If the climate really is changing – and we’re the cause of it – then the “wrenching changes” to our lives we’re told are necessary to avert catastrophe might be something we have to accept.
Like chemotherapy for cancer.
But what if the diagnosis is wrong?
What if they are lying to us?
Maybe we should get a second opinion – or at least give it a second thought – before we jump on the “climate change” bandwagon.
I personally have a few misgivings based on a few inconvenient truths I’d like to share with you – along with some politically incorrect observations.
First, I will concede that the climate does change. But is this something abnormal? Is man responsible for it changing abnormally?
The fact is atmospheric gas composition and average temperatures have varied wildly over the eons of time the Earth has existed and long before human beings existed. They will vary in the future as well.
Now, the assertion made by the “climate change” crowd (their choice of words is very interesting) is that human activity is causing an unnatural increase in C02 levels and temperatures. But this is an assertion – based on computer models – and cooked data. I’ve looked into it, as opposed to genuflecting before the warbles of non-scientist politicians (this includes, by the way, the non-scientist Bill Nye the “science” guy, who holds no academic degree in any applicable discipline) who have a clear interest in peddling the idea that there is a “crisis” – the sky is falling! – which of course they have the solution to.
For example, the taking of ground temperature readings in paved-over/concrete-covered urban areas (heat sinks) and other such manipulations, which give a distorted (arguably, a deliberately dishonest) impression of average temperatures and whether trends are within normal parameters.
Also, the folding in of greenhouse “emissions” from natural sources such as methane blooms (bubbling up of gasses from the seafloor) with man-made sources such as carbon dioxide coming out of the tailpipes of vehicles.
What about the massive naturally-occurring “emissions” of C02?
The careful putting aside of solar activity as a possible and entirely normal contributory factor (not surprising, given we lack the enforcement ability to impose solar emissions standards on the nuclear furnace that anchors our solar system).
Note that even the verbiage is shifty.
We were initially (back in the ’70s, some will recall) warned about global cooling – and an imminent ice age. We were going to freeze to death. When this did not happen global warming was subbed in. It resonated for awhile (in the ’90s especially) after a few very hot summers. But then some very hard winters ensued.
The climate, er, changed.
So now we have climate change – a brilliantly fluid saying that encompasses anything that occurs, whether warmer or cooler. The climate is changing!
“We” must do something to prevent this…
Except of course, it is us (and just us) who will be on the receiving end of “change.”
This is worth thinking about, in order to divine motives – and evaluate the veracity of the claims being made.
If this “crisis” were real rather than contrived, why is it that the government itself has not taken “action” – as regards its own “carbon footprint”?
Which is Sasquatch like, relative to ours.
Consider the carbon dioxide (and other) emissions output of an M1A Abrams battle tank vs. a Camry. The federal government has a fleet of approximately 8,848 such tanks (many more tanks than the German Wehrmacht had its disposal when it invaded the Soviet Union in the summer of 1941) and tens of thousands of gas (and diesel) guzzling (and C02 spewing) supporting vehicles.
41,062 Armored Fighting Vehicles, to be specific. Plus troop transports, Jeeps, Humvees and so on.
If “we” are in imminent danger from man-caused global warming (whoops, climate change) triggered by the release of C02 and so on from internal combustion engines, why is the military allowed to maintain this vast fleet of tanks and related heavy equipment? Surely, the “defense” of the Homeland could be achieved with fewer such than Hitler needed to get within 15 miles of Moscow?
How about the multiple aircraft carrier battle groups and the oceans of jet fuel consumed by their air wings (13,444 aircraft)? The fuel oil consumed by the non-nuclear supporting ships? What is their “carbon footprint”?
And why isn’t it being reduced?
I mean, if we are facing a “crisis” and all?
The government exhorts us to accept material diminishment but never makes such sacrifices itself. This ought to tell people something.
The people running (and who want to run) the government finger wag at us about our wasteful ways yet themselves live in huge dachas (see, for example, soon-to-be-former Dear Leader Obama’s new home; or prospective Dear Leader Hillary’s 5,300 sq. foot home in Chappaqua, NY). There is also ex-would-be-Dear Leader Mittens Romney’s 11,000 square foot home (with a car elevator).
None of these people Live Small.
They insist we do.
Did you ever see Al Gore’s progagandamentary, An Inconvenient Truth? At one point, Al is monologuing about the urgent need to change our ways as he drives along in his Cadillac Escalade. Which is a huge SUV with a huge V8 engine.
And a huge “carbon footprint.”
I will begin to take “climate change” seriously when I see Al and Barry and Hillary and Mittens and all the rest of them begin to make “wrenching changes” to their lives. When the C02 plumes eructed by the “defense” conglomerate are “controlled.”
I don’t expect it to happen anytime soon.
Which says a lot about the “crisis” they keep telling us is imminent.
Of course it’s all a con to get rich people richer. Al Gore was so confident that he and his fellow grifters were going to get the ‘carbon credit’ scheme passed though congress, that they set up a type of stock exchange to handle the trading and wheeling and dealing in those BS credits. I don’t remember the details of it, but I’m sure it’s been a yuge disappointment to Gore and his criminal government mafia pals.
You can bet your ass that if hilligula is elected that legislation will go through.
Legislation, be damned.
Get with modern times. When leftists want a new rule, they either have a federal judge (or SCOTUS) ram it down our throats, or they issue an “Executive Order,” or they have a rule-making body in an Executive Department agency like the EPA pass what for all practical purposes is treated as a law.
Congress is utterly unnecessary now. Only perpetual children still believe the “separation of powers” and the US constitution govern our nation-state.
It was called the Chicago Climate Exchange (bank) and it failed/
went bankrupt. Actually, it started out as The Shore Bank…and what
a wild bunch of cohorts were involved! It was a real zip-zinger, and
the character of the men involved will be so obvious.
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/shorebank.php
Yeah, OwlGore was so confident of that sea level rise that he bought a mansion on the Pacific Coast. Hyprocrites, all.
It’s just a euphemism for eugenics. A significant portion of greenhouse gas emissions are from food production. A tax on these emissions is a tax on food. Pure and simple. This hits the poor and hits em hard. A 10% tax on all crops would probably cause an outright population growth halt. This would hit the continent of Africa the hardest. Millions more would starve to death. The irony is that you would think the racists among us would be all for this. But the ones that are for this carbon tax are the same ones that are always screaming “racist”. It’s just another example of the total cognitive dissonance that has infected our world. Any, and I mean ANY diversion of resources towards combatting climate change, implies a diversion of resources away from food production, and that is going to result in increasing crop prices, which means death for thousands if not more.
It’s just an excuse to let a different group of con artists rob the till.
As long as the world is full of wealth, it is going to be Open Season on it, and the modern approach is to con people into going along with the theft rather than simply steal it openly (via taxes or other kinds of extortion.)
I’m pessimistic.
You are prescient.
Of course we’ll have climate change only it will take millions of years as the geological record shows. The greenies can’t wait that long as they need a payout within their lifetime so they propose man made global warming. Man made warming is a Hypothesis. A Hypothesis is an unproven theory.
The existence of “God” is a Hypothesis, an unproven theory. The Holy Rollers go completely batshit if someone disputes the existence of their “God” as the Greenies become hysterical if someone denies man made global warming and their crusade to save the Planet.
When over population causes food shortages and we resort to cannibalism and become one gigantic Donner Party hopefully they will eat the greenies first.
Roy, I hope we all get to dine on the assholes who were Obama’s speechwriters behind his “you can keep your doctor, you can keep your healthplan” lies. There’s a video of them laughing about this, like it was just one more line they got the rubes to bite on.
http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/geoffrey-dickens/2016/05/10/charlie-rose-and-presidents-speechwriters-laugh-about-obamacare
Y’all watch this and tell me you don’t share my desire to beat these clowns to death. There are literally thousands of such young men and women dedicating their lives to destroying us. I sincerely hope I live to see the opportunity to give it back to them…with baseball bats, hammers, brass knuckles—–heck, I’d throw in a crossbow.
Hello Sirs,
I am a climate change communicator.
I have a network of actual scientists that I talk to.
If you would actually like to talk to a real climate scientist then I can arrange that.
Matt
Do you mean “real’ as those who are part of the bought and paid for crowd, or the ones who do research independent of government?
Bill McKibben of 350.org also has no science background. “Climate Change Communicator”. That’s a thing?
Dunno about anybody else, but I’m more worried about an impending nuclear WWIII than unlikely climate change catastrophe.
But maybe that’s just me.
Naturally occurring CO2 emissions = 97%
Human generated CO2 emissions = 3%
The only item that is imminent is the government and corporations waiting to steal from our pockets.
Guys don’t get sucked into believing every conspiracy theory out there. Climate change is real. Hard data proves it’s happening. My brother works for the UN on this very issue and there is no way he would be going along with a con.
Your brother is either very gullible/stupid OR he is just an evil scum bag that will do anything for a gov’t paycheck.
Real live Anonymous trolls visit here, maybe even the paid variety. I’m more impressed every time I visit.
Anonymous = Ass Clown**
Just ignore them. If they can’t be bothered to consistently post under the same username they are not worth carrying on a conversation with.
**Ass Clown = Skid mark in the collective underwear of society.
Of course climate change is real. The climate is in an intergalacial period and the continental ice cap has been melting for about 12,000 years.
The outcry over climate change is like the aztec shaman priests gathering everyone together when an eclipse was predicted to awe, shock and control the masses. The purpose of the gathering was shame and control using a natural phenomenon as a prop.
The UN is a tool of the commies and the NWO; don’t trust a damned thing they say or do.
[quote]Naturally occurring CO2 emissions = 97%
Human generated CO2 emissions = 3%
The only item that is imminent is the government and corporations waiting to steal from our pockets.[/quote]
This means nothing, in fact it’s an argument FOR climate change! In the natural cycle, the earth would be absorbing that 97% so if that’s the earths limit of what it can absorb, then we’re adding that extra 3% per annum, which is a shitload of CO2.
Well, now it is obvious – not only is your brother fucking stupid, you are proof it runs in the family.
If I were to investigate a problem, I would concentrate on the most relevant indicators; in this case it is Naturally Occurring CO2; one would then find the largest contributor within that indicator and seek to reduce that. For example, you could kill all the anteaters on the planet and you would eliminate the single biggest contributor of CO2 to the atmosphere.
Anteaters cause volcanos?
How do you know that’s the limit? How do you know the 3% “extra” can’t also be absorbed, hmmm?
good job kokada, can’t respond intelligently so just resort to insults.
No more stupid than your supposed science.
[quote]How do you know that’s the limit? How do you know the 3% “extra” can’t also be absorbed, hmmm?[/quote]
I’m not saying I know it can’t just saying Kokada’s argument is meaningless
ta da!
If true I could begin the reversal process tomorrow morning.
From now on no more air travel for any reason. No more electric use for anyone who is not a provider of their own needs. End all sales of energy.
Problem solved.
Any takers?
Didn’t think so.
The basic premise is that man is affecting the climate and that is bad. The solution is that man should affect the climate and that would be good.
Am I missing something?
Depends: TPTB are chem-spraying us and will kill off all life on Earth with Aluminum nano particles; each of us has about 5 billion of them in us now and each particle is doing us harm; that is bad. If men could stop the chem-spraying, that would be good; we need to kick a lot of liberal know-it-all stupid commie asses like the Spanish did 1936-39.
there’s no solution, we’re all fucked. If we stop burning fossil fuels, 90% of us die of starvation or likely major wars wipe out humanity, so we gotta keep burning and die of starvation from future climate crises. Makes me feel guilty for bringing children into this world cos they’re likely the ones to suffer.
Anon – your BS has a stench.
Weren’t we supposed to be burnt to a crisp already from the GloBull Warming Armageddon.
The Inconvenient Lie – erase the MWP; temper the LIA; create ‘New Math’ for the blade; and use a proxy instead of modern temp records for the steep rise at the end.
Too little of rain, snow, hurricanes, tornadoes, tsunamis, erectile dysfunction, AND too much of rain, snow, hurricanes, tornadoes, tsunamis, erectile dysfunction all point to GloBull Warming – what a Cock of crap.
At the risk of sounding over-simplistic here, Occam’s razor comes to mind. If what they taught me in school was true, plants & light change CO2 back into O2. It’s a normal cycle. Maybe “they’ve” debunked that so-called settled science now that it doesn’t fit “their” agenda.
There’s no doubt in my mind that anything we can do to take care of our home is a good thing. How much does the average person contribute to the problem if there even is one? How much difference will taxing us make? The Algoreans will still live in their mansions by the rising seas & fly around in their private jumbo jets producing many times more CO2 than I do per year because they can.
If, in fact, man made climate change is true then why are the big forests in South America being depleted? How much marine plantlife (the largest O2 maker on earth ?) is being destroyed by the shit still pouring into the Pacific from Fuck-you-shima?
Sure this is all man-made, but not by the average Joe on the street driving a V-8 pickup truck to work or heating their homes with, gasp, coal. Major corporations are doing it for profit. Now these are the same folks pulling the gub’mintal puppet strings to tax us on their misdeeds. The corn/ethanol boondoggle, the electric car horseshit, that hole in the ozone layer that will melt the icecaps, global cooling in the 70s, global warming in the 90s, now climate change so nobody can call them on it. Nothing adds up truthfully. I’m severely allergic to bullshit & am breaking out in hives.
So it all comes back to greed for $$ & power. It’s a big club & you ain’t in it. Tar & feather is too good for these whores, Gores, & anyone else associated with the lies.
“Future climate crises.” Take a Valium. The earth was warmer during the Middle Ages. Humans thrived. The IPCC anticipates 4-8″ of sea level rise by the end of the 21st century. BFD
Same old hackneyed drivel from the denier cohort.
The US military is a bloated oil squandering parasite that provides millions of jobs and makes a lot of rich people even richer and it will not be reduced because climate concerns are of far lesser importance.
Like it or not the fact is that there is a very strong consensus among climate related scientists that AGW is highly probable. Delusions that this consensus is a conspiracy are ridiculous. The personal emissions of individual scientists and politicians is a worn out red herring and does not change the facts.
The scientific consensus is that cigarette smoking increases the probability of getting cancer. By Eric Peter’s idiotic logic we should discount this science if a few doctors and cancer researchers smoke cigarettes.
Of course there are a few contrarian
scientists who dispute some details of the consensus which is normal and healthy. Personally I’ll stick with the clear majority, not that it makes any difference as the lemmings have already decided they’ll take the path off the cliff and there’s fuck all we can do about it now.
The only idiot here is you, Cdubbya.
In the 70’s it was global cooling and a new ice age; then it was AGW and we were all going to die when the oceans overheated. Now it’s “climate change”, and we are responsible for environmental collapse because our computer models, which don’t agree with actual measurements or account for sunlight, say so.
As a parent, this reminds me of childish prevarications. “The cookies are gone, did you eat them?”
“No, the bear did”.
“What bear? There are no muddy bear footprints on the carpet, and no bear poop on the floor; the doors are not broken so the bear didn’t break in, and there are no bear scratches on the doorways where they would sharpen their claws”.
“Then it must have been a unicorn …”
That’s all AGW / climate science is, an attempt to get away with eating the cookies while trying to keep your parents from figuring it out. There’s no science involved, the theories cannot be tested or falsified, and the True Believers are closer to religion than any science can be.
You’re a fool, Cdubbya, but I refuse to become one just to join in your foolishness.
Just another trick from the psychopath inbred sicko jews. Steal more from the goyom. And of course their agenda is also to reduce the worlds population my 95%. Unless and until we rid the earth of these vermen,we are doomed. Next up WWthree.