5 Filters

Zharkova praised in this new article in TCW - the word is spreading!

Environment
#1

TCW seems a fairly popular site so this piece and btl commentary is useful in spreading Zharkova’s work.

cheers

2 Likes
Excellent Article: "Hinkley Point C – Why nuclear power accelerates carbon emissions"
#2

Thanks for posting CJ. As @PontiusPrimate has highlighted Zharkova is dismissed by other AGW scientists. This leaves a dilemma for the uninitiated - who to believe?

Zharkova seems one of the most knowledgeable specialist AGW opponents. Unlike some other scientific controversies, the bones of the disputed matter does not crystallize down to simple handles. In covid for example, it is obvious after a little digging that highly viable treatments were being suppressed and opposed; also that the politics of pushing vaccines were as obvious as the intent of an evil cartoon character.
But as AGW boils down to impenetrable science, with no clear ‘handles’ for the lay person, almost everyone is in the ‘uninitiated’ category!
So she does need to be heard. All we can do is to look at the discussions, debates, responses and see who is blinking, evading or otherwise heading for the exit.

Here she presented her work

Discussion underneath this version,

…a discussion which wasn’t as illuminating as it could have been. People in a hurry to decide whether to move north or south…

Cheers

1 Like
#3

“almost everyone is in the ‘uninitiated’ category!”

Considering the nature of this particular strand of science, Evvy, I think I’d ditch the ‘almost’. Anyone - at all - who purports to certainty about these complex processes is kidding him/herself, and trying to kid us too.

1 Like
#4

Indeed - Zharkova herself professes uncertainty. Maybe she’s embarrassed by the ‘mathematics’ of the embedded Covid modellers who go for the headlines.

#5

I definitely fit into that category. However, I lean off the fence in Zharkova’s direction as it seems to me to be a bit like Galileo, or perhaps Alex Jones saying the time of total surveillance and control is coming 20 years before anyone thought it possible. Outliers, especially in science, are often the catalyst for major shifts in thinking and or beliefs.

Thanks for posting @Evvy_dense

2 Likes
#6

Hi folks, there are a few key areas that never seem to be bottomed out :

  1. Is Rancourt right that only a minute layer of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere can release energy back to the earth due to the “optical saturation phenomenen” (like painting another black layer on a black board failing to make any real difference) and so doubling CO2 in the atmosphere will have a minimal impact? Zharkova agrees with Rancourt at around 1hr 19 mins in the TCW linked youtube of Zharkova.
  2. Is Rancourt right that there is no evidence for the claim that CO2 warming increases water vapour in the atmosphere, which is the biggest green house gas, and hence increases global temperatures?
  3. How important is the earth’s mechanism for the transfer of energy around the globe in driving climate change as proposed by Javier Vinós and Andy May?
  4. Zharkova’s research into solar energy and sunspots as well as movement of the earth nearer and further away over a whole variety of cycles have really not been confronted by the AGW crowd, afaik.
  • as with Covid, Jabs, Ukraine and Central Bank digital Currencies currently in our headlines Global Climate Change has nothing to do with the stated official reasons, the power of media/political manipulation has distorted public perception of all these events leaving the door wide open for the eugenic fascists to complete their take over in the West.

cheers

1 Like