Which is it(Climate change)
- Thread starter TigerRagRob
- Start date
More insanity from the climate cult!! They cut down millions of trees to build wind mills and now this loony plan!! Wow!! Trees suck up carbon dioxide...duhhh. plant a tree you nuts!!
Biden Regime to Spend $1.2 Billion to Vacuum Carbon Dioxide Out Of The Air
www.thegatewaypundit.com
Biden Regime to Spend $1.2 Billion to Vacuum Carbon Dioxide Out Of The Air
Biden Regime to Spend $1.2 Billion to Vacuum Carbon Dioxide Out Of The Air | The Gateway Pundit | by David Greyson
On Friday, the Biden regime announced it will spend $1.2 billion in taxpayer money to vacuum the sky of carbon dioxide.
www.thegatewaypundit.com
More than 1,600 scientists, including two Nobel laureates, declare climate 'emergency' a myth
The global coalition of scientists say that politics and a journalistic frenzy has propelled a doomsday climate change hysteria. The signatories also ask other scientists to "address uncertainties and exaggerations in their predictions of global warming."
justthenews.com
More than 1,600 scientists, including two Nobel laureates, declare climate 'emergency' a myth
The global coalition of scientists say that politics and a journalistic frenzy has propelled a doomsday climate change hysteria. The signatories also ask other scientists to "address uncertainties and exaggerations in their predictions of global warming."By Addison Smith
Updated: September 1, 2023 - 10:03am
UPDATE: The version of the story published on August 29 overbroadly characterized the exact language of the declaration itself regarding "greenhouse gasses." It has been corrected.
A coalition of 1,609 scientists from around the world have signed a declaration stating “there is no climate emergency” and that they “strongly oppose the harmful and unrealistic net-zero CO2 policy” being pushed across the globe. The declaration itself does not demonize carbon monoxide and does not discuss any harmful effect of other pollutants. The thrust of the declaration challenges the hysteria brought about by the narrative of imminent doom.
The declaration, put together by the Global Climate Intelligence Group (CLINTEL), was made public this month and urges that “Climate science should be less political, while climate policies should be more scientific.”
CLINTEL is an independent foundation that operates in the fields of climate change and climate policy. CLINTEL was founded in 2019 by emeritus professor of geophysics Guus Berkhout and science journalist Marcel Crok.
“Scientists should openly address uncertainties and exaggerations in their predictions of global warming, while politicians should dispassionately count the real costs as well as the imagined benefits of their policy measures,” the declaration says.
Of the 1,609 scientists who have signed the declaration, two signatories are Nobel Prize laureates. The most recent to sign is Nobel Prize winner Dr. John F. Clauser, winner of the 2022 Nobel Prize in Physics. In an announcement from CLINTEL, Clauser is quoted as saying "Misguided climate science has metastasized into massive shock-journalistic pseudoscience. In turn, the pseudoscience has become a scapegoat for a wide variety of other unrelated ills. It has been promoted and extended by similarly misguided business marketing agents, politicians, journalists, government agencies, and environmentalists."
The underlying report that engendered the declaration lays out a series of statements challenging many of the common climate claims. For example, one of the most common claims – and repeated without question by many – is that the earth will soon pass "tipping points that will lead to catastrophic environmental damage, including dangerous sea level rise, entire species going extinct, and even greater suffering in many nations, especially the poorest."
The sense of immediate crisis has been repeated constantly by mainstream media, including The New York Times, which said flatly, "Earth is likely to cross a critical threshold for global warming within the next decade."
In 2009, former vice president Al Gore famously predicted that "the Arctic would be ice-free by 2013." He later backtracked, according to Reuters, who said Gore was merely quoting other scientific reports. Gore had three years earlier published "An Inconvenient Truth" the subtitle of which was "The Planetary Emergency of Global Warming and What We Can Do About It." A documentary film based on the book earned $24,146,161 in gross receipts that year.
Celebrity activist Greta Thunberg tweeted in 2018 – five years after Gore's doomsday prediction – that "climate change will wipe out all of humanity unless we stop using fossil fuels over the next five years." The Highland County Press reported that she deleted the tweet.
Last week, John Kerry, President Biden's "Special Presidential Envoy for Climate" spoke at a conference in Edinburgh, Scotland, saying that "scientists who have spent a lifetime tracking this human-made crisis described themselves as 'alarmed' and 'terrified.' As one said unequivocally, “we are now in uncharted territory.”
"So now, humanity is inexorably threatened by humanity itself—by those seducing people into buying into a completely fictitious alternative reality where we don’t need to act and we don’t even need to care," Kerry added.
The signatories to the CLINTEL declaration say that global warming is “far slower than predicted,” and that “inadequate models” often guide climate policy.
The CLINTEL declaration comes at a time when recent claims abound that natural disasters such as the wildfires in Maui and Canada, the heatwaves across the globe and other events are driven by climate change. The declaration goes on to challenge the ever-ready blame on climate change, stating “There is no statistical evidence that global warming is intensifying hurricanes, floods, droughts and suchlike natural disasters, or making them more frequent.”
As President Biden and countless world leaders push heavily for net-zero carbon emissions by 2050 the scientists assert that this is not only “unrealistic,” but harmful to world economies.
“There is no climate emergency. Therefore, there is no cause for panic and alarm. We strongly oppose the harmful and unrealistic net-zero CO2 policy proposed for 2050,” the paper reads, proposing “adaptation instead of mitigation.”
Insurance companies disagreeMore than 1,600 scientists, including two Nobel laureates, declare climate 'emergency' a myth
The global coalition of scientists say that politics and a journalistic frenzy has propelled a doomsday climate change hysteria. The signatories also ask other scientists to "address uncertainties and exaggerations in their predictions of global warming."
More than 1,600 scientists, including two Nobel laureates, declare climate 'emergency' a myth
The global coalition of scientists say that politics and a journalistic frenzy has propelled a doomsday climate change hysteria. The signatories also ask other scientists to "address uncertainties and exaggerations in their predictions of global warming."
By Addison Smith
Updated: September 1, 2023 - 10:03am
UPDATE: The version of the story published on August 29 overbroadly characterized the exact language of the declaration itself regarding "greenhouse gasses." It has been corrected.
A coalition of 1,609 scientists from around the world have signed a declaration stating “there is no climate emergency” and that they “strongly oppose the harmful and unrealistic net-zero CO2 policy” being pushed across the globe. The declaration itself does not demonize carbon monoxide and does not discuss any harmful effect of other pollutants. The thrust of the declaration challenges the hysteria brought about by the narrative of imminent doom.
The declaration, put together by the Global Climate Intelligence Group (CLINTEL), was made public this month and urges that “Climate science should be less political, while climate policies should be more scientific.”
CLINTEL is an independent foundation that operates in the fields of climate change and climate policy. CLINTEL was founded in 2019 by emeritus professor of geophysics Guus Berkhout and science journalist Marcel Crok.
“Scientists should openly address uncertainties and exaggerations in their predictions of global warming, while politicians should dispassionately count the real costs as well as the imagined benefits of their policy measures,” the declaration says.
Of the 1,609 scientists who have signed the declaration, two signatories are Nobel Prize laureates. The most recent to sign is Nobel Prize winner Dr. John F. Clauser, winner of the 2022 Nobel Prize in Physics. In an announcement from CLINTEL, Clauser is quoted as saying "Misguided climate science has metastasized into massive shock-journalistic pseudoscience. In turn, the pseudoscience has become a scapegoat for a wide variety of other unrelated ills. It has been promoted and extended by similarly misguided business marketing agents, politicians, journalists, government agencies, and environmentalists."
The underlying report that engendered the declaration lays out a series of statements challenging many of the common climate claims. For example, one of the most common claims – and repeated without question by many – is that the earth will soon pass "tipping points that will lead to catastrophic environmental damage, including dangerous sea level rise, entire species going extinct, and even greater suffering in many nations, especially the poorest."
The sense of immediate crisis has been repeated constantly by mainstream media, including The New York Times, which said flatly, "Earth is likely to cross a critical threshold for global warming within the next decade."
In 2009, former vice president Al Gore famously predicted that "the Arctic would be ice-free by 2013." He later backtracked, according to Reuters, who said Gore was merely quoting other scientific reports. Gore had three years earlier published "An Inconvenient Truth" the subtitle of which was "The Planetary Emergency of Global Warming and What We Can Do About It." A documentary film based on the book earned $24,146,161 in gross receipts that year.
Celebrity activist Greta Thunberg tweeted in 2018 – five years after Gore's doomsday prediction – that "climate change will wipe out all of humanity unless we stop using fossil fuels over the next five years." The Highland County Press reported that she deleted the tweet.
Last week, John Kerry, President Biden's "Special Presidential Envoy for Climate" spoke at a conference in Edinburgh, Scotland, saying that "scientists who have spent a lifetime tracking this human-made crisis described themselves as 'alarmed' and 'terrified.' As one said unequivocally, “we are now in uncharted territory.”
"So now, humanity is inexorably threatened by humanity itself—by those seducing people into buying into a completely fictitious alternative reality where we don’t need to act and we don’t even need to care," Kerry added.
The signatories to the CLINTEL declaration say that global warming is “far slower than predicted,” and that “inadequate models” often guide climate policy.
The CLINTEL declaration comes at a time when recent claims abound that natural disasters such as the wildfires in Maui and Canada, the heatwaves across the globe and other events are driven by climate change. The declaration goes on to challenge the ever-ready blame on climate change, stating “There is no statistical evidence that global warming is intensifying hurricanes, floods, droughts and suchlike natural disasters, or making them more frequent.”
As President Biden and countless world leaders push heavily for net-zero carbon emissions by 2050 the scientists assert that this is not only “unrealistic,” but harmful to world economies.
“There is no climate emergency. Therefore, there is no cause for panic and alarm. We strongly oppose the harmful and unrealistic net-zero CO2 policy proposed for 2050,” the paper reads, proposing “adaptation instead of mitigation.”
Home insurers cut natural disasters from policies as climate risks grow
Some of the largest U.S. insurance companies say extreme weather has led them to end certain coverages, exclude natural disaster protections and raise premiums
"In the aftermath of extreme weather events, major insurers are increasingly no longer offering coverage that homeowners in areas vulnerable to those disasters need most.
At least five large U.S. property insurers — including Allstate, American Family, Nationwide, Erie Insurance Group and Berkshire Hathaway — have told regulators that extreme weather patterns caused by climate change have led them to stop writing coverages in some regions, exclude protections from various weather events and raise monthly premiums and deductibles.
Major insurers say they will cut out damage caused by hurricanes, wind and hail from policies underwriting property along coastlines and in wildfire country, according to a voluntary survey conducted by the National Association of Insurance Commissioners, a group of state officials who regulate rates and policy forms.
Insurance providers are also more willing to drop existing policies in some locales as they become more vulnerable to natural disasters. Most home insurance coverages are annual terms, so providers are not bound to them for more than one year.
That means individuals and families in places once considered safe from natural catastrophes could lose crucial insurance protections while their natural disaster exposure expands or intensifies as global temperatures rise."
Pretty limited options where I am due to a number of factors, but flood and hurricanes are in there. My previous company exited the market and a bunch of others have as well. Maybe 4-5 companies that will write on the water in Mt. Pleasant and rebuild cost over X amount. None of the traditional names.
The minor hurricane last week combined with the king tide pushed water nearly as high as hurricane Irma. Irma destroyed 600’ of my dock. Thankfully, the wind direction and velocity were in our favor this time.
Another 2 feet of water rise and my insurance company is paying for all the damage underneath my house. Garage, louvers, elevator shaft, personal property, cars?, golf cart, drywall, etc etc. And I just had a $50K+ claim (my first ever) for a lightning strike.
Who can possibly think cutting millions of acres of trees down is a good idea? This is pure evil.
revolver.news
We’re regret to inform you that Bill Gates is at again, pushing his “fuzzy science.” Gates is now advocating for the removal of 70 million acres of trees to combat “global warming.” Yes, this sounds harebrained, but could there be more to Gates’ agenda than just chopping down trees in the name of lowering carbon dioxide? Many critics who view Gates as a constant schemer with a vision for a New World Order suspect he has an even bigger plan in the works. More on that below.
First, the background from Slay News:
Here’s where things get interesting. Many are speculating that Gates’ proposal to cut down and bury 70 million acres of trees aligns perfectly with the World Economic Forum’s vision: a future where people live in small pods and eat bugs while Gates and his ilk live high on the hog, enjoying everything the world has to offer.
It’s clear that both Americans and people worldwide are growing weary of this tech geek’s attempts to block the sun, genetically engineer mosquitoes, buy up farmland, control populations, vaccinate everything that moves, and now, eliminate forests by cutting down trees and burying them. Given Bill Gates’ questionable association with Jeffrey Epstein, perhaps it’s time for him to take his billions, retreat to an island somewhere, and let the rest of live in peace.
New haunting theory has emerged on why Bill Gates wants to destroy so many trees... - Revolver News
Go away, Bill.
revolver.news
New haunting theory has emerged on why Bill Gates wants to destroy so many trees…
September 4, 2023 (a day ago)We’re regret to inform you that Bill Gates is at again, pushing his “fuzzy science.” Gates is now advocating for the removal of 70 million acres of trees to combat “global warming.” Yes, this sounds harebrained, but could there be more to Gates’ agenda than just chopping down trees in the name of lowering carbon dioxide? Many critics who view Gates as a constant schemer with a vision for a New World Order suspect he has an even bigger plan in the works. More on that below.
First, the background from Slay News:
Critics point out that the trees targeted for removal won’t be available for home construction. This could make things worse for the already unstable and expensive U.S. housing market and hit the middle class especially hard.
Here’s where things get interesting. Many are speculating that Gates’ proposal to cut down and bury 70 million acres of trees aligns perfectly with the World Economic Forum’s vision: a future where people live in small pods and eat bugs while Gates and his ilk live high on the hog, enjoying everything the world has to offer.
It’s clear that both Americans and people worldwide are growing weary of this tech geek’s attempts to block the sun, genetically engineer mosquitoes, buy up farmland, control populations, vaccinate everything that moves, and now, eliminate forests by cutting down trees and burying them. Given Bill Gates’ questionable association with Jeffrey Epstein, perhaps it’s time for him to take his billions, retreat to an island somewhere, and let the rest of live in peace.
Editor of Nature journal slams climate scientist Patrick Brown's 'highly irresponsible' research after he said publications reject studies that don't 'support certain narratives'
- Dr Magdalena Skipper, the editor-in-chief of Nature, accused Patrick T. Brown of 'poor research practices' after he said journals favor 'distorted' climate research
- Brown claimed the world's leading academic journals reject papers which don't 'support certain narratives' about climate change
- 'When it comes to science, Nature does not have a preferred narrative,' Skipper said of the journal
Head of top science journal denies 'distorted' climate research claim
Dr Magdalena Skipper, the top editor at Nature, accused Patrick T. Brown, a lecturer at Johns Hopkins University and doctor of earth and climate sciences, of 'poor research practices'.
A lie? uninformed? Misspoke? Or just plain stupid? Any resident libs care to explain?
Here's the actual quote. You'd need to ask him what he means but I would assume he means global warming would affect the entire globe and be irreversible, whereas a nuclear war would likely be more contained geographically and recovery would be possible.
"And guess what? In addition to helping the environment overall — and the only existential threat humanity faces even more frightening than a — than a nuclear war is global warming going above 1.5 degrees in the next 20 — 10 years. We’re — that’d be real trouble. There’s no way back from that."
Remarks by President Biden in a Press Conference | The White House
JW Marriott Hotel HanoiHanoi, Vietnam 9:09 P.M. ICT THE PRESIDENT: Good evening, everyone. It is evening, isn’t it? (Laughter.) This around the world in five days is interesting, isn’t it? Well, you know, there is that — one of my staff members said, “Remember the famous song, you know, ‘Good...
So i'll take that as just plain stupid. Nuclear war is much more dangerous than the earth raising its temperature by 1.5 degrees over a 10-20 year period. It's not even close.
Fantastic video and spot on. The climate agenda scam has always been about money, power, and control. The trap was set years ago and sadly people across the globe continue to fall for it.
This point is probably the closest thing to an actual scientific consensus wrt global warming catastrophe theory.
Liar...I captured this screenshot from FoxNews showing those temperatures were 20 degrees Fahrenheit higher in Germany on that date. 6/21/22
Here's the clip
Record heat wave devastates countries across the globe | Fox Business Video
FOX Weather meteorologist Jane Minar breaks down the relentless heat wave plaguing countries across the globe, including the U.S. and the U.K.
All you do is LIE
Take and stick it bubba. I am calling you a liar.Liar...I captured this screenshot from FoxNews showing those temperatures were 20 degrees Fahrenheit higher in Germany on that date. 6/21/22
Here's the clip
Record heat wave devastates countries across the globe | Fox Business Video
FOX Weather meteorologist Jane Minar breaks down the relentless heat wave plaguing countries across the globe, including the U.S. and the U.K.www.foxbusiness.com
All you do is LIE
I just proved that you are. How will you prove me wrong? Waiting
Increase in disasters due to warming had been thoroughly debunked...or at least rendered non-conclusive at best.
A more plausible reason insurance companies are dumping people on the coast is that with so many people moving there and spending insane amounts of money on their Mc mansions, insurance companies are out leveraged and need to offload risk.
I do believe climate change is a thing been happening for approxmatily 20k years however I do not believe fossil fuel is the big dog causing it . I believe the change is due to the change in the earths axis and the earths core heating up .
grist.org
www.smithsonianmag.com
www.nature.com
www.nsf.gov
'Global warming comes from within'--Is heat at the Earth's core the real cause of global warming?
(Part of the How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic guide) Objection: We all live on a thin crust that floats on a huge ball of molten iron, and at its core, the Earth’s temperature is over 5000 degrees C! It’s pretty far fetched to think a few parts per million of CO2 can have […]
grist.org
Humans Have Shifted Earth's Axis by Pumping Lots of Groundwater
Removing water from the ground has led to sea-level rise and caused Earth's axis to shift by about 2.6 feet between 1993 and 2010, per a new study
Rampant groundwater pumping has changed the tilt of Earth’s axis
Human depletion of underground reservoirs has shifted the global distribution of water so much that the North Pole has drifted by more more than 4 centimetres per year.
www.nature.com
Study Adds Clue to How Last Ice Age Ended
New Zealand glaciers melted as European glaciers briefly expanded
www.nsf.gov
Last edited:
I am a staunch “climate change catastrophe theory” denier. I trust the quantum physics analysis that suggest CO2 can drive climate but so far. CO2’s greenhouse effect is logarithmic—resulting in essentially only 1 degree C warming for every doubling of CO2. The latter is the point about which the much-embellished “climate science consensus” largely rest.I do believe climate change is a thing been happening for approxmatily 20k years however I do not believe fossil fuel is the big dog causing it . I believe the change is due to the change in the earths axis and the earths core heating up .
'Global warming comes from within'--Is heat at the Earth's core the real cause of global warming?
(Part of the How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic guide) Objection: We all live on a thin crust that floats on a huge ball of molten iron, and at its core, the Earth’s temperature is over 5000 degrees C! It’s pretty far fetched to think a few parts per million of CO2 can have […]
Humans Have Shifted Earth's Axis by Pumping Lots of Groundwater
Removing water from the ground has led to sea-level rise and caused Earth's axis to shift by about 2.6 feet between 1993 and 2010, per a new study
Rampant groundwater pumping has changed the tilt of Earth’s axis
Human depletion of underground reservoirs has shifted the global distribution of water so much that the North Pole has drifted by more more than 4 centimetres per year.
Study Adds Clue to How Last Ice Age Ended
New Zealand glaciers melted as European glaciers briefly expanded
To be sure, the continuous unbounded pumping of C02 into the atmosphere resulting in ever higher CO2 concentrations is of some concern, but its net effect cannot be said to be either positive or negative. About this point there is certainly NOT a scientific consensus as the catastrophist will have you believe.
Nevertheless, the variations in the Earth’s orbit and solar activity and its effect on global climate is largely factored in in the well-understood Milankovitch cycles and other related phenomenon.
Last edited:
Saudi & Middle East Green Initiatives
Saudi & Middle East Green Initiatives
www.greeninitiatives.gov.sa
These schemes for an enthusiastic EV spending spree have nothing to do with the international climate and everything to do with domestic special interest politics.
I had sniffed out this scheme myself a few years ago.... Although I was a little more liberal with my number, putting it around 6 to 9% of the total global greenhouse gas emissions for passenger cars using data from the EPA website. You can probably find some threads with these and aimilar comments from me on this board.
The media routinely gets caught in these and other similar overt lies. It's sickening.
Interesting quote: (paraphrasing) interesting that we call a gas a pollutant that if we were to significantly reduced it we would all die.
