I don’t have the time or inclination to do the detailed research done by you and people like @PontiusPrimate and @Evvy_dense so thanks for doing my research for me. Rightly or wrongly I make my decisions based on the big picture and this whole thread and your links served to convince me my belief that global warming is a scam. 
2 Likes
Ignoring the fact that I’m a complete cynic nowadays, I’m inclined to believe it’s a scam.
During my childhood it was global cooling. Acid rain made a brief appearance. It seemed we wouldn’t be able to go out doors twenty years ago. Then we moved to global warming, which didn’t warn too many folks and now we have climate change. Like it doesn’t constantly change.
Do I believe that we as a species need to change? Yes. Take Americans thirst for oil. They use 60% more than China, with about 25% of the population. That’s not good.
Science has shown it is untrusted. Sure, they can create marvelous things, but studies etc are paid by someone and they expect results. The right results. The corruption by capitalism is everywhere. Greta stinks. Off topic or training as I prefer to think, she shows herself as an average 16 year old. Shallow and ill informed.
The Queen lobbying to exempt her estates from Green regulations, the business types listing jets as essential business tools and those huge gatherings tell me we aren’t in it together, so why believe them?
And if it is true? It was the rich and powerful that lied to us to cause the problems we supposedly face today and tomorrow. Why on earth would they have the answers?
4 Likes
Hi folks, to put all this in perspective I noticed this material from James Corbett, I haven’t been through it all but for those who want to go further and deeper here are the links:
James Corbett stuff
“SHOW NOTES:
First, we’ll need to define our terms, so we’ll have to determine what the average global temperature is and how it’s measured:
What is the Average Global Temperature?
Then we’ll have to examine the temperature record to make sure we have an accurate dataset to work from:
Orwell’s Nightmare: Temperature Adjustments and Climate Change
And then we’ll have to deal with any anomalies presented by the data in that record:
The Global Warming Pause Explained
And, of course, we’ll have to present that data accurately:
Lies, Damned Lies, and Global Warming Statistics
Then we’ll have to listen to actual environmental scientists about the usefulness of the anthropogenic global warming hypothesis to the work of actually preserving natural ecosystems:
Interview 1117 - Jim Steele on How Bad Global Warming Science Hurts the Environmental Movement
And we should also talk to scientists about the models that form the backbone of our ability to forecast the impact of our actions:
Interview 1261 - Judith Curry Explains Climate Modeling to the Layman
We should also keep in mind the politicization of the message and how that interferes with such forecasts:
UN Warning: Just 3 YEARS Left to Save the Earth!
While not forgetting how the nature of science is itself transformed by the perception of crisis:
We should also make sure that we are in fact dealing with science and not pseudoscience by clearly stating, and then testing, a falsifiable hypothesis:
Climate Change is Unfalsifiable Woo-Woo Pseudoscience
And we should keep in mind the other political agendas that could be at play here:
A Message to the Environmental Movement
You should also find out more about the IPCC and how they compile their infamous report:
Episode 282 - The IPCC Exposed
And you’ll have to address the fact that 95% of Scientists all believe in global warming!
Global Warming Minute - Why is the IPCC “95% Certain” that Climate Change is Manmade?
And answer why anyone would lie about climate change. I mean we all know that the big oil companies covered this up for decades, right
What Did #ExxonKnew and When Did They Knew It? - Question For Corbett #048
But what about climate scientists? Why would they lie?
Why Would People Lie About Climate Change? - Questions For Corbett #033
What? Do you mean to say big oil actually supports the transformation of the global economy on the back of the global warming lie? How does that work?
Interview 1446 - James Corbett on The Post-Carbon Energy Eugenics Hoax
Need I go on?..”
cheers
1 Like
Hi @CJ1
Fair enough. Just as a recap, let’s just see what we covered
- Monckton is totally discredited as a source. I’ve provided evidence for this, none of which has been engaged with. I think we can therefore all agree on that. Just about anything that Monckton says on this subject is worthless.
- Mann didn’t publish his data/methods. I think we can all agree this is false. He did, I gave a link above
- Mann made errors in the hockey stick calculation. False. So far I’ve seen zero evidence of errors. The errors in McIntyre’s work, however, are clear for all to see.
- NAS found his work to be “not credible”. False. As I’ve argued at length above, NAS agreed with him, as did very many of his colleagues
- The hockey stick is flawed. False. As I have shown above, there has been ample replication of this basic chart. All the new data supports it more today than it ever did
The fact that you stick with a single discredited source and have consistently refused to engage with any of the actual evidence doesn’t do much to advance your arguments. If you ever want to come and take a look at the actual, real world of data, let me know.
It’s a shame that massive scientific experimentation and careful study from thousands of people all around the world over decades doesn’t convince you. But then you’re not alone - millions of other people in the world prefer magical thinking to careful reasoning these days. It’s just a shame that the kind of magical thinking that got us into this mess cannot also get us out of it.
Just as a last question, I’ll ask you the same question as I asked @PatB - what evidence would you need to see to be convinced that human caused climate change is really happening? Pat has no answer to that question - he clearly can’t think of anything that would be convincing to him. Perhaps you can?
Cheers
PP
Hi @PatB
Well… apparently that would be wrongly then.
I wish I could say that I am surprised that you prefer to cling to ignorance rather than actually take a look at the data for yourself. Fair enough I guess. Many people prefer the position of opinionated ignorance to actual information.
If you ever do come up with an answer as to what kind of evidence would convice you that climate change is real, I would be interested to hear it.
Cheers
PP
Yes, to me these observables are crucial.
I’ve noticed a tendency to dismiss global warming (or climate change) because various nefarious organisations like the WEF and their political supporters have suddenly in the last couple of years joined this “cause”. However, for many decades scientists the world over have been trying to get politicians (and the media) to take the problem seriously – mostly without success.
I think it is a real shame how the world reacted to Covid – in that distrust of officials on Covid gets transferred to distrust on climate change (CC). There is little resemblance between the scientific consensus on CC and the one on Covid. The former has been established by large numbers of independent studies in different countries over the course of decades, the latter has been taken on trust from the WHO and from panicking leaders of certain dominant countries, with large obvious holes in the “theory” (masks don’t work, then they do; vaccines need many years of testing, suddenly they don’t; direct personal experience contradicting the narrative; etc…).
The same doesn’t apply to CC – from my personal experience the years seem to be getting warmer. Also the idea that humans are seriously affecting the biosphere in all sorts of ways is absolutely clear, so that they can affect the climate is not at all surprising.
1 Like
Right, so we’ve all got to live in a police state, because of incredibly vague stuff about ‘climate change’ that perfectly fits the NWO agenda.
Go for it, but don’t do it on my planet. I’m sure enough people will chip in so that the nutters can go to another planet to set-up their police state.
1 Like
How does that follow? Why should realizing there is a serious problem imply this?
I definitely don’t want to live in a police state!
1 Like
As I’ve probably said before, the Victorians were the first urban society in history; in that the majority of people lived in towns and cities.
Nowadays that’s even more so. One gets a bit weary of bods tapping away in front of a computer screen, in New York, London, Paris, Delhi, or wherever, who have no real contact whatsoever with the natural world.
Some of us still live in the natural world.
Willem, we posted at the same time.
The entire ‘green agenda’ is police state, because it’s all about telling people what they can and cannot do. I won’t even ask what your ‘serious problem’ is, beyond the fact that a large number of people on this planet go to bed each evening without enough food in their belly.
I think the coming energy and food shortages might focus people’s minds wonderfully.
1 Like
Thanks to all for a very active and polite discussion! I’m glad to see James Corbett’s links posted. He has been proven right on just about everything, so I do take his opinion on climate change seriously, though I, on first hearing it, had a knee jerk negative reaction. The same as I had with Alexander Cockburn who was, a few years back a noted skeptic, based more on the clear hypocrisy of Al Gore who rode the global warming gravy train while fronting also for big Nuke companies in the USA.
Just to add some rather trivial information, but in my mind connected; as I’m sure everyone is aware Barack Obama used his ‘payback dough’ to buy a beautiful beachfront home off the coast of Boston, so he doesn’t seem worried about rising seas. But look at the number of USA citizens who live 100 miles from the border (200+million) and those who live on the coast (94 million) and those who live in hurricane territory, 60 million. A huge amount who would indeed be affected by rising seas if indeed they rose. Do the ‘climate change elite’ REALLY believe in rising seas?
Of course, that’s not to speak of the UK! If there is truly a danger of rising seas wouldn’t the elite be doing something different? A bit like, if Covid was indeed dangerous would UK elites really have been partying as if THEY KNEW they were not in danger?
1 Like
Reviewing all that’s been said in this thread, E, I’m still inclined to stand pat on my basic position: pretty certain that the climate will change, because it always has and always will, cued by whatever triggers happen to be around from moment to moment; and also pretty certain that a human population-overshoot episode, with associated ultra-splurge of previously-sequestered hydrocarbons into the atmosphere, can’t just have NO effect; but still pretty certain of the inherent uncertainties of the situation: we just don’t know, with any justified certainty, how exactly it’s all going to play out. Moreover, we simply can’t know for sure about the evolutions of a probablistic system. They’re just not predictable in detail.
And meantime, both we common shlubs and ‘our leaders’ are - in actual, observable reality - content to live according to the rule: “Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof”, and not really bother ourselves too much about imagined possible apocalypses of the - always receding - near future. The alarmed convinced minority, the Greta-ites, will concern themselves about this matter. But most of us won’t; not till the allegedly-upcoming ills are actually on us: “Sufficient unto the day…” And sure, shysters-on-the-make will try to monetise the climate panic, and play it up. But that’s just shysters doing their eye-to-the-main-chance thing, as usual.
Meanwhile, there are the upcoming ills of the Long Descent, already on us, with which we’re having to cope right now…
Well said @Willem
One of the worst knock on effects of covid was how it destroyed the reputation of many important parts of the scientific community… All the hard and careful work done over decades destroyed in a few months
What a shame
1 Like
Well, as I’ve said before, just because this agenda is threatened with being hijacked by various groups, doesn’t negate serious problems. Perhaps you don’t recognise that thanks to human behaviour we’re living through a major extinction event right now, glaciers are drying up all over the world. And all because we must consume, consume, consume (thanks to those same globalists/capitalists).
2 Likes
Willem, you said it yourself in your post: And all because we must consume, consume, consume (thanks to those same globalists/capitalists).
The only way we can preserve our planet is to completely change the financial system. It might sound a bit radical, yet I predict it’s going to happen over the next five years or so (and it will be very painful).
In the meantime, climate change, et al, is being peddled by the very same people who are part of the present financial system.
I could paraphrase Johnny Rotten here, at the end of the final Sex Pistols gig, which took place in San Francisco, but I shall resist.
4 Likes
I agree with you, Rob. However that is what a mathematician would call a “necessary but not sufficient” condition. It has to happen, yes, but unless it results in a massive reduction of our co2 output (and a corresponding increase in, say, tree planting) it won’t - by itself - be enough to stop runaway climate change from happening.
If the country were anywhere near self-sufficient in terms of food production? Sure: encouraging bugs and wild flowers is A Good Thing.
In terms of engineering dependence on very long supply chains, which can easily break, oooopsiee, this looks like another calculated move to tame the population with the threat of starvation. But I’m cynical like that.
2 Likes
Earning self-sufficiency BY encouraging bugs and wildlife - aka permaculture - is precisely the way to go, if we want to see Britain achieve the level of food-security that Cuba has created, in the face of constant Swamp-Creature subversion. A matter of some urgency, as the ukstate’s Swamp-Creature owners in USAmerica preside over the decline and fall of their empire, and Britain is left pretty well bare in the world, with nothing much left to offer in the way of mutually-profitable trade.
Food security is straightforward enough. Good government, such as the Cuban Communist Party creates in Cuba, would help decisively in English-raj-class-enslaved Britain.
People like Mark Shepard and Jim Kovaleski (qv) - amongst plenty of others - are actually demonstrating the path to food security, whilst earning themselves good livings as practical businessmen-farmers; as all farmers have to be, to stay afloat.
The islands of Britain and Eire could do this pretty comprehensively, even with the current (temporary) serious over-population of Britain. All it needs is basic understandings of the true current nature of our polity, leading to a deep re-build of British constitutional structures; basically leading to genuine democracy across all the nations of The Isles, instead of the chronically-hopeless bad government of the raj-class’s political wing in Paedominster; and of the raj-subverted ballsless midgets in Dáil Éireann.
1 Like
I guess we agree that the financial system is largely responsible for causing the problem, and is set to perpetuate it. In absolute terms it isn’t necessary because the problem could theoretically be resolved. But realistically it is necessary. I would say changing the financial system is at least 90% necessary and 90% sufficient, but not 100% of either. If the public were allowed to determine priorities and solutions, they would.
The financial system IS going to change, if the Schwabbers have their way. Just not in a good way.
The political system whereby mega corporations have more power than governments, and the governments only represent big business anyway, is the thing that needs to be changed for definite. It will remain in place in a worse form after any Great Reset - the purpose of which is to tie down the population, so their remaining rights can be removed. That will end any nonsense about governments being accountable to their populations. Few will even be rebelling as there will be such a clampdown on what will be officially categorised as misinformation.
“But actually, he thought as he re-adjusted the Ministry of Plenty’s figures, it was not even forgery. It was merely the substitution of one piece of nonsense for another. Most of the material that you were dealing with had no connexion with anything in the real world, not even the kind of connexion that is contained in a direct lie. Statistics were just as much a fantasy in their original version as in their rectified version. A great deal of the time you were expected to make them up out of your head. For example, the Ministry of Plenty’s forecast had estimated the output of boots for the quarter at one-hundred-and-forty-five million pairs. The actual output was given as sixty-two millions. Winston, however, in rewriting the forecast, marked the figure down to fifty-seven millions, so as to allow for the usual claim that the quota had been overfulfilled. In any case, sixty-two millions was no nearer the truth than fifty-seven millions, or than one-hundred-and-forty-five millions. Very likely no boots had been produced at all. Likelier still, nobody knew how many had been produced, much less cared. All one knew was that every quarter astronomical numbers of boots were produced on paper, while perhaps half the population of Oceania went barefoot.”
3 Likes
Good points ED.
A change in the financial system by itself is not enough to prevent the problems ahead of us, I think. Any system that requires perpetual economic growth is a problem. Limits on our finite planet are a constraint that cannot be ignored.
I wish I shared your optimism about letting the public decide priorities and solutions. The idea of Citizens Assemblies is a cornerstone of XR too. The worry that I have is ample evidence of the public frequently making choices that are against their own interests (I mean BoJo? Really?)
I agree 100% with your take on the great reset and the Schwabistas.
I don’t know what the answer is. But I know it’s not pretending the problem is not real…
Cheers
2 Likes