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!

  • 5089
    MEMBERS
  • 133233
    MESSAGES
  • 40
    POSTS TODAY

Discussions

Climate Change farce...   The Serious You: How Current Events Affect You

Started 9/8/22 by WALTER784; 46081 views.
Msg 325 of 369 to Showtalkshowtalk 
In reply toRe: msg 324
WALTER784
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]
View Full Message
 
 ReplyToggle Dropdown
Msg 326 of 369
In reply toRe: msg 325
WALTER784
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.”  
Image
 
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.

New research shows wildfires have decreased globally while media coverage has spiked 400% - LifeSite (lifesitenews.com)

FWIW

 

  • Edited September 16, 2023 11:43 am  by  WALTER784
 
 ReplyToggle Dropdown
Msg 327 of 369 to WALTER784WALTER784 
In reply toRe: msg 326
Showtalk
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.

 
 ReplyToggle Dropdown
Msg 328 of 369 to Showtalkshowtalk 
In reply toRe: msg 327
WALTER784
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

 
 ReplyToggle Dropdown
Msg 329 of 369 to WALTER784WALTER784 
In reply toRe: msg 328
Showtalk
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.

 
 ReplyToggle Dropdown
Msg 330 of 369 to Showtalkshowtalk 
In reply toRe: msg 329
WALTER784
Staff

From: WALTER784

Sep-17

Showtalk said...

They are starting fires in abstentia by not clearing brush or dead trees.

Sounds like arson if you ask me.

FWIW

 
 ReplyToggle Dropdown
Msg 331 of 369 to WALTER784WALTER784 
In reply toRe: msg 330
Showtalk
Host

From: Showtalk

Sep-17

They didn’t light the matches, they just set up the fuel, so to speak.

 
 ReplyToggle Dropdown
Msg 332 of 369 to Showtalkshowtalk 
In reply toRe: msg 331
WALTER784
Staff

From: WALTER784

Sep-18

Lack of proper forest management is one of the major causes of fires. 

Just look at Japan, Germany, Switzerland and numerous other really mountainous countries throughout the world... the ones who better maintain their forests have less fires. Those who do nothing, end up with under brush which is easily ignited by just about anything from a lit cigarette butt, to a lighter or even lightening!

The cigarette butts and lighters are purposeful, but lightening is natural... however, if there were no dry under brush to catch fire and spread it so quickly, the fires could more easily be contained.

I look at it as willful negligence and a pre-cursor to a fire!!! 

FWIW

 
 ReplyToggle Dropdown
Msg 333 of 369 to WALTER784WALTER784 
In reply toRe: msg 332
Showtalk
Host

From: Showtalk

Sep-18

Yes it is but they don’t even see the one term consequences of their decisions. They are cussing more environmental damage with fires than they are saving by not removing dead plants.

 
 ReplyToggle Dropdown
Msg 334 of 369 to Showtalkshowtalk 
In reply toRe: msg 333
WALTER784
Staff

From: WALTER784

Sep-24

In other words...

They can't see the forest for the trees because they've all been burned down!!!

FWIW

 

 
 ReplyToggle Dropdown
Keep Reading
TOP