Former Climate Change Alarmist Reveals Corruption Within the Scientific Community (1 Viewer)

When you talk about cycles: Would humans be able and willing to reset their own changes to the world so that, for example, we would have the Brazilian rainforest and the Great Planes with huge herds of bison again like we did 300 years ago?
 
I'm not sure it's even a binary choice between 'natural' and 'manmade'. my emphasis is more is it cyclic or not.

all human beings suffer from the same lack of perspective when it comes to the potential of the existence of cycles that transcend the length of time periods we are used to tracking and therefore, comprehending.

thus are the climate alarmists correctly interpreting us as being near the end of one single trajectory, OR, are we somewhere in the middle of the first of a million cycles?

Answer: we have no idea, but a generation 100 removed might....

People tend to judge the climate based on their own puny existence. We all have heard people say "this is the hottest July ever." Or they will say the opposite "this is coldest July ever" as though their 50 years on the planet is a good gauge of climate.
 
When you talk about cycles: Would humans be able and willing to reset their own changes to the world so that, for example, we would have the Brazilian rainforest and the Great Planes with huge herds of bison again like we did 300 years ago?
To the best of my knowledge 300 years ago, they didn't have any great planes or even small planes for than matter but they did have wood planes.

Aside from that, we cannot go back. We cannot stop doing something and expect the world to step back to be what we think it was because so many things have changed from 300 years ago. You yourself can revert if you want though. Live off the land, starve in winter, die if you have appendicitis, see your family starve if you can't work after an accident. There isn't anyone who knows what it was actually like 300 years ago anyway.

The facts are from previous form we will destroy every wild animal and probably the world itself. It is what humans have always done. Every invasion has resulted in wiping out the indigenous population and taking everything they had or destroying it. You cannot pick and choose the bits you want because it sounds idyllic. Amazon and Apple are probably creating more CO2 than many whole countries but I don't hear anyone calling for them to be shut down.

As individuals we can do so little but the organisations and governments who can have little intention of doing anything except complain about how little progress they have made and blame all of us for the problems. How do we use less plastic if every food is wrapped in it?
 
Last edited:
You only have to watch what they do, not what they say.
And look at their multi-million dollar shorefront homes :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: And let us not forget their favorite mode of transportation which is private plane. All those proselytizers going to closed conferences where they virtue signal to each other do not plane-pool:)

At the moment, we are in a warming cycle (at least as much of a cycle in earth time as 50 years can be). What does that mean? warmer is generally better for humans but we are significantly exposed to rising seas. Rather than trying to force the US to "break" the "cycle" alone (which is what the alarmists are proposing since China, India, and developing countries don't count), perhaps we should work on pollution control which also includes Co2 emissions, and figure out how to move people away from exposure to rising seas. On the other hand Obama is not concerned about rising seas given his two new mega-million waterfront properties, neither of which is on stilts.
 
How do we use less plastic if every food is wrapped in it?
I'm with you on this one. People like to see what they are buying, especially with meat but butchers can go back to butcher paper and ditch the plastic wrap since people have already picked what they want from the case. I remember Christmas shopping for the twins when they were little. Everything was a gazillion tiny pieces (always plastic) stapled onto a piece of cardboard. I would look at the stuff and think - I don't want to have to take that apart and once I do, the gazillion tiny pieces will disappear into the radiators, under the furniture, etc. I tried very hard to walk away from stuff like that but didn't always succeed. I get why they do it for kids toys but why for stuff that adults buy? I just bought an 8 pack of the small round 3v batteries. It was packaged on an 8 x 11 piece of cardboard with the eight small (but not tiny) batteries displayed under molded plastic. We don't need to "see" the actual batteries. A picture would suffice. The batteries could have been packaged in a cardboard box, stacked and maybe separated by paper in a container about the size of a D battery. In this case, the packaging is probably to deter theft since the D battery size package would be much easier to steal. The tiny batteries for things like hearing aids are much easier to lose so there is more justification for the flat plastic wrap.
 
When you talk about cycles: Would humans be able and willing to reset their own changes to the world so that, for example, we would have the Brazilian rainforest and the Great Planes with huge herds of bison again like we did 300 years ago?
Planes weren't invented until the early 1900's, by the Wright brothers.
Col
 
And look at their multi-million dollar shorefront homes :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: And let us not forget their favorite mode of transportation which is private plane.
This statement is shabby and biased.
"Of course" only these people have expensive villas, and private planes were invented especially for them.
The Republican party members, on the other hand, live in 60-square-meter apartments in blocks of flats and only ride bicycles.
 
You miss the point. I don't care if they live in multi-million dollar waterfront homes and fly private everywhere they go. I only object when they try to tell me that rising seas are a clear and present danger and I MUST give up my gas powered car because it is bad for the environment. It is the hypocrisy that I object to.
 
Last edited:
It wasn't really clear from the extensive presentations so far that you're only worried about your gas powered car.
 
I guess you skipped the posts on pollution and plastic, especially single use plastic.
 
No, I expressly agreed to that and as you can read.
I'm unclear on your point. You do not think that flying private but telling me that I have to give up my gas powered car and insisting the world is coming to an end because of global warming and the seas are rising but buying expensive waterfront property are not hypocritical positions?
 
This particular combination of points shows a great deal of ambiguity, and I see it that way too.
 
And the sky is sometimes blue.
Relevance to the topic? Is the opinion worn out? Arguments have been around for a long time.
I honestly have no idea what you are talking about. I'm sure you will explain though.
Col
 
Then I got this weird comment about blue sky etc. Most odd.
Col
Maybe the inference was to blue sky thinking, brain-storming or run up the flag.
All terms that climateers use in their seminars, meetings and discussion groups as they create and expand their very own variation of climatology.

Their mantra that always must be strictly adhered to is : Disregard the facts, keep it simple and maintain the fear. There is money to be made.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom