found at http://www.probeinternational.org/Hulme-Mahony-PiPG%5B1%5D.pdf
Even the British Royal Society in 2010 released a statement that “Any public perception that the science is somehow fully settled is wholly incorrect.” And, as the Financial Post of Canada noted, “… if the science isn’t settled, there can hardly ever have been “consensus” on the issue.” As a matter of fact, there has been a good outcome from the East Anglia scam: Colin Porter (personal correspondence, email) wrote about the East Anglia scam “So where are we 12 months on? Our great learned societies realised just how little there was to the evidence, that it was manipulated along with the peer review process, as was the IPCC AR4 assessment, that there was even evidence of inventing data and further evidence of attempts at thwarting the free dissemination of data and codes in direct contravention of one of the first principles of the scientific method, that of reproducibility and/or falsification. So humiliated were these societies that they had been so utterly hoodwinked as to the veracity of the so called science that enmasse, they withdrew their support for the “consensus” and called for a return to fundamental scientific principles in dealings with climate science and for the restoration of a healthy sceptical scientific community. Heads rolled at the very top of these once great organisations for their direction of policy and political interference.” We can be thankful, then, that East Anglia exposed and eliminated some of the lead frauds behind the AGW scam. Of course, they will soon be replaced in some other fashion by other leftist fanatics, of that we can be sure.
Regarding natural global warming (not caused by man) the survey found that 54 % agreed that "global warming is happening," with 25% disagreeing and 21% were unsure. Almost half said they needed a lot more information before forming "a firm opinion." Study was funded by the National Science Foundation, see www.climatechangecommunications.org.
I am.going to sift through all the great info.you have sent. Thanks so much. You should start a Substack so we could easily share your info. Think about it. You already have created enough material in your comments for several.exvellent articles.
I do have one, called Att Viska (Swedish verb... long story). I actually have a 700 pp paper on the topic. If you would like you can have it and data mine it for any thing you would like. My goal is truth... not worried about making money off this (I'll leave the apotheosis of money to the vile Pfizer phrauds!)
Kind regards, Jim aka "Blaise," to throw off the H8TE-filled somnolent wokesters just a tad.
That is awesome. I will sign up. I do what I do for my fellow man and not for any reward or money. Please do send me your pp. karen.bracken@reagan.com. I will be sure to push your Substack. Thanks
Good post, Karen. Should have a million likes, not just one!
Thanks so much.
♥️