Opinion Polls: Delphi's Polling Place
Hosted by Showtalk
Opinion polls on all subjects. Opinions? Heck yes, we have opinions - but we're *always* nice about it, even when ours are diametrically opposed to yours. Register your vote today!
- 5085
MEMBERS - 132983
MESSAGES - 33
POSTS TODAY
Discussions
Climate Change farce... The Serious You: How Current Events Affect You
Started 9/8/22 by WALTER784; 45736 views.
Staff
From: WALTER784
Sep-4
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 d
...[Message truncated]
Staff
From: WALTER784
Sep-4
1,600 hundred of them?
They will show their facts, demand that they be proven wrong and we'll have to wait for the rest to pan out.
If all 1,600 of them lose their jobs, expect 8,000 or more lawsuits!!!
FWIW
Staff
From: WALTER784
Sep-4
And then there's this too:
“Climate Change” Crusher: HumanProgress.org Publishes Video Claiming 14% INCREASE in Green Vegetation. Mostly Due to Excess Carbon in Air
By Brian Lupo
Aug. 21, 2023 1:30 pm
The Climate Cultists won’t like this video released by HumanProgress.org’s Twitter account yesterday: a 2016 paper published in Nature by 32 authors from 24 institutions in 8 countries has revealed that an analysis of satellite data shows that there has been a 14% increase in green vegetation over 30 years.
This analysis aligns with elementary school-level science as well as statements made by Green Peace co-founder and Director at co2coalition.org, Dr. Patrick Moore, during an interview:
“One of my missions is to turn on its head the idea that carbon dioxide is a pollutant and somehow dangerous, when in fact it is the most important nutrient for all life on Earth. And without it, this would be a dead planet.
I say not only is carbon dioxide good, it is essential. And it’s a good thing that we are putting some more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, because it was running low before we came along. If we had definitive proof that CO2 was causing serious problems and we could prove it, don’t you think they would write that down on a piece of paper somewhere so people could read it? They don’t have definitive proof.
HumanProgress.org published a video over the weekend that claims a 14% increase in green vegetation over the last 30 years. The video cites that 70% of this increase is attributed to CO2 in the air and that vegetation has increased every year from 1982 to 2009. The increase amounts to the equivalent of two landmasses the size of the United States in new green vegetation.
The “greening” is most impactful in arid regions where they have high temperatures and higher CO2 concentrations. This helps plants to retain more water during transpiration which will help during dry spells and make the plants less “water-stressed.” The increased CO2 results in higher crop yields, which equates to more food and a thriving wildlife. The video claims upwards of a $3 trillion increase in crop yields over the last 30 years.
This won’t stop the Leftist from their doomsday prophecies based on absurd logic. Earlier this month, Joe Biden announced plans to spend $1.2 billion on essentially a vacuum cleaner to suck carbon out of the air and store it deep underground. At the same time, socialist Bernie Sanders was asking the DOJ to prosecute people in the fossil fuel industry who dissent on their climate change narrative.
FWIW
Host
From: Showtalk
Sep-4
It’s harder to disprove a huge number of scientist than if there were only a few but they will try.
Staff
From: WALTER784
Sep-5
“Overwhelming Consensus” on Climate Change Crisis is “Manufactured,” Says Climate Scientist
By Jim H?ft
Aug. 10, 2023 11:30 am
While the scientific community widely accepts that the Earth’s climate is changing and humans are playing a significant role, Judith A. Curry, a prominent American climatologist and former chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology, questions the prevailing narrative.
In a recent interview with New York Post‘s John Stossel, Curry presents her perspective that the “overwhelming consensus” is largely “manufactured.”
“It’s a manufactured consensus,” Curry told Stossel. She points to a system where scientists gain more recognition, and subsequently, more funding by promoting catastrophic scenarios.
This ‘alarmism,’ she asserted, plays a pivotal role in shaping their careers.
“There’s an incentive to exaggerate risk to pursue ‘fame and fortune,’” she added.
Curry is no stranger to media attention. When she published a study indicating a sharp rise in Category 4 and 5 hurricane intensity, the media spotlight shone brightly on her.
“We found that the percent of Category 4 and 5 hurricanes had doubled,” she said.
She was widely celebrated, especially by climate activists who were eager to link extreme weather events to climate change.
“I was treated like a rock star,” she recalled, describing a period where she was in high demand among politicians and climate alarmists.
However, her meteoric rise faced challenges when other researchers observed inconsistencies and gaps in her work, particularly during years with fewer hurricanes. Unlike many, Curry heeded the criticisms, delving deeper into her own research.
“Part of it was bad data. Part of it is natural climate variability… They had a point,” she acknowledged. Her ability to admit faults and consider external critiques marked her as an exception in the field.
Describing what she sees as an established “climate-change industry”, Curry traces its roots to the United Nations’ environmental programs.
In this incident, leaked emails exposed some climate scientists attempting to withhold data and stifle opposing views.
“Ugly things,” Curry told Stossel, referring to the tactics revealed in the emails, including efforts to sidestep Freedom of Information Act requests and attempts to influence journal editors.
The UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), was primarily set up to find evidence supporting the narrative of “dangerous human-caused climate change.”
“The IPCC wasn’t supposed to focus on any benefits of warming. The IPCC’s mandate was to look for dangerous human-caused climate change,” she said.
“Then the national funding agencies directed all the funding . . . assuming there are dangerous impacts.”
Per New York Post, this is how “manufactured consensus” happens.
Curry also criticized academic journals for their bias. Highlighting an instance where an editor from a leading scientific journal openly discouraged debate on climate change, Curry raised concerns about the implications this has on scientific discourse.
“What kind of message does that give?” she asked.
Curry believes that this has led to a one-sided trajectory for those in academia: “Promote the alarming papers! Don’t even send the other ones out for review. If you wanted to advance in your career, like be at a prestigious university and get a big salary, have big laboratory space, get lots of grant funding, be director of an institute, there was clearly one path to go.”
Curry is not alone. Nobel Prize winner in Physics, John Clauser, lashed out at the science heretics who continue to push global warming and who “threaten the well-being of billions of people” as reported by The Gateway Pundit.
...[Message truncated]
Staff
From: WALTER784
Sep-16
New research shows wildfires have decreased globally while media coverage has spiked 400%
Danish academic Bjorn Lomborg's analysis reveals a large disparity between the actual number of wildfires and the concern raised over them by the mainstream media and politicians.
Clare Marie Merkowsky
Thu Aug 31, 2023 - 3:46 pm EDT
(LifeSiteNews) — Research has revealed that wildfires are on the decline, despite the mainstream narrative that they have increased because of “climate change.”
Danish author and academic Bjorn Lomborg’s analysis, published in the Wall Street Journal, reveals a large disparity between the actual number of wildfires and the concern raised over them by the mainstream media and politicians.
“Climate change hasn’t set the world on fire,” Lomborg declared. “It turns out the percentage of the globe that burns each year has been declining since 2001.”
Lomborg’s claim is confirmed by the satellite data from the Global Wildfire Information System, which records a consistent decline in the extent of burned areas since the early 2000s.?
“In the early 2000s, 3% of the world’s land area burned each year. Last year, fire burned 2.2% of the world’s land area, a new record low,” Lomborg stated.
“Yet you would struggle to find that reported anywhere,” he added.
However, despite wildfires occurring less often, reporting on “climate change” has increased by 400% between 2010 and 2020.?
Lomborg pointed out that while satellites reveal that the world is burning less, the media continues to claim that there are more fires as a result of “climate change.”
“This falsely scares everyone,” Lomborg declared. “And that’s not okay.”
Despite the evidence, the mainstream media and liberal politicians, including Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, continue to claim that wildfires are increasing.
“We’re seeing more and more of these fires because of climate change,” Trudeau claimed in June.
“These fires are affecting everyday routines, lives and livelihoods, and our air quality,” he added. “We’ll keep working – here at home and with partners around the world – to tackle climate change and address its impacts.”
However, Trudeau’s claim is not only unfounded but completely untrue, according to data from the Global Fire Monitoring Centre, which revealed that Canada experienced much worse fires in 1989, 1994, and 1995.
Furthermore, many of the fires this spring and summer were discovered to be caused by arsonists, not “climate change.”
Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) have arrested arsonists?who have been charged with lighting fires across the country, including in the Yukon, British Columbia, and?Alberta.?
In Quebec, satellite footage also showed the mysterious simultaneous eruption of several blazes across the province, sparking concerns that the fires were a coordinated effort by arsonists.?
In August, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith revealed that 500 of the 650 wildfires occurring in the province are of human origin, not “climate change.”
Despite the overwhelming evidence, the Trudeau government and mainstream media continue to claim that the fires are unprecedentedly dangerous and caused by “climate change” in an attempt to pass further regulations on natural resources.
The reduction and eventual elimination of the use of so-called “fossil fuels”?and a transition to unreliable “green” energy has?also?been pushed by the World Economic Forum (WEF) – the globalist group behind the socialist “Great Reset” agenda – an organization with which Trudeau and some in his cabinet are involved.??????
While Trudeau’s plan has been pushed under the guise of “sustainability,” his intention to decrease nitrous oxide emissions by limiting the use of fertilizer has been criticized by?farmers. They say this will reduce profits and could even lead to food shortages.???
Moreover, experts are warning that the Trudeau government’s new “clean fuel” regulations, which come into effect next year, will cost Canadian workers??– many of whom are already struggling under decades-high inflation rates – an average $1,277 extra annually.
FWIW
- Edited September 16, 2023 11:43 am by WALTER784
Host
From: Showtalk
Sep-17
Numbers have been declining but recent fires are bigger and do more damage, all due to lack of clearing dead brush or fuel.
Staff
From: WALTER784
Sep-17
Showtalk said...
Numbers have been declining but recent fires are bigger and do more damage, all due to lack of clearing dead brush or fuel.
Correction... are mainly due to arson in an attempt to push climate change!!!
FWIW
Host
From: Showtalk
Sep-17
It’s not all arson and it doesn’t need to be. They are starting fires in abstentia by not clearing brush or dead trees. They also allow nonnative invasive grasses to take over. They claim they only want native plants but unless they remove the non natives, it will all die and burn. Native grasses adapt to a climate so they don’t die and turn into fuel as quickly.
TOP