RSS
“你怎么敢？”
八个世纪前，在中世纪时期，一些欧洲儿童被异象抓住。 耶稣基督向他们显现，敦促他们前往圣地并和平地使穆斯林信奉基督教，以赎回他们的人民。 他们的讲道启发了成千上万的理想欧洲青年，他们经历了艰苦的前往黎凡特的旅程。 绝大多数人在途中死亡-无论是饥饿还是疾病-其余大多数人都放弃了，选择返回家园。 一些人设法到达了地中海，也许希望 走 就像摩西和耶稣一样，但后来被卖为奴隶制，惨遭突尼斯统治。 与此同时，在德国，愤怒的父母的孩子在这些男孩行凶者被安排逮捕并吊死他们的父亲之后丧生。 至此结束了最理想化的冒险，即 此 儿童十字军东征.
今天，我们有望传讲另一个奇妙的故事：十六岁的瑞典女孩格雷塔·滕伯格（Greta Thunberg）通过对气候变化的启示性警告，已在媒体/联合国/非政府组织机构中引起全球轰动。 她的声明样本：
“我希望你能感受到我的恐惧。”
“我不应该在这里。 我应该回到海洋另一端的学校。 但是你们所有人都向我们的年轻人求助。 你怎么敢！ 你用空话偷走了我的梦想和我的童年。 但是，我是幸运者之一。 人们在受苦。 人们快死了。”
“您还不够成熟，无法像现在这样说。”
“我们永远不会原谅您。 我们不会让您逃脱这个。 在这里，现在就是我们画线的地方。 无论您是否愿意，变革都将到来。”
但是格雷塔·滕伯格是谁？ 她是现代的圣女贞德吗？那个少女，她的异象激发了法国人抗击英国入侵者并建立了法兰西国家的念头？ 还是她 农卡乌色，十五岁的非洲先知曾警告说，只有屠杀其所有部落的牛，才能避免发生神的灾难？ （剧透：当预言未能实现时，她的科萨部落成员屠杀了牛，又屠杀了更多的牛，导致400,000万牛和40,000万非洲人死亡。）
人们喜欢提到她的“格蕾塔”之所以流行，正是因为她两极分化。 对于教育媒体-联合国气候综合体， 最后 we have a young person saying the truth (regurgitating their own messages, to be precise) to elected officials and business leaders. 她是一个孩子。 她是个女孩子。 她声称自己是自闭症患者（尽管她肯定已经从父母那里学到了很多东西，而父母似乎是极左的瑞典演员，但她当然有古怪的举止）。 她站起来 恶霸。 而且，我的朋友们几乎总结了我们日趋女性化和婴儿化的文化中的“左派”。 左派的胜利是女性在尖叫“想孩子”！ 而他们的人则s缩着屈服于两腿之间的尾巴。 理性和自私自利的考虑自然无法在情感上的歇斯底里和道德black诈的气氛中展开。
格雷塔的所有特征自然会惹恼右翼。 政治，尤其是民主政治，其中每个派系都在人口中寻求专门的基础，这奖励了两极分化和分裂。 政治部族蓬勃发展，并且团结一致，不是他们所同意的， 但他们讨厌的人。 因此，格蕾塔（Greta）对主流权利的敌意恰恰是愤慨地将其支持者甩在了身后。
当然，唐纳德·特朗普也可以这样说。 让我同情美国总统的一件事是，他在民主党和主流媒体中的许多敌人绝对是无耻，不公平和虚心的。 他们难道不是要特朗普引用一个合法的问题吗？ 上帝知道有很多选择。 但是不，他们必须诉诸无休止的谎言，虚伪和无稽之谈。
格雷塔（Greta）和特朗普（Trump）是镜像。
当然，一个“孩子”不会冒出一种成熟的政治意识形态来消灭经济体系，并以某种形式的跨国绿色共产主义（“公平”，“气候正义”）来代替它。 事实是，无论他们的权威人物告诉他们什么，孩子都倾向于简单地反省和激进化。 在第三帝国就是这种情况，在这里，青年被敦促克服父母一代的阶级偏见和保守主义保守主义。 这导致臭名昭著的书籍燃烧，大部分是马克思主义，色情和/或犹太作品（这是青年运动的倡议，而不是纳粹领导人的倡议）。 法西斯主义意大利和毛泽东的共产主义中国也是如此，后者导致了灾难性的文化大革命。
但是，全球化主义者和主流环保主义者对格雷塔感到安慰，因为毕竟她是对的。 对于那些因情感上操纵性地利用孩子来促进其政治议程而感到反感的人，我说：在爱情和战争中，一切都公平。 对于那些不喜欢格雷塔（Greta）的跨国绿色共产主义品牌的人，我说，就像沃特·索布克（Water Sobchack）谈民族社会主义：至少这是一种精神。
事实上，我要说的是格里塔（Greta）和她的运动有很多见识。 为了避免高中入学而“罢工”的想法非常出色。 这项措施的流行表明，青年人凭直觉理解在教室里坐在屁股上是完全没有意义的时间浪费。 当然，她可能会说她“应该在学校里”，但实际上，反对上学的整个罢工表明，年轻人对此有很深的了解：他们的高中课程完全浪费了他们的时间（例如 是的部长！ 已经指出 几十年前）。
格蕾塔（Greta）本人从逃学中受益匪浅，成为了全球明星。
“教育，教育，教育”被认为是我们的社会灵丹妙药，导致了宝贵的专业“技能”（并因此带来了经济增长和普遍的社会向上流动），而事实是这些机构是荣耀的日托中心，在最好的是，只能说是一种智力马戏团训练。 这种有条不紊地顺从权威的做法，应该能够培养“有能力的个人”和“批判性思维”。 青年人对此感到厌倦，因此不再出现。 年轻人还感到自己一生的疯狂，这种疯狂的日常活动，造成了如此之多的浪费，却一文不值。
格蕾塔（Greta）派发的那种演讲显然是针对西方白人的。 没有其他人对这种情感敲诈和道德吸引力很敏感。
但事实是，截至今天， 欧洲和北美的排放量不到全球排放量的三分之一，而且这些排放量正在下降。 仅亚洲的排放量就比所有西方国家的总和还要多 50%，而且这一数字还在迅速增加。 Greta 提出了一个轻松的左翼论点，即地球被摧毁只是为了“极少数人”的财富。 但事实上，她今天厌恶的经济增长主要是关乎将数十亿亚洲人提高到西方人认为理所当然的中产阶级生活水平。
气候十字军的主要环境风险是它会蔓延到普遍的卢德主义，就像德国总理安格拉·默克尔（Angela Merkel）所发生的那样，他关闭了核电并声称正在建立一个 Energiewende （“能源变革”）支持可再生能源。 结果：燃煤电厂再次被点燃，并从拥有原子能的法国进口电力来弥补。 西方人在经济上越成功，他们在愚蠢地浪费多余的财富方面似乎就越有创意。
（完全披露：我在法国国家宣传的稳定饮食中长大，颂扬我们核电行业的奇迹，我在成年生活中没有学到任何东西，让我有理由修改这个判断。）
我对气候十字军的问题不在于目的，而在于所涉及的心理和制度手段。
在我看来，如果有意识地愿意，紧缩和节俭是绝对可取的，作为实现精神和物质专制的手段。 也就是自控、自律、独立，换句话说， 主权，在最深刻、最普遍和最真实的意义上。 二战期间，一位意大利海军军官告诉美国记者洛思罗普·斯托达德 (Lothrop Stoddard)：“你会惊讶地发现我们已经变得如此自给自足。 自治是个好主意。 让一个国家警醒。”[1]T. Lothrop Stoddard， 进入黑暗：来自第三帝国内部的未经审查的战争报告 （爱荷华州伯灵斯顿：奥斯塔拉，2011 [1940]），第6. 意大利传统主义作家朱利叶斯·埃沃拉（Julius Evola）走得更远，详细阐述了“专制的精神意义”。[2]Julius Evola，“自治的精神意义”，1 年 1938 月 XNUMX 日，Julius Evola（译 E. Christian Kopff）， 传统主义者对抗法西斯主义 （伦敦：Arktos，2015 年）。
气候运动的问题在于，在大多数情况下，它不会对个人提出这样的要求。 大都市的“气候支持者”阶层本身往往是富裕的常客，他们的生活围绕着当代中上阶层生活的一系列完全多余的活动。 气候运动是 不能，主要是为了个人减少我们的物质需求和抑制我们的胃口，以地球和我们个人的名义，为什么不以国家主权的名义。 不好了。
现代的儿童十字军更像是一种道德要求， 国家的行动. 这在政治上是有道理的，但这意味着什么呢？ 这意味着一个需求 一个已经肥胖的国家更加压迫和窒息我们已经高度管制的社会民主社会. 这将不符合一个民族为自己维持社会标准或促进其集体独立的意愿，而是服从于联合国编造的永久性法规。 最终结果不是个人和国家的赋权和主权，而是个人和国家服从未经选举产生的官僚跨国委员会。
起初，我对孩子们的“气候游行”及其在欧洲媒体上引起的轰动并没有太大的想法。 我认为它体现了大都市欧洲人和国际委员会对“假冒和同性恋”象征性行动而非真实和负责任的行动的偏爱。 不过，格蕾塔在美国媒体和国会的热烈欢迎表明她可能具有更广泛的吸引力。 美国青年似乎与欧洲青年趋同，远离基督教和个人自由，转向世俗的社会民主。 妈咪之州正在蔓延。
我假设某种形式的气候变化正在发生。 但我也记得几十年前被警告“海平面上升”。 我仍在等待荷兰沉没在海浪之下——它的记忆只会在取代我们的有色人种中作为传奇而存在——或者至少是沿海房地产价格崩溃。 然而，他们没有。
尽管如此，我并不对当前的环境恐慌带来的一些好处感到绝望：道德的回归，公民义务的观念的回归。 埃兹拉·庞德 (Ezra Pound) 在 1930 年代抱怨道：
自由被“定义”在 人权 作为“做任何不伤害他人的事情的权利”。 限制性和高度道德的限制条款在几十年内被删除。 自由的概念退化为仅仅意味着不负责任和像最懒惰的亚人类一样愚蠢的权利，并且几乎可以进行“任何和每一项”活动，而不管其对公共福利的影响。[3]埃兹拉·庞德《教师的使命》 英文期刊 (1934), 引自 TS Eliot (ed.), 埃兹拉·庞德的文学散文 （纽约：新方向，1968 年），第 59-60 页。
最终，气候十字军代表了对资本主义民主的有益批判。
一些气候活动家，例如 减少 （去生长）倡导者和天体物理学家 奥雷利安·巴劳，似乎也将他们的活动与某种禁欲主义配对。 一旦这些人的个人生活趋于 传教， 我会听。 我相信，实际上在 XNUMX 世纪后期和 XNUMX 世纪初期开创了生态学的右翼，如果能够回归其苛刻的道德根源，将会蓬勃发展。
没有人知道儿童气候十字军会导致什么。 就强度而言，格蕾塔·通贝里对工业文明、消费者和商业的攻击只能与 Unabomber 的著作或阿道夫·希特勒对十一月罪犯的谴责相媲美。 Greta 的论证让我们提出了一些问题：气候否认者应该拥有哪些权利？ 他们的孩子应该被没收吗？ 他们应该像否认大屠杀的人一样入狱吗？ 他们是否应该被送到夏令营，在那里他们可以自由地欣赏我们必须保护的自然并接受彻底的生态教育？
更重要的是，我们能否期望这些资本主义民主国家——最重视追逐腹部和个人舒适——能够实现“气候正义”？ 在没有技术的情况下 解围，我应该不会。 最终，格蕾塔的议程将必须载入我们的宪法，由善良的监护人保护，并置于民主选举政治的变幻莫测之上（顺便说一下，原则上，美国宪法或欧盟的许多经济政策中所载的权利也是如此）。政策）。 我有时想知道 Greta 是否计划将她的气候三月变成罗马的三月。 她已经不止一次地明确了自己的抱负：“不管你喜不喜欢，变革即将到来。 真正的权力属于人民。”
[1] T. Lothrop Stoddard， 进入黑暗：来自第三帝国内部的未经审查的战争报告 （爱荷华州伯灵斯顿：奥斯塔拉，2011 [1940]），第6.
[2] Julius Evola，“自治的精神意义”，1 年 1938 月 XNUMX 日，Julius Evola（译 E. Christian Kopff）， 传统主义者对抗法西斯主义 （伦敦：Arktos，2015 年）。
[3] 埃兹拉·庞德《教师的使命》 英文期刊 (1934), 引自 TS Eliot (ed.), 埃兹拉·庞德的文学散文 （纽约：新方向，1968 年），第 59-60 页。
English
Arabic
Chinese (Simplified)
Dutch
English
French
German
Hebrew
Hindi
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Russian
Spanish
Swedish
Turkish
Vietnamese
这些是事实，除了任何十字军东征之外，如下：
• 4℃， 变暖 是特朗普政府在一个人的一生中做出的预测。
• 〜6°摄氏度 变暖 导致P-Tr灭绝的行星生命几乎灭绝。
停止否认科学；相反，使用它。我建议十字军面对以下两个悖论，这两个悖论都已得到科学研究的证明，如下：
（1）杰文悖论： 保护只会使资源更加经济，以供下一次使用。 正如这项研究表明“节能无济于事”。
简而言之，全球变暖是不可阻挡的。但人类目前的处境更加糟糕，全球变暖势不可挡。这是真正的问题，另一个对气候运动更令人不安的悖论：
(2) 麦克弗森悖论: 不做就该死，做就该死。我找到的最好的解释在这里：
麦克弗森悖论背后的科学证据在题为“我们需要重新思考我们对全球变暖的了解：新的计算显示科学家严重低估了空气污染的影响设立的区域办事处外，我们在美国也开设了办事处，以便我们为当地客户提供更多的支持。“
我保证这两个有科学证据的悖论会让十字军们疯狂到想要杀掉你陈述它们的地步。悖论#1 中可怜的科学家蒂姆·加勒特基本上已经开始否认自己的工作，只是为了避免自己的工作被追赶。
在我看来，保守派对不可阻挡的全球变暖的反应并不是针对我们人类所犯的将地球煤层和油田蒸发到大气中的巨大错误所造成的不可阻挡后果的幼稚十字军东征，而是一种 临终关怀 一个晚期病人的模型，就像有人发现你患有第四期胰腺癌一样。当一个人患有晚期癌症时，他们就等于死了；然而，他们仍然有一些生活要做，而且要尽可能舒适地生活。
一项安慰措施是禁止探访和接纳陌生人进入我们的国家。我建议保守派熟悉气候科学，然后写这样的期刊文章（我自己的右翼幻想标题真正的科学文章）：
当然，气候正在发生变化。这就是为什么它是气候而不是天气。 3000年前的撒哈拉沙漠并不像2000年前那么大。塔里木盆地并非沙漠，但已有1500多年的历史。在北极发现了史前棕榈树。 600 年前，气候变化（变冷）迫使维京人放弃了格陵兰岛定居点。这些都不是“西方文明”造成的。虽然毫无疑问现代污染导致了环境污染，但目前还没有已知的方法可以准确测量现代文明对气候变化的影响（如果有的话）。
对于所有在这里发帖的寡头和技术官僚爪牙以及他们的恐怖分子来说，这是一个很好的解决方案。 “气候变化”危言耸听者，为了环境的利益，首先应该立即停止重复的习惯，在极端的时间内集体屏住呼吸。通过这一勇敢的举动，他们将立即扭转他们认为由呼出二氧化碳造成的“损害”。这一行动将使其他人类呼吸更加轻松。这种牺牲将被注意到并受到高度赞赏。就这些。
你正在重复标准的否认主义者的长篇大论，从 #1 最常用 否认者溴化物，然后继续重复 #40、#59 和 #47。不幸的是，否认科学不再适用于 智商较高的一半 包括我在内的保守派人士：
很棒的曝光，让我没什么可补充的……
但我们现在看到“学校罢课”的天才之举又回来咬住非国大的屁股了。我的期望也差不多……
寡头和技术官僚的爪牙？ 感谢您表明自己的身份！我想，在你试图抹黑烟草致癌的所谓“垃圾科学”失败后，你必须想办法赚钱。
您对这些全球主义精英的 33 条银子的看法是多少，嗯？
呼出二氧化碳，让我们看看，那就是 #138 在全球主义精英一长串否认科学的文章中。像埃克森美孚、科赫工业公司这样的全球主义精英，你会得到更多的报酬吗？ 皮博迪煤炭公司 如果您在一天内将所有这些都击中，有点像玩气候否认宾果游戏？
为什么歇斯底里的气候变暖论者总是根据民意调查或“97%”的科学家来发表自己的声明？人们真的能相信 97% 的科学家在某件事上达成一致吗？能否提供一些事实来证明或至少支持您的案例？
顺便说一句，100% 的科学家和所有其他职业都相信，自地球存在以来，气候一直在变化。 “气候变化”是一个愚蠢且毫无意义的标签。
我们已经煮熟了。毫无意义。我们能做的最好的事情就是享受我们剩下的最后几年。
小格蕾塔只是一个非常年轻的宣传傀儡，被她的父母和其他左翼气候法西斯分子滥用。由于她患有阿斯伯格综合症，她可能更具可塑性。因此，她被愤世嫉俗的宣传者宣传为代言人。她可能“相信”自己所说的话，但这只是因为她已经被精心设计成对这个主题的片面观点。
利用儿童作为鹦鹉是一种粗鲁的法西斯/共产主义策略。他们缺乏成熟度和复杂的教育，以至于现代社会无法保护他们免受性、工作和暴力的影响。然而，形形色色的国家主义者都热切地为这个自以为是的小女孩鼓掌，她在其他时间和地点也会以类似的自以为是的方式赞扬元首或斯大林同志。
想象一下，如果有一位类似的年轻女性捍卫第二修正案或在不受迫害的情况下发表不受欢迎的想法的权利，左派会多么愤怒。他们的嚎叫声仍会响起。
也许有一天，可怜的格蕾塔会明白她是如何被别人剥削和利用的。如果她有这样的心理/情感自我意识，那将对她有害。非常难过。
你可能会对黑人着迷，但真正的黑人 天才之举 这就是两个世纪的老白人科学教给我们的关于气候的知识。
图形来源： https://skepticalscience.com/history-climate-science.html
或者你是说，来之不易的老白人智慧身体是垃圾？
人们真的能相信 97% 的科学家在某件事上达成一致吗？ 地球是球形的吗？是的。但让我们问问美国宇航局。
科学共识：地球的气候正在变暖
https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/
ps：在你鹦鹉学舌般地模仿气候否认主义者的标准借口之前，一定要从头到尾读一遍，科学不可能达成这样的共识。
pps 你只是情不自禁地人云亦云 #1 否认科学的溴化物。你们两个 NPC 在几分钟之内就重复了完全相同的事情。你们头上有某种奇怪的接收天线吗？
你仍然在呼出二氧化碳，并加剧了你所宣称的问题。如果你开始以大大降低的速度呼吸和呼气，这将有助于那些不想受到你代理的暴政统治的其他人类。
有趣的是你在评论 乌兹网。该网站爆料虚假叙述。一般人是不会来这里的。他们只访问主流网站和色情网站。既然你不是在寻找失落的历史叙述，也没有在福克斯和 CNN 发帖，那么你一定是被送到这里的。好战士。继续听大师们的课。您将在一天结束时收到您的款待。
成为希拉里的镜像并不是一个人应该通过写四个不相关的段落来努力实现的目标。你没读过文章吗？正如杜罗彻所写，你的行为与特朗普仇恨者的行为方式相同：
现在我投票给特朗普，我讨厌看到政变的持续企图。但我也是 52% 接受气候变化科学证据的共和党人之一。澄清一下，我不喜欢格蕾塔，也不喜欢她的社会主义处方，但她接受气候变化的科学证据是正确的。在这些鸡毛蒜皮的问题上攻击她，会让你看起来比她不成熟、没受过教育。
站起来，表现得像个成熟的男人。然后专注于白人最擅长的事情：科学和发现！花一两个小时浏览一下 用真实科学揭穿的否认科学借口的整理清单 自从你从学校毕业后，就真正尝试一次学习一些科学的东西。
你还在鹦鹉学舌地重复否认主义者的溴化物＃138；理解这一点会让你看起来不那么傻：
你是否好奇你们这些否认主义的 NPC 到底拥有什么？ 究竟 同样的虚假叙述？
还有多少 对待 你有没有从全球主义精英亿万富翁那里学到什么？ 科赫工业。或者更确切地说，您的报酬是由 (((默瑟））） 家庭？承认！
已经证明， 全球变暖=欺诈
欺骗性温度“曲棍球棒”的发明者在加拿大法庭上受到羞辱 （1）：
整个全球变暖神话已被用作庞氏骗局。资金从相信非科学气候变化神话的科学否认者流入“绿色”能源公司。然后，这些公司为制造歇斯底里的人创造个人利润。
科学证明的事实——风能和太阳能都联网 *增加* 污染。然而，你不需要深奥的科学来理解风骗局。这张图说明了风能设施的碳氢化合物消耗情况。
和平😇
_____
(1) https://www.technocracy.news/fatal-courtroom-act-ruins-michael-hockey-stick-mann/
1850 年，有几个地方有温度记录，有些在北美，有些在欧洲。南半球有一个气象站，位于印度尼西亚。声称 1850 年就知道全球气温的说法是荒谬的。直到 20 世纪末，气温数据才相当可疑。假设二氧化碳强迫或“增强的温室效应”的气候模型并没有很好地跟踪卫星温度数据。自 2 年左右结束 500 年小冰期以来，气候出现了一定程度的变暖，大约每 1850 年就会出现一次起伏。到目前为止还不算什么大惊喜。变暖和变冷可能是由太阳循环引起的，而二氧化碳的影响很小。
当谈到末日叙事时，我不一定是否认者，只是怀疑论者。
请停止谈论“气候变化”。你推销的是气候变暖。气候一直在变化。如果碰巧下雪，静态气候可能会很不幸。
艾伯特还指出，他对宇宙并不确定 😀
我希望我们不会回到让法院来决定科学是什么的时代。
除非，除非……（！！！）……我们每天建造一座核电站。
确实，看起来“我们已经煮熟了，”正如你所说。您读过这项关于“温室地球”的新研究吗？
正如哥伦比亚大学科学家 Wally Broecker 在 1975 年创造了“全球变暖”一词，而大多数 Unz 评论者都认为 被iceageTV的片段迷住了——有句名言：“如果你和一头愤怒的野兽住在一起，你就不应该用棍子戳它。”
1-我刚刚在《明镜周刊》上读到一篇文章，内容是每年有数百名为阿拉伯国家的足球世界杯和田径项目建设的工人如何死去。当局称这是自然原因或心脏病。但文章称，选择这些工人是因为他们年轻、健康，而他们死亡的真正原因是因为高温——即使他们试图减轻高温的影响。人们已经因为太热而死亡。
2- Durocher 显然对气候变化不太了解，或者根本不了解任何事情。他为什么不简单地读一本有关气候变化的书，并尝试获取一些有关气候变化是什么以及它对我们意味着什么的信息？
3- 正如我在另一次帖子中解释的那样，反对全球变暖的运动与 Greta 没有什么关系。这个问题几十年来一直有人在探索，这是自19世纪以来已知的基础科学。有人写过它，也有过关于它的报道文学和纪录片。甚至还有其他孩子发起了一场与气候变化有关的运动，比如十多年前由一名德国男孩发起的“为地球植树”运动。
4- 荷兰人认真对待气候变化。为什么 Durocher 不去荷兰一趟，看看他们正在采取什么措施呢？他们一直在努力研究如何建造更好更高的堤坝。
5-如果杜罗彻有一个关于核废料的解决方案，他可以来德国，我认为德国人会为这个解决方案支付数百万美元。如果他不知道核废料带来的问题，也许他应该尝试获取一些信息，包括法国的核能信息。法国显然希望减少核能在电力生产中的比例，这是有原因的。
6- 德国的能源转型与默克尔无关。这是上届政府决定的。默克尔对能源转型毫无兴趣，也从未采取过任何行动。她没有孩子，所以她从来不关心这个。
到底谁“在加拿大法庭上受到羞辱”？你英雄和 病态骗子和科学否认者蒂姆·鲍尔 和他的组织前沿中心。这里是 ”道歉和撤回” 法院强迫他们出示：
迈克尔·曼还亲自起诉蒂姆·鲍尔，这场官司没有赢或输，而是 下令。你可以像我一样在网上阅读法官的理由，部分原因是蒂姆·鲍尔（Tim Ball）请求法院驳回该判决，因为他抱怨年老心脏病发作，部分原因是案件拖得太久，3名证人死亡，还有 1 人因残疾而无法出行。无论如何，法庭不是科学裁决的地方。有趣的是，否认主义者对这个法庭案件大肆吹捧，好像法庭可以证实科学事实，但在他们的嘴里，他们却贬低法庭系统为邪恶和腐败。嗯，那是哪条路呢？
你仍然产生过多的二氧化碳。继续以大大降低的速度进行呼吸。尽自己的一份力量，帮助解决您认为存在的问题以及您个人造成的问题。
你为什么不尝试自己了解一些有关气候变化的知识呢？格蕾塔似乎知道很多，而你似乎对这些问题一无所知。有很多由科学家、记者等撰写的好英文书籍。你不是时常看书吗？
记录的温度记录确实是现代的，从大约 1880 年前开始。 800,000 年。格陵兰岛或东方冰芯的代理温度可以追溯到 XNUMX 万年前。其他代理进一步。 Google，或者更确切地说，DuckDuckGo（无跟踪）。
> 假设二氧化碳强迫或“增强的温室效应”的气候模型并没有很好地跟踪卫星温度数据。
你在重复那些谎言 神奇“无穷力量”信徒 和 连环骗子罗伊·斯宾塞。以下是 UAH 卫星数据的实际跟踪情况，与罗伊一次又一次被发现传播的谎言相比：
> 有一些变暖
像这样。再次注意 UAH 和 RSS 卫星数据如何确认：
Sumber: https://www.epa.gov/climate-indicators/climate-change-indicators-us-and-global-temperature
> 变暖和变冷可能是由太阳周期引起的。
六年来，太阳辐照度一直在下降，而气温却一直在上升。你捐给美国宇航局的税款已经为你提供了这张图表，以劝阻你听到并重复的错误观念。让你的钱物有所值，看看吧：
资料来源：NASA https://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/189/graphic-temperature-vs-solar-activity/
> CO2 影响很小。
抱歉，CO2 的影响已经因果关系成立。 https://www.nature.com/articles/srep21691
https://www.yahoo.com/news/putin-condemns-greta-thunberg-parents-un-speech-180804727.html
普京表示，格蕾塔·通贝里不理解“复杂且不同”的现代世界
或者，换句话说……
你可以停止使用那些陈旧的和 #1 最常使用的是科学否认者的神话，这实际上是一个遗漏的谎言。当然，情况已经发生了变化——气候变化导致了几次大规模灭绝。最好在这里阅读：
另外，由此推论 #1 神话是这样一种说法：如果气候变化之前发生过变化，人类就不可能造成气候变化。这种论点就像声称由于闪电可以自然引发森林火灾，因此人类不可能因引发森林火灾而受到指责一样愚蠢。
“共识”与科学无关。科学家要么是对的，要么是错的。当前 99% 的理论可能都是错误的，只有一位科学家是正确的。在微生物发现之前，“共识”是疾病是由瘴气或“坏空气”引起的。
我对气候科学一无所知，但我不能非常认真地对待它，只要：a）从第三世界到第一世界国家的大规模移民不断受到警告我们反对气候变化的相同力量的推动（还有什么比推动更糟糕的事情）甚至更多的人从低消费国家到高消费国家？), b) 热带和地中海气候区的海滨房产仍然相当昂贵，尽管这些地区预计会在几年或几十年内发生破坏。
世界末日的想法一直伴随着人类，气候变化只是最新的时尚。
三倍地愚蠢并不能让事情变得如此。您是否意识到您正在吃掉呼出的碳？听说过碳水化合物吗？你知道植物从空气中吸收二氧化碳吗？你读完了四年级的科学课吗？好悲伤！
不要成为这样一个 普拉特。 （观点被驳斥一千遍）
旦尼尔303，
你可以随心所欲地否认科学，但这对你没有帮助。
你没读过这篇文章……叹… 法院没有做出裁决。
曼恩拒绝提供他用来生成虚假数字的基础数据。科学过程的一部分是共享数据，以便测试和复制结果。反科学家曼恩因拒绝分享数据而退出了科学界。
我们确实知道他的结果是神话般的。第二张图遵循公开数据：
我很抱歉你是一个相信全球变暖神话的科学否认者。可悲的是，你对受人爱戴的先知曼和他的秘密数据的信心是错误的。
— 您还相信哪些其他基于信仰的秘密？
— 翻译金片上的秘密文字怎么样？
和平😇
不能折断那根曲棍球棒！迈克尔·曼著名的“曲棍球棒”温度记录已得到许多其他科学研究的证实，如下图所示：
资料来源：气候神话——曲棍球棒坏了
https://skepticalscience.com/broken-hockey-stick.htm
> “共识”与科学无关。
你还能读书吗？我恳求你读到最后 NASA 的科学共识网页，它指出， “从技术上讲，‘共识’是意见的普遍一致，但是 科学方法引导我们远离这个，转向一个客观的框架......“ 如果你有标准的英语能力，你就可以阅读剩下的部分。然后回来告诉我们为什么科学家们不能在某些事情上达成一致，比如地球是一个球体，然后让记者用速记术语“共识”来描述它。
> 我对气候科学一无所知
清楚地。
> 我不能非常认真地对待它，只要：a）大规模移民
既然你顽固地拒绝理解现实，你就无法写一篇基于气候变化限制移民的科学论文。哎呀！与此同时，这是我自己创建的幻想标题，下面有一篇关于因环境问题而限制移民的真实科学文章的链接：
我不会读你那些撒谎的否认科学的网站，你太胆小了，甚至在引用时都不会链接到这些网站；我读 法官的实际决定。您也可以，它是公开可用的并在线发布。
> 法院没有做出裁决。
我就是这么说的，被驳回了。我什至加粗了这一点。但 您 让它变得像法院裁决科学一样。
连环骗子蒂姆·鲍尔的图表版本在三个方面具有欺诈性， (1) 改变最初没有被错误标记为 2000 年的时间刻度，并通过 (2) 当数据只是本地温度记录时，欺诈性地将数据歪曲为全球数据，并且通过 (3) 不承认最初的科学家 （兰姆，1982） 图表的形状是从谁那里抄袭的。
下面的文章剖析了蒂姆·鲍尔的欺诈行为，这实际上只是蒂姆·鲍尔着色的早期欺诈行为。继续阅读标题为“从帽子里变出一只羔羊”的部分。
从帽子里变出一只羔羊
https://skepticalscience.com/IPCC-Medieval-Warm-Period.htm
> 基于信仰
这描述了你们这些神创论（智能设计）科学否认者，他们想象耶和华对气候拥有神奇的“无限力量”，正如2009年福音派关于全球变暖的宣言所述，如下：
某处的冰正在融化。这意味着你和你的整个气候变化僵尸团伙呼气过于频繁。当你们的使命是听从压迫者的命令，为世界寡头赚取数万亿美元时，你们所有人都必须亲自站出来，对你们产生的二氧化碳承担责任，并大幅降低你们的呼吸频率。
绿色和平组织创始人表示：
https://www.breitbart.com/radio/2019/03/07/greenpeace-founder-global-warming-hoax-pushed-corrupt-scientists-hooked-government-grants/
500 名科学家联名签署了以下致联合国的信函，声明：“不存在气候紧急情况。”
https://clintel.nl/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/ecd-letter-to-un.pdf
“在每一项仔细的研究中，温度首先上升，然后二氧化碳上升，温度首先下降，然后二氧化碳下降，至少在过去的几百万年里，温度导致二氧化碳的变化，这是毫无疑问的……地球上的主要冰河时代过去的二氧化碳水平也非常高，比现在高得多” – William Happer，普林斯顿大学荣誉退休物理学教授
“我们现在将这一立场视为教条的原因是政治参与者和其他人寻求利用价值数万亿美元的能源行业中大量的机会。” ——詹姆斯·汉森，美国宇航局
http://www.jerome-chappellaz.com/files/publications/climate-and-atmospheric-history-of-the-past-420-000-years-from-the-vostok-ice-core-antarctica-38.pdf
嗯。匿名先生，享受你的气候灾难吧。
事实是，尽管地平论者显然是错误的，但他们在为他们的理论提供简洁而令人信服的解释方面比“气候变化”辩护者做得更好，后者甚至不知道他们想说服我们什么的。几年前是“全球变暖”，现在是“气候变化”，基本上可以是任何事物。我想，涵盖所有基础。他们引用的温度和影响到处都是，以及后果和解决方案。
无论如何，我不仅不相信，而且真的不在乎。不管我怎么关心，明天整个世界都会下地狱。
你承认，通过你的心理投射，你是 使命是听从压迫者的命令，为世界寡头赚取数万亿美元，比如科赫工业公司、埃克森美孚公司、（（美世家族））以及其他神秘的全球主义精英亿万富翁，你正在为他们鹦鹉学舌地模仿他们的科学诽谤公关活动，这是从大烟草公司去年的科学诽谤公关活动中复制而来的。
> 500 名科学家
你完全是在撒谎；让我们检查一下你们所谓的“科学家”之一的资历。
> 温度先升高，然后CO2升高
错误的， 连环骗子 威廉 ”二氧化碳妖魔化犹太人” 哈珀在撒谎，利用 #12 最常用的气候谎言。这张图表反驳了他的谎言：
图表来源： “全面的， 超过90％ 冰期-间冰期变暖的发生 after 大气中二氧化碳含量增加（图 2）。”
https://skepticalscience.com/co2-lags-temperature.htm
发布一个又一个谎言只会造成一件事：让你成为一个连环骗子，这会让你与科学否认者为伍。
来自丹麦国家航天中心的亨里克·斯文斯马克。大约在 35 分钟处得出结论。
旦尼尔303，
你既是科学否认者又是骗子。
该链接位于#17，您已经回复了。注意力持续时间短多？然而，由于你忙于撒谎和否认科学，我会再次为你提供它。
https://www.technocracy.news/fatal-courtroom-act-ruins-michael-hockey-stick-mann/
你显然是文盲——除了懒惰、科学否认者和骗子之外。
我说得很清楚，先知曼，你们神圣的秘密数据守护者，由于不遵守科学方法而自愿退出科学。即使是法院也无法强迫反科学家曼恩遵守科学程序。
再次，我很抱歉你相信先知曼和他最神圣的秘密数据。你是一个有信仰的人，也是一个科学否认者。你们盲目的反科学信仰的绝对性和顽固性令人印象深刻。如果你必须的话，就继续撒谎吧，但我们都在嘲笑你错误地描述为科学的基于信仰的神话。
和平😇
你的链接提出了一个很好的观点。
政府和基金会中的科学否认者希望得到符合他们先入为主的观念的答案。因此，从科学否认者那里获得“研究”资助的简单方法就是使“研究”结果符合他们要求的全球变暖神话结果。
这样恶性循环就开始了。随着科学否认者的金钱产生越来越多的假论文，真相被埋葬了。像 Anon303 这样的科学否认者甚至可能不明白他们在否认科学，因为他们有大量由科学否认者“研究”资助资助的论文。
有充分的证据表明风能和太阳能在其整个生命周期内都会增加污染。只要对气候变化的歇斯底里还在推动这些解决方案，我们就知道它们不太理性。还记得戈尔在扭转全球变暖神话之前是如何推动全球变冷神话的吗？
和平😇
_____
> 简洁而令人信服的解释
你看过吗？ https://skepticalscience.com/big-picture.html or https://climate.nasa.gov/
> 几年前是“全球变暖”，现在是“气候变化”
电子邮件和短信 #89 科学否认者的谎言！ “气候变化”是 1956 年科学期刊文章中使用的术语。“全球”变暖一词被创造出来 二十年后 1975 年。虽然这两个术语在科学文献中经常使用，因为它们指的是两种不同的物理现象。
> 他们引用的温度和效应无处不在
什么？对全球各地保存的几个不同记录的比较看起来是否像是“到处都是”的温度？
Sumber: https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/
首先，如果你要开始吹捧斯文马克（Svenmark），他是一位著名的否认主义者，因为他实际上是一位已发表文章的科学家，他声明如下：
“我相信毫无疑问，二氧化碳是一种温室气体。” (2018 年 XNUMX 月)
您现在是否同意 Svenmark 的观点，即二氧化碳毫无疑问是一种温室气体？如果你不同意，那么你对他的假设就一无所知。在你回答这个问题后，我将讨论他关于宇宙射线的假设，以及他如何在科学期刊的一篇又一篇文章中被证明是错误的。
> 你既是科学否认者又是骗子。 |哈哈！你在进行心理投射。
> 链接 |请阅读在以下网站上公开发布的法官决定： 政府网络服务器.
尽管你滑稽地试图“翻转剧本”，但曼恩的研究已经得到了证实 多 其他科学研究复制了他的工作，如下所示：
> 想要符合他们先入为主的观念的答案。 |纯粹的心理投射。
> 符合“研究”结果 |你总是、总是、总是抹黑真正的科学，就像一个大烟草公关骗子告诉大家，证明吸烟导致癌症的科学在某种程度上是“垃圾”，这一次 否认主义谎言长长的清单上的 #32 和 #95 的混合体.
太阳能/风能政策决策颠覆了已有两个世纪历史的气候科学体系，就像船舶设计上的分歧推翻了位移物理学一样。你如此用力，这很滑稽。你真是个害羞的人。
> 阿尔·戈尔曾宣扬全球变冷神话 |他不是科学家，而只是政治人物，所以谁在乎呢？但 请告诉我们 他在何时何地做了这件事！如果你所说的确实是真的，那就很有趣了。
> 呼气过于频繁 |这种彻头彻尾的谎言你已经说了四次了。你已经在这里向公众透露了 哇哟爸爸是， 谎言之父。说谎和愚蠢是经常同时出现的特征，很明显，你太愚蠢了，不知道植物中的碳水化合物含有从空气中获得的碳，所以当你吃碳基植物时（甚至吃肉）最终以碳为基础的植物）然后呼出你吃下的碳，这是生命的碳循环 增加 净零 碳排放到大气中.
而且：
“继首次 ECT 成功之后，（Vattenfall于2012年再次起诉德国，要求赔偿4.3亿欧元以及与其两座核电站相关的利润损失的利息。 2011 年福岛灾难和全国范围内的反核抗议活动之后，德国议会决定加快逐步淘汰核能，随后采取了这一法律行动。除其他事项外，议员们下令立即永久关闭德国最古老的反应堆，包括 Vattenfall 的克鲁梅尔和布伦斯比特尔核电站。由于多次故障，两者均已停用数年。截至撰写本文时（2018 年 XNUMX 月），此案仍在审理中。”
“截至 2018 年 15 月，德国政府已花费超过 XNUMX 万欧元的法律和行政费用来辩护此案。此外，Vattenfall 还向德国律师索赔了 26 万欧元。”
摘录如下（重点已添加）：
https://www.energy-charter-dirty-secrets.org/
袜子木偶先生。至少三个帐户上发布了一个粗鲁且令人讨厌的漏洞，可能还有其他帐户。有人向罗恩举报他。
́\_(ツ)_/́ 好吧……10个小时过去了，总共有45条评论，但没有一个人有足够的勇气深思熟虑地考虑和回复，或者以其他方式发表评论。 1. *蟋蟀*
我投票给特朗普，实际上认为他退出京都议定书对美国有好处，这一点可以从我在评论中写的内容中得到证明。 2，即“全球变暖势不可挡”。我并不是真的想扔掉我的多辆汽油/柴油动力 SUV、卡车和有趣的玩具，因为杰文悖论。 *蟋蟀* 那里也有。是因为这里的每个人都是“从不特朗普”或“笨蛋”吗？来自特拉维夫 A123 的 👃 代表甚至没有偷看一眼。
试图拉一个 @插口 twatter deplatforming，你是吗，我亲爱的朋友？这一切都是因为你想报复在上一篇全球变暖主题中被递给你的帽子！你的行为连女人都不如！我在一个电子邮件帐户下发帖，但在 Anonymous 上确实犯了一个拼写错误，没有 m，为此我清除了 cookie，以摆脱不断将其放入的自动填充功能。任何版主都可以看到我正在发帖 尽管存在拼写错误，但在一封电子邮件下。长大了，更要停止你的恶意谎言了，好吗？
另一件让你生气的事是我打破了你幼稚的世界观。正如科学表明的那样，当人们的世界观受到威胁时，他们就会生气。不管怎样，不要让太阳落山让你的愤怒消散。 🙂
我建了一座海滨房子。
自从我岳父还是个孩子的时候起，大海已经下降了，或者陆地已经上升了六英尺——在我们现在有房子的地方游泳。
这片土地是免费的，现在是我们的了。 我的岳父蹲在土地上。 如果情况相反，我们就可以在现在房子所在的地方钓鱼赚钱。 我们是做养鱼业的。 所以呢。 不仅仅是气候变化。
我鄙视的是假装人类、植物和动物不能适应变化。 世界上最愚蠢的人是危言耸听者。
您住在芬兰还是瑞典？ 由于冰河时代冰重量的减少，陆地仍在向上反弹。
尽管陆地（相对）快速上升的情况很少见，但世界各地的海平面正在上升， 和加速。但这是最不用担心的全球变暖问题，到本世纪末，全球变暖幅度仅为几英尺。嗯，在地势很低的地区，这将意味着更多的风暴洪水，这很糟糕。
一些否认者试图将奥巴马购买海滨别墅解释为对科学的否定，但这是基于美国宇航局观察和预测的数学计算 https://sealevel.nasa.gov/
• 奥巴马官邸海拔3 米（10 英尺）。
• 预计到 65 年海平面将上升 26 厘米（2100 英寸）。
他这辈子就好了！我很高兴白宫里没有黑人！
> 植物生命，而动物无法适应变化。
任何科学家都意识到生命可以适应——当 变化率 是慢的。 如果变化速度过快，适应能力就会被淹没，从而导致灭绝。 参见这项研究：
现在，明白了这一点，目前由全球变暖引起的栖息地变化速度非常快，相当于地质时期的变化速度。 小行星 撞击地球。 看这个图表：
图表来源：澳大利亚国立大学地球与气候科学家 Andrew Glikson http://arctic-news.blogspot.com/2019/09/blueprints-of-future-climate-trends.html
地球上的生命正在撞上众所周知的砖墙。我们已经处于地球第六次大规模灭绝之中。
木星上的“气候变化”！
好的！对这个荒谬话题的明智评论。
格蕾塔的共产党人不想被告知的事情：
共产主义气候“专家”：41 个没有实现的预测: https://www.breitbart.com/environment/2019/09/20/nolte-climate-experts-are-0-41-with-their-doomsday-predictions/
数十个失败的气候预测可追溯到 80 年前: https://www.theepochtimes.com/dozens-of-failed-climate-predictions-stretch-80-years-back_3096733.html
人类历史上最大规模的科学欺诈: https://principia-scientific.org/most-massive-scientific-fraud-in-human-history/
最近二氧化碳排放量的上升使地球变得更加绿色: https://principia-scientific.org/recent-rise-in-co2-has-made-earth-5-greener/
100％的美国变暖归因于NOAA数据篡改: https://realclimatescience.com/100-of-us-warming-is-due-to-noaa-data-tampering/
现在有几家公司拥有从空气中捕获二氧化碳的机器，并将二氧化碳转化为白色颗粒状的产品，可以将其重新制成汽油，价格比我们目前支付的价格每加仑高出约 2 美元。我想碳纤维材料也可以用这些颗粒生产。
我从各个地方的 NPR 链接中看到了该公司的简介。我不记得这家公司的确切名称，但在看到他们的发明后，我对变暖问题感到非常平静。
人为全球变暖是一个骗局
https://wattsupwiththat.com/
虚假的“97% 气候共识”进一步崩溃，485 年有 2017 篇新论文揭穿了它: https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/01/10/the-97-climate-consensusstarts-to-crumble-with-485-new-papers-in-2017-that-question-it/
97% 气候共识的说法被揭穿:
- 查看更多： http://www.thegwpf.com/richard-tol-claim-of-a-97-climate-consensus-does-not-stand-up/#sthash.i2b7hiYZ.dpuf
和：
理查德·托尔：97% 气候共识的说法站不住脚
守护者: http://www.thegwpf.com/richard-tol-claim-of-a-97-climate-consensus-does-not-stand-up/
有人说，“我们有 12 年的时间来限制气候变化灾难”，即让地球继续越过“行星阈值”进入“内在反馈”正反馈循环。该图说明了“行星阈值”（也被科学家称为“临界点”）和“内在反馈”（正反馈循环）。
来源： https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1810141115 [与评论 #21 中的引用相同]
每个人都知道什么是正反馈循环，对吧？你也知道吗 为什么 你的鼻子进化到可以检测出几部分的硫化氢（那种可怕的臭鸡蛋味） b亿？ 全球变暖导致大气中的硫化氢和二叠纪灭绝
植物喜欢二氧化碳，二氧化碳越多越好。
控制狂共产党人的二氧化碳排放主张被彻底推翻：
https://principia-scientific.org/?s=CO2
那里找到了许多例子中的几个：
– 二氧化碳不会导致全球变暖的 25 个原因
– 新仙女木分析：没有证据表明二氧化碳会影响温度
– 研究：大气二氧化碳与“化石燃料”排放之间没有相关性
– 气候欺诈者迈克尔·曼有罪，二氧化碳无罪！
– 另一项实验证明二氧化碳与气候变化无关
– 二氧化碳数据处理
– 科学家：二氧化碳浓度上升导致南极变冷
– 研究：驾驶特斯拉比柴油车产生更多的二氧化碳
– 三分钟视频揭露二氧化碳气候胡言乱语：
> 荷兰人认真对待气候变化。
真的。慕尼黑再保险公司等保险公司和再保险公司也是如此。非常认真。傲慢的科学否定者应该 说到做到 如果公司相信自己的科学否定，则向他们提供折扣再保险，如果他们是对的，就可以发大财。但否认者只是说说而已，就像城市教室里的一群野蛮黑人，智商太低而无法理解科学，并且只想破坏比他们更好的人。
这是一部商业级的小说，是为公众上演的，就连这篇文章的评论也证明了这一点，它是完全值得的。
精英，它如何控制一切，它如何欺骗一切——这一切都是大多数人应得的，事实上，这是不可避免的。
格蕾塔，斯努库姆，我和我的朋友和家人来找你们这些年轻人并不是为了希望。我们知道“出自宝贝之口”只是一句愚蠢的格言。现在把你的屁股和你未开发的大脑滚回瑞典吧，10年后再回到我们身边。
首先，格蕾塔是强大的全球主义者的傀儡，他们利用她来推进他们的议程。作为一名国家社会主义者，我相信保护我们的环境，并且相信我们正在污染地球。作为一名俄罗斯东正教徒，我相信上帝控制着气候，而不是人类。总而言之，我们可以尽自己的一份力量来减少污染，但最终地球的命运掌握在上帝手中。
此外，我厌倦了在落基山脉登山和狩猎时捡起别人的垃圾。我也厌倦了科罗拉多州弗兰特山脉的伪君子——尤其是博尔德和长青——他们提倡绿色生活，却开着一辆新车型来到天然杂货店，价值100万美元的路虎，住在价值数百万美元的豪宅中，并炫耀他们频繁前往东南亚的“人道主义”旅行。这些白痴难道没有意识到这样的旅行要消耗多少航空燃油吗？这次旅行的唯一目的就是为了在 Instagram 上拍一些自私的自拍照，并安抚他们的社交圈里充满了豪华轿车自由派、SJW 朋友的人吗？
与此同时，像我和我的同龄人一样，居住在高落基山脉地区，过着极其简约、自给自足的生活方式，不会因为做一些对我们来说很自然的事情而寻求别人的认可或赞扬。
那不是“许多”，而是“另一个”。
他们可能伪造了数据吗？
这样做的动机一定是巨大的：它使一些人变得非常富有（桑伯格谈到的人），而作者立即获得了成功，就像迈克尔·曼一样
是和不是。他们不应该利用这个女孩，但气候变化是真实的。
而且，在我看来，自然和环境是非政治性的。文化马克思主义者或另类右翼或任何人都可以种植树木或灌木来改善自然栖息地并增加绿化覆盖率。
如果种植树木和灌木（在合适的地方种植合适的树种）实际上成为一项国家资助的家庭活动，有政府的信息和设施，它可以在不挥舞政治旗帜的情况下对自然环境产生巨大的改善（也有助于促进民族团结） 。
我在自己的土地上做到了这一点，以前的阳光炙烤和干旱已经变成了绿色阴凉的地方，有新的野生动物。主要是按照彼得·安德鲁（Peter Andrew）的书“从边缘回来”中的想法，自然地构建绿色覆盖物。
无人质疑 UAH 卫星温度记录（由亨茨维尔阿拉巴马大学 Roy Spencer 运行的项目）
数据显示，近0.5年来气温上升了40℃。 0.125°/十年的速度并不高！实证科学有效的 40 年并不是很长。
Satteline 测量直到 1970 世纪 19 年代末才成为可能。它们提供了对真实全球温度的唯一有效估计。所有其他可追溯到工业化时代之前的记录都是基于空间覆盖范围较低的地面站（特别是在南半球），这些地面站受到校准、传感器故障、传感器更换和环境问题的影响。由于不断推进的工业化和城市扩张，造成了热岛效应。各种可疑的插值、外推和均质化方案被炮制出来，以得出 20 世纪和 XNUMX 世纪卫星时代前全球气温的代理值。这些指标已被全球气候变化政治运动的江湖骗子具体化为“真实的全球温度”，并且毫无疑问地被真正的信徒和各种宣传者所采用。
格蕾塔提出了一个轻率的左翼论点，即地球正在被摧毁只是为了“极少数人”的财富。
她是对的。塑料厂、化石燃料、生物工业、森林砍伐，都破坏了生态系统，这使得这些工业的所有者（“极少数人”）变得非常富有。
但她的解决方案是错误的。
格蕾塔确实想通过某种方式储存工厂或发动机排出的烟雾来拯救地球。她没有宣传的是应该关闭污染工厂。后者会有所帮助，前者正在与一种只会让“极少数人”致富的副现象作斗争
“你可以停止使用陈旧且最常使用的科学否认者的神话，这实际上是一个遗漏的谎言......”
还需要强调的是，我们造成的全球变暖所造成的大部分危害不仅取决于变化本身或其程度，还取决于变化的程度。 率 它发生的时间。发生一千年的变化可能只会导致平稳过渡；如果把它压缩到一百年，其影响可能是灾难性的。
我们现在看到了这一点，美国西部的全球变暖以及甲虫突然能够破坏缺乏对甲虫防御能力的松树物种，因为它们生长在冬季对甲虫来说过于严酷的海拔高度。比如说，如果甲虫每年只能平均垂直向上移动一英尺，那么就会只有一条非常狭窄的死亡和垂死树木带。如果将其增加到每年 10 英尺，就会出现大量枯死的木材，因此，有可能发生一些令人印象深刻的森林火灾。
……我们现在似乎正在发生火灾。即使我们不能或不会完全阻止全球变暖，仅仅减缓它的速度就可以取得很大的成果。气候变化本身并没有什么问题，但让它突然发生就会引发各种灾难。
NOAA 最长的验潮数据记录位于纽约巴特里，测量周期长达 162 年。尽管气候危言耸听者提出了有科学缺陷的断言，但该地点以及 NOAA 美国所有其他沿海地点都表明，过去 30 年来海平面没有加速上升。
极端天气事件中未检测到全球变暖信号：
“总而言之，飓风活动的趋势信号还没有时间超越自然过程的背景变化。人为气候变化可能导致飓风活动发生变化，但由于这些变化与估计的自然变率相比幅度较小，或者由于观测的限制，这些变化尚无法检测到。但目前还没有令人信服的证据表明人为全球变暖导致了飓风活动的变化。” （朱迪思·库里饰演）
“使用避免 I 类错误的传统观点，TC（热带气旋）活动可检测到的变化的最强烈的情况是观测到的西北太平洋盆地最大强度纬度向极地迁移，11 位作者中有 11 位对观测到的更改为检测的低到中置信度（另一位作者具有中置信度，另外两位作者具有中到高置信度）。微弱多数作者（XNUMX 名作者中的 XNUMX 名）对于人为强迫导致极地移动的信心很低。作者团队的大多数人也对任何其他观察到的 TC 变化代表可检测的变化或可归因的人为变化的信心很低。” （托马斯·克努森等人。 https://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/pdf/10.1175/BAMS-D-18-0189.1)
小罗杰·皮尔克 (Roger Pielke Jr.) 一直孜孜不倦地呼吁科学家和其他人发表声明，将飓风影响归因于气候变化，并援引政府间气候变化专门委员会 (IPCC) 和其他国家/国际评估结果。
没有 灾难性 气候变化正在发生。一般来说，温暖的天气和二氧化碳对人类有利。趁温暖持续，尽享温暖。
事实上，回顾过去一百万年，古气候学家发现，我们人类目前正处于一个温带（而且有些罕见）的“间冰期”。这种温和的气候只持续了约 12,000 年。因此，趁着这异常舒适的天气持续下去，享受它吧。
需要知道的是，仅在过去的一百万年里，北半球就经历了八次漫长的“冰川期”。 “冰河世纪”这个词是否引起了人们的注意？已经有八个了。
当我们进入下一次深度冻结（“冰川期”）时，大多数人类肯定会灭亡。所谓的稍微温暖、有利于作物生长的温度的危险正在无耻地大肆宣传。而且不诚实。
当科学问题应该交给受过教育的（成年）科学家时，为什么一个十几岁的女孩会被视为灾难性全球变暖（哎呀——造成“气候变化”）的典型儿童？这一最新策略纯粹是煽动性的。
温暖主义者想愚弄谁？温暖主义者试图激起谁的单纯激情？
答案是：平均阅读头条新闻、观看电视。低信息量的毒品。
这就是为什么温暖主义者在一个严格基于科学的问题上引入了情感（政治化）因素（一个受创伤的孩子）？
气候游戏完全与政治、金钱和权力有关。和欺骗。
请记住，如果所谓的“环保主义者”得逞，当今大多数石油出口国（包括伊朗、伊拉克、俄罗斯、委内瑞拉和利比亚）将在经济（和军事）上遭到毁灭。
崔波诺？
以下是对气候危言耸听者用来愚弄公众的熟悉伎俩的简短、及时和富有洞察力的审视：
– 无论 NASA 的定义是什么或可能改变成什么，共识都是不科学的。事实上，当一个人敢于抛弃共识并开始质疑时，科学就开始了。
– 正如“赞成”方所明确指出的那样，该术语是“气候变化”而不是“气候变暖”。如果没有变暖，就不会有与二氧化碳相关的问题。时期。我们被骗了。我们不必改变我们的行为。
– 一些石油公司“反对”的事实并不能证明“支持”是正确的。有趣的是，一些大声疾呼这些指控的人如何用彩色图表和其他他们自己不可能制作的精美材料来支持他们的观点。
– 核工业已经死在水中。目前还没有解决任何极其严重的问题的办法。福岛县仍然每天都在向海洋倾泻洪水。没有人知道这会对浮游生物（我们的主要氧气供应者）产生什么影响。
– “专业人士”应该诚实：他们希望其他人为他们拯救地球。没有一个“专业人士”愿意牺牲任何东西，没有人愿意做出个人改变，除了戴上不同的帽子。他们要求继续同样的生活方式，并真正期望其他人提出“他们的”解决方案。这只是时尚。他们没有看到风能和太阳能背后的能源浪费及其造成的污染。他们可以购买一种设备来节省能源。这最能描述他们的精神状态。他们真的对工业流程、废物和能源一无所知。
– 节俭让我们自由，但我们讨厌它。即使提到它也会导致愚蠢的推理，就好像我们期望人们步行 30 英里，而周围的每个人都使用汽车，冷冻他们的卧室，而每个人都生活在奢侈中，或者在手动设备的世界中手动完成所有事情几乎灭绝了。大家都会嘲笑他们，这当然是重点，因为他们自己绝对不想这样生活。
“事实”，是吗？
主题就这么多
致所有支持隐藏在新绿色秩序背后的新自由主义企业法西斯主义的有用白痴
http://www.wrongkindofgreen.org/2019/09/11/the-manufacturing-of-greta-thunberg-for-consent-volume-ii-act-i-a-design-to-win-a-multi-billion-dollar-investment/
http://www.wrongkindofgreen.org/2019/09/14/the-manufacturing-of-greta-thunberg-for-consent-controlling-the-narrative-volume-ii-act-ii/
http://www.wrongkindofgreen.org/2019/09/15/the-manufacturing-of-greta-thunberg-for-consent-to-plunder-what-little-remains-its-going-to-be-tremendous-volume-ii-act-iii/
http://www.wrongkindofgreen.org/2019/09/17/the-manufacturing-of-greta-thunberg-for-consent-they-mean-business-volume-ii-act-iv/
http://www.wrongkindofgreen.org/2019/09/18/the-manufacturing-of-greta-thunberg-for-consent-the-behavioural-change-project-to-change-everything-volume-ii-act-v/
OT，但关于儿童十字军的故事是后来的“开明”知识分子创造的神话，他们用它来嘲笑基督教世界，类似于许多其他关于“黑暗时代”的夸大或错误的说法，例如“Jus Primae Noctis”或贞操带或精巧的酷刑器具，或宗教裁判所受害者和被烧死的女巫的数量等。
麦克弗森的说法不可信：
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2018/jul/09/there-are-genuine-climate-alarmists-but-theyre-not-in-the-same-league-as-deniers
现在这篇文章对你来说可能没有多大意义，除了它是由怀疑科学（Skeptical Science）的主要贡献者撰写的，这是一个由多位科学家组成的合作网站，你（或与你非常相似的人）在本主题的其他地方作为权威链接了该网站。
文章作者解释了为什么怀疑科学旨在揭穿某些“气候变化错误信息”（作者称之为否认主义），而不是其他风格（作者称之为危言耸听）。
去年，科学家们进行了一场内部辩论，讨论“揭穿者”之间关于揭穿什么的决定如何扭曲了气候科学消费者对证据的印象。怀疑科学的另一位贡献者（https://andthentheresphysics.wordpress.com/2018/07/02/climate-misinformers/）写道：
你，匿名者，也许还有非常关心的格蕾塔和气候积极分子运动的很大一部分，都是这种非常有意的框架的产物，在这个框架中，学术权威在“否认主义”方面监管他们认为的错误信息，而不是在“危言耸听”的一面。无论他们的动机是什么，或者他们这样做是否合理，都不是重点：重要的是，这场讨论是经过非常谨慎的管理的，事实上，所有从学术机构出发并涉及学术界的辩论往往都是如此。
一些怀疑论科学人士之所以对让危言耸听者胡言乱语感到紧张，同时对他们能找到的每一个否认主义主张进行反驳，是因为他们已经意识到危言耸听实际上与否认主义是一样的。因此，为了解决评论#1，您可以轻松地接受危言耸听的预测，就像您可以接受否认主义立场来证明放宽排放标准等事情的合理性一样。麦克弗森认为（或者他改变了主意？）到 2030 年，我们都将灭绝，如果你采纳他的观点，所有减少排放的尝试往好里说都是误导，往坏里说是骗局。
既然承认 AGW 可能是真实的，并且主流科学在这个问题上或多或少是正确的，那么我们如何解释活动家和我们的精英的行为呢？
1）西方发达国家人均碳足迹较大，但排放量持平或下降。这意味着我们应该首先减少向西方国家的移民，但我们的精英和活动人士却要求相反的做法（气候难民等）。
2）接下来，活动人士和精英们对于日益彻底的工业化中国的大量且不断增加的排放无话可说。去工业化也许是不可能的，但停止工业化则是另一回事。
3) 核电这一可行的减少排放途径受到了活动人士和许多负责人的反对。精英和活动人士只想要太阳能和风能，它们无法规模化，有时看起来 EROEI 为负，不会有意义地减少排放，实际上可能会增加排放。
如果我们的精英们相信（正如他们声称的那样）我们陷入了一场生存危机，如果没有快速的去工业化，我们都会死去，我们就会期待爆发全面战争，首先摧毁发展中国家的工业能力，然后摧毁彼此的工业能力。相反，他们向同事发放可再生能源补贴，精心策划关于个人责任的毫无意义的辩论和信息宣传活动，而且总体上表现得好像他们不太相信自己的儿童先知所说的话。现在可以说，我们只是拥有非常可怕和愚蠢的精英，这是非常有道理的。
瑞典的新式美食：
马格努斯·索德伦德和格蕾塔应该自愿参加。 Magnus Soderlund 烤肉配野生瑞典越橘酱，Greta Thunberg 扇贝配瑞典福雷斯特鸡油菌。
我是一个中世纪主义者。这场为儿童而战的运动从未发生过。一些历史学家对“pueri”一词进行了错误的翻译。大多数十字军东征都是针对贵族的。但也有下层阶级的人想要为圣地而战。在（中世纪）拉丁语中，“pueri”也可以用于仆人和下层阶级。所以只是一群仆人去讨伐而已。当时没有人（甚至）希望他们的孩子离开家。
在许多与格蕾塔合影的照片中，指导她并保护她免受记者提出“错误”问题的，是她的官方“处理人”路易莎-玛丽·纽鲍尔 (Luisa-Marie Neubauer)，她出生于汉堡，现年 23 岁，是“ONE 基金会”的青年大使。乔治·索罗斯、梅琳达和比尔·盖茨。
格蕾塔前往美国的这艘价值4万欧元的游艇是罗斯柴尔德家族的一艘游艇，后来被罗斯柴尔德家族转让给了德国大亨格哈德·森夫特。此次航行的共同船长是皮埃尔·卡西拉吉 (Pierre Casiraghi)，他是摩纳哥已故亲王雷尼尔三世和女演员格蕾丝·凯利 (Grace Kelly) 的孙子。
Greta 在联合国的表演是 27 年前类似活动的重演。 1992 年，时年 12 岁的塞文·卡利斯-铃木 (Severn Cullis-Suzuki)，加拿大著名环保人士和电视名人大卫·铃木 (David Suzuki，生于 1936 年) 的女儿，在里约热内卢举行的联合国地球峰会全体会议上发表讲话，她在会上“让世界保持沉默五次”。分钟”……说“我们是一群努力做出改变的 12 岁孩子”；她在 YouTube 上发表的关于环境的“倾听孩子们的心声”联合国演讲：
在 1960 年代至 70 年代，不是“全球变暖”而是“冰河时代来临！”，这是“科学家”的官方恐慌……1979 年与《星际迷航》的斯波克先生伦纳德·尼莫伊合作的电视广告警告我们，数百在观众的孙子时代，数百万人可能会冻死：
已故天气频道创始人约翰·科尔曼称全球变暖是“历史上最大的骗局”……AccuWeather 创始人乔尔·迈尔斯博士也支持这种“否认主义”……杰里米·科尔宾的科学家兄弟皮尔斯·科尔宾也是如此
对许多人来说，一个转折点是 2009 年东安格利亚大学的“气候门”丑闻，当时发布的一份内部电子邮件显示，科学家们渴望欺骗以获取更多“全球变暖资金”，其“做法从恶劣到恶劣，不一而足”。专业精神对欺诈性科学的影响。偏见、数据操纵、逃避信息自由请求以及颠覆同行评审过程的行为都被揭露了。”
https://www.masterresource.org/climategate/climategate-trump/
“贾斯汀·墨菲 (Justin Murphy) 在推特上表示，如果格蕾塔·桑伯格 (Greta Thunberg) 指导全球政策，那么我们‘不能反对杰弗里·爱泼斯坦 (Jeffrey Epstein) 向 16 岁青少年支付性费用’”：
https://www.dailydot.com/layer8/justin-murphy-greta-thunberg-jeffrey-epstein/
“气候变化是联合国主导的一场骗局，目的是结束民主并强加独裁统治……全球变暖只是安装新世界秩序新世界秩序的‘钩子’”
– 莫里斯·纽曼 (Maurice Newman)，2013-15 年度澳大利亚总理托尼·阿博特 (Tony Abbott) 顾问
https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/climate-change-a-unled-ruse-says-tony-abbotts-business-adviser-maurice-newman-20150508-ggwuzt.html
无脚本的格蕾塔·瑟恩伯格听起来是什么样的？
美国有温度问题吗？有什么特别的吗？
美国过去、现在和未来的每日温度记录，Gerald A. Meehl 等人，Proc Natl Acad Sci US Av.113(49)； 2016年XNUMX月
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5150363/
(A) 1930 年至 2015 年美国大陆观测到的年平均（实线）和平滑（绿线）表面气温的时间序列，以及年度最高纪录与最低纪录的比率（点）。 (B) 与 A 相同，但每日最高温度除外。 (C) 与 A 相同，但每日最低温度除外。
这是一个非常好的评论。谢谢。
真的吗？科隆的尼古拉斯和克洛伊的斯特凡当时是虚构的吗？
感谢您的评论。你有资源吗？
小格蕾塔不是科学家，也没有贩卖科学。不，她正在贩卖 情感 反而。她的歇斯底里只是“限额与交易”的推销，这与环境无关，与华尔街无关。这只是另一个金融部门的骗局。
如果您想长时间阅读并想真正了解《Little Greta》背后的故事，请尝试以下操作： http://www.wrongkindofgreen.org/2019/01/17/the-manufacturing-of-greta-thunberg-for-consent-the-political-economy-of-the-non-profit-industrial-complex/
“气候变化”造成的绝望并不是任何人为自然灾害的结果。他们只是因为越来越多的人发现了他们的小骗局并呼吁他们和他们的假媒体在这个问题上停止这一事实而感到害怕。特朗普拒绝《巴黎协定》让他们都感到不安。
该评论者是付费巨魔。请注意他使用三段和（已经过时的）术语“NPC”的笨拙和唐突的方式。他显然是被指派使用这些伎俩作为伪装的。另一个付费巨魔提到了智商……他被告知，UNZ 的人相信智商，而让他们生气的一个好方法就是称他们为愚蠢。还要注意他试图扭转局面的笨拙方式，指责气候怀疑论者从全球主义精英那里拿钱，而气候变化显然是他们强加给我们的。科赫兄弟，就像 Netflix 的电视剧《家庭》，就像迪克·切尼一样，对于那些感觉到有什么可疑的事情正在发生但缺乏勇气、时间或智慧来一路走入兔子洞的人来说，起到了非常有效的损害控制作用。这些最终无能为力的福音派人士被允许采用和揭示由他们的犹太复国主义大师完善的技术的笨拙版本。当他们转移人们的注意力时，他们会带来不可估量的好处。我对这些技术的效果感到沮丧。关于迪克·切尼的电影《副总统》在这方面尤其令人震惊。他们无法阻止自己添加一个场景，其中一名工作人员对迪克·切尼做出完全无端的评论：“但是以色列反对入侵伊拉克！”他们在这次行动中做得非常出色，不仅设置了一个非裔替罪羊（布什），而且在非裔替罪羊（切尼）中设置了一个非裔替罪羊来抓住稍微聪明一点的非裔。然而，就像 WTC 7 或拉里·西尔弗斯坦 (Larry Silverstein) 无法阻止自己购买巨额保险一样，他们总是抓得太多，然后以这种方式暴露自己的掩护。对于有眼睛的人来说，这种肆无忌惮的行为是令人震惊的。然而事实是，这些技巧将继续发挥作用，因为在一个人克服其编程并看到其机制所需的时间内，另外十个已经被编程。我注意到，前几条评论通常是付费的巨魔，他们经常在一个团队中工作，互相同意和回应。我想他们每次发布新文章时都会收到通知，并尽快发表第一条评论，这样它就会更加明显。
进一步证明了整个 Greta 事件的宣传性和舞台性，她正在一辆特斯拉上巡游美国——美国宣传机器在整个西方大力宣传这款汽车。
忧思科学家联盟
美国军事和石油
美国军队使用的石油比世界上任何其他机构都多，但它也是清洁车辆技术的领导者。
和
上述两篇文章都急忙补充说，美国国防部正在努力控制能源消耗。
格蕾塔会领导一场运动说，为什么我们需要如此军事化？这就是我可以支持的儿童十字军东征。
_______
** 德国无法控制足够的石油/能源流动，导致其装甲车毫无用处。
格蕾塔·桑伯格（Greta Thunberg）是共产党的母狼，被犹太媒体描述为最新版本的塔木德秀兰·邓波儿（Shirley Temple）。另一个初出茅庐的骗子，她的命运一目了然：强制精神崩溃，随后自杀未遂和康复，一本书和电影交易，当她以高声权威的方式讲述她的特殊命运时，她给人类带来了更多无尽的单调乏味的岁月。世界上犹太人控制的电视机。
格蕾塔，罗杰斯先生离开了社区，不，你不能也不会成为我们的朋友。曾经。
不存在气候紧急情况，也没有证据表明气候变暖是人类造成的。
感谢您对辩论做出的重要贡献：
跟着钱
为我们带来“力比多·多米南迪”和“城市屠杀”的同一群社会工程师正在资助气候变化活动。
惠特尼·韦伯关于爱泼斯坦和摩萨德的文章的推论：
英国亿万富翁阿根廷巴塔哥尼亚“平行国家”背后的黑暗秘密
at Mintpressnews.com网站
蒂埃里·迈桑报道 伏尔泰网,
以色列在巴塔哥尼亚的项目是什么？
犹太人正在引导不受欢迎的南美人进入美国，准备接管。
卡宾枪在墨西哥安装了定位系统。 。 。
有点像德拉克斯发电站燃烧的树林。来自脑死亡生态潜鸟的另一个好主意。当卢德分子推倒风车并开始建造第五代核武器时，我们可以认真对待气候变化宗教。顺便说一句，这些也可以燃烧当前库存的核废料。与它一起生态潜鸟！
真正的格蕾塔.
关于 UAH 数据和“江湖骗子”：
1. 罗伊·斯宾塞（Roy Spencer）是一位神奇的神创论信徒，他签署了一份关于气候变化的福音派声明，声明一位神奇的神对气候拥有“无限的力量”。
2. 罗伊·斯宾塞 (Roy Spencer) 被当场抓获 先令换谢克尔。他是皮博迪煤炭公司的雇员，并因在法庭案件中否认全球变暖而获得报酬。法庭不相信他的先令。
3. 罗伊在早期的卫星数据上撒了又谎，被抓到说谎，试图少撒谎，但又被抓到，然后 已经被拖着又踢又叫地经历了5个不同的数据修订版，到目前为止，他的卫星数据相当准确地显示了全球变暖。看来他现在处于版本 6，如您图表上的标签所示。由于他不值得信任，他甚至在国会听证会上被一位美国海军上将斥为骗子，该听证会保存在 YouTube 上。罗伊仍然不断地撒谎，改变图表，否认为皮博迪支付先令，尽管有充分的记录，你可以在中间管的几个地方发现他的谎言。
中国可以做到这一点
今年入夏之际，太浩湖附近山脉北部创纪录的冬季降雪仍未融化，因此斯阔高山度假村的滑雪活动一直持续到 7 月 XNUMX 日（周日）长假周末。今年早些时候，阿尔卑斯山中部也出现了创纪录的降雪，因此在重新开放之前，需要使用特殊的铣刨机来清除蒂罗尔州一条受欢迎的山口道路上的数吨大冰，这是前所未有的。
根据气候歇斯底里者过去打着“科学”幌子的预测，现在雪应该已经成为过去。鉴于降雪量不断创纪录，一些愤世嫉俗者现在将雪称为“全球变暖粉末”。然而，尽管山上仍然有数百万吨的积雪，但法国一号电视台在第一个夏季周末的头条新闻是现在的全球变暖，明天的全球变暖，以及未来更多的全球变暖，仅仅因为巴黎度过了一个温暖的周末。
根据危言耸听者的说法，二氧化碳的地位已悄然演变为有毒气体，甚至违反了物理定律。虽然它比氮气或氧气重，但据说它会在高层大气中积累，然后起到“温室气体”的作用，而不是落回地球并与蔓延的地面植被相互作用，将其转化回氧气。然而，专业的危言耸听者并不介意在起泡酒、水、啤酒或可乐中摄入二氧化碳。
对于一些常见的嫌疑人来说，全球变暖骗局肯定会有利可图，他们希望通过新兴的碳交易计划来致富，通过额外税收或通过其他创收结构（例如绿色政策咨询）强行从消费者那里获取财政资源或无意义的商业诈骗。去年夏天，这些潜在的奸商中的许多人乘坐私人飞机飞往西西里岛，并在谷歌亿万富翁的赞助下在南部海岸的一个海洋度假村会面。聚会包括好莱坞演员（“名人”）和哈里王子等人，他们将协助推动这一盛大骗局。
大多数政治精英伪君子也不认真对待他们传播的骗局。上周在纽约与格蕾塔·通贝里举行公开会议之前，安吉拉·默克尔乘坐她的大型空客 A340（四引擎），但没有足够的空间容纳她的女国防部长，因此她飞往美国东部外交部长也乘坐另一架政府飞机滑行，据称此后不久，他乘坐第三架政府飞机飞往美国。这些德国政客也不会梦想放弃他们配备司机的奥迪 A8 豪华轿车。
最近的一篇文章—— 气候与金钱踪迹，作者：F. William Engdahl，25 年 2019 月 XNUMX 日 – 指出了幕后的亿万富翁寡头与格蕾塔之间的联系，格蕾塔显然被欺骗，在不知情的情况下充当了他们别有用心的利益和贪婪的代言人。成立不到一年的“突破能源”组织已与欧盟首席委员容克签署了一份谅解备忘录，让其成员优先获得任何资金，其中大量资金即将到位。突破能源公司的成员包括乔治·索罗斯、马克·扎克伯格、比尔·盖茨等臭名昭著的亿万富翁。
媒体诱导的格雷塔邪教宣扬全球变暖骗局所伴随的歇斯底里的恐慌戏剧，与1980年代伴随艾滋病毒骗局的歇斯底里的恐慌戏剧类似，被称为“艾滋病流行”，并且非常有利可图。用于医疗和制药机构。当时的抗议团体 行动起来！ 举办媒体活动，要求同性恋者应该获得剧毒药物 AZT，以免受其不良影响，其中许多人随后死于“艾滋病”，俗话说“艾滋病”。
如果当时和现在这两个恶作剧的最终结果是相似的，那么有针对性的感知管理（“精神控制”）计划将需要成功地迫使数以百万计的轻信的格雷塔邪教追随者，特别是信徒，在一场大规模自杀事件中自杀。规模宏大，将这个不稳定的星球从呼出的二氧化碳中拯救出来。在某种程度上，这位十几岁的戏剧女王女演员格蕾特·格蕾塔确实相信自己的炒作，也许她可以以身作则。许多人可能会欢迎（如果不是也喜欢的话）这样一个致命的结果。
1. 卫星读数始终低于仪器读数，这就是为什么卫星读数被向上捏造以掩盖实际表面温度较低的原因
2. 3/4（主要是农村）的气象站在过去 100 年里关闭，主要是由于城市化和缺乏维护。由于铺路和缺乏树叶，城市比周围的乡村温度高几度。因此记录的气温上升主要反映了城市化
3. 普通温度计的精度为+/-（1-2）度，位于大多数气候模型预测加热范围内
4. 大多数气候模型都是解耦的并且在数学上是原始的，因为否则它们将是不可解决的
在这里看到所有这些生态潜鸟相信“气候科学”，这很奇怪，他们同时也持有不科学的信念，认为这个问题可以通过风车或神圣想象电池来解决。
你怎么敢——读了《明镜周刊》的废话，然后在《乌兹别克斯坦评论》上提到它？
这些是人类大脑活动的对立面！
GJ – Greta Jugend 的伟大之处在于，从现在开始的几年内，我们将在德国和整个西方国家培养出不再相信父辈告诉他们的任何事情的年轻人。他们最终将成为真正的成年人，并对那些强迫他们接受这种气候白痴的老师大骂。
听听这位英国豪女士对全球变暖的废话的回答
{ 地球是球形的吗？是的。但让我们问问美国宇航局。}
当然可以。
NASA 是一个政府机构，和美国几乎所有其他科学机构一样，已经变得政治化和腐败
阿尔·戈尔或他的科学家在 10 到 15 年前做出的世界末日预测有多少已经实现？
西方世界末日论者煽动的所有歇斯底里都有一个目的：政委官僚控制你的生活，并将财富从生产者转移到寄生虫。中国*和印度是比美国污染严重得多的国家，它们不会对那些被洗脑的孩子大肆吹嘘一切终结或尖叫着SJW游行并要求这样或那样的行为大喊大叫。
关于那个 “科学共识”：曾经，当时最伟大的科学家们一致认为太阳绕着地球转，除了一位科学家。
______
* 中国正在国内外建设数百座燃煤电厂。
没有剧本的格蕾塔……
理性地思考，核废料没什么大不了的，你可以把它埋掉，这只是对储存设施等的歇斯底里。人们对辐射不理性，因为它是一种“看不见的危险”。但如果这是一个大问题，我们可以建造钍反应堆。或者快中子增殖反应堆。
问题是，由于民众的恐慌，切尔诺贝利事故之后以及福岛事故之后，建造/运营核电站所需的繁文缛节数量急剧增加。
她当然这么做了，因为那是选民想要的。福岛核事故后，她支持关闭核电站以留住选民。这是在她的政府期间通过立法决定的（尽管与社会民主党联合）。
你的评论非常好；你实际上是在阅读和思考。我已经在 unz 的评论区里扔了麦克弗森悖论近一年了，你是第一个真正理解他所说内容的人，我的朋友。你让我脸上露出笑容。我也认为他的预测有些过分，但他的预测所依据的同行评审科学研究不容忽视。
> 学术权威对“否认主义者”一方而非“危言耸听者”一方监管他们认为的错误信息
确切地！气候运动的一个重要组成部分是 抱有希望当人们假设没有希望时，气候活动人士就会对那些没有希望的危言耸听者感到愤怒，就像他们对否认者感到愤怒一样。
据我听说的传言，左翼气候活动家“警察”曾试图解雇发表论文的科学家蒂莫西·加勒特，因为他证明“全球变暖是不可阻挡的”，而他现在经常基本上否认自己的“危言耸听”的科学文章，只是为了保留自己的观点。他的大学工作。 （他处于一个独特的位置，因为所有右翼自由主义自由市场狂热分子也讨厌他在加勒特发表的几篇期刊文章中学习经济学并基于热机热力学建立了真正的经济学科学。）
个人说明：不久前，我自己，作为一个保守的右翼分子，是一个典型的科学否认者，滔滔不绝地说出所有蹩脚的废话。但是，当我和从事农业的朋友一起忍受 2010 年以来全球变暖的一些影响时，我开始摸不着头脑，开始真正研究实际的科学。我已经确信全球变暖是真实存在的，发现它实际上是一个两个世纪以来成熟的科学体系。
但我并没有成为一名气候活动家。我从一个拥有大量汽油和柴油动力玩具的“否认者” 普锐斯司机身上滚煤 对于一个“危言耸听者”来说，“全球变暖是不可阻挡的”（Garrett，2009；McPherson） 我还在给普锐斯司机滚煤。 全部基于 我他妈的爱科学！ 🙂
需要澄清的是，我不是一个十足的混蛋，实际上并没有把我的卡车调整为滚煤，但从比喻上讲，引用蒂莫西·加勒特的“全球变暖是不可阻挡的”，甚至用麦克弗森来嘲弄他们，让左翼活动家噎住了科学比柴油烟雾更糟糕。
这不是事实，这是一个假设……一个断言。
抱歉，伙计，但我看到的唯一对科学的否认来自于你辩论一边的人，他们不遗余力地阻止任何与我们即将到来的厄运的反科学共识相反的研究和讨论。
是的，事实。既然你在情感上没有能力考虑唐纳德·J·特朗普总统提出的基于科学的事实，那么很明显，你是一位蓝头发、嚼着地毯、不喜欢洗澡的希拉里选民。还保留着“我和她在一起”的保险杠贴纸吗？
全球变暖是一个骗局，也是联合国《21世纪议程》和《2030年议程》的一项协议，目的是促进建立一个世界政府，并建立一个碳交易骗局来敲诈人民。美国宇航局有报告，可以在谷歌上搜索到，二氧化碳在大气中起着冷却剂的作用，完全揭穿了全球变暖的骗局，此外，二氧化碳是这个星球上生命的重要条件之一，因为植物和树木吸收二氧化碳并产生氧气，如果没有这个星球和它上面的一切都会死亡！
顺便说一句，蒙大拿州已经连续三天断断续续地下雪了。
甚至无法解决所说的内容，只是发布您典型的长篇大论。你是一个嚼着地毯、蓝头发的希拉里选民，讨厌特朗普，但在接下来的几十年里你会知道特朗普的预测将被证明是正确的。既然你是一个典型的粉红、热爱犹太人、流产婴儿、装软糖、热爱黑人、投票希拉里的混蛋，让我们来看看你的无反应的冗长的例子：
> 最近二氧化碳排放量的上升使地球变得更加绿色
哈哈！错误的。 1998 年以后就没有了。你卖的那是 20 年陈旧的鸦片，胡说八道。
地球停止变绿已有20年了
植物生长速度下降与全球变暖相关的空气湿度下降有关
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/earth-stopped-getting-greener-20-years-ago/
你觉得这更环保吗，沃利？也许你是色盲？
你没读过文章吗？一半的排放量来自亚洲。这些国家大幅减少排放是唯一合理的道路，但这永远不会发生。
唯一合理的做法是应对温度上升。节约用水、在受海平面影响的地区限制建筑等。我们无法以任何有意义的方式成功降低大气中二氧化碳的 PPM。
当然。您可以在以下位置阅读相关内容：
P. Raedts，《1212 年儿童十字军东征》。见：《中世纪史杂志》第 3 期（1977 年），第 279 页。 234-XNUMX。
我有它的数字副本，以便我可以将其发送给您。
> 事实上，当一个人敢于抛弃共识并开始质疑时，科学就开始了。
哦，真的是现在！ unz 97% 的共识是什么？对你来说，科学是什么时候开始的？你什么时候敢质疑共识？你什么时候开始把它抛在脑后并开始提出问题？
美国联邦航空局的书《航空天气》中有一个部分展示了如何在天气地图上绘制等压线和其他线。令人震惊的是用于构建地图的实际读数很少。蒂姆·鲍尔博士的网站上有一篇文章解释了最近如何必须修改对最基本的大气流动的理解，这本身就将气候灾难降格为儿童的可怕童话。他还通过良好的视觉效果展示了实际的天气读数对于做出如此古怪的主张是多么孤立。
天气预报所基于的数学类似于金融中的布莱克-斯科尔斯期权定价公式，这种依赖几乎在 90 年代末导致了世界银行系统的崩溃，并且与不准确的飓风预报所造成的大量短期经济浪费类似。实施“气候科学”和 GND 的主要影响肯定会产生灾难性的经济浪费和人类痛苦。
克莱数学研究所获得了 1 万美元的无人认领的奖金，用于奖励对这些知之甚少的（纳维-斯托克斯）方程的解的进展，尽管如此，这些方程仍然鼓励兼职气候学家的政治人员做出有保证的预测，就像 LTCM 声称的确定性一样使用基本相同的数学。此外，可证明的、彻头彻尾的欺诈是气候科学的主要特征，除非事实证明并非如此，更不用说将其政治化，以至于我们可以从电视上最新的世界末日电视布道者和新全球主义泛神论的高级女祭司圣格蕾塔那里看到世界末日的现场直播。瑞典。
> 一半的排放量来自亚洲。
真的！当我在上面写道“我投票给特朗普，实际上认为他退出京都议定书对美国有好处”时，就暗示了这一点。
> 我们不会以任何有意义的方式成功降低大气中二氧化碳的 PPM。
又是真的！正如我所说，“全球变暖是不可阻挡的。”我们完全同意。你写的一切都是正确的。对全球变暖的保守反应应该是像你说的那样，应对气温上升。
你，我的朋友，说得对。我希望特朗普和保守派能够像你们一样对全球变暖进行界定。我将在这里发布一条小小的幻想推文，希望能够实现这一点：
你怎么看呢？ 🙂
由于阿斯伯格症诊断的滥用，DSM5 并未将这种综合征纳入其疾病分类学。它对应于精神分裂症/精神分裂型人格障碍，汉斯·阿斯伯格最初将其描述为“自闭症精神病”（或更常见的术语是过度内向）你知道，许多医生渴望成名，渴望“发现”疾病广告给它他的名字。
.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Asperger
你在心理上投射了你所写的每一个细节，并蹩脚地试图“翻转剧本”。因为你智商太低，无法真正理解科学。就像一个野性的黑人一样，你之所以具有破坏性，是因为你没有足够的心理能力去理解。
为了证明您不懂科学，请告诉我们您对将二氧化碳放在红外相机和蜡烛之间会发生什么的看法，例如在这个证明二氧化碳是温室气体的实验中。
标题：伊恩·斯图尔特 (Iain Stewart) 演示二氧化碳对红外辐射的吸收
如果你不像野性黑人那么愚蠢的话，这个实验很容易在你自己家里进行。
我一直在阅读您的评论，它们确实是很棒的帖子，包含大量信息。也许您可以选择一个发帖名称，而不是“匿名”。
我饿的时候就吃
我干的时候就喝
如果天气变冷我会冷冻，如果天气变暖我会油炸
但不管怎样，为什么，那我就死了！
我已经决定气候问题不再由我掌控，所以我只能顺其自然。我怀疑，从很多方面来说，如果每个人都这样做，对我们所有人来说都会更好。有些事情是人类无法解决的，我相信“气候”就是其中之一。不幸的是，对儿童的操纵并非如此，因此，被操纵的年轻人只想取悦操纵她的无情操纵者，这令人遗憾。同样不幸的是，她的饲养员对这个年轻人来说似乎比中国所有燃煤企业的排放量总和还要危险。
> NASA有报告，可以在谷歌上搜索到二氧化碳可以作为冷却剂
我确实知道你歪曲了美国宇航局的报告。 CO2 不充当冷却剂。二氧化碳是一种会吸收热量的温室气体。但当二氧化碳捕获热量时，它会让更少的热量返回太空，并且太空附近极其稀薄的高层大气会冷却下来，因为更多的热量被捕获在较低的 2% 的大气层中。所以，是的，自从收集卫星数据以来，稀薄的高层大气层正处于创纪录的寒冷状态——因为这里的温度更高。
你的陈述表明，愚蠢党中智商较低的那一半人对科学对话的破坏性就像一群野性黑人在英国文学课堂上的破坏性一样。
当格蕾塔成为甘地主义者时，我会相信她的诚意。 在那之前，趁你 15 分钟的阳光持续下去，尽情享受吧！
这对我来说是一个有趣的话题，所以如果可能的话，这篇文章可以发表吗？
与其让蒙古族瑞士小姐喋喋不休地谈论天气，不如让一个年龄相仿的男孩和女孩去巡演，谴责大更替的恐怖？
一如既往，我喜欢 M. Durocher 文章中的许多观点。
会加三四个。
亲爱的小格蕾塔不仅患有自闭症，在她对气候变化产生歇斯底里的担忧之前，她还曾有一段时间拒绝说话，甚至挨饿。
所以，几年前。
她的支持者还声称她16岁还没有经历青春期（在她变成这个奇怪的人物之前），我相信这一点，这就是为什么她对于一个16岁的瑞典人来说看起来如此奇怪。
对于气候恐慌类型来说，引人注目的一件事是，他们尖叫着“科学”，而实际上他们通常是从未研究过科学的人，更重要的是，他们鄙视那些学过科学并做过科学的人。许多（“97％”中的绝大多数）“气候科学家”根本不是科学家，只是官僚和拥有狗屁学位的追随金钱的机会主义者。
这是一个笑话。和这个话题上的其他人一样，我是一个怀疑论者，而不是否认者。
最后一点，同意几个OP，但要更具体地说明。看看最早从太空拍摄的非洲照片，然后看看最近的照片。这就像沙漠海地和绿色多米尼加共和国之间的对比。这与欧洲或最近的中国以及偶尔的日本采掘业无关，而与这些地方的人口行为如人类蝗虫有关。
印度尼西亚和马来西亚部分地区的许多人故意纵火也是如此，尽管程度不那么严重，但这些火灾燃烧了深层泥炭沉积物，大量释放二氧化碳、灰烬以及在火灾中未消耗的部分甲烷。还破坏了人口稀少地区的主要碳汇。
然而，气候狂热者永远无法考虑这种现象（我只列出了对我来说最引人注目的两个，还有许多其他例子）， das ist 动词.
真是笑话！
相关不是因果关系。
顺便说一句，在中纬度地区，冰淇淋消费量与强奸发生率之间存在相当强的相关性。
（两者都在夏季增加。）
杜罗彻先生，你无法抗拒纳粹类比的诱惑，即使这意味着自相矛盾 反驳权威人物的任何要求。
这是令人反感的声明，一点一点：
与童年学习的质量相同
Citizens for National Security [非营利组织，501(c)(3) 公共慈善机构]
他们努力审查佛罗里达州公立学校教科书中有关伊斯兰教的讨论（毫无疑问，很快就会出现在您孩子的学校中）
焚烧的书似乎表明纳粹分子不幸地失败了：
——孩子们烧毁了冒犯“父母那一代墨守成规的保守主义”的书籍；
——他们是自己这样做的，而不是在纳粹的指导下。
盟军媒体关注的意大利儿童似乎比同时代的德国人年轻得多，也更骨瘦如柴。
但既然我们谈论的是给孩子洗脑 只是简单地反省和激进化他们的权威人物告诉他们的一切， 对这张中国年轻人庆祝国庆70周年的截图很感兴趣
更糟糕的是，做出 ADL 肯定会立即提出问题的手势：
哈哈。纯属造假。 “调整过滤器，同志们。”
请注意，居民并没有报告这种虚假的荒漠化。
真的很绝望，你证明了我的观点……你回避了。
特朗普谈可笑的“全球变暖”： https://www.azquotes.com/author/14823-Donald_Trump/tag/global-warming
前任。：
NASA数据证明特朗普有权退出《巴黎气候协定》: https://www.prisonplanet.com/nasa-data-proves-trump-right-to-exit-paris-climate-accord.html
哎哟！
衷心感谢您的夸奖。
我选择匿名发帖，尽管有你所说的缺点，因为我有时会与一些消息灵通的高人交往，他们在人工智能和监控方面把我吓得屁滚尿流。我不会详细介绍，因为 TED 已经有很多关于人工智能将如何杀死我们所有人的精彩演讲。所以我经常切换服务器，匿名发帖，因此。因为我想在发帖时遵守 UNZ 的规则，同时对全球变暖发疯，所以我在这个帖子的最后几天没有切换服务器（303 保持不变），这样看起来我就没有在尝试绕过 4 次/小时的规则。否则，如果我发帖速度较慢，我会切换服务器等，然后就会发生变化。使外部资源更难抓取 unz 的网站以获取个人信息。
但我知道您可能想回头看看我所说的话。我所说的大部分内容都可以在以下资源中找到，这也将更方便您参考：
1. 关于揭穿否认主义关于全球变暖的神话， SkepticalScience.com 至少是最好的起点。您将找到合适的术语放入scholar.google DeSmogBlog 还有关于否认者的良好档案。
2. 盖伊·麦克弗森（Guy McPherson）对我来说似乎有点疯狂，但他仍然是一位发表过论文的科学家，并且拥有大量经过同行评审的科学期刊文章 点击此处 和 点击此处，支持他的疯狂假设。尽管有他的假设，但请欣赏他的参考资料。你将在那里阅读几天！
3. nymag 有史以来最受欢迎的文章，引起气候活动人士对作者的愤怒谴责，已被仔细 此处注释。像麦克弗森一样，您将花几天时间阅读这些带注释的文章。
4. 我每月至少阅读的几篇博客 点击此处 和 点击此处.
5.并且不要忘记 蒂姆·加勒特。实际查一下他的期刊文章的pdf版并阅读，确实不错。可怜的家伙最近被迫否认自己的科学才能保住自己的工作，因为他所说的话让气候活动人士感到非常不安。而且，为了证实他有多聪明，游手好闲的“自由市场”家伙也讨厌他用经济术语解释文明的热机！ 🙂
“永远不要让真相妨碍一个好故事。”
―马克吐温
另一个咬灰尘。
“消失的冰川”
https://realclimatescience.com/
https://realclimatescience.com/disappearing-glaciers/
还有更多
首先，你的白痴“相关性不是因果关系”是一个谎言，特别是一个遗漏的谎言，经常被科学否认者散布。我将通过添加相关信息来纠正您，以使此类声明正确：
知道了？别再做那种蠢事了，孩子。接下来，二氧化碳导致变暖已经确定：
把因果关系放进你的烟斗里，然后抽它。
是的，冰河时代后地球变暖。打哈欠。
特朗普对二氧化碳排放造成的历史性变暖只字不提。
是的，有 城市岛屿热效应 这不是二氧化碳导致的变暖，也不是暴力的共产党试图强加给每个人的。
推荐的：
https://www.azquotes.com/author/14823-Donald_Trump/tag/global-warming
> 她有一段时间拒绝说话
他受了欺压，他受了苦难，他却不开口。
> 并让自己挨饿
当他禁食四十天四十夜之后，他就饿了。
> 真是笑话！
法利赛人也这么说。
否认 AGW 只是美国保守主义的一个独特口号。不过，这是一个非常有用的。热带海珀利亚 FTW！
自 1800 年工业时代开始以来，全球变暖就一直在发生。由于全球变暖，冰川融化并不奇怪。看看这张温度记录图，告诉我们 1920 年冰川融化到底有多令人惊讶？
你也去问问托尼·海勒吧。他会很困惑。
六个月后……
“格蕾塔是谁？”
“教育是人们忘记了在学校学到的东西之后剩下的东西。” 艾尔伯特爱因斯坦
24 年 2019 月 4 日 Greta 和 AOC |他们不知道的 XNUMX 个关键气候数字
气候变化永远不会与太阳粒子强迫相同。该视频是气候讨论中的一些关键数字，下面是我希望 Greta 和 AOC 点击的更多链接。
匿名（303）：
抱歉，你实在是太废话了，我知道回应是没有结果的。你根本不知道人类造成的二氧化碳与当前变暖有什么关系。没有什么！
是的，首先，气候变暖。我们不知道到底有多少，但地球一直在变暖。
其次，人类造成的二氧化碳确实会导致变暖。我们知道多少。它已经闻名一百多年了。这种变暖只是我们所报告的变暖所需的一小部分。气候科学家如何解释变暖的大部分原因？通过在气候模型中使用模糊因素。当然，出于显而易见的原因，他们不会称其为捏造因素，因为没有人会认真对待它们。他们称之为敏感性因素。它们是如何衍生的？通过运行模型并与（质量较差的）历史数据进行比较，并调整敏感度因子，直到模型的工作效果可接受。这称为曲线拟合。这些模型真的可以预测未来会发生什么吗？如果他们这样做，那将是偶然的，而且可能性极小。事实上，如果你观察任何对气候模型与预测（可追溯到 2 世纪 1980 年代）的公正研究，你会发现这些模型的记录很糟糕。
总而言之，气候科学家唯一拥有的就是这些计算机模拟。通过对数据进行曲线拟合的计算机模型来对非线性、耦合、混沌系统进行建模是荒谬的。任何做过混沌系统建模的人都知道这一点。
显然您从未参与过任何计算机建模。没有良好的科学证据可以将人类造成的二氧化碳与任何严重的全球变暖联系起来。
阿亚图拉乔治·索罗斯和先知曼领导下的全球主义第一清真寺的存在是为了破坏美国。全球主义神学的信仰之一是废除科学。盲目且毫无疑问地接受 AGW 神话是强制性的。
相信科学并否认基于信仰的 AGW 神话既不奇怪也不保守。这是每个有基本功、智力中等以上的人看了事实后都明白的。那些缺乏技能和智力的人投票给民主党。
和平😇
同时，对于生活在现实世界中的我们这些人来说，这是全球变暖骗局的全部内容：
http://www.investors.com/po…
“上周在布鲁塞尔举行的新闻发布会上，联合国气候变化框架公约执行秘书克里斯蒂安娜·菲格雷斯（Christiana Figueres）承认，环保主义者的目标不是拯救世界免遭生态灾难，而是摧毁资本主义。
“这是人类历史上的第一次，我们将自己的任务设定为在一定时期内有意改变自工业革命以来已经统治了至少150年的经济发展模式，”她说。
谈到新的国际条约，环保主义者希望今年晚些时候在巴黎气候变化会议上能够通过，她补充说：“这可能是我们赋予自己的最艰巨的任务，这是有意改变第一个经济发展模式人类历史上的时间。”
和
http://www.cfact.org/2017/0…
IPCC于2007年发布的第四次总结报告的主要作者奥特玛·埃登霍弗（Ottmar Edenhofer）坦率地表示了优先考虑。 他在2010年发表讲话时建议：“人们必须摆脱国际气候政策就是环境政策的幻想。 相反，气候变化政策是关于我们如何重新分配事实上的世界财富。””
感谢您提醒我们一个真实的、近期的、可测量的现象，称为“全球变冷”。尽管这 30 年的时间已经被遗忘，但“全球变冷”确实发生在大约 1945 年至 1975 年之间。早在 1970 世纪 XNUMX 年代，我还是一名新闻系学生时，就曾写过关于这一“令人震惊的”气温下降的文章。
奇怪的是，平均气温真正下降的同时，二氧化碳含量却迅速上升。没错：二氧化碳排放量在上升，但气温却在下降。三十年来。
那怎么来的？
痴迷于二氧化碳的热衷分子对此没有任何解释。但很明显，气候远比温暖主义者愿意承认的复杂和混乱。
这是对影响自然气候变化宏观周期的力量的引人入胜的科学解释。现代人对一种微量气体（CO2）的关注已经严重失调。
浪费时间
“IPCC”是什么鬼？
WTF 是粒子强迫吗？
如果您提供一些基本定义将会有所帮助
不错的地图！很好地展示了 罗蒙诺索夫海岭 俄罗斯潜艇在上面插了一面旗帜。 🙂 需要写一部小说，讲述两个幸存的人类群体，一个在北极，另一个在南极，像欧内斯特·沙克尔顿爵士在象岛上的 28 个人一样以海豹脂肪为生。但爱斯基摩人是女性！*结局应该是现实的——莱博维茨的颂歌 风格——其中一个乐队的领军闻到了，那是什么味道，煎蛋卷？他已经很多年没有尝过这种味道了，走进营地却发现根本没有火。但他还是闻到了那股淡淡的味道。**
*劳伦斯·亨尼。 （1970 年 23 月。）阿拉斯加爱斯基摩妻子交易的功能和局限性。北极。卷。 1，第 24 期，第 34-XNUMX 页
** 宾夕法尼亚州立大学。 （2005 年 1 月 3 日）。全球变暖导致大气中的硫化氢和二叠纪灭绝。科学日报。 2019 年 XNUMX 月 XNUMX 日检索自 http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/02/050223130549.htm
如果您想学习一些东西，请访问 SkepticalScience.com，它整理并组织了您刚才介绍的所有几种常见的科学抹黑策略。模型均已涵盖。涵盖了混沌理论。那里的所有文章都链接到真实的、经过同行评审的、已发表的科学期刊文章，你应该检查这些文章，而不是鹦鹉学舌地重复大烟草/大石油公关公司付费的业余否认主义网站上的废话。
总而言之，你只是一个普拉特（观点被驳斥一千遍。）
> 尽管这 30 年的时间已被遗忘，但“全球变冷”确实发生在 1945 年至 1975 年左右。
如果本世纪中叶的降温是记忆漏洞的话，科学文献中公开讨论了原因。你理解英语的能力是否被记忆洞了？
又一个小普拉特挨了屁股。 （观点被驳斥一千遍）
与 Greta Thunberg 相比，我更感兴趣的是美国国家海洋和大气管理局 (NOAA) 的气候学家关于多年来冰芯样本所证明的人为气候变化的警告。
她 16 岁。甘地喜欢年轻的她们。
https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/ezj3km/gandhi-was-a-racist-who-forced-young-girls-to-sleep-in-bed-with-him
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/oct/01/gandhi-celibacy-test-naked-women
不要喂码头木偶。尤其是驾驶一两辆 SUV 的人，他（或她）自己承认。
仅凭这一点，礼貌小姐就让世界失去了多少北极熊的生命？
然而，由于纯粹的傲慢而超越桑伯格小姐是一项应该得到认可的成就。
澳大利亚妇女是 弃之糟粕。我可以理解为什么明尼阿波利斯的索马里警察会惊慌失措，尽管拔枪的举动太过分了。它们都只会叫，不会咬人。
你又有点普拉特了。 （观点被驳斥一千遍）
> 特朗普什么也没说
错误的。你需要听听特朗普到底说了什么。特朗普是这样说的：
证明：
同样来自特朗普……
你很难踢刺。
你读过的科学是诱发焦虑的，而心理防御机制是 改善你的死亡率显着性 是否认。我对你有感觉，伙计。
她是阿斯伯格，在气候变化危机中相当于当时的艾伦·库尔迪。而且令人讨厌1000倍。
胡扯。对一个重要且重要的现象（正如当时所声称的那样）的一些提及并不能改变这样一个事实：“全球变冷”是由当时的“专家”（和精英媒体）大肆宣传的，而且同样的现象也已被广泛传播。今天基本上被遗忘了。这很能说明问题。
1975年，作为一名新闻系学生，就读于大学。在科罗拉多州，我亲自采访了 NCAR（国家大气研究中心）主任 Stephen Schneider。他和当时的所有其他专家一样，完全支持“全球变冷”。值得注意的是，施奈德或其他人在此期间都没有声称，在 1945 年左右开始的经济衰退之前，气温已经上升了一个世纪。
要么“全球变冷”在当时是一个大肆宣传的骗局，要么有证据表明施耐德和其他气候学家过去和现在都无法预测和完全理解塑造我们星球不断变化的气候的多种力量。
尽管如此，当时报道的全球平均气温下降据称比现在所声称的更为不祥。为什么“专家”总是犯错？
奇怪的是，在今天出现的许多气温图表中，从 1945 年到 1975 年往往没有明显的降温现象。但这与这个时期所声称的完全相反。这对我来说意味着许多气候“事实”正在被扭曲和“修改”。
值得记住的是，在这个时代，由媒体主导的炒作“全球变冷”的运动得到了科学家和媒体的配合。同样的勾结再次上演。
PS-仅仅因为有人提出了可笑的说法，即全球平均气温三年来的下降完全是由于“气溶胶排放”，并不能证明这种说法是正确的。它无法被证明，也无法被证伪。这是一个理论。但将一个人为因素归因于一个巨大、复杂和混乱的系统是一个明确的危险信号。经过几十年断断续续的气候研究，我逐渐意识到 没有单一因素本身 决定温度。只有傻瓜才会相信。
你的教条主义信仰表明了非凡的天真和意识形态的承诺。
你需要帮助，朋友。
（格蕾塔）“正是她两极分化才受欢迎”
大错特错了。事实上，格蕾塔之所以受欢迎，正是因为疯狂的德国人（他们崇拜BO/BC/HC行走的土地），这些疯狂的德国人，德国是人类精神病的中心，这些德国疯子将她提升到了圣人地位，当然，一位 GS 的祝福。
德国是万恶之源：共产主义（是的，我们知道马克思是希伯来人）海洛因、心理学、反法西斯主义、绿色疯狂，德国畸变的名单很长，当然因为他们是左派傻瓜，媒体永远不会触及这个问题。
关于格蕾塔：她疯了，无可救药。
1973年以来一直是Authenticjazzman“ Mensa”的资格，经过机师培训的美国陆军兽医，也是专业爵士乐艺术家。
地球气候史。
塞拉利昂的许多人都缺乏双手，因为该国狂热的儿童兵切断了他们的联系
“你的教条主义信仰表明了非凡的天真和意识形态的承诺。” – 他是一个令人讨厌的巨魔。他是犹太人的概率 P>0.8。
“科学是对专家无知的信念”理查德·费曼（Richard Feynman）
3 年 2019 月 XNUMX 日 正式发布 – GRETA 是一个项目
格蕾塔作为一个人，本意是好的，但格蕾塔作为黑手党精英的一个项目，还太年轻，不知道宣传机器有多么险恶。
全球变暖骗局是否是“制造”出来的？
来自铁山的报告：关于和平的可能性和愿望，1967 年出版
> “专家”（和精英媒体）大肆宣扬“全球变冷”这一事实
10 年至 1964 年间，只有 1979% 的科学文献预测了气温变冷。 （Peterson，2008）你正在小题大做。
我喜欢打你们这些小普拉特（观点被驳斥一千次）。我开始怀疑你是否喜欢它。
好帖子。 这是我也分享的另一个信息丰富的视频。
28 年 2016 月 XNUMX 日天气不是气候！
不，天气不是气候……即使外面很暖和。 但如果你的生活中有一个气候崇拜者坚持不这样做，这里有一些关于全球变暖和模糊定义的“极端”天气的事实，你可以用它们来谈谈一些道理。
这不太正确。你需要观察特朗普所说的结果。
有两种不同的策略在起作用。
___
#1——特朗普经常说一些话来引发特定的反应。
Antifa 的法西斯冲锋队希望特朗普站在他们一边吗？这样的言论一定会像一桶冰水一样击中他们。
提供看似达成一致的言论是一种挫伤士气并在疯狂左派和更疯狂左派之间制造裂痕的策略。
___
#2——从内部进行讨论比从外部进行讨论更容易。例如：
特朗普可以公开宣称中国是增长最快的污染国。因此，任何有关“气候变化”的计划都必须包含可执行的二氧化碳排放限制。这当然与AGW神话神学家想要的恰恰相反。科学否认者希望限制美国而不是中国。
如果你想要一个更具体的例子。通过将“枪支管制”作为一个话题，他成功地阻止了每一项反第二修正案的立法。唯一值得注意的变化是“碰撞库存”禁令。而且，这种设备充其量只是一种新奇的设备，而在最坏的情况下，如果它导致过热故障，就会带来人身安全风险。
和平😇
看起来是这样。
他的风格很有趣。显示出某种性格类型。性格也。
大多数“进步主义者”都属于这种类型。
好。
是的…..
特别
和
或者，简单地说，“自私的伪君子”。特别是后来。
> 特朗普谈可笑的“全球变暖”
https://tinyurl.com/AlarmistTrump 哎哟！ 回到你身边！ 🙂
那个小女孩不是长着一张纯粹邪恶的脸吗？
> 希望限制美国而不是中国。
你还能读书吗？我在评论#48中写道：“我投票给特朗普，实际上认为他从京都撤军对美国有好处。”
通过你那厚厚的小无边帽也能明白这一点：“能量守恒没有帮助。” [我在评论 #2 中写的内容]
如果你写信回应我，至少回应我所写的内容。听起来公平吗？
ps 我自己制造了 AR-15，不需要你的枪支解释。而且我在靶场比赛中得分比你高。去旋转你的陀螺而不是试图在这里旋转东西。
> 显示出某种性格类型。 |这是怎么回事DOC？你学的是在线专业吗 苏联精神病学 学习？ 字符 ？事实上，我可以回答什么物理量可以在全球范围内融化冰的问题。
我会问你：在全球范围内融化冰的物理量是多少？你有足够的品格诚实地回答吗？
这个政府浪费了我们“可悲者”的财富，而你们却如此间接地怨恨。
没有人会自愿给你们这些绿色骗子一分钱。
同样，
新鲜空气。
我以为我会得到这样的回应。这是真正的信徒的典型特征，他们不能——或不愿——讨论科学的实际内容。
该网站纯粹是宣传。
一个问题。请用您自己的话告诉我，科学究竟包含哪些内容表明人造二氧化碳是当前变暖的一个重要原因？
无需技术解释。这不是一个棘手的问题。任何像您一样觉得有必要对此滔滔不绝的人都应该能够回答这个简单的问题。
还有，请不要把我指向一个胡说八道的网站。我熟悉该网站已有一段时间了。自 90 世纪 XNUMX 年代初以来，我一直在研究非线性、耦合、混沌系统的计算机模型。您在这方面有什么经验吗？
或者，你只是在吹烟？
非常感谢，我会保留您引用的链接并尽可能阅读！
我想他也是同性恋的理论已经被抛到九霄云外了！
全球蜂拥而至……人口增长是未来预计变暖情景中的一个因素，并且由于许多环境/社会原因而本身就令人担忧。
奥尔多·莱奥波尔多（Aldo Leopoldo）、加勒特·哈丁（Garrett Hardin）是几十年前许多人渴望的环保主义者领袖之一，当时我们就知道对景观和人类经历造成了有害影响。
当我们享受一场可预见的后果的盛宴时，一切都没有改变。
全球变暖活动人士最好考虑一下自己缺乏洞察力，较少关注人口问题，而不是因对气候变化缺乏行动而告诫世界。
我确信，在其他“研究”领域也会有类似程度的共识，而这些领域都是由假装冷静的江湖骗子主导的。营养学、心理学、神学……
有多少营养“科学家”支持 Ancel Keys 关于膳食饱和脂肪与心血管疾病之间联系的假设？或者盐摄入量和动脉粥样硬化之间的联系？在无症状人群中，膳食胆固醇和血清胆固醇之间的联系以及通过他汀类药物降低血清胆固醇的必要性？
有多少比例的心理学家支持同性恋是一种精神疾病的观点？
有多少比例的圣经“学者”接受摩西、亚伯拉罕、出埃及记等的历史性？
有多少医疗机构拒绝接受塞麦尔维斯在太平间解剖后接生前洗手的禁令？
有多少比例的地质学家等拒绝了韦格纳的构造板块理论？
有多少比例的政治理论家拒绝米塞斯对社会主义的批评，认为其内部不一致？
历史上充满了某些学科中的统治集团以独裁方式利用其权威的例子。这主要是因为权威职位会吸引有独裁倾向的人。当他们的学科诡计的核心原则冒着被揭露为虚假的风险时，他们的反应就像所有独裁者一样：将异端扔到外部的黑暗中，并继续传播现有的正统观念，直到现任领导层“过时”。正如马克斯·普朗克（Max Planck）打趣的那样（转述）：真理一次推进一场葬礼。 （这并不是说愚蠢和错误的思想只会持续一代人；它们在先前权威人物的直接学术后代中持续存在，但它们的普遍性被减弱，因为这些思想从外部的黑暗中渗透回来）。
.
气候“科学”尚未充分接受对“Cochrane Collaboration”品种的强有力的独立审查；一旦它被确定为与心理学和营养“科学”相一致，像你这样的人就应该被识别和征用，你的财产应该重新分配给那些目前正在为无数白痴的千禧年自慰幻想买单的人，他们的主要动机是与真理发现无关，一切都与政治和自身利益有关。
气候邪教的研究成果与埃利希的“人口炸弹”胡言乱语，以及至少可以追溯到马尔萨斯的鸡小胡言乱语（他的假设在他落笔之前已经被证明是错误的三代人......粮食生产）已经超过了人口增长，并且已经超过一个世纪了）。
正如我之前指出的：问问谁作为本科生进入“气候科学”。他们是同一类进入神学院的人：真正的信徒。而且他们绝对不是高中毕业的最聪明的孩子。
这里的问题是左右两边的反科学元素。 右派有许多气候变化否认者，而左派则反对核武器，这阻碍了唯一有效的解决方案。
34个发达国家的科学院认为气候变化是无可争议的。 尚不清楚的是时间范围以及善恶效果之间的平衡。 对于那些认为没有好的效果的人，他们还没有考虑过地球上最大的两个国家，俄罗斯和加拿大，这两个国家都会因全球变暖而受益匪浅。 另一个可能的好方面是作物的CO2施肥（以及地球上所有其他植物的生命）。
如果我们担心二氧化碳水平（没有必要惊慌，对不起格蕾塔），那么解决方案是显而易见的，而且几十年来一直摆在我们面前……核能。核能不产生二氧化碳，事实上，根本不产生不受控制的废物。过去人们相信核能发电“太便宜而无法计量”。这是基于基础物理学的。核反应堆使用的“燃料”的能量密度是化石燃料的一百万倍。由于“安全”要求无休止地提高，价格已经提高到了疯狂的程度，但即便如此也是有道理的。
核能确实是提高全球每个人生活水平的关键，不仅是生活在能源丰富的生活方式中的舒适的瑞典人，而且还包括每个人。 不会造成环境破坏。 能量无限，一切皆有可能。
我认为作者误导了。最初的儿童十字军是由患有精神疾病的成年人利用理智正常的儿童发起的。儿童气候运动是由非常理智（尽管愤世嫉俗）的成年人利用患有精神疾病的儿童发起的。
她有精神病，仅此而已。但那些把她放在那里的人都没有精神，所以傀儡师必须像神智正常的罪犯一样被处决。
可爱的图表。颜色不错。一切都没有任何意义。没有人“预测”全球变冷。正在测量全球变冷。这是真的。这是一种趋势。然后这种趋势在 70 年代末结束。
正如我提到的，我作为科罗拉多大学新闻系的学生写了关于“全球变冷”的学期论文。我研究了这些现象。当时存在经过科学测量的“不祥”指标。是的，“冰河时代”这个词在精英媒体和科学家中广泛流传。我对 NCAR 主任史蒂芬·施奈德 (Stephen Schneider) 进行了详细采访，他对“全球变冷”的长期（潜在）影响表示担忧。
全球变冷成为《纽约时报》、《华盛顿邮报》、《洛杉矶时报》、《新闻周刊》、《波士顿环球报》和《时代》杂志等的头版新闻。我亲眼所见、读到了这些危言耸听的故事。这些头条新闻（以及“专家”的媒体喋喋不休）是我选择“全球变冷”作为我高年级学期论文主题的原因。
如果“绝大多数”科学论文都预测“变暖”，那么这些媒体头条新闻（来自气候专家）就不会如此普遍。但他们确实是。全球变冷恐慌引发了许多世界末日的预测，就像现在人为造成的二氧化碳恐慌一样。但请记住，简单的水蒸气是比二氧化碳更普遍的温室气体。
至于全球变暖，当时被称为“温室效应”。 “全球变暖”一词是在七十年代末平均气温下降结束之后才出现的。这可能就是为什么温暖派倾向于从 70 年左右开始测量大气温度。这个日期大约是北半球降温的最低点。聪明的。具有欺骗性。
与此同时，让我们希望人类找到一种方法来遏制目前世界范围内正在发生的大量森林砍伐，更不用说正在发生的不可逆转的巨型动物灭绝（由狩猎和栖息地破坏引起，而不是天气变暖）。
不可否认，这些问题是严重和现实的。我们知道他们的原因。
> 我们这些被你隐晦地憎恨的“可悲者” | 这很奇怪！我投票给了特朗普；这会让我成为一个自我憎恨的可悲者吗？哈哈！天哪，我现在感觉就像罗恩·乌兹一样，被疯子贴上了自我憎恨的犹太人的标签。当你四处给别人贴上自我憎恨的标签时，仅仅因为你对他们所说的话一团糟，这让你成为了疯子之一。 > 你绿了 | 什么是绿色的，我的约翰迪尔？阅读我的评论 #48，我有多辆汽油/柴油 SUV、卡车和玩具。无论如何，如果我可以问你，你认为什么可以融化全球范围内的冰？有足够的勇气诚实回答吗？
ps 别让太阳在你的愤怒中落下，伙计。
一句话总结：否认者 NPC 大声喊道“科学家很糟糕！”
所以现在轮到你做科学研究了，因为世界上其他人都搞砸了，但是 你。 欧比旺·克拉托比，你是我们唯一的希望！从回答这个问题开始： 在全球范围内融化冰的物理量是多少？ 迫不及待想收到您的回复！
这就是所谓的胎儿酒精综合症。
好吧，我所知道的是，只要她不是瑞典人，她就不会成为瑞典穆斯林暴徒轮奸的受害者。
> 纯粹的宣传。 | 不，科学不是宣传。你只是一个否认者 NPC，大喊着“科学家坏了！” > 一个问题。 | 你拒绝对这样的问题做出任何事实性的回答，因为你太胆小了，甚至无法回答一年级科学课的问题：
是什么在全球范围内融化冰层？
资料来源：Jim Pettit 每月更新的 PIOMAS“北极海冰死亡螺旋”图表
对普京言论的不诚实解释。
伙计们。那些进入“全球……气候……无论如何……”的内容请跳过/忽略。
只是好奇。
那个组合出于显而易见的原因，恕我直言，这在俄罗斯人中极为罕见。
或任何东欧东正教人士。
您认为这种情况在未来会发生改变吗？
“这里的问题是左翼和右翼都有反科学分子。右翼有许多否认气候变化的人，而左翼则反对核武器，这阻碍了唯一有效的解决方案。
的确。这两派人士实际上都不在乎发生什么。左派只对美德信号感兴趣，而右派只是不想让左派获得另一点。
你提到核电。还有一个重大遗漏；没有人考虑过我们可以采取什么措施来抵消全球变暖；例如，我们可以种植植被，或者我们可以将化学品倾倒到海里。这一切都是为了以某种方式保护地球，使其保持原始和完美。
好吧，首先，现在有点晚了；这个老女孩在几千年前就失去了她的樱桃。其次，对于 70 亿人来说，没有人对步行 7 英里去市场非常感兴趣，这是不可能发生的。试图消除我们对地球的影响是荒谬的。我们要影响它；我们需要考虑如何管理这种影响。
但这是否会扰乱格林的力量——他们的要求纯粹是徒劳的？不——他们所关心的只是祝贺自己的美德，因为无论如何船都会继续下沉。至于右派，他们希望幻想不会发生任何影响。
......当然（打哈欠）像往常一样，我们绝对不会摆脱困境。所发生的一切就是退化将变得明显，并且 然后 我们必须采取激进的措施来拥有一些东西——当我们现在就可以采取行动时，不必做任何真正繁重的事情，并且拥有更多。
使自己成为一个适当的句柄，以便我们可以跟踪您的评论历史记录。
你写的，我什至引用了：
我对你所写的内容的回应是：
准确回复您所写的内容有何不公平？
_____
你认为基督徒为什么要旋转陀螺？这是一个反问句。
我们明白。作为一名虔诚的穆斯林，区分一种异教徒和另一种异教徒对你来说是不可能的。你试图用你自己的 PRATT 行为来指责人们。您的宗教信仰的另一个明显迹象。你是塔基亚（Taqiyya）的践行者，这是穆斯林欺骗异教徒的戒律。
你为什么不回到德黑兰的宗教学校并背诵你的撒旦诗句呢？你在这里所获得的一切只是让自己难堪并提供喜剧效果。
和平😇
> 简单的水蒸气 |又一个普拉特（观点被驳斥一千遍）
这就是事情，我希望你能做到 不能 接受科学的事实证据。你只相信任何被证伪的东西 冰河时代来临！ 叙述你想要的，因为你是一个超级聪明的人 记者。 无论如何，科学永远不会改变你对世界如何运作的看法。随着时间的推移，当全球变暖的后果变得更加严重时，你的认知失调就会加剧，我会想起你并轻笑一声。
但如果你的废话是事实的话，提到的冰川就会消失。
他怎么认识我前任的？
LOL
冰河时代过后，气候变暖。所以呢？
特朗普没有提到二氧化碳。哎呀！
LOL
特朗普对二氧化碳只字未提。
当然，冰河时代之后地球总是变暖。
她可能会出现在电影《玉米之子 II》中
没有人认为气候没有变暖。问题是——大部分情况是什么造成的？
我仍在等待您回答我的一个非常基本的问题，即实际科学的内容表明人造二氧化碳是一个重要原因。
或者，正如我所问的——你只是在吹烟吗？
你再一次试图向我们喷烟。
再说一次，据我所知，没有人会争辩说没有变暖。
现在，要么让我们知道你确实了解这种变暖的情况，要么就别再胡言乱语了。
我之前的评论（#96）的附录：
耸人听闻的全球变暖预测并未发生——它过去和现在都只是一个骗局。
独立 – 20年2000月XNUMX日
降雪现在已成为过去
https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2015/11/snowfalls-are-now-just-a-thing-of-the-past-the-independent.pdf
全文：
最新的全球变暖骗局，释义为：十二年后世界将毁灭。
这是Unz网络。她的长相太像雅利安人了，不可能是纯粹邪恶的面孔。
你当然是正确的。 1970 年代全球变冷文章的详细列表可以在这里找到：
http://www.populartechnology.net/2013/02/the-1970s-global-cooling-alarmism.html
你想打赌 Denier303 进入完全发牢骚的 PRATT 模式并且甚至不会看链接吗？他显然还不够成熟，无法意识到自己在每一点上都被击败和揭穿。
和平😇
浏览这个帖子我发现你是人造的信徒（注意：这个形容词应该 时刻 被包括在内）气候变化，与气候变化否认者作斗争（与“大屠杀”使用的语言相似可能不是偶然） - 好吧 - 继续传播这个词：尝试说服尽可能多的人，就像你喜欢那个人一样 -气候变化是真实存在的，并且对人类的长远未来构成了具体的风险——努力让他们改变生活方式，以减少他们个人对这一现象的影响。
但事情是这样的：不要试图使用或支持使用政府的强制力来告诉我能做什么和不能做什么，不合理地限制我的生活方式选择，或增加我的税收负担。
并停止以“匿名[303]”的身份发帖——用你的大脑想出一个绰号；你将同样是匿名的。
MKUltra 项目：中央情报局的精神控制行动。
塔基亚？ 那是什么，某种适合外卖的中式鸡肉菜肴吗？是这样发音的吗？施洛莫，你看起来对奇怪的外国东西很熟悉。但我确实知道什么物理量可以在全球范围内融化冰！你？
也许不是，也许雅利安人毕竟是纯粹的宇宙邪恶。
谢谢，我真的需要看看所有这些。
“因为没有事实，就没有真理。只是要操纵的数据。我可以给你任何你想要的结果。它对你来说有什么价值？因为没有对错，也没有对错。我晚上睡得很好。没有羞耻，没有解决办法，没有悔恨，没有报应。只是卖T恤的人。只是有机会参加可悲的小马戏团。” “在真主的花园里”。唐·亨利.
将二氧化碳减少到工业革命前的水平。
希望在不断变化的气候中
撒哈拉曾经更小，更绿。
派葛丽塔去植树。
97% 的付费科学家。
许多退休专家不同意 97%。
你怎么能在读到“模型”这个词的同时，仍然断言它所支持的猜想是事实呢？你是反科学的典型代表。
热量，就像太阳传给地球的热量一样。
您所缴纳的税款用于寻找您所承认的全球变暖原因的答案。不妨让你的钱花得值：
•气候变化的原因
https://climate.nasa.gov/causes/
如果您是自由主义者并且不喜欢从政府来源学习，那么总是有伊森·西格尔（Ethan Siegel）博士。天体物理学家、作家和科学传播者，在多所大学教授物理学和天文学：
• 全球变暖最简单的解释
https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2019/01/02/the-simplest-explanation-of-global-warming-ever/
两者都不长。两者都读。哦，你们这些热切求知的人，哪一位能更好地解释这一点？
这需要实际的思考，也许还需要一点个人创造力；他或她似乎缺乏的品质。
所以，匿名者（303），你实际上对你所谈论的内容一无所知。
你无法回答一个非常简单的问题，即当前变暖的主要原因是什么。
难怪你这么讨厌。你躲在你所施展的所有烟雾和镜子后面。
当然。作为穆斯林，你也会因为自己的谎言而撒谎。 ……你的塔基亚练习就是你撒谎的原因。 (1)
既然撒谎被发现了，你真的应该放弃了。
____
当然，您的穆斯林信仰确实解释了为什么您如此喜欢仇恨网站“怀疑科学”。这是网站创始人的照片，穆斯林想要从男人身上得到的一切：(2)
你真的应该回德黑兰的家。你在这里的任务失败了。
和平😇
_____
(1) http://www.freedompost.org/islam/deception/common-taqiyya-or-islamic-lies-and-deceptions-by-muslims.html
(2) http://www.populartechnology.net/2012/03/truth-about-skeptical-science.html
我读了她的话，认为她在谈论瑞典的移民政策。
她看起来也像阿尔弗雷德·罗森伯格的私生女。
科学意义上的“共识”这个词是不科学的。
这些二氧化碳废话背后的力量是社会工程师和疯子。
科学源于问题，科学永远不会“解决”。
尝试让他们改变生活方式？我在这篇文章中多次说过，我拥有多辆汽油和柴油动力车辆以及各种玩具。显然你没有读到我写的第一条评论。让我回忆一下：“节能没有帮助。” [评论#2]
我希望任何人接受全球变暖科学的唯一原因是在制定民族主义政策时变得更加可信，例如禁止移民，我已经多次声明或暗示，从评论＃3开始。让我重复一遍。我希望你接受气候变化科学 在制定民族主义政策（例如禁止移民）方面更加可信。
大多数人都认为，“民族主义无法解决气候变化问题。如果你想成为21世纪的民族主义者，你就必须否认这个问题。”这是来自这里的引用： https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change_denial#Nationalism
我衷心不同意。我认为气候变化可以成为民族主义政策的推动力，首先是禁止移民。
请阅读我的评论#3。没有人对此发表任何评论。 Unz上禁止移民的评论怎么可能没有一条评论呢？有点奇怪！也许这里评论的每个人实际上都是受索罗斯资助、欢迎移民、热爱黑人的自由主义者，我不知道。
所以，更多的雾里看花。关于我的想法。你对真正的科学包含什么一无所知。你所能做的就是继续复制/粘贴。
你对此有如此强烈的信念，但却完全不理解，这难道不困扰你吗？
顺便说一句，这更像是一种宗教信仰，而不是任何基于知识的信仰。
不过，我会给你信用。您确实知道如何剪切和粘贴。
所以，你向每个人证明，你实际上并不是在寻求知识，即使知识是用勺子灌输给你的，而只是扮演少年“回答问题！”的角色。游戏。太悲伤了。
哦，多么丰富多彩的图表啊。我很好奇他们如何声称在过去 40 年里每个月都如此准确地观测和测量了北极总冰量，并访问了他们的网站。他们不能、没有、也没有；这只是另一个“模型“，容易出现错误和不正确的假设。
还记得几年前那些记者前往南极海洋地区进行纪实研究，旨在“证明”全球变暖假说不是骗局，结果却被冰雪笼罩吗？多么尴尬。据报道，多年来，南极洲的冰块一直在增长。显然，您突出显示的可爱图表甚至懒得将北极冰模型与南极冰块进行比较。
无论如何，海平面并没有上升，因此北极模型中据称正在减少的冰块只是转移到了其他位置，或者空气中存在更多的水蒸气或地面上有更多的水，或者所有这些的组合如果模型中的假设成立的话，就有可能。
然而，全球变暖骗局声称任何温度变化主要是由人类通过排放二氧化碳的机制引起的，尽管太阳能和火山活动（包括水下火山活动）在影响全球气候方面发挥着更为重要的作用，那么又如何呢？该图实际上应该证明吗？
.
疯。
愤怒的犹太人综合症。
一个可以追溯到石器时代的地中海神话。
干得好，全球范围内的冰融化需要全球变暖，或者正如科学家所说的那样，全球变暖。您现在正走在获得更多科学知识的道路上。额外奖励：该网站准确量化了多少：
全球变暖速度为每秒 4 颗广岛原子弹
https://4hiroshimas.com/
如果你仍然好奇，我建议你问自己这个问题， 为什么 这些额外的热量是否被我们的星球保留了？
这将为您提供来自一位非常老的科学极客的深刻见解。 12 年 2017 月 20 日 还有 XNUMX 篇新论文将太阳强迫与气候变化联系起来
80 年已有 2017 篇太阳与气候论文 自 2014 年以来，已有 400 篇科学论文证实太阳与气候之间存在密切联系
http://notrickszone.com/#sthash.CjwNNE2y.UlXHWu4j.dpuf
2 年 2019 月 XNUMX 日太阳警告，惊人的天气/科学新闻
每日太阳、地球和科学新闻
> 你怎么能在读到“模型”这个词的同时，仍然断言它所支持的猜想是事实呢？你是反科学的典型代表。
正如约翰·冯·诺依曼所说：“科学并不试图解释，它们甚至几乎不尝试解释，它们主要是 制作模型设立的区域办事处外，我们在美国也开设了办事处，以便我们为当地客户提供更多的支持。“
我知道，我知道，约翰·冯·诺依曼是 “海报儿童” 这些邪恶的白人老头压迫你，所以他一定是 rayciss 或 sumfin，因为这与你晚上辛勤工作的色彩研究科学家相冲突。
这再次证明了我的观点，我在这条评论中多次说过，愚蠢党中智商较低的一半在科学对话中的行为就像纽约英语文学教室里的野性黑人一样具有破坏性，仅仅是因为他们无法理解它。
这么简单的问题都找不到答案，你会不会感到有点尴尬？
我看得出您知道如何复制和粘贴。我必须假设你知道谷歌搜索？？？
我正在指出气候科学家一直隐藏的肮脏的小秘密。您显然不知道这个非常简单问题的答案。而且，您无法通过 Google 搜索找到它。难道你不知道这是为什么吗？
难怪你这么讨厌。您非常不想与任何真正了解该主题的人进行理性讨论。
是时候爬回你的岩石下面了。
是的。
我们有很多充分的理由反对大规模移民和支持基督教民粹主义，但又不撒谎来推动否认科学和基于信仰的 AGW 神话。
丹尼尔[303]的实际动机很难理解。另一方面，由于他的命令来自阿亚图拉基尔曼尼亚，普遍存在的语无伦次并非史无前例。
和平😇
Anaymous(303)，看起来你正在照镜子。
事实证明，当谈到您对 CAGW 的信仰时，您只不过是一个宗教狂热分子。
我敢打赌，你认为这就像在桶里射鱼一样——直到有人指出，你不仅无法解释你对 CAGW 的信念背后的基础是什么，而且你甚至无法通过 Google 找到它搜索！！
你太笨了以至于不会为此感到尴尬吗？
棘手的问题。这个谈话是否分散了人们对我们生活在岩石上并且正在慢慢耗尽石油的认识的注意力。读到这篇文章的人不会在他们的一生中看到任何气候变化的影响。
没有观察？哈哈！你完全是在撒谎。再去读一下网站。
是的，数据包含在模型中，因为这正是科学所做的。正如约翰·冯·诺依曼所说：“科学并不试图解释，它们甚至几乎不尝试解释，它们主要是 制作模型设立的区域办事处外，我们在美国也开设了办事处，以便我们为当地客户提供更多的支持。“
你是我观察到的另一个例子，即愚蠢党中智商较低的一半在科学对话中就像一群野性黑人在英语课上一样具有破坏性，因为他们无法像 智商较高的一半.
我认为像《京都议定书》这样关于全球变暖的全球主义精英政策是疯狂的。您对美国退出京都公约感到不满吗？
对此一无所知。
这些类型需要不断地强化他们的自我价值感。对他们来说，最好的方法就是……嗯……演讲 其他人，最好是“时尚”话题。 “喋喋不休的班级”中最新最热门的问题/主题/主题是什么。
而且……他们真的 讨厌 他们认为“未洗过”。也就是说，每个人的社会地位都低于其社会地位。
只要他们只能使用扩音器并且只是胡言乱语，他们就是无害的。
让他们掌权，你就会遇到严重的问题。
严肃的。
303 确实抗议很多，我想。看看较老的和较年轻的仙女木。东方冰芯数据。当然，地球正在变暖。北美上空一度有1-2英里厚的冰盖。过去海平面低了 300 英尺，高了至少 200 英尺。如果您能够摇摇晃晃地爬到山顶，请寻找圆形岩石。这意味着它曾经在水下。北美的沙漠曾经被水淹没。这就是为什么它是碱性的。据我所知，当时还没有SUV，也没有AC。就我个人而言，如果纽约、华盛顿、旧金山、洛杉矶、伦敦、特拉维夫、中国和印度的一半被水淹没，我会认为这是好事。把所有愚蠢的东西都洗掉。我确信我遗漏了一些东西。
你真的对蓝发 SJW 愤怒模式很满意！但是，在您乞求向您提供此类知识之后，您是否没有能力阅读一篇大约需要 4 分钟的文章，这难道不感到羞耻吗？
•气候变化的原因
https://climate.nasa.gov/causes/
•全球变暖最简单的解释
https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2019/01/02/the-simplest-explanation-of-global-warming-ever/
没什么隐藏的，就在那里。不过，请回到你的 SJW 愤怒模式，因为你无法阅读！哈哈
不存在气候紧急情况。正如下面的链接所示，数百名科学家同意这一说法。但让辩论开始吧。我喜欢不受约束的言论自由，你呢？
无论如何，现在肯定不存在气候灾难。我碰巧住在索一个非常炎热、干燥、荒凉的沙漠地区。由于人类的创新和规划，加州变得绿色美丽。太棒了！
现代人类现在可以在地球上的任何地方舒适地生活。就在一个世纪前，情况并非如此。
至于“气候变化”，事实上，未来几十年内气温可能会略有升高（确切原因未知），同时大气中二氧化碳含量略有上升。所以呢？这对植物（肯定）、大多数动物以及大多数人类来说都是一个福音。请记住，二氧化碳是植物性食物。这意味着更多的食物和更多的生命。毕竟，没有人知道地球的完美、理想的平均温度应该是多少。你？
还要记住，每年因寒冷天气而死亡的人数多于因炎热天气而死亡的人数。所以让我们拯救生命。
如果我们能够立即停止并人为地将地球正在发生的（自然的）气候变化稳定在目前的位置，生活将会精彩地继续下去；除了人口正在爆炸式增长（特别是在第三世界）这一顽固的事实之外，人类正在捕猎许多大型动物以致灭绝，原始的自然栖息地正在因人类砍伐森林和人为火灾而受到破坏。这些都是真实且不可否认的气候/环境问题。但这些实际的环境危机似乎对温暖主义社区不感兴趣。怎么会？
难道这和金钱、权力有关？这当然是可能的。
事实上，大多数植物和动物很容易适应温度和气候的适度变化。每年气候的季节性波动证明了这一点。
此外，在某一天，室外温度的变化通常会超过 50 华氏度。然而，这并没有杀死甚至损害大多数动植物。这是正常的。生物体非常坚韧且适应性强。
但请随意培养并享受涉及灾难性的神经紊乱 人为 “气候变化”。享受你未经证实的理论的乐趣。请记住，您和您的“专家”朋友不断推销的无数炒作和时间表仍然没有实现您的幻想。
你的“迫在眉睫的气候灾难”一直没有发生。
这难道不会让你感到一点点尴尬吗？
现在生态灾难的最后期限是多少？
请告诉我们什么时候会发生这种事。我想要一个约会，谢谢。
与此同时，不要把你的神经症强加给我们其他人。
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/sep/29/scientists-tell-un-global-climate-summit-no-emerge/
我认为这根本不难理解。他是一位宗教狂热分子（关于 CAGW——很可能还有其他事情），接受“大祭司”告诉他的信仰。他甚至无法理解那句老话：当你发现自己掉进坑里时，首先要做的就是停止挖掘。
通常情况下，我不会在这样的论坛上引诱某人。我会努力就这个话题进行冷静、理性的讨论。如果某人有点笨拙，我会尽力避免争论。但它们都很稠密——而且——令人讨厌，我总是控制不住自己。
我有一个简单的问题，什么时候气候才能得到拯救？在什么情况下你会认为气候再次“正常”，并且你会扔掉你那有趣的二氧化碳世界末日时钟？
换句话说，什么时候你会宣布胜利“万岁，我们拯救了气候”？
而且，为什么要为了5G而大量砍伐树木呢？根据杀伤网格规划者的说法，地球上不会有任何地方未被发现。
如果你想寻求赞美，那么， 你的自拍照很漂亮的牙齿！ 但为什么你如此竭力避免回答一个关于什么能融化冰的简单问题呢？对于一年级科学课的水平来说，这并不难。 是什么在全球范围内融化冰层？
https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/145439/okjokull-remembered
“请阅读我的评论 #3。”
为什么？你已经把自己定位为一个难以理解的白痴。
古英国马尔萨斯主义加上古英美末日论。
您的回复说明了有关您的所有信息！
这是一个最可信的解释。由于丹尼尔[303]仍然平庸且微不足道，因此可能不值得努力深入挖掘动机。
我必须把它留给你。由于该线程中的图形数量，我已经达到了技术限制，无法比平时提前渲染它。因此，这可能是我在该标题下的最后一篇文章。祝你好运…
和平😇
电磁辐射，例如微波辐射。
问题是，是什么原因造成的？太阳，和/或在大气中喷洒以增加电导率，与电离层加热器相结合，例如类似HAARP的装置，俄罗斯人称之为Sura，也称为Eiscat？
洋葱最新消息：
瑞典教会宣布格蕾塔·通贝里为耶稣基督的“继承人”
如果语言充满激情但文明，我会同意。
但是，仅从几篇文章来看：
真正的动机更多一点，怎么说呢，更黑暗。
我确实相信这很重要 识别此类类型，尤其是在未来的时期。
或者，在实际层面上：他们让你陷入……辩论……然后报告你。或者将其发布到某个地方。
仅仅是一个想法。
> 我有一个简单的问题，什么时候气候才能得到拯救？
不会的。正如我在第 2 条评论开始的四条不同评论中所写的那样，“全球变暖是不可阻挡的。”
> 什么时候你会宣布胜利“万岁，我们拯救了气候”？
理论上，如果全球变暖是可以阻止的，那么在地球气候超过“行星阈值”进入“内在反馈”（即正反馈循环）之前阻止它。这些引文是从评论 #21 和 59 中引用的一篇期刊文章中引用的。两条评论都有文章中的精彩插图，或者您可以单击并阅读它并查看此处的插图： https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1810141115
> 为什么要为了5G大量砍伐树木？
我不。你什么时候才能停止打你的妻子？
同意。
我的观点是：另类右翼人士应该对此类类型产生快速的“感觉”。
A 主题和语言的结合 应该触发“剪切并移动”。尤其是在工作场所、一些公共聚会等。
呵呵……我个人记得，在工作场所遇到麻烦是因为我确实在当时/地点表达了“未开明/未受过教育”的想法。承认，这件事发生在几年前，但我确实吸取了教训。也很幸运，因为人力资源经理是一个年龄/生活经历相似的人。而且，当时的气氛比较轻松。
现在……我确信我会被当场解雇。
仅仅是一个想法。
44（假）1966年有关天气和地球资源的世界末日预言
http://rafapal.com/2019/10/03/44-predicciones-apocalipticas-sobre-el-clima-y-recursos-planetarios-que-no-se-cumplieron/
> 但这些实际的环境危机似乎对温暖主义社区不感兴趣。怎么会？
怎么会？因为你是一个专门制造虚假叙述的撒谎的垃圾记者。我在谷歌上花了2.7秒才找到这个，这完全反驳了你的假新闻。
我并不赞同这一点，也没有真正读过它，我只是粗略地浏览了一下，以证明那位吹牛的记者是错的。再努力一点吧，伙计。您应该是一名记者，但您忘记了人们在网上以毫秒为单位进行自己的研究。哎呀。
是的，你无法阻止大自然的循环。
接下来的全球降温也将是不可阻挡的。
寒冷比炎热更成问题，寒冷可以消灭文明。
那么这个关于二氧化碳的谎言和白痴到底有什么模糊之处呢？
那么，我一定不能读书吗？我读了那些简单的链接。是的，这就是它们的本质——简单化。任何对气候科学有所了解的人都会对这些网站摇头。
我可能错过了，但我什至没有看到提到斯万特·阿伦尼乌斯这个名字。如果你不知道的话，他首先计算了二氧化碳含量增加对地球温度的影响。是的，二氧化碳 是一种温室气体。不幸的是，它只对当前气候变暖的说法起到了一小部分作用。
我会再问一次，尽管我确信你只会给出另一个自作聪明的答案，再次证明你对自己所谈论的内容一无所知。
我把它放在块引用中有帮助吗？
无需技术解释。如果你知识渊博 在所有，这将非常容易回答。
请不要向我发送任何更简单的废话链接。
我想我们可以深入探讨 co2 ppm 的细节以及其他深奥的论点。但是，你如何解释太阳系中的其他行星正在加热？也许是太阳？这是疯狂的言论。此时，为了缓解“全球变暖”，我们是否要以某种方式改变地球的轨道或公转？告诉我，明智的人们，你们将如何实现这一目标？我知道，给承诺涅槃的可疑实体更多的钱！我喜欢听杂技和科学胡言乱语。我强化了我的信念：人类几乎都是白痴。只要我们放弃这些权利和那些舒适，大爸爸或妈妈就会让一切变得更好，我们就会生活在永恒的幸福中。所有人都为我们的新世界气味欢呼！ PS，对于那些拥有计算机的人来说，请查找同行评审的恶作剧。我出去了。
彼得：
是的，完全同意。今天的左派把我吓坏了。历史是清楚的——而格蕾塔·桑伯格的使用是彻头彻尾的可怕。
我们都知道，钟摆回归只是时间问题。
格蕾塔，愚蠢的瑞典女孩，你怎么敢向大人说教，你这个愚蠢的16岁女孩，无知
，愚笨，被你自己的父母、你的学校和他们背后的金主利用
你连课都不上课，怎么敢教大人？？？ ，闭嘴，回学校去。受够你了。
你们会做得很好！很高兴知道特朗普受到所有关注的感觉，人们紧紧抓住他的每一句话，利用他们业余的在线精神病学技能来推测他的性格特征、动机、手的大小等等。我喜欢它！我在小组中留下了一个空位，供其他一些有进取心的专家加入，所以不要害羞！
> 接下来的全球降温也将是不可阻挡的。
抱歉，不会发生。即使太阳达到“大太阳极小期”（例如“蒙德极小期”），它也只会对人类造成的全球变暖产生最轻微的影响，如下图所示：
资料来源：太阳活动极小期对人为造成的全球变暖几乎没有任何影响
https://skepticalscience.com/grand-solar-minimum-mini-ice-age.htm
你断言人类无法影响自然是个傻瓜。仅仅因为过去气候发生了变化就声称人类不能导致全球变暖，就像仅仅因为森林火灾过去是自然发生的就说人类不能引起森林火灾一样。
我们需要的是，作为“纯粹的废话”，Thnmbellina 和 David Hogg 的变形序列。
最好是，它应该至少分为四个阶段，每个阶段有两个愤怒的面孔。
我知道怎么做，但没有时间。
这个结果没有多大意义，除了证明两个青少年怪胎的相似性，他们俩（我不确定霍格的情况是否如此）都设法避免了青春期。
有趣的事实：拇指姑娘的船通过空运运回欧洲。
机组人员同样选择飞回。我不确定，但非常怀疑，作为富有的瑞典人，他们乘坐的是牛舱。
假设拇指姑娘将在 Noo Yawk 表演，直到盛行风有利于相反方向的相同特技。
……或者也许是头等舱航班，或者乘坐某人的私人飞机。
真是进退两难啊！
嗯……这是一把好武器。或者工具。
他们知道自己想要什么。
为了实现这一目标，他们会不惜一切代价。 没什么.
这里有一个模式。这就是所谓的“主动性”。他们拥有它； “我们”不。他们行动； “我们”做出反应。
我想这就是“保守派”的意义所在。
在军事上，这被称为“防御”。军官学员在战术方面的第一课是：防守大多数时候都会失败。大多数时候，进攻获胜。即使防守获胜，也是通过反击。罪行。
事实上，我们不这样做。
即使在上述段落中的“防御”中，领导者也会知道“线”，其中防御变得“不退一步”或反击。红线。
“我们”不知道我们的那条线在哪里。
或者，实际上，30年前的左派现在是“顽固的种族主义者”。我的意思是……哈哈哈……切格瓦拉会怎么看待变性人、同性恋、同性婚姻和所有这些狗屎？这些……呃……“左派”会怎样对待他呢？大概把他关起来吧。或者更糟。
事实上，有道理。 “婴儿潮一代”真正想要的就是尽可能地享受他们在这个星球上的剩余日子。
“左派”（与真正的左派无关，但我们跳过这个……）知道这一点。
他们有主动性，不断推动……并获得……而“保守派”则慢慢退却。 经常.
为自己争取时间。享受他们的退休生活。他们赢得了……………………..
事实上，如果你是婴儿潮一代，这是一个很好的策略。
> 我什至没有看到有人提到斯万特·阿伦尼乌斯这个名字。
噢，糟糕。你在我的评论 #12 中错过了阿累尼乌斯！你怎么能错过呢？我相信你会给出另一个自作聪明的答案，再次证明你对自己所谈论的内容一无所知。
我崩溃了！没有人说我是白痴或反驳我的评论！也许只是我没有任何漂亮的图形来支持我的陈述。难道对那些令人尊敬的空洞言语的唯利是图的价值的活体解剖是缺乏真实性的吗？没有把握。难道胜利的沧桑和庸俗的热闹蒙蔽了人们的眼睛？可能吧。
“气候变化”狂热是反教会千禧年主义/弥赛亚主义/“唯灵主义”末日恐怖的“世俗化”卷土重来，这种恐怖周期性地震撼世界并养活所有革命者（平等主义、共产主义、无政府主义、法西斯主义、女权主义）、反“建制派的运动。帕尔乌斯/托洛茨基/文化大革命/反文化的“不断革命”。女性在这些运动中发挥了核心作用。
是的，“气候游行转变为罗马游行”是一种明显的可能性。请参阅#247：“瑞典教会在 2018 年的一条推文中宣布青少年明星气候活动家 Greta Thunberg 为耶稣基督的指定继承人，该推文在她在联合国发表演讲后重新出现：
“公告！该推文于 1 年 2018 月 XNUMX 日表示：“拿撒勒人耶稣现已任命了他的继任者之一格蕾塔·桑伯格。该账户由利姆汉斯教会运营，此前曾在推特上发表过几条气候激进主义的言论”。瑞典教会的大主教是乌普萨拉大主教——目前是瑞典第一位女大主教 Antje Jackelén！不要忘记，天主教神父是可恶的“虐待儿童者”（同时也是“反同性恋者”）和（同样严重的）“反女性者”。
您是联合国21世纪议程和2030年议程的推动者，也是一个世界政府！
或者上演核冬天。
核冬天到底发生了什么？它曾经和现在的气候变化一样严重。
https://fas.org/pir-pubs/risk-nuclear-winter/
另一座坦博拉山也会有所帮助。
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_Without_a_Summer
> 大多数时候，进攻获胜。即使防守获胜，也是通过反击。罪行。
确切地！右派有一条道路可以继续进攻，夺取气候科学的旗帜，并开始利用科学来实施禁止移民等民族主义政策。
但不，你称进攻为“疯狂”，因为你唯一知道的就是防守，失败者。
You can download a PDF copy of the article from the link attached to this comment
Good thoughts, peter. I can’t find anything at all to disagree with.
To anyone still reading, I can explain what the science actually involves. Since man-made CO2 only accounts for a fraction of the warming, it is assumed that the extra CO2 causes mainly water vapor to provide the majority. As the late Dr. Joanne Simpson of NOAA said, the science consists “almost entirely” of computer simulations. She commented (after retirement, of course) that everyone knew the fragility of those models. How do they make the models fit the poor quality historical data? They use what they call sensitivity factors. These are nothing but fudge factors, of course, and the parameters are determined by what the models need to fit the historical data. So, the physics is not understood. Actually, it is worse than that. Each model has its own fudge factor. So, in summary, climate modelers have no idea what causes the warming currently being seen. All they have are guesses.
Now, if I walked into a hedge fund office and said that I had a computer model of the coupled, non-linear, chaotic system they were trading, and it was fabulously profitable on the historical data, and that I had curve-fit it to that data, I would be laughed out of the place. The difference is that, in a hedge fund office, there is accountability! In climate modeling, that accountability is missing. And, of course, the climate scientists are not about to explain this to anyone – even if asked about it.
BTW, pointing this out on a site like ARS Technica will get you banned. Likewise on a site like Naked Capitalism. I would not even bother to try on any of the sites that dimwitted “journalist” linked to here.
97% of Soviet researchers once endorsed the science of Jean-Baptiste Lamarck and Trofim Lysenko, with the few deniers limited to marginal institutions in the country’s backwater east.
You seem to believe everything you read online that confirms one of your pre-conclusions. I’m not even sure what your point exactly is.
Does the article above (that you apparently haven’t read) definitively prove something dear to your heart?
Then what, pray tell, is it?
(More humans = hotter weather = less biodiversity?)
Let’s agree that human population growth should be controlled for obvious reasons. Resources are finite. Ecological habitats are fragile.
On the other hand, there is no reason to believe that rising human numbers 通过他们自己 will cause catastrophic anthropogenic global warming. That is your religious conviction, not mine.
I’m not sure what nugget of certifiable truth it is that you just stumbled upon, but I can tell you that I am not interested in reading any more politicized 预测 about future catastrophic ‘climate change’. You and you warmist buddies have lost all credibility on this subject due to your confident but wrongheaded prognostications.
The warmist track record on climate change should be an embarrassment, yet you and your fellow travelers seem to feel no shame. Why is this?
When a student does poorly repeatedly, that student generally receives an ‘F’. (Doesn’t that make sense?)
Anyway, I urge you to take your meds and climb to higher ground before the rising oceans swallow you up!
Yeah……………………….
As (small sample):
No wonder you get banned from every comment site, you’re parroting the fraudster Tim Ball’s garbage. He lies when he claims he’s a climatologist too.
Climate Myth — “Water vapour is the most powerful greenhouse gas” (Tim Ball)
https://skepticalscience.com/water-vapor-greenhouse-gas.htm
And then you start banging away at another PRATT (Point Refuted A Thousand Times), teh models, what, for the fiftieth time in this comment thread. If the models are so bad, how come they’ve proven so good?
分析：气候模型预测全球变暖的程度如何？
https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-how-well-have-climate-models-projected-global-warming
The track record of climate science is not embarrassing. You should actually consider the record. It’s analyzed here:
Everybody who says that we have only 10 years, or whatever the current lie is, forfeits their life and all their assets if they are wrong. In return, we will support them in luxury for the next decade.
有没有人？
烟草不会引起癌症——它可能确实会增加患某些癌症的机会。但它并不会导致全球变暖——就像人类没有导致全球变暖，但可能会稍微、非常轻微地加剧全球变暖一样。
Odd, I promoted “nationalist” policy in this comment section, including “prohibiting immigration.” Is your “find” function working on your computer. Or rather, do you need a primer on nationalism? Would that help alleviate your confusion?
Now Catch-22, I promote, because it’s a funny novel.
Your repetition of the “on a global scale” causes me to doubt that you know what the term “physical quantity” means.
However, I’ll tell you what physical quantity is required to change water from solid to liquid phase on 任何 scale: energy.
这就是为什么爱因斯坦无比聪明，尖叫着美国必须生产原子弹。
错误。
Just one of 178,000 hits on 学者.google.com with a search 吸烟+癌症+因果。 Took all of 5 seconds. Thanks for demonstrating what I’ve been saying all along, the Big Tobacco lies about “junk” science are just like the Climate Denier lies about “junk” science.
Energy, true. But a shady shyster like you will do anything to say what kind of energy it is, won’t you? LOL! Gee, is it electrical energy? Gravitational potential energy? Oh, wait, it’s HEAT! When can you be honest enough to tell us that heat, or another term, warming, is what melts ice? So we’ve got ice melting all over the world. That means it must be warming all over the world. So anyway, like pulling hen’s teeth, I finally got out of you that there is indeed global warming. Thanks buddy!
Now where ya reckon that extra warming is coming from? Al Gore with a propane torch? The friction of the gears in your head jamming? Or something else?
我非常同意你的评价。说得好。
这很滑稽。距离我住的地方几个小时的路程刚刚下了近 60 英寸的雪。去年，科罗拉多州的积雪量比前一年增加了 900% 以上。 2017年的积雪量比常年增加了300%以上。过去两年，内华达山脉东部部分地区降雪量创历史新高，猛犸象降雪量超过 900 英寸。由于积雪融化，优胜美地的泰奥加山口直到 4 年 2017 月 XNUMX 日左右才开放。过去几年里，惠特尼山一直是六月下旬的冬季攀登胜地，由于危险的、类似冬季的条件需要登山技术，因此死亡人数显着增加。
过去的几个冬天和春天，整个西部山区都非常美丽，因为我们下了很多雪。由于积雪，我们的水库已满，野火也很少。
这是对的。每个人体内都存在癌前细胞。外部力量——例如有问题的生活方式选择和/或习惯可能会加剧这些细胞从健康变成恶性。
有点。但可以工作。
Those who’ve paid attention to this thing since inception, a question:
I remember it started as “Global Warming”. I tried to follow it at the time but phased out soon when I recognized the agenda and related methods.
I did notice, later, shift to “Climate Change”.
对于我这种类型的人来说，知情人士是否会插话，告诉我这件事发生的时间、具体情况、如何发生以及到底是谁更改了名字？必须是一个人..团队。
非常简短的解释将不胜感激。
Yeah, those numbers truly are “funny.” The highest 2017 snowpack figure, in any month and in of the several regions of Colorado, is 247%, which was June in the South Platte Basin, as evidenced here:
科罗拉多州历史积雪百分比（按分水岭）
https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/co/snow/?cid=nrcs144p2_063325
And why didn’t you mention those 2018 numbers? Is that because only a single region for only a couple months barely managed to get above 90%?
想澄清一下吗？🕵️
There has been massive deforestation since the industrial revolution (and consequent explosion in the world’s population). Check out Europe, India and China pre-industrial revolution to the present. This is habitat loss for the world’s wildlife putting many species at risk.
“你怎么敢”应该是“她怎么敢”！
格蕾塔和 21 / 30 的“气候”议程一样都是骗子。
必须阅读..这里
https://climatechangedispatch.com/climate-change-civil-war-begins/
她有一个管家！
'有一个小秘密。向公众隐瞒了……格蕾塔·桑伯格有一名经纪人。一个一直陪伴在她身边并控制她的言行的人。
处理者是一位极端激进的德国绿色环保主义者，名叫路易莎-玛丽·纽鲍尔（Luisa-Marie Neubauer）（如图）。她的薪水是由（当然）乔治·索罗斯资助的组织支付的。
不仅如此，我们知道（真正的科学）二氧化碳与行星温度没有任何关系，这是通过天体物理观测证明的，无论是在这里还是太阳系中的任何其他地方。大约十年前，温室气体效应就被理论和实验证明是错误的。人类无法控制地球，就这样。如果您相信，那就去火星或金星生活吧！
加时。嘿，亚兹曼。只想大声喊出来。我是一名打击乐手，演奏交响乐、爵士乐、摇滚乐、乡村乐、乡村摇滚乐、雷鬼乐等。大多数人忘记的东西比学到的还要多。现在，我喜欢Satchmo、《Sunny side of the street》、Peggy Lee、《Why don't you do right》。喜欢 Steely Dan，尽管那不是纯粹的爵士乐。干杯。影子知道潜伏在人们内心（和思想）中的邪恶。再会。
我的评论措辞错误，本意是强调该州降雪量高于平均水平的几个相关部分。
此外，较大的数字反映了今年早些时候发生的一些重大风暴后的积雪。过去两年，该州的几个地区受到了严重打击——主要是从甘尼森到拉夫兰分水岭的落基山脉中部。 2017 年 XNUMX 月，莱克县部分地区的气温下降了近 XNUMX 英尺。甚至更东边的丹佛，格雷山、托里山和比尔斯塔特等山峰在进入 XNUMX 月时都被新雪覆盖。
今年早些时候，包括春末的暴风雪在内，落基山脉中部、圣胡安和雪岭遭受了严重破坏。
这里有几个例子来驳斥你的说法，即没有任何一个地区的积雪量超过了上一年的 90%：
圣胡安的积雪量比平时多了近 200%。
“今年冬天圣胡安降雪约 38 英尺。大部分积雪仍然比正常情况多出近 200%，紧紧地贴在构成圣胡安山脉脊椎的大陆分水岭陡峭的一侧。”
https://coloradosun.com/2019/05/28/floods-lake-city-snowpack-colorado/
这是今年五月中旬《丹佛邮报》发表的另一篇文章（这篇文章发表后又引发了几场风暴）：
“毫无疑问，这是一个非凡的冬季，赛季后半程尤其活跃。截至周日，科罗拉多州的积雪量是 161-1981 年中值的 2010%。”
https://www.denverpost.com/2019/05/13/colorado-snow-totals-2018-19-winter-season/
向北进入怀俄明州，包括夏安和杰克逊在内的几座地铁都打破了过去几年的降雪记录。
2019 年 40 月杰克逊的降雪打破了 XNUMX 年来的 XNUMX 月份降雪记录。
“2019 年情人节，怀俄明州杰克逊镇打破了 35.3 月份降雪记录，当月降雪总量为 33 英寸。 1978 月份整个月的降雪量旧记录是 XNUMX 年的 XNUMX 英寸。”
https://www.mountainweather.com/2019/02/jackson-wyoming-breaks-february-snowfall-record/
2017年夏延的降雪打破了102年创下的1915年的纪录。我相信今年早些时候的另一场风暴已经打破了上述纪录。
“周四和周五在夏延举行的为期两天的破纪录活动中，春季雪一直在下”
https://www.wyomingnews.com/news/local_news/cheyenne-snowfall-breaks-record-set-in/article_892c1c0e-3d22-11e7-80e6-5fb125030652.html
也许天气模式正在发生某种程度的变化，就像莱德维尔曾经是科罗拉多州最冷的地区，现在是甘尼森一样。在我看来，这些变化说明了天气模式的轻微偏差，这表明“气候变化”确实是周期性的。
Your ridiculous criticism is completely unwarranted because my assertion, to which you took offense, was correct, in that it suggested that given data points (492 months) were not based on continuous monitoring and measurement but just a model with extrapolations from sporadic data.
Here is the quote from the link you cited, which states this:
So that pretty twelve-color polar graph is merely an attempted estimation, with an uncertainty they assume to be ±1350 cubic kilometers for October.
However, that was not even the main thrust of my comments. Your response expanded on relative trivia but failed to answer what this graph, assuming it were valid, is supposed to prove, given that you presented it as some kind of deep revelation – which in any case did not contradict anything I had written previously on this thread.
The graph most certainly does not prove that human generated carbon-dioxide causes global warming, which has remained an unproven and highly speculative supposition for so long that it has become a fantastic hoax and therefore deservedly contentious.
‘Another Mount Tambora would help as well.’
I can’t see any reason why such a response shouldn’t be at least seriously investigated. One could minimize the chances of fatal miscalculation by erring on the side of caution; i.e., try creating a relatively modest disturbance and see what effects are generated.
Not to give fuel to the denialists, but a related thought is what about all that coal we used to burn? The pea-soup fogs and the blackened stone buildings all over Europe…perhaps we were generating a cooling shroud without knowing it and now that we’ve mended our ways, global warming is the result. Certainly the appearance of global warming has more or less coincided with the disappearance of the classic air pollution of the late nineteenth/early-to-mid twentieth century.
On another tangent entirely, the failure to consider such active measures as artificial Tamboras is perhaps symptomatic of the flaw in the position of those who profess to wish to reverse global warming. They seem be interested not so much in halting global warming as in using it as a stick to force mankind in general to just stop consuming energy.
不会发生的。 Naučte Narozeninový dort - krok za krokem on-line kreslení tutoriál na narozeninovém dortu. Zdarma poučit pro karikatury, by CuteKittenLoveX na drawingnow.com. you could get affluent Americans to agree they can’t tool around in motor homes and Europeans to forgo long jet flights on their annual vacations. But all those billions of Third World peasants have been dreaming of the day they can afford a motor bike and no one’s going to tell them they have to keep walking seven miles a week to market after all.
If we actually want to fight global warming, we have to quit talking about what people 应该 do and think instead about what they 将 do. If you don’t want that Third world peasant generating more CO2 with a motorbike, etc, you’d best start figuring out how you’re going to get him an electric one.
你是个有趣的人。
You post ridiculous childish diagrams and peddle your site as gospel.
CO2 has nothing to do with warming whatsoever, only in your faked computer models and doctored diagrams.
You are making a fuzz about a fraction of 3% human CO2 contribution, which you claim would dramatically change the climate. It doesn’t.
Newsflash, the earth is not a green house, it is not a closed system, it can handle a fraction of 3% pretty well. CO2 is not a function of temperature, which you science illiterates claim it to be.
The Oceans produce over 75% of the CO2, you should fight the evil oceans as per your cult.
What you guys try, is the modern form of selling indulgences, and you act like a religious fanatic, totally irrational and fraudulent.
> I remember it started as “Global Warming”.
You remember wrong, liar. As a matter of fact, the term “climate change” was used in a science journal article in 1956. Not until two decades later was “Global warming” coined in 1975. And I’ve already covered the same bullshit lies in comments #21 and #41 from others in your pack of low-IQ liars. Like I’ve said all along, the lower-IQ half of conservatives behave just as disruptively in a conversation on science as a pack of feral Negroes in a new york History classroom. And just like a pack of Negroes, you resent your betters like me for running rings around you intellectually.
Pulling back the curtain on junk science;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=8455KEDitpU
Lord Monckton on the economics of windmills:
Patrick Moore, the Sensible Environmentalist
Dr. Willie Soon Demolishes the extreme weather panic and other hysterical arguments
感谢您的关注。 在 评论#127，我解决了另一位先生的类似要求，并提供了我在 Unz 最常使用的气候变化参考资料的简短列表。 享受阅读它们。
Of course, that is what has happened in the past as CO2 in the atmosphere changes naturally. Now CO2 content in the atmosphere is being drastically changed by humans as we evaporate the earth’s vast coal beds and oil fields into our thin layer of atmosphere.
Here is a graph of solar variation, temperatures, co2 content, and methane content over the last half million years of cycles of glaciation. Please take note of the lines off the graph. CO2 is completely off the graph, methane even worse, and temperature is responding to that greenhouse gas CO2 “forcing.” Buckle up kiddos, that red line is going vertical; it’s going to be a wild ride into a new “hothouse earth” climate from millions of years back.
Sumber: http://www.antarcticglaciers.org/glaciers-and-climate/ice-cores/ice-core-basics/
p.s. Some people falsely claim humans can’t change the climate, just because the climate changed naturally in the past. That is as deceptive of a notion as claiming humans can’t cause forest fires, just because they happened naturally in the past.
Benny Peiser: ‘What I told Cambridge University’s spoiled green students’:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cPF-0rrTefs
Greta Thunberg without a script to read from:
Let’s flesh out ypur claim that things are happening on a “global scale’, in ways that are not consistent with how things have happened in the past.
Problem… go back less than halfway to the ‘Little Ice Age’, and the proportion of the Earth that has reliable 全年 observations drops towards zero.
And now, a very direct and specific challenge, which will expose you as an innumerate ‘follower’.
Present us with your understanding of the confidence intervals for the following estimates:
(a) dendroclimatological estimates of global annual mean temperatures; and
(b) the bounds on a 100-year forecast, as calculated at year 1. I won’t even ask that you show (i.e., copypaste) your working.
Your problem is, forecast bounds and the bounds on estimates obtained using proxies and instrumental variables, are both part of my stock in trade for the last 30 years. I’ve taught that shit to 3rd and 4th year classes at a university that was (and is) in the top few dozen in the world.
But by all means, find out what your superiors tell you to think, and I will be more than happy to tear it to shreds. (For the moment, I won’t bother to ask you to show us the credentials that entitle you to judge others… that can wait, because I’ve always got ready access to my absolutely fucking awe-inspiring academic record).
There is a very good reason why climate forecasts are shit (quite apart from the difficulty of forecasting complex systems)… beside being 2nd quintile talent, thise doing the forecasting have the same mindset as revivalist preachers – viz., they think that they have to pound the table and bullshit about the End being Nigh, because otherwise nobody is prepared to pay their bills.
While you willfully ignore the scientific evidence of climate reality, you promote an oxymoron of Christian Populism/Nationalism. It will never work except as a tiny denomination out of the 30,000 or so Christian denominations around the world, because the vast majority of Christians themselves will not accept what goes against what is taught in the New Testament, that (1) the faith is 全球主义者/国际主义者 (2) 每个人都是平等的, and (3) “we all bleed red,” as these Christians note:
I wish you all the luck in the world fighting against what’s taught in the New Testament and trying to adapt a Globalist/Internationalist religion to a Populism/Nationalism sect. If your schismatic denomination ever grows to be as politically significant as the Amish, I might even join. Are we going with button britches?
But new wine must be poured into new wineskins. 葛丽泰 is pouring her wine in the new wineskins of the majority of the world who accepts the reality of climate change, while you’re trying to patch old skins riddled with holes. Of course, you’ve been making the same mistake since the conservatives abdicated the Cathedral’s realm of science at the Scope Monkey Trial.
The modern Cathedral is science. The doors are open, walk in and take leadership.
可怜的通伯格的长篇大论至少有一部分是妄想。她吟诵道，我们都向她（或者实际上是年轻人）寻求希望！这不仅显然是不真实的，因为我不会去任何地方寻找希望。但如果我的头部突然流血，并决定需要一条舒适的毯子，那么我最不想去的地方就是那个悲惨的、满脸皱纹的末日预言家。
You have an agenda that fits with UN Agenda 21 and 2030 and you are an agent provocateur.
“即使我们轰炸俄罗斯，我们的人口仍然太多，污染也太多。
我们必须吃掉婴儿，二氧化碳太多了，我们必须吃掉婴儿。
我们只有两个月的时间。”
I knew you were trying to do climate science denial via the “haw, haw, look at it snowin’, we need more global warmin’!” Thing is, extreme weather, including extreme winter weather like the “polar vortex cold snaps,” is caused by global warming. Here’s how:
1. As average temperature warms, the Arctic warms more. It’s called “Arctic Amplification.” That amplification reduces the temperature gradient between the equator and the North Pole.
2. The lowered temperature gradient weakens the “polar vortex” or “jetstream,” so that instead of a tight circle, it becomes wavy. Scientists have observed an increase in this “waviness.”
3. The “waviness” allows relatively cold air to “escape” is usual region, like leaving a refrigerator open, and brings the cold snaps south to the continental US.
4. Meanwhile, while we’re freezing our ass off for a 3 day polar vortex blizzard, the Arctic is freaking hot. Scientists call this phenomenon “Warm Arctic – Cold Continents” and I’ll illustrate one example here, one on which Trump tweeted about, missing the fact the Arctic region had a heat wave:
I could post more graphics from NASA explaining the increased “waviness” of the polar vortex, but I’ll let you google that. It isn’t hard to find.
You are a typical know-nothing journalist. You swallow the revised “history” and are good at one thing – convincing others to swallow it too.
The models running in real time have had a dismal record in matching reality.
Anyone who has followed this for the last couple of decades knows this. I suspect that you know it too.
As for the science being “settled” – and as for the climate models being “so good” – the arguments might be a whole lot more convincing if they did not have to use fudge factors to curve-fit the data.
The data the alarmists use is not only poor quality, but it is “massaged” so much that it is nearly useless. The physics is understood so poorly that they have to use fudge factors to make the models even appear to work. And, even then, the projections of the models have consistently overestimated the increases in temperature.
What makes me disgusted is that science has been prostituted to politics.
And, people like you – and the people who put up those websites – actively work to deceive others.
So, one more time – can you tell us, in your own words, what the actual science consists of that shows man-made CO2 to be a significant factor in any current warming?
> assuming it were valid
LOL! You really are dumb as a feral sub-Saharan Negro. Do you really think that the sky above the Arctic Sea is like the song 牧场是我家, ♫ where the skies are not cloudy all day? ♪ Good grief, it’s cloudy sometimes in the Arctic, which means the satellites simply can’t see the ice every 90 minutes as the satellite passes over.
If you think interpolating data between clear days somehow “invalidates” the PIOMAS data, then you would also be stupid enough to assert that the measured height of your nephew whom you get to see only once a year is invalid, because you didn’t have your eye on his height every second. The stupid is so strong with you, it burns. Hell, you’re retarded. You never got through high school math, did you?
I know you’re too fucking stupid to get it, but I’ll try anyway. Here’s a primer on interpolation:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpolation
You’re obtusely being yet another “teh moduhls!” PRATT (Points Refuted A Thousand Times). Here goes:
> why climate forecasts are shit
LOL! If so, why have they proven so good? An early example, here’s that famous guy Hansen’s 1981 model:
And they keep getting better all the time! Which means the only thing full of shit is you. You can find the above graph, and more here:
资料来源：分析：气候模型预测全球变暖的程度如何？
https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-how-well-have-climate-models-projected-global-warming
瞅 地球工程观察网, chemtrails and HAARP are deep state operations to try and manipulate the weather, chemtrails have been sprayed over the skies since at least the 1980s by my personal observation and are ionizing the atmosphere to allow HAARP to function, see 地球脉搏网 with Nick Begich.
You’re still being a der modhuls have a dismal record! PRATT (Points Refuted A Thousand Times.) This extremely early model, from the 1975 scientific article in which the term “global warming” was originally coined by Columbia University scientist Prof Wally Broecker, doesn’t look too shabby! Of course, he overestimated growth of industry in his model. In 2016 he estimated that CO2 would be 424ppm, whereas only 404 pm has been observed, but it didn’t do too bad for 30 years of forecasting! You try forecasting something 30 years ahead, nitwit.
Chart Source – Analysis: How well have climate models projected global warming?
https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-how-well-have-climate-models-projected-global-warming
不是太寒酸！
https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a333462.pdf
Such habitual falsehoods indicates that your agenda fits with the 👿谎言之父👿. But at least you know 哇哟爸爸.
And yet the planet still warms. Here’s the latest monthly update from NASA’s GISTEMP:
Oh, don’t say that, some people on this site will worship her for being related to an alleged victim of Jewish ritual killing 🙂
Chemtrails, HAARP, bah! It’s UFOs!
If you read the the whole thing—which consists mostly of the standard “junk science” PR campaign from Big Tobacco—you’ll also be reassured by the good doc that 二手烟 is just dandy for your lungs. Your T-zone will tell you!
Greta is no more, really, than David Hogg with breasts. (Tiny ones)
I need to thank you for posting those links. Now I can point to just how corrupt climate science and journalism have become. Anyone who wishes to look at actual results might want to check out what someone like Judith Curry writes. She and Nic Lewis took a look at climate models and concluded that models have exaggerated the warming from CO2 by as much as 45%. They found that the planet is much less sensitive to changes in CO2 than the models indicate. Dr. Curry also stated that the models do not include key elements of climate variability, and they are not useful in predicting how this century will turn out.
And, for being an honest scientist, she is vilified.
https://www.thegwpf.org/content/uploads/2017/02/Curry-2017.pdf
But, again, 303, I should thank you for once again showing me why I should never get into a discussion with dishonest people on the internet. The mere fact that the climate models require fudge factors to curve-fit the models to historical data tell me all I need to know about the integrity if the people doing the modeling. Anyone who knows anything about modeling chaotic systems knows this to be true.
You have outed yourself as a promoter of global warming and an agent of promoting UN Agenda 21 and 2030 and an agent of the new world order.
You hit only a small percentage of PRATTs (Points Refuted A Thousand Times) that science-deniers like you devote to CO2. Why did you skip over so many? Try harder!
Screensave from SkepticalScience.com search item “CO2”
I wondered how long it would take to trot out Curry’s PRATTS.
Fudge factors to curve-fit the models? OK, which “fudge factor” did Wally Broecker use in his 1975 model, which has proven useful, as analyzed in comment #315. You say models use fudge factors, I would like you to identify whatever fudge factor Broecker used in his extremely primitive model. Here’s his original:
Repeat your lies for the 15th time, if you wish. I suggest you get a squeaky little prayer wheel from Tibet, and let it accomplish your repetitive nonsense for you. Automation is great!
嘿影子，你和我在同一张乐谱上，哈哈哈，就我们的鼓手而言。
This afternoon I had a rehersal session with my guitar man (he plays an original Kalamazoo Gibson), myself winds sax/flute. We did amongst others, “I can’t give you anthing but love”, “Autumn Leaves”, “Have you met Miss Jones” , ” C’est si bon”,”After you’ve gone” , old standard warhorses, but they are still great melodies, and good changes to solo over.
最美好的祝愿并继续摇摆。
阿杰姆
Ha! Actually, I’m glad you posted that, 303. That has to be one of the dumbest replies I’ve ever seen.
Just more smoke and mirrors.
I picture you as Adam Schiff. Then everything here makes sense.
At least you got me laughing.
Anonymous-troll believes “sceptical-science” debunks or disproves something, but that is nowhere happening. In reality they just state a different and usually wrong opinion. The alleged nr 1 myth is no myth at all, but they need to attack this the most because with that goes all the rest of their deceptions. However, it should be formulated in a striker way: “There is not a single modern climate property or phenomenon that is outside of the range of natural variability”
As there is none, it needed to be invented, most famous example is the “Hockey-Stick”. Michael Mann and his copycat fraudsters cherry-pick data from different sources to get Hockey-Stick shapes.
Modern temperatures are not unprecedented, unusual, or hockey-stick-shaped:
https://notrickszone.com/category/medieval-warm-period/
Temperature data continuously needs to be manipulated because it is not warming enough, for hundreds of examples see. https://realclimatescience.com/
The anonymous-troll illustrates the main methods of the climate bullies quite well. Shaming language and using deceptive or outright invented graphs. Examples:
comment 26: the models are running hot, that is usually not even disputed by Warmists, here it can be seen that Roy Spencer did not just shift the temperature curve:
comment 109: the Satellite picture of Desert-Ireland is a complete joke, the greening from co2 real. example study: http://www.nature.com/articles/nclimate3004, more info here: sealevel.info
comment 182: looks scary, but the the animation has no other purpose than to deceive. Less than 0,01% of the total ice sheet of Greenland is melting every year.
It would be interesting to known what the “CO2 sensitivity” actually is, but it does not really matter much. Important is that there is no increase in extreme weather. Not drought, heat, flooding, hurricane, etc. None. The best proof to see that there is no climate crisis is the lack of sea level rise acceleration: Take a look at any long-term tide gauge – they are flat. (The different constant rates are because the land/continents can sink and rise differently.) If there is no acceleration in some of them, there is none anywhere else, as the oceans are connected vessels. End of Story. Well, almost. There are several papers that claim to have found the elusive, dangerous sea level rise acceleration. But instead of proofing anything about sea level rise this rather is further proof that some “climate scientists” are corrupt crooks.
You’d make a good 纵火犯的害羞律师 with your line, “Judge, we have established that forest fires have been caused by natural ignition sources for millennia. Thus, if nature can do it, that unequivocally proves that my client cannot be guilty. We solemnly present to the court a study how natural lightning causes forest fires. ”
It’s not about interpolation but about your failed attempts at misdirection. Once again you dodged the main question and failed to explain what that polar graph of modeled Arctic region temperatures are supposed to prove, within the overall context. I suggest you consider participating in the Greta Cult’s upcoming mass suicide initiative.
具有讽刺意味的是，气候辩论变得像 JQ 一样充满争议。
让我将话题转向另一个类似的话题，也是像格蕾塔这样的“儿童十字军”应该在西方讨论的话题。
美国和英国的肥胖危机。美国全国的肥胖率接近 35%，有几个州的肥胖率甚至达到了 40%。西弗吉尼亚州和密西西比州的比率超过 39%。科罗拉多州、夏威夷州和哥伦比亚特区是最健康的。科罗拉多州是唯一一个肥胖率低于 25% 的州，但该州的肥胖率约为 22%，因此仍不被重视。
“目前，35 个州的成人肥胖率超过 30%，31 个州的成人肥胖率超过 25%，48 个州的成人肥胖率超过 39.5%。密西西比州和西弗吉尼亚州的成人肥胖率最高，为 23%，科罗拉多州最低，为 2017%。 2018年至XNUMX年间，佛罗里达州、堪萨斯州、明尼苏达州、密苏里州、新墨西哥州、纽约州和犹他州的成人肥胖率上升，阿拉斯加州下降，其他州和华盛顿特区的成人肥胖率保持稳定”
https://www.stateofobesity.org/adult-obesity/
现在让我们来研究一下药物滥用——尤其是吸烟，正如一些人在本主题前面评论过的那样。
尽管美国的吸烟率有所下降，但电子烟的使用量却在猛增。 “自由”在美国造就了极其堕落和不健康的民众。此外，冰毒和海洛因在全国范围内的流行已经失控，尤其是在密苏里州等州，独立城是该国已知的冰毒首府。
当谈到健康和消除国家的堕落时，我建议向东看俄罗斯，人们很快就会注意到俄罗斯东正教（ROC）的积极贡献。
在过去五年中，酒精消费量下降了 43% 至 80%，具体取决于您查看的数据。据东正教和俄罗斯卫生部长称，这一比例为 80%。根据世界卫生组织 (WHO) 的数据，这一比例为 43%。
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-49892339
https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2018/01/16/russian-alcohol-consumption-falls-80percent-in-5-years-says-minister-a60196
至于吸烟方面，莫斯科进一步加强了禁烟范围，将阳台纳入禁烟范围。
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesrodgerseurope/2019/10/01/russias-balcony-smoking-ban-gets-off-the-ground/amp/
欧洲大部分地区和俄罗斯都禁止使用转基因生物、防腐剂和人造成分。找到一个肥胖的中欧、东欧或俄罗斯公民就像大海捞针一样。
但西方的情况并非如此，不是吗？然而，我们有一个被宠坏的、天真的“儿童十字军”，她用“气候变化”对我们的环境有多大破坏性的要求来责骂我们。
不，格蕾塔，对我们的环境造成破坏的是 退行性癌症 西方社会已经屈服了。资本主义、消费主义、唯物主义、现代主义、全球主义、虚无主义、普世主义、平等主义、文化马克思主义、多元文化主义、个人主义、世俗主义、犹太复国主义等等。
奥斯瓦尔德·斯宾格勒在他的杰作中说得对， 西方的衰落.
Your arrogant replies reveal you as a charlatan for the global warming scam.
哦，帕特里基乌利·穆。
纽约有很多坚果。
First, who said that? I’ve already addressed and quoted in comment #59 that something 相当相似 to that has been said, but that you are twisting words and misrepresenting the original statement, just as badly as Liddle Adam Schiff twisted Trump’s words to the Ukranian president. All you’re doing is proving that you have the moral integrity of Nancy Pelosi.
• You, one minute: Various dubious schemes of interpolation
• You, the next minute: It’s not about interpolation
You’re a two-faced man, unstable in all his ways.
Who knows, she might get saved tomorrow, and then you’re on the shit list.
https://mosesmosesmoses.wordpress.com/2015/12/21/how-to-talk-to-a-climate-change-zealot/
我的大胆。
No more mention of those “fudge factors” from you! Why is that? Can’t find any in the original model in which the term “global warming” was coined? (Broecker, 1975) Can you look harder? I’m very keen to sniff out these “fudge factors” that you loudly proclaim “massage” the data.
好的！几年没玩了，但我的装备还在。 Slingerland 1988 年，推出 16 英寸和 18 英寸落地通鼓。 Ludwig 10 凸耳军鼓、短笛和预 Ludwig 木质军鼓。还有我所有的扩音设备、吉他等。清理我的财产以出售并逃离加利福尼亚人民共和国。去年二月，我们遭遇了 50 年来最严重的暴风雪。到处都是树木。 1968年，是最后一次下这样的雪。当然，那时我还是个孩子，喜欢失学。顺便说一句，我们没有空调，有时不得不穿外套去上课。老年不适合娘娘腔。
Climate alarmists are minions of the Antichrist and Supremacists. Their culture of death involves the culling/depopulation of humanity. They want to “save the world” by implementing wars and the Globohomo initiative. Their first targets for extermination are the weakest and the most vulnerable. It wasn’t enough, however, to promote and implement state-sanctioned abortion, sodomy and usury throughout the entire world. They are now promoting the eating of human flesh and babies. Ask yourselves who has what to gain by hijacking a comments section and making it more difficult to find articles and videos like the ones linked below?
‘Swedish Behavioral Scientist Introduces Eating Human Flesh At Food Conference As Emergency Measure For Climate Change’ – https://www.theepochtimes.com/swedish-researcher-pushes-human-flesh-eating-as-answer-to-future-climate-change-food-shortages_3068833.html
“carbon tax”
我想对烟草使用发表评论。 60世纪70年代和200年代曾有过研究。他们试图通过烟草让老鼠患上癌症。相当于每天2支香烟。它未能给他们带来癌症。研究确实发现，烟草中的某些物质使老鼠对辐射具有一定的免疫力。二战前，美国近一半人口吸烟，癌症发病率极低。直到原子武器和石化工业的兴起，我们才发现癌症呈上升趋势。我已经深入许多兔子洞进行研究。并非一切都像看起来那样。我不会引用这些研究或其他研究。那是你的工作。如果你决定接受的话。
是的，正是如此。环保主义实际上是他们的宗教。我曾经约会过一个属于这个阵营的女人。虽然她在很多方面都很出色，但毫无疑问，她受到了这种类似邪教的运动的严重灌输。她是一名纯素食主义者，虽然我出于健康原因尊重她的选择，但我鄙视她对动物“权利”的选择。她是一位世界级的登山运动员，她的外表吸引了男性的大量关注，但在幕后，她的活动同僚们正在密谋并执行在科罗拉多州博尔德市各地杂货店里毒害肉类的行动。我不相信我的前任曾参与过其中任何一项行动，但她完全支持此类行动，并且是一位热心的环保活动家。这些组织还扰乱并迫使沃尔玛邻里市场在开业大约一年后退出博尔德。
此外，她对博尔德的愿景是不仅禁止拥有所有机动车辆，而且禁止其进入地铁。
?!?!………
等待。重读。
？！？！
O……………….K.
Ahm……good luck.
您知道人们可以在scholar.google 上搜索并找出研究的真相吗？我在大约 4 秒内找到了这个，涵盖了你提到的几个旧实验。
IARC Working Group on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risk to Humans. Tobacco Smoke and Involuntary Smoking. Lyon (FR): International Agency for Research on Cancer; 2004. (IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans, No. 83.) 3, Carcinogenicity Studies in Experimental Animals. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK316402/
去读吧。与你上面的愚蠢言论相比，一些摘录很可能是在重复大烟草公关的胡言乱语：
• 阴影: “The equivalent of 每天200支烟。=
• 学习: “…rodents were exposed to the smoke of 每天七到十支烟 on 5–7 days per week (Dalbey et al., 1980; Wehner et al., 1981)”
• 阴影: “It failed to give them cancer.”
• 学习: “Laryngeal 癌症的发生频率几乎是原来的五倍 in strain BIO® 15.16, however, and two animals of this strain developed nasopharyngeal tumours. The incidences of tumours at locations other than the respiratory tract were similar in the two strains (Bernfeld et al., 1974).”
好？
Am I acting too white for your ghetto tastes?
> Earth’s climate has always been and will always be changing, regardless of human activity
That’s the #1 PRATT. Which is just as stupid as a lawyer saying in court, “Judge, we have established that forest fires have been caused by natural ignition sources for millennia. Thus, if nature can do it, that unequivocally proves that my client cannot be guilty.”
So you didn’t get very far, did you, shyster? Want to start over with something more believable for the jury?
I trust you judge 所有 religions with the same standard, i.e., taking the worst behavior of one of the adherents, and making that representative of the whole religion. Mostly, I see that sort of game played by Douchey Neckbeard Atheists judging Christianity. Since nobody but Douchey Neckbeard Atheist fulminate against religions like that, it pretty much proves you’re a Douchey Neckbeard Atheist. How many fedoras are in your closet?
This is interesting, how did anonymous 303 become 339, thought this was not allowed on UNZ ie using 2 handles for the same person, or are you an imposter, either way what a childish reponse.
“Take eat, this is my body,” and, “For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink.” And get this, it’s not just eating corpses in an emergency, it’s human sacrifice! “Christ our passover lamb has been sacrificed.” Ask yourself, whose crazier, Swedish meatball climate alarmists, or the cultists of ancient Jewish storytellers. Anyway, it makes me glad I’m packin’ heat, just in case these flesh-eating weirdos start loosing their cool, which is a likely result of of global warming.
It does? O.K.
None. Is that good or bad? In your BOOK.
Now…..what if I were a “Gray Goatee Agnostic”? Not sure about “douchey” but your call/either way.
Just for the sake of…ahm…conversation… here.
Here we go………………………………………
的确。您可以通过进行一些简单的研究来了解有关这些“操作”的更多信息。几年前，几名罪犯被抓获并逮捕。我相信受害的要么是Lucky's Market，要么是Sprout's。博尔德每日摄像机报道了这个故事。
此外，几年前我光顾了 Baseline 附近的一家著名咖啡店。在工作时，我无意中听到一大群中年人的谈话，他们正在讨论沃尔玛有多么邪恶，以及他们将如何直接在店外举行抗议，以扰乱他们的生意。他们给沃尔玛贴上“邪恶”标签的理由似乎仅仅是基于这样一个事实：大部分产品并非不含转基因成分，并且来自采用“不道德”耕作方法的商业化农场——而且这家特定的商店绝对没有生意在博尔德。
大约在这个时候，沃尔玛邻里市场搬进了博尔德，以便为低收入人群（西班牙裔场地管理员等）提供购买杂货的地方。这些拉美裔人都没有住在博尔德，尽管占该镇人口很大一部分的豪华轿车自由主义者一直呼吁“多元化”，但博尔德人确实竭尽全力以典型的左派方式阻止多元化。
Whenever, where-ever, youth protest for whatever reason, all I can hear them shout, all I can read on their banners is “I want to live!”
> comment 109: the Satellite picture of Desert-Ireland is a complete joke,
No, it’s not a joke, it is representative of the changes in plants that satellites observe from space. The picture on the right is Ireland in a drought the next year, which shows much less green, and more brown.
> the greening from co2 real.
Not any more. Up to 1998, additional CO2 did green the Earth. Now, because CO2 is heating the earth, plants are becoming water stressed, and the earth is most definitely not getting more green. The earth’s plants are getting more brown. Here’s the NDVI satellite data, analyzing two different date ranges, pre-1998, and post-1999:
Basically, your juvenile “everything-is-awesome” shtick has run out of steam. It’s hilarious that you acknowledge humans are changing the whole globe with CO2, but are willing to cherrypick only positive consequences of our evaporating earth’s vast coal beds and oil fields into the atmosphere, while you childishly ignore any negative consequences.
> Trump does not mention of CO2.
Wrong. Do you really think he didn’t mean CO2-caused global warming when he signed this, Mr. Word-Weasel?
Trump obviously believes in human caused (by CO2) global warming, because he says so, made such a statement, and signed his name to that unequivocal statement.
Anthony Watts, among other professional deniers running same science-smearing campaign Big Tobacco did, are scammers. Here’s the dossier on the charlatan Anthony Watts. Notice his credentials; he couldn’t even manage to graduate college:
安东尼·沃茨
https://www.desmogblog.com/anthony-watts
One of the more clever denier websites is “notrickszone” which has a list of ~400 or so real scientific papers on the solar cycle influence on climate, which several deniers here on UNZ have breathlessly referenced to. It’s so stupid to posit them as denying climate science, because no climate scientist denies the effects of solar cycles on the climate.
In perspective, this is how influential solar cycles are. See that squiggly orange -colored line labeled solar irradiance? See it? It’s kind of small, isn’t it? The notrickzone morons try to make a mountain out of a molehill.
GISS 气候模型中的强迫
Sumber: https://data.giss.nasa.gov/modelforce/
More and more people are catching on to…global warming science being valid. FIFY! 🙂
The only people denying global warming are the lower-IQ half the the Stupid Party. These doltards behave as disruptively in conversations on science as a pack of feral Negroes behave in an English language classroom, for much the same reason, they lack the mental faculties to grasp more difficult subjects like science. And like feral Negroes, they resent their intellectual betters.
The higher-IQ half (52% to be exact, myself included) of the Stupid party is on board with the scientific evidence.
So now anonymous 303 is 339 and 116, interesting.
It’s actually super boring, just my being on different servers while at a waterpark resort this weekend with my wife and children. The moderators know I am posting under the same email identifier, and can observe that I’m not trying to cheat the 4x/h rule. But the mundane doesn’t keep the lower-IQ half of the Stupid Party from trying to effect an @Jack style deplatfoming coup attempt, since you’re so inept at higher subjects like science.
Why can’t you stay on topic? Hey, got an easy question for you….什么会融化冰块？ Even the Trump Administration publicly admits the Arctic sea ice is in a death spiral. Do you disagree with Trump?
You won’t admit what melts ice, because that leads to a scientific inquiry into why exactly all this extra heat is now being retained on our beautiful Earth. You consider such scientific facts as HATE FACTS, just like @Jack.
So now you are 110, however do you know what you really are, you are a charlatan for the scam of global warming, and your attempts to make it seem like more people are for this scam are failing, you are an imposter!
Voice of reason and common sense: Nobel Prize winner and physicist Ivar Giaever
It’s most certainly not a scam, but a reality as evidenced by scientific observation. However, the Stupid Party, which abdicated its birthright to the Cathedral’s realm of science at the Scope Monkey Trial, no longer has a seat at the table of policy making based on scientific facts.
That is why I advocate accepting scientific evidence, so that Conservatives can sit at the table and have a credible voice in making policy. I would love to watch Trump capture the global warming flag with a tweet proclaiming, “America must preserve her resources to mitigate extreme weather events from global warming; no more immigration!”
You evidently do not love your own nation, because you wish to keep losing to the Leftist, and prefer to suck on a pacifier of magical thinking based on bronze-age fables about creation* told by Jewish storytellers. That’s SAD!
______
* 2009 Evangelical Declaration on Global Warming, a Creationist (“intelligent design”) denial of science, claiming that the consortium of gods, Elohim, have make-believe “infinite power” (like juvenile power-rangers!!!) over the climate these deities spoke into being with their word-magic in Genesis. Even the serial liar Roy Spencer, in charge of UAH satellite data, signed it, and comically rejects rational deductions from his own data.
By the way 110, 116, 303, 339, you have destroyed any credibility for your posts by being a charlatan and an imposter.
The risibility of your juvenile name-calling is exceeded only by your cowardice in considering what melts ice.
Sadly, you got your science-man-bad playbook from the orange-man-bad team.
Hehe…so….guys, have you, finally, started to realize there is, really, just one way to deal with a type you are presented here?
True, it takes a bit of experience to recognize it, but, once you’ve done it that’s pretty much it.
One of the nice things about this online pub is the ability to practice that skill. This example is rather good for the purpose.
只是我的2美分。
My critics need more than vague insinuations to stop me. Same with Trump’s.
What’s melting ice around the globe, buddy? The only way you can stop 莫伊 is to provide a better model that explains why all this extra heat is being retained to cause, e.g., the death spiral of Arctic sea ice.
To various Anonymous XXX posts:
1) Arctic death spiral:
Yeah, sure there will be no ice 2008, err 2012, err 2018 err whatever…
There is no ‘death spiral’ in the data:
https://i2.wp.com/ads.nipr.ac.jp/vishop.ver2/data/SeaIceExtentGraph/graph/image/SIE_seasonal_all_n.png?resize=700%2C438&ssl=1
2) Solar forcing:
“In perspective, this is how influential solar cycles are. See that…”
GISS models climate forcing… When was GISS able to model the past?
No GISS is ‘modellin’ past temperatures :D, GISS values change over time cooling the past:
3) Greening the Earth: Wavelet gave a 400 words post where he rationally explained several points why there is no reason to panic, the data is within normal variations parameters, you just answered one sentence from it with a post about 1999-2015 when we know the global temperature did not rise.
“because CO2 is heating the earth, plants are becoming water stressed”
It is the other way around, CO2 increases plants resistance to droughts.
Change in leaf area 1982-2015:
The world is greener 2000-2017:
https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/thumbnails/image/global_tamo_2017_full.pnggreening-of-earth-nasa-study-shows
4) Temperatures are not abnormal high. Greenland was warmer during the medieval warm period, vikings grew barley in Greenland:
https://sciencenordic.com/agriculture-archaeology-denmark/vikings-grew-barley-in-greenland/1447746
格蕾塔在 17 世纪的马萨诸塞州塞勒姆过得并不好
请原谅我劫持帖子，但我必须回复 339。你引用的研究存在缺陷。首先，他们使用对他们正在寻找的相同癌症易感的老鼠/仓鼠。这似乎是不诚实和不诚实的。使用野生老鼠/仓鼠怎么样？然后，通过可重复的受控实验，我们得出了一个诚实的结论。如果有足够的钱和实验室，我可以饲养带有隐性基因的狗，并证明肉对它们有害。或者说太阳从西边升起。即使您尝试过，也无法证明二手烟会导致非吸烟癌症的惊人上升。所以，你的学业也是废话。感谢您的时间与兴趣。
1. Your data from JAXA isn’t sea ice volume, it’s sea ice extent. But even September minimum sea ice extent, as show in your JAXA graph, is half of what it was in the 80’s. That’s a death spiral.
2. That is serial liar Tony Heller’s graphic. How Tony is flat-0ut lying with that graph is 这里介绍. Yes, GISS has adjusted their data to be more accurate, and the following graph shows the differences in the versions. Of course, if you don’t believe me, you can check the publicly available data here: https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/history/
3. We’re on the downside of peak-green. Everybody knows the extra CO2 made the earth greener, at least for a while. It’s now getting perceptibly browner, according to the Normalized Difference Vegetation Index ( NDVI ) satellite. Of course, you can still say that earth is greener than 1985. But it’s less green than 2000. Here’s the graph:
4. They grow barley in Greenland 现在可以做些什么, as well as potatoes, turnips. Also raise sheep.
@匿名者[116]
“1. Your data from JAXA isn’t sea ice volume, it’s sea ice extent.”
Yes, volume is not direct measured but extend. It is almost funny to see how PIOMAS (modelling sea ice volume) has to redraw their graphs to accommodate for the no longer shrinking sea ice and still keep the illusion of downwards trend.
“But even September minimum sea ice extent, as show in your JAXA graph, is half of what it was in the 80’s. That’s a death spiral.”
It matters when one starts measuring. ’79 was a cold period. There are satellite measurement before that which show an increase ’73-’79
Since about one decade and a half the extend is stationary. That is not a death spiral.
2. Oh well, the orwellian named skeptical science site.
Their arguments?
a) first personal attack – is not a climate scientist. As if only a climate scientist could draw a graph from data.
“His qualifications are a Bachelors degree in Geology, and a Masters in Electrical Engineering. ”
b) “Heller’s giff does not demonstrate any significant change in values. Rather, it exhibits a change in the range of the y-axis from -0.6 to 0.8 for “NASA 2001” to approximately -0.85 to 1 for “NASA 2015″. ”
什么？
Nice to see confirmed that Toni is using NASA’s own data and NASA’s own graphs and let everybody judge if this is significant or not when such changes happen to historical data.
“apparent change in trend” – lol
” even though the available history of adjustments results in a net reduction in the trend of the last two decades of the 20th century, not an increase.”
He is not arguing that the trend was increased. That is a strawman argument.
What the graph is showing is the elimination of natural variation that will accommodate the narrative of a continuous rising in temperature more suitable with a CO2 influencing the climate story which is not what the real data is, but the adjusted data shows.
3) “Of course, you can still say that earth is greener than 1985. But it’s less green than 2000.”
Not true. I posted you the NASA graph from 2000-2017 which shows clear greening in perfect alignment with what science says:
http://www.co2science.org/data/plant_growth/plantgrowth.php
4) from your own article:
“The timing coincides with the Medieval Warm Period, a time of mild temperatures well documented in Europe between 950 and 1250”
文章认为：
“Young says. “The Medieval Warm Period is very well documented in Europe, but it wasn’t global. In fact, warming in Europe often coincides with cooler conditions in Greenland as more cold air gets pulled out of the Arctic and funnels through Baffin Bay.” ”
That is a working hypothesis of this group. Others differ:
http://www.co2science.org/data/mwp/mwpp.php
I tend to agree with them. Svensmark’s theory makes sense to me, the CO2 driving the climate not.
During ice ages CO2 followed temperature, clearly documented in the ice cores.
Anyone who buys into the CO2 nonsense fails bravely the idiot test for mental retards.
The CO2 mafia’s heroine is a mentally disabled girl, who do you think their target audience is? The mentally challenged I suggest, and the weakest, Children.
Without CO2 there would be no life on this planet, and the CO2 mafia sell it to you as a poison, they want to sell indulgences on CO2. It is a taxation on breathing air.
> 具有讽刺意味的是，气候辩论变得像 JQ. | Yeah, about that…
…Zionists rank the lowest in accepting science, and nation of Zionist Christians is nearly as low as the Jews they worship. The Asian Tiger Moms of S. Korea and Japan sure aren’t Joowzed; neither is Obama’s fam.
Mass movements of True Believers often make the childish their 目标受众. Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of Greta. How do you propose attenuating these mass movements of immature minds?
1. > volume is not direct measured | You’re lying. Go read how PIOMAS does direct observation, including CryoSat radar measurements and from subs breaking through the ice and measuring it.
2. No, Tony Heller is blatantly misrepresenting NASA GISTEMP data. Tony Heller is such an embarrassing liar to even the denialists, that Anthony Watts fired him from writing on his website. You may as well be touting the work of Bernie Madoff.
3. You can’t read a simple chart. The Normalized Difference Vegetation Index ( NDVI ) from two different satellite data shows earth greened from 1982 to a peak of ~1998. After that, it has leveled off and started browning, although still being greener than when first observed. If you (or NASA) want to assert that the earth is greener than 1982, that’s still true, but the greening effect has peaked, leveled off, and is in slow decline, i.e,, browning.
4. There was indeed a Medieval Warm Period, but you’re trying to make a mountain out of a molehill with it. And no, CO2 doesn’t lag temp. That last PRATT has already been refuted in my comment #37, with a graph proving your assertion wrong. If you want to learn something, go take a gander.
George Carlin’s wry humor goes right over the heads of the lower-IQ half of the Stupid Party. Carlin actually acknowledges AGW as being true. So can you pack of inept liars stop misrepresenting him?
“I look at it this way… For centuries now, man has done everything he can to destroy, defile, and interfere with nature: clear-cutting forests, strip-mining mountains, 毒害大气， over-fishing the oceans, polluting the rivers and lakes, destroying wetlands and aquifers… so 当大自然反击，打他的头，踢他的坚果时，我很享受. I have absolutely no sympathy for human beings whatsoever. None. And no matter what kind of problem humans are facing, whether it’s natural or 人造, I always hope it gets worse.”
- 生命值得失去 (2006)
So , now you are 110,116, 303, 339 and 683, a true deceiver.
匿名[299]
“1. > volume is not direct measured | You’re lying. Go read how PIOMAS does direct observation, including CryoSat radar measurements and from subs breaking through the ice and measuring it. ”
Before accusing somebody of lying do your homework.
http://psc.apl.uw.edu/research/projects/arctic-sea-ice-volume-anomaly/
“PIOMAS is a numerical model with components for sea ice and ocean and the capacity for assimilating some kinds of observations..”
Assimilating some kind of observations is not a graph based on measured data.
匿名[299]•免责声明：
6年2019月6日，格林尼治标准时间下午03:200•XNUMX字
“Tony Heller is blatantly misrepresenting NASA GISTEMP data.”
It is very easy to prove you are not right:
In the gif I posted ( October 5, 2019 at 11:08 pm GMT ) from Toni are the 2 graph of NASA GISTEMP superimposed.
No graph has been changed. Those are the original 2 NASA graphs aligned for years and temperature anomaly.
First is from 1999 fig 6:
https://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/1999/1999_Hansen_ha03200f.pdf
The second is from 2017:
Both documented on Toni’s site.
Historical data should not change.
Yours is yet another example of banal stupidity; I have no control over the number; Unz changes the number. I’m not sure how Unz’s website determines the number, but it changes if I shut off my computer or change locations, and have a pretty good idea why, but we’ll see if you can divine it. The lower-IQ half of the Stupid Party is as disruptive in a discussion of science as a pack of feral Negroes would be in an English Lit classroom. Thus, it is no surprise you remain incapable of considering a question like, 什么融化冰？
1986年，2001年和2012年的Pastoruri冰川。照片：国家水务局，秘鲁/监护人
The warmist community is full of loud and arrogant charlatans. Why are they so obsessed with CO2? CO2 gives life.
There have been many epochs in Earth’s history with the PPM of CO2 were considerably higher than now, and life flourished.
Also, for over 30 years (1945 to 1976 approx) global atmospheric CO2 增加 annually yet atmospheric temperatures 下降.
Dear Warmist: Why did this happen?
Do not change the subject. Answer the question, please.
Other natural forces obviously play a bigger role our planet’s climate than one trace atmospheric gas (CO2). Those forces are still with us.
Do the warmists deny this?
If not, then why not discuss this phenomena as well as its implications? Try this for starters: climate is immensely complex and chaotic.
How does any scientist separate global warming from 人为 全球暖化？
I hear crickets
Why do the warmists keep making predictions which fail?
Shouldn’t warmists be held accountable for dire predictions which consistently DO NOT COME TRUE?
In summary, the warmist cult is similar to the neocons. They are powerful and united but they keep getting it wrong. Further, their ‘remedies’ for various ‘crises’ cause real harm to outsiders (individuals and industries not in the cult.)
Lastly, like the neocons, the warmists demonize those who dare to doubt their status and expertise. We are the true skeptics, yet they smear us as ‘deniers’.
Maybe, like bad/evil ‘Holohoax deniers’, the warmists want to put us in prison or in re-education camps.
Warmists are a dangerous and dishonest cult, prone to certitude-driven extremism.
匿名[299]•免责声明：
6年2019月6日，格林尼治标准时间下午03:200•XNUMX字
“3. You can’t read a simple chart”
You have posted no link to a scientific publication but a picture painted red showing 0.005 changes, pretending it shows satellite data 1999-2015.
I have answered with a broader view and link from NASA that covers 2000-2017 and suddenly the picture changes again to green (5% greener per NASA)
Is this clear? Do you understand?
匿名[299]•免责声明：
4. “And no, CO2 doesn’t lag temp. That last PRATT has already been refuted in my comment #37, with a graph proving your assertion wrong. If you want to learn something, go take a gander.”
From your link #37
“based on Antarctic ice core data, changes in CO2 follow changes in temperatures by about 600 to 1000 years, as illustrated in Figure 1 below.=
还是那句话： “CO2 follows changes in temperature by about 600 to 1000 years .
Is this clear?
Yes, the alarmists are arguing that CO2 is adding to the warming in a feedback, this is a different story.
Look at the data from the site you posted, at the previous warming. CO2 remained in high concentration for several thousand to 10 thousand years at about 130000-120000 years before present whilst the temperature plummeted to very cold.
Does this show like the climate driver?
As your tone is far from polite, to put it mildly, I will not answer further posts from you.
I did my homework on PIOMAS, and you’re still lying, because (1) you don’t understand basic English, and (2) you have no clue about scientific models. That’s the nature of the lower-IQ half of the Stupid Party.
Global warming is being pushed by UN Agenda 21 and 2030 to deindustrailize America and this goes hand in hand with the elites open borders agenda, another UN sponsored deal and all of this is for their goal of a satanic zionist new world order.
NASA has reports that debunk global warming and reports that CO2 actually acts as a coolant in the upper atmosphere and a recent report by NASA states climate change occurs because of changes in the earths solar orbit and not because of man.
The government has been spraying chemtrails in the skies of America for over 30 years by my own observation and these chemtrails contain nano particles of aluminum and barium and strontium which are toxic and are going into the air we breathe , the water we drink and the soil we grow our crops in , and these chemtrails are poisoning our earth, but they say they are doing it to block the suns rays to help cool the earth, but actually they are doing it to enable HAARP to ionize the atmosphere to guide hurricanes, tornadoes and in general to control the weather, this is insane!
For more information on chemtrails and HAARP go to 地球工程观察网 和 地球脉动网.
The data didn’t change, but with more stations, you get more data. Tony Heller tries to fool you into thinking NASA’s GISTEMP database and methods are not publicly available knowledge:
> your tone is far from polite
That’s hilarious. You accuse me of being a liar, I simply show that you’re a liar who is also stupid. Cry me a river, snowflake. And now you’re demonstrating even more stupidity, because you’re cherry-picking my reference and deliberately misrepresenting what it says. You’re deliberately lying, and ineptly so, because you forgot this part, the very first sentence, you lying sack-of-shit dumbass:
Yes, that chart shows a climate driver: CO2, initiated by other natural cycles, with CO2 being 90% of the driver of the warming cycle.
The reason you’re running away like a coward is because you can’t take the heat, and it’s so easy to prove you’re lying. Bye Felicia.
CO2 gives life, sure; so does water. By your idiotic thinking, that means it could never be bad and cause somebody to drown. Go on, take a long walk off a short pier. Water always gives life, dontchaknow! LOL All the rest of your moronic PRATTS (Points Refuted A Thousand Times), such as the mid-century cooling, I’ve already debunked previously in this thread. You’re just chasing your own tail in circles because you like to hear yourself barking.
> NASA has reports that debunk global warming and reports that CO2 actually acts as a coolant in the upper atmosphere
That NASA report you’re misrepresenting actually confirms a “prediction of climate change theory.” Let’s read what it actually says:
If we humans lived in the upper reaches of the atmosphere near space, we’d have a cooling problem, sure. But we live on the ground. At least most of us do. Goofy tinfoil airheads like you perhaps don’t.
p.s. DesertFox promotes HAARP because he sells RF-resistant tinfoil hats, but he tries to memory-hole the “Aliens Cause Global Warming” I posted in #319. These tinfoil hat sellers are shady folks, and perform cattle mutilations in Argentina, which is how UFOs refuel for their methane-fueled Warp-drive, so there’s definitely an Agenda 21 cover up going by DesertFox.
Here are the basics of science-denial:
I by what I said, do some research and your arrogance says all there is to say about you.
I stand by what I said, do some research and your arrogance says all there is to say about you.
You might want to study the difference between GHCH data and USHCH data. Show us the fraud. The data is publicly available. Nothing hidden. You do your homework, buddy. And remember, the US is only 2% of the surface of the globe. Making mountains out of molehills is a science-denier specialty.
Funny how all the climate deniers assert that correcting data is bad, but when climate denier Roy Spencer adjusts the UAH satellite data through 6 versions for things like satellite orbit decay, it’s all good! Except, well, his got adjusted the wrong way for the deniers, so that’s kind of confusing, isn’t it?
Me “arrogant?” Do you feel I need to apologize for acting white? Let me know how I can make reparations to your repressed psyche, you poor dear.
You must feel very oppressed when in the presence of white folk like me who know and can quantify what melts ice.
你疯了。
我不认为如此。
There is certain…how to put it….personality/character at works here, but, there is a method too.
Flooding.
As I said before, there are really, just 二 ways to deal with it in real life and only one in “online pubs” like this.
Hehe…I suggest taking this as a decent learning/training exercise. Online pub version, that is.
Your amateur attempt at 苏联精神病学 可以 be construed as a sideways compliment… And when his friends heard of it, they went out to lay hold on him: for they said, He is insane. But the only water I’ve walked on was in solid form. What’s left of it now. This fellow has been under twelve feet of ice, more miraculous than walking on the stuff, solid or otherwise…
Ever figure out what melts such vast quantities of ice around the globe?
He reminds me of a blogger on business insider when they still allowed comments, his name was Ted Schnur and he also was a rabid global warming advocate.
Flooding? Are you referring to my ability to stay on topic, unlike you? Or the kind of flooding from rising sea levels, such as in Miami?
海平面上升与其他因素相结合，经常淹没迈阿密
https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2019/08/08/analysis-sea-level-rise-is-combining-with-other-factors-regularly-flood-miami/
If sea levels aren’t rising, like so many confidently claim here, I really think you global warming deniers should make a killing offering discount reinsurance. The water can’t possibly be rising from melting ice from Greenland and Antarctica, right? Will you put your money where your mouth is?
Well, if you can’t figure out what melts ice, at least you can obsess like a rabid bitch over every personal detail of mine, much like the infamous 过度依恋女朋友! But seriously, do you have insecurity issues? The most frequent cause of insecurity is a recent failure, and there is no failure worse than being unable to figure out what melts ice. I want you to beat this insecurity you’re feeling right now. Can you take a few minutes, focus your attention on something other than 莫伊, and look into what melts ice?
p.s. Greta knows.
Well….I just see the tactics as quite effective in online…ahm….debates/discussions. Look at this thread: one character only versus several, and his/its output is higher.
There IS a method in all this.
People, in general, are conditioned to react to quantity of input. Quality doesn’t matter here as far as an average person is concerned.
The essence of propaganda/marketing.
You do need a certain personality/character (or lack of it) to do that, though.
It’s…hehe…” good fit”. The character does his/her online therapy and the agenda pushers have their foot soldiers doing the work.
Now…those really curios and/or cynical could, perhaps, ask: what agenda is that which needs THESE types to push it?
并非一切都像看上去的那样，但告诉人们的一切都是事实，而事实恰恰是最能实现精英阶层普遍追求的东西。
It’s been some decades that the prevailing part of the élite has been deeply hostile towards the tobacco selling élite.
这些人都是疯子。
How could something be “unethical”, that doesn’t harm you, or someone you care about?
In the last five days of this comment thread, have you though or wrote of 什么 以外 莫伊, peter-STAN? Could you divert just 5 minutes of your life from obsessively analyzing me, and give it a whirl to answer the question, What melts ice?
p.s. Greta knows. For all her many and grievous faults analyzed in this comment thread, that makes her more capable and honest than you. That’s gotta hurt.
No, every comment by Anonymous is 100% correct, he is using scientic fact to hand you your ass on a plate. It is very amusing watching him being swarmed by a dozen IQ 80 mind controlled dolts all braying like jackasses “Global warming is a hoax” as he, all alone against many, cuts the lot of you into lunch meat. Anonymous is grounded in reality, assclowns braying “Global warming is a hoax” live in a fuzzy headed fantasy world. I myself don’t need a Climate Scientist to convince me that Global Warming Is Not A Hoax, I can step outside. For the past 19 years I have directly witnessed the climate of SW Ontario go from harsh long winters of five months duration to short very mild winters, only January and February might be called “cold” if you want to stretch the meaning of the word(we have RAIN in January the last five years!!!), and March, which in the 20th century had the heaviest snowfall, is now the start of Spring. 20th century Summer was just June and July, with leaves beginning to show colors in mid-August, now Summer lasts for 7 months(April-October inclusive) with heat-stroke producing temperatures. 20th century Fall had all the leaves dropping first week of September, now we have no Fall, and there are green leaves lasting till mid-December. Dont go looking for “beautiful Fall colours” we have none. Nope, don’t need no Climate Scientist to convince me Global Warming Is Not A Hoax, I live in reality and it does the convincing. Now, IQ 80 Assclowns, its time to wake up from your fantasy world and accept reality, not that I think you will, nor do I really care.
Arigato Sensei, you are a martial artist of the mind. Reading your “exchange” with these mind controlled dolts is like watching a good samurai film, where one impeccable swordsman is attacked by a dozen moronic assholes, and he deftly cuts all twelve to ribbons.
Bombercommand says:
7年2019月2日，格林尼治标准时间上午51:300•XNUMX字
@沙漠之狐
No, every comment by Anonymous is 100% correct, he is using scientic fact to hand you your ass on a plate. It is very amusing watching him being swarmed by a dozen IQ 80 mind controlled dolts all braying like jackasses “Global warming is a hoax” as he, all alone against many, cuts the lot of you into lunch meat.
Yes scientic fact is all he has, science not so much.
As low IQ talk and ad-hominem is all over the thread…
Anonymous looks to me like an arrogant individuum not able to read more then the headlines. From IQ looks rather average IQ, 98 maximum I would say.
Your comment is either a sock puppet of himself to help digest the severe blows he received or an even lower IQ character, probably 88 to 92.
It is not the one that screams louder all over the thread that is right and not the one that puts the last comment that wins the discussion.
Anonymous and you do not seem to have understood that, even worse, do not seem to be able to understand it.
让我举个例子吧。
If CO2 would be the climate driver as our AXXX says then the high CO2 in the atmosphere after Eemian would have kept the planet warm, or at least slowed down the cooling.
I have pointed this to AXXX at #384 however he was not able to digest that point. All he can do is repeat and post from other sites ignoring what he does not understand.
What happens when the planet is warming? Well CO2 is slowly degassed from the oceans. The oceans will continue to degass CO2 as long as parts of the ocean come to the surface and get warmer. The ocean is huge, it takes long. An interglacial is short, about 10k years, by the time it gets colder the oceans are still degassing, then start to absorb CO2. This is what we see in the ice cores.
Alarmists claim that CO2 is then responsible for 90% of the warming in an interglacial.
No model can reproduce and interglacial with such a sensitivity.
If it would be this, then the subsequent cooling could not have went all the way down with that much CO2 in the atmosphere.
Are you able to digest this? Is AXXX able to digest this?
No he is not ready and not able. It would need me many threads and a lot of post to slowly educate an average IQ and maybe never to explain to a low IQ.
So what does a higher IQ do? Well what many in the thread have done, you don’t argue with stupid, you try to tell them once, or twice, then you give up.
As you pointed AXXX is on a crusade. He though he won, stupid people think he won, as he undoubtedly will have the last word.
The others do not have all the time in the world and do not follow a missionary call on a crusade.
In the ice cores CO2 lags temperature. IT is written even on the site he is linking, yet he is still pretendind this is not the case an. Pointing to this simple sentence is not cherry picking, it is a simple fact.
I start again laughing when I reread his comments trying to run around the corner. Yes maybe CO2 contributes to the warming, but it still lags temperature.
甚至更多 high CO2 concentration does not stop the planet from cooling.
Thus CO2 is not the main driver. QED.
How stupid can you be not to understand this simple fact?
I agree with your general assessment of the quality of the postings from Anonymous.
Anonymous is clearly frustrated by the unwillingness of people to follow where the science is leading. While the science is indeed imperfect, there is more and more reason to think that the Earth is warming up and that we are contributing to that temperature increase.
What Anonymous has to realize is that most people who are not trained in a scientific field will have a hard time understanding the arguments and do not understand how and why science works. Most importantly, conviction has no place in a scientific argument, only verifiable observations that can be used to form models and make predictions.
With that being said, if one is going to engage in any rational discussion with others, leave out the name calling, even if you are dealing with individuals who are very closed minded and do not know enough to know that they are ignorant about the subject that they claim knowledge in.
In my eyes, the biographic details of Greta don’t matter. The main thing is that the young generation follows her call for action and claims its right of survival from the political class. The numbers which she mobilizes exceed a threshold beyond which they can’t be ignored. Therefore, there is hope that it becomes a movement of no return.
The realization of the ecological turnaround is an enterprise of immense dimensions. The climate change which is the theme of the present article, is only one of the multiple subjects related to the ecological crisis. The most important, overpopulation, has received only insufficient attention so far. Others as consumption of ressources, pollution of air, soil and water (in particular the sea) are each discussed separately. However, alltogether they form a network of interconnected factors. But we cannot change these factors brutally. This would not only be inhumane, but create increased inequality and also be counterprodutive. This means that social and cultural factors must also be included.
A network of this type must be treated holistically. Science has developed a tool for this: Systems Theory and its popular version, Systems Thinking. Did you hear about it? Probably not, because the knowledge about this branch of science is still kept within the ivory towers of our universities. Thus, if Greta sends the politicians to the scientists, they will not yet find them responsive. They have not yet recognized that their new tool is of fundamental importance for the project “Ecological crisis”, far beyond some applications in a few special disciplines.
As Greta has shown, the “Project” is a bottom-up effort which must be ported by all of us. However, after a century of ego-individualism, the general public is not trained for an altruistic cooperation in a large scale undertaking. Systems Thinking must become part of the basic training at all levels of education and professional training. Such programs must be adapted to the local level of knowledge. Special attention must be paid to third world countries in order to make them catch up rapidly with industrialized countries, but beware, they may have some knowledge, too, to contribute which we don’t have.
For more details concerning my explanations refer to my website.
Greta’s handlers, through her, are pushing on relentlessly in their drive towards world communism, and leftist fools such as yourself simply cannot see through this, that you are being used in the same perfidious manner as in tune with your stupidity and your own desire for world communism.
1973年以来一直是Authenticjazzman“ Mensa”的资格，经过机师培训的美国陆军兽医，也是专业爵士乐艺术家。
不要说
Maybe, just maybe, the objective of the “flooding” is not any “rational discussion”. It’s, perhaps, simply about feeling good by putting other people down. Among some other things.
Online self-therapy.
He has a good company in this pub, for sure.
That’s for “foot soldiers”. Always the same.
Now, for the true power, it’s more interesting.
The very methods used against….read this..”deniers” ( rings a BELL?..) online and in reality are calling for vigilance.
有其他 deeply wrong with all this. And more “they” push, more the ordinary people will realize that.
So…hehe….good.
At least you acknowledged that the planet is warming and CO2 is increasing, so we are making some progress…,….
“Anonymous is clearly frustrated by the unwillingness of people to follow where the science is leading. “
Correction – where he & the alarmists believes the science is leading.
The science is not pointing towards alarmism, not pointing towards a catastrophe, global extinction and so on, no matter how hard the drums of alarmism are beating.
Most realists do have a technical study and understand very well how science works, there are few alarmist who do it properly.
What I found is that most alarmists use precooked answers.
However once you asks a question that does not fit with a prepared answer they hide behind the finger, and answer with ad-hominem or ignore the argument.
This is not how a conversation about science works.
There were 4 points that I discussed with the Anonymous alarmist, he lost the argument on all 4 but was not capable of acknowledging it, as it does not fit his belief. Here is the problem.
1) CO2 in historical data is lagging temperature by 600 to 1000 years. This is widely documented and recognised, even on the site that he is linking to.
Saying that CO2 does contribute to warming does not mean it reverses the position.
Alarmists claim that CO2 is then responsible for 90% of the consequent warming.
How valid is this claim?
If it would be so, how can cold come fast without the CO2 being removed from the atmosphere?
According to them it should cool gradually about 10% no more ;), the atmosphere would lose some CO2 then cool a little bit again and so on as 90% of the warming was caused by CO2.
It is not how it happened, therefore their claim is not valid. The cooling shows clearly that CO2 is not in the driver’s seat, as climate driver.
2) Earth greening.
Our alarmist claims that in the period 1999-2015 the Earth did not benefit from CO2 enrichment, therefore from now on it is only worse with more CO2.
a) There are many thousands of scientific work that show plants do benefit from atmosphere with CO2 enriched.
b) NASA has covered a greater period then he picked up, 2000-2017 which shows 5% greening
c) Plants can better endure droughts in CO2 enriched atmosphere
It is obvious CO2 enrichment continues to benefit the planet.
Most C3 plants evolved with CO2 ppm in the thousands, it is so absurd to pretend otherwise and still… Oh well.
How does our alarmist follow where the science is leading?
He sees only his one chart, has no further arguments and insults.
No, this is not how science is followed.
3) GISS temperature charts
I simply posted one comparison between historical data in two periods by GISS. It shows changes to historical data that support the CO2 as main driver theory.
My personal assumption is that GISS is using their model to process the data and therefore with every new iteration the data fits more and more to the model.
He screamed hight treason and tried to accuse Toni Heller who is the creator of the respective chart of misrepresenting the data.
“Tony Heller is blatantly misrepresenting NASA GISTEMP data.”
Only after several replies by me was he forced to recognise that true, the data is real, that is GISS data:
“Funny how all the climate deniers assert that correcting data is bad, but when climate denier Roy Spencer adjusts the UAH satellite data through 6 versions for things like satellite orbit decay, it’s all good!”
Moving the goalposts much?
There is a different conversation about the need for adjustments, how many such are done and in what directions are the adjustments and so on, but why does one have to start with obvious lies?
4) PIOMAS
PIOMAS is a model that tries to model the ice volume.
They try to incorporate as much as possible from observations, but even the authors explain it clearly as I posted above. PIOMAS is not real data but a model.
This is why I prefer to work with ice extend which comes from direct observations.
Now our alarmists wants to take the PIOMAS results as gospel. This is no real data, it is a model.
I worked with models, I know how difficult is to model complex phenomena and I take the results of models with a grain of salt, even for models that have been validated against real data, especially when I do have real data to work with.
So in conclusion I strongly disagree to the suggestion that our alarmist understands where the science is leading.
I rather see him like another alarmist who hides behind predigested arguments that fit his own beliefs.
If Greta’s handlers were sincere in their intentions, they would not have picked a spokesgirl who could star in a remake of The Exorcist. Greta doesn’t realize she has been picked to turn people off to her bogus “message”. ” Renewables Will Save The Planet” and “Global Warming Is A Hoax”, two sides of the same worthless coin minted by experts in Psychological Warfare.
We on the mature side of life remember some other “end of the world; we must do something NOW” scenarios.
We also remember all-knowing PhDs, politicos etc. hammering all that on us. And, of course, people like “multiple Anon” here.
After some time all that becomes simply boring.
So, some of us reading/posting here, probably, simply don’t care much about all that tech stuff. I don’t.
No offense to experts in the field. Just me.
My interest in this, and related matters, is on the human side of the issue. Mental stuff if you will.
Or, what is 这 which drives these…ahm….”aware of the Problem” people to act like that? Those “foot soldiers” of the Movement. What drives the true power behind them is obvious.
You’re parroting two common denialist PRATTS (Points Refuted A Thousand Times) easily debunked at SkepticalScience.com:
1: Denialist PRATT: CO2 is coming from the ocean
2. Denialist PRATT: CO2 lags temperature
The first one provides evidence you never made it past 7th grade science class, because you’re trying to turn Henry’s Law on its head. When the partial pressure of a gas in the atmosphere increases, the dissolved gas in the liquid increases. Which has been observed, the oceans are steadily absorbing more CO2, not outgassing it. And the second one is related to the first. If you really think you’ve oceans are net outgassing CO2 right now, try writing a scientific paper on it. You’ll be a world-renowned hero if you’re correct in disproving Henry’s Law.
Repeating the same lies over and over and over again doesn’t make something true. If indeed you can prove that GISS data is corrupt, you’d be a world-renowned hero. The data is publicly available at the NASA GISS website, so go do the work. NASA GISS also addresses Tony Heller’s lies that have been made popular among the lower-IQ half of the Stupid Party, and you totally ignore that.
You haven’t yet thought of anything other than 莫伊 for a whole 5 days. I’m living in your head, rent free. 🙂 It’s because you’re frustrated in your quest to answer the question: what melts ice. Well, what melts ice?
> Mental stuff if you will.
Looks like we’ve got a pontificating “mental stuff” expert here, who can’t figure out what melts ice. No wonder he changed his diploma mill major to Amateur Soviet Psychiatry Studies. Still can’t determine what melts ice? Let’s give you hint:
Graph Source: Four Graphics (and a Book) that Help Explain Climate Change
https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/blogs/earthmatters/2016/01/25/four-graphics-and-a-book-that-help-explain-climate-change/
Do you really imagine that humans can evaporate earth’s vast coal beds and oil fields into our thin atmosphere with zero consequences? That’s “the human side of the issue” about melting ice. But you’re not even interested in “the human side of the issue.”
> Anonymous is clearly frustrated by the unwillingness of people to follow where the science is leading.
“peterAUS” did a good job of analyzing the fact that playing defense is a loser’s game (in comment #261.) Yet he insists on losing. I’m frustrated that Conservatives/Right (or whatever label you prefer) insist on playing defense instead of going on the offense, capturing the flag, and running with it.
An example of winning by accepting science: The Right’s HBD writers finally went on the offensive to capture the evolution flag.
Similarly, climate science could readily be used as evidence to justify common sense political policy like prohibiting immigration, as I have written in several comments.
Does the right want to win with science? Or does the right want to lose by ineptly rejecting it? That’s the choice.
感谢您的客气话。
And to clarify to others, my purpose of arguing here at Unz is not to win against an enemy, but to demonstrate a weapon to the home team, so that the Right can go on the offense, instead of always being on the defense, which is a loser’s game. Science is mighty sword;* presently, the Left is wielding it, while the Right tries to deny it exists. And losing. It’s time to pick up the sword of science and start winning, just like the HDB fellows have done by accepting evolutionary biology.
* the etymology of science derives from the Latin word scindere, “to cut, divide”
Well, he suggests, not insists (free will etc…) on starting to think about Secession. Yes, yes, I know, totally O.T. and, more importantly, totally unpopular in this (online) pub. Let’s not even talk about real-life alt-something. Boomers simply can’t have it.
He simply believes that, this issue wise, “we” (that means White Nationalists, another unpopular thing around) should use their time and energy on other pursuits. This is simply a distraction. As a topic.
What isn’t a distraction is the mindset of “multiple Anons” here. Because that’s pretty much the same mindset “we” (from above) see all the time when topics “we” care about pop up. Same methodology, same language, attitude, feel. Change “climate change” to “race”, “ethnicity”, “guns”…same.Hehe…let alone “secession”. And the last, but definitely not the least The THING (TM).
Plenty of examples here of that. The thread is a good exercise.
I am positive that “we” will need that skill more and more in times to come. Recognizing, after just one sentence, who, really, “we” are communicating with. And then act accordingly. Both online and much more importantly, in real life.
Online, he believes that endless …ump…”debating”….with “prog” opponents is counterproductive. “Climate Change” zealots among the rest.Time. Energy. Better to spend that time…say….doing own daily fitness routine. Or working on certain skillsets. Having fun. Whatever.
In real-life….it’s a bit more complicated, of course. For smart people.
I think it was in Gleick’s 混乱：创造新科学, but I remember reading decades ago that if one created a 3D grid of temp/wind/humidity/etc sensors placed one foot apart through the 整个 atmosphere and fed the data to a algorithm running on an 任意地 powerful computer, it would be able to predict the weather to about 3 weeks out. After that, the 缺失数据, that data falling unmeasured between the sensors would catch up to the system and it would go unpredictably off the rails. By 4 weeks, its predictions would have no connection to the real world.
这就是 理论 best that can be done with a 1’x1’x1′ 3D grid of sensors. I know weather ain’t the same as climate, and that climate is a much more general phenomena, but the data “climate science” has been looking at is orders of magnitude, indeed orders of orders of magnitude more general than that. They’re the equivalent of looking at the world through 100′ of stationary 1″ pipe and making conjectures about what the rest of it looks like.
At the end of the day, the earth’s temperatures have been going up and down since it solidified into a ball, and we should surely not be surprised that they’re going up or down even now.
Worst case? There’ll be a die-off. If you believe in that, the best advice for the individual is to collapse now and avoid the rush. Autarchy has salubrious effects even if the die-off never happens.
> By 4 weeks, its predictions would have no connection to the real world.
Except Wally Broecker’s 1975 model of global warming—the study in which the term “global warming” was coined—was remarkably accurate for 30 年. (see comments #315 and #324) So you don’t have the slighest clue what you’re banging on about. You’re simply parroting the same boring PRATTS refuted time and time and time again.
When will you stop telling flat-out lies? For example: “Guns.” I’m strong pro-2A, and am a single-issue voter on the 2A. You demonstrate all the same methodology, same language, attitude, feel of the Ephors, loser. Maybe there’s a reason you want to lose. Hmm?
Hehe…you don’t get it. It’s simple.
Your types have a 品格缺陷.
他们应该 不能 被信任。
Not only are you a born loser, you’re a habitual liar (e.g., blatantly misrepresenting my position on guns and the 2A.) Your malicious lying is a fatal character flaw. So is your inability to address reality. You still have yet to admit what melts ice. That’s SAD. Can you take a hint?
Why is all that warmth being retained on the earth now?
p.s. The only thing from which you’ve ever seceded is factual reality; as a secessionist, you must consider having your head up your ass your greatest success.
The computer he ran his model on had the computing power of a modern toaster. His data was no more than a quadrillionth of requirements. If it was accurate, and I see no reason to think we know whether it was or wasn’t, it was blind luck.
With well in excess of 100 comments in 5-6 days, you’re obsessed, if not yet barking mad. Suggest you join your kids in the pool so as to run some cover for the red eyes & sweat, and dissolve some of the long since dry spittle.
Peter’s right. You are a textbook case study.
> If it was accurate
There’s no “if” about it, moron. You can read and see a graph the analysis of Broecker’s 1975 model in my comment #315. And his is the most basic, primitive model of climate science. Later models have been getting more and more accurate.
You’re “science-man-bad” shtick isn’t any more effective than your character-assassination allies’ “orange-man-bad.” Did you obtain your debate strategy from Hillary Clinton?
Not only is there no human caused global warming, there is no significant global warming at all. Realclimatescience.com
Forecasts are not “facts”
All models incorporate assumptions.
All models are wrong, some are useful.
Science stays exactly the same, until it changes.
CO2 is not pollution, it’s plant food.
There is no scientific reason to conclude that ‘catastrophic anthropogenic global warming’ (CAGW) is on its way or poses any serious threat to humankind.
On the other hand, there are many genuine environmental hazards and pressing political crises facing humanity right now. The lives and well being of millions are at risk.
The case, in fact, can me made that a slight uptick in average temperatures worldwide could increase global food production and modestly benefit humankind. No one knows for sure. Surely, a general rise in CO2 will enhance food production and overall plant growth on Earth. This is good news.
I concede that it is impossible to know ‘future climate’ with any certainty. In fact, no one actually knows what the ideal average global temperature for planet Earth should be. Do you? Even warmists don’t know.
The link below provides a detailed, scientific examination (hosted by none other than Leonard Nimoy of Star Trek fame) on the perils posed by periodic and cyclical ‘global cooling’.
Fact: the Earth has had at least eight glacial periods (in No. America) over the past one million years alone. Glacial periods last far longer than mild and productive ‘interglacial periods’ such as the one we’re now living in. (Our interglacial period started about 13,500 years ago but it was seriously interrupted for about a century or so by the Younger Dryas Event).
Warmists hate to admit this (or even discuss it) but glacial periods are truly devastating to life. Warm periods on the other hand (‘interglacials’) are generally beneficial to life, especially human life, not to mention the rise of human civilization.
When the next glacial period returns it will be calamitous and deadly.
Please note that all the scientific ice core data as well as the biological evidence found in deep sea sediment discussed in the documentary below remains accurate and useful in understanding past climate patterns. This understanding allows us to predict future climate changes, even though our planet’s climate remains chaotic and somewhat unpredictable (a fact that warmists often deny).
Please note that this YouTube video has suspended comments on the documentary below. The suspension of comments is due to the fact that the warmist community hates people who doubt or who question their authority. Warmists therefore often rely upon censorship. As we’ve all observed, warmists also routinely defame people who doubt warmist certainty. This phenomenon has a name.
It has been identified as the ‘Warmist Authoritarian Personality Syndrome’ (WAPS). It’s been theorized that WAPS comes from feelings of sexual inferiority and low self-esteem. The onset of WAPS has also been linked to high levels of TV exposure and fear-driven propaganda.
In extreme cases, WAPS has been associated with the rise of politically correct totalitarianism as well as unjust taxation.
This personality syndrome explains why warmists tends towards hyper-dogmatism and political extremism. Warmists detest skepticism which they mislabel ‘denial’.
That the Trump Administration has made such a forecast is a fact; quit trying to play childish word-games to weasel out of reality, dumbass. Sure, water is plant food too, which means, by you logic, that it can never have a negative effect; go take a long walk off a short pier, and see if you can walk on the stuff. And tell us, would you analyze Wally Broecker’s famous—he coined the term “global warming”—1975 model (comment #315) as useful, or not?
> 根本没有显着的全球变暖。
LOL! Do you imagine ice melts as it gets colder, huh? Back in May, I made several charts with quotes from Tony Heller’s idiotic website that you suggest, Here’s 一个有趣的例子:
其他…
Tony Heller is such an utter embarrassment to even the lying sack-of-shit science-denialist community, that the fruitcake Anthony Watts had to chew him out and fire him from writing on his website. But I suspect he may have written under the pseudonym “彼得·巴金斯博士” for Unz.
> Makes sense, actually. All what “boomers”…you are a boomer….
Oops, yet another lie of yours, I’m not a boomer either. Like I said, your greatest success as a secessionist is separating yourself from reality by sticking your head up your ass. You’re a loser who thinks seceding all the port cities, rail heads, and transportation terminals to the enemy is a winning strategy. Apparently, you never heard of 物流.
But these facts still stand, in spite of your flailing attempts to ignore them:
• 4℃， 变暖 是特朗普政府在一个人的一生中做出的预测。
• 〜6°摄氏度 变暖 导致行星生命在 P-Tr 灭绝中几乎灭绝。
没有 serious threat to humankind? But there is. You missed the #1 comment, didn’t you?
• 4℃， 变暖 是特朗普政府在一个人的一生中做出的预测。
• 〜6°摄氏度 变暖 导致P-Tr灭绝的行星生命几乎灭绝。
And not only is a previous 6°C rise in average global temperatures a serious threat, the exceedingly fast rate of the rise makes it more so.
> When the next glacial period returns it will be calamitous and deadly.
So you’re one of those alarmist ice-age-now! flat-earthers. I suppose you follow the work of the the-dumb-cunt-who-can’t-do-teh-maths who states “the substantial temperature decreases are expected during the two grand minima to occur in 2020–2055,” (Zharkova, 2019) as touted a couple months ago by Unz contributor Lance Welton.
2020 is two and a half months away. Can’t wait to see those “substantial temperature decreases” over the next few years and watch all the “warmists” like Trump Administration official Mike Pompeo—who publicly states the Arctic sea ice is rapidly disappearing—be humiliated.
Rubbish. My model is the simplest, and I’d venture to claim is the only reliable one.
We know a priori that global temperatures by turns go either up or down when they’re not remaining stable. My climate model predicts that this behaviour will continue indefinitely, even when the data and climate models indicate otherwise.
It’s a matter of supreme indifference to me which of the 3 they’re doing now, as there’s simply no way to tell.
With that, I’ll leave you to your apoplectic ravings.
> My model
Which is where? Oh, right, you haven’t the slightest clue what a scientific model actually is. You don’t even know what “data” and “numbers” are. Your alleged “model” is nothing more than the #1 most parroted PRATT, that climate has changed before, but you haven’t the slightest clue what drives any of it.
> there’s simply no way to tell
For an imbecile in the lower-IQ half of the Stupid Party, true, just as there is no way for a feral pack of Negroes in a nyc classroom to grasp calculus; you haven’t the mental capacity.
You accuse me of “political extremism,”, because I propose a political policy of prohibiting immigration, in comments #3, #33, #218, #267, #278, #362, and #421.
Are you some Soros lackey who considers prohibiting immigration as extremist, markgreen? You must have a “refuges welcome” sign in your lawn. You’re just another lying sack-of-shit, as nefarious as Adam Schiff. But like the constant barrage of attacks on Donald J. Trump, you can’t hurt me by name-calling, I’m Teflon-Anon!
To all you self-styled skeptics who think you’re so very clever at proving theevhul wharmists are cheating on the data, well…
Guess what! When former global warming skeptics do their own analysis of the data, they show the Earth warming FASTER (!!!) 比那些 evhul wharmists at NASA GISTEMP, as follows:
Honest “deniers/skeptics” who are actually smart enough to analyze the data become 不-deniers. Come on in boys, the water is fine.
” They would have not picked a spokesgirl who could star in a remake of The Exorcist”
What you apparently don’t grasp is that the only type of supporters, young or old, they can find for their lunacy is in fact : Freaks. NO level-headed clear thinking person would ever align themselves with these madmen.
And for your sorely needed information : There is no such workable phenomena as : Psychological warfare, all psychology/psychiatry being humbug., pure nonsense.
阿杰姆
好评论。
Thanks for the good laugh and the pretty accurate description of the alarmists, the actual climate change deniers: they deny natural climate change.
Their mantra is that the current warming is unprecedented, never before seen on this planet, which actually only shows how ignorant they are.
As you mentioned the Younger Dryas Event was several orders of magnitute higher, with tremendous cooling happening in a very short period of time, decades or years, a 800 years or so reinstated ice age and a fast subsequent warming, but try to make a WAPS 😉 to understand that…
Modern warming is comparable to the Medieval Warm Period when not a little colder then it was, which seems reasonable as there was a continuous downtrend since Holocene optimum.
Funny watching you low-IQ NPCs parrot the tactics of the Leftists. Oh, that awful “hate!” Boohoo! Well, here’s yet another hate fact for you to examine. 🔬
How long will it take you to gather the courage to make an honest inquiry into what is melting ice around the globe? Or don’t you have sufficient character to honestly assess it?
You seem really smart on several subjects. Do you know what melts ice?
> Their mantra is that the current warming is unprecedented
错误。 〜6°摄氏度 全球化 变暖 导致P-Tr灭绝的行星生命几乎灭绝。
You sound like an idiot claiming that climate scientists don’t know about the abrupt climate change of the Younger Dryas.
Now, I have to ask you a question: Do you understand that Greenland is only a small fraction of the globe? Greenland isn’t the globe. The globe isn’t Greenland. Consider that for a second, ok? Has it sunk in yet?
> Modern warming is comparable to the Medieval Warm Period
Wrong. The Medieval Warm Period was regional, not the globe. A region of the globe is only a fraction of the globe. Do you know what the word “regional” means? Have you ever observed a globe before? Could you look at one before responding?
graph source: How does the Medieval Warm Period compare to current global temperatures?
https://skepticalscience.com/medieval-warm-period-intermediate.htm
不用去
和
This guy did some research there:
https://realclimatescience.com/the-history-of-the-modern-climate-change-scam/
I, personally, do remember the “dire threat of Ice Age”.
What is new, today is the effort behind all that.
It would be interesting to see (somebody could’ve already done it) who, exactly, are the people behind this girl and the latest use of children. Kids didn’t come up with the idea and put the organization together.
谁是, exactly, are the people who came up with the idea and organized all that. The 回到顶部 of that chain, that is. I have a feeling it can’t be more than 20 persons.
Holocene optimum was warm, and the earth is now warmer. Let’s look at NOAA’s article on it, rather than swallow your misinterpretation of the data.
source: What’s the hottest Earth has been “lately”?
https://www.climate.gov/news-features/climate-qa/what’s-hottest-earth-has-been-“lately”
> I, personally, do remember the “dire threat of Ice Age”.
Of course you do! Because you’re a dolt who was glued to sensationalist TV shows and rags, not reading scientific journals. Only 10% of the scientific literature from 1966 to 1979 predicted cooling. (彼得森，2008) All this has been documented in comment #161, but that doesn’t keep you TV-addled dolts from constantly trotting out PRATTS (Points Refuted A Thousand Times.)
> 我有种预感
A dolt with a case of Muh feelz is truly the best sort of evidence. Is this really how you go through life? At least you know what living as a woman is like, without going through all that transition crap. You didn’t do that, did you?
UN Agenda 21 and 2030, to turn America into a third world country.
Scary stuff, it sounds like an earlier Rabbi’s economic agenda I’ve read, “卖掉你所有的财产，把钱捐给穷人。” I think we’re on the same side, Desert Fox. As I said in comment #48, “I’m not really wanting to get rid of my multiple gas/diesel-powered SUVs and trucks and fun toys.”
I bet you don’t want to either. What these bleeding heart Rabbis and Liberals do not understand is—as I wrote in comments #2, #168, and #218—“energy conservation does not help.” Spiritually or climate-wise.
Want to join me and go rollin’ coal—I mentioned that in comment #104—on some Prius owners?
Well….I get the big picture. Was simply thinking about this exercise (the girl in the article and all those youngster protests around).
As this, for example:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/oct/07/four-teenage-girls-among-30-arrested-in-sydney-climate-protests
Now…not really people in Australia who got their marching orders from abroad.
那…team abroad…which organized all this.
为：
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/sep/27/climate-crisis-6-million-people-join-latest-wave-of-worldwide-protests.
Those are the names I’d like to see.
Always…”organisers”…never John Smith, Jane Smith…stuff like that.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_strike_for_the_climate
The idea for all this (“use the kids” on top of it) must’ve originated somewhere, by 一些 人。
Or…hehe….who were/are the members of the Inner Party who initiated all this?
> Those are the names I’d like to see. Always…”organisers”
From your reference: “Thunberg, one of the organisers.” If you want to out-organize an Aspie girlie with itty bitty titties, then you’re gonna need to start swinging some dick on this thing.
> …never John Smith, Jane Smith…stuff like that.
No! Super-scary! From your reference: “Thunberg, Anna Taylor, Luisa Neubauer, Kyra Gantois, Anuna De Wever, Adélaïde Charlier, Holly Gillibrand and Alexandria Villaseñor.” No John Smith there! I mean, who names their kid “Anna?” Jesus, those names sound spookier than the 👹monsters under your bed.👾
然而你 仍然 cannot manage to 组织 a coherent thought in your head to answer the question of 融化冰的东西。 Ever wonder why you feel you’re 防守 每时每刻？
I know the question regarding melting ice is really tough and has frozen your brain like a deer’s in the headlights, so maybe something easier will help.
Look at Kentucky, it was mostly green (zone 6) with a little dark green (zone 5) and now it’s all yellow (zone 7.) Is this a horticultural conspiracy organised by the Jooz?
> not only can you not explain
Easy-peasy, kermie:
• The Causes of Climate Change
https://climate.nasa.gov/causes/
• 全球变暖最简单的解释
https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2019/01/02/the-simplest-explanation-of-global-warming-ever/
The Flesch-Kincade grade level is 10.4 on the first, 9.8 on the second, so take your pick, if you can read at a high school level.
A couple things to consider, (a) the US is only 2% of the global surface considered in global warming, and (b) the dust bowl era of the 1930s is an example of regional human-caused climate change, drought and heat waves, from dust aerosols resulting from plowing up the prairie.
Many science-deniers like Tony Heller who bang on constantly about the Dust Bowl high temperatures in the US take full advantage of the fact that most Americans seem to think that the United States, 2% of the globe, is the whole globe.
xkcd中的动画片，它描述了Ivar Giaever对“ T”的行为
Ivar Giaever –诺贝尔物理学奖得主和气候伪科学家
https://skepticalscience.com/ivar-giaever-nobel-physicist-climate-pseudoscientist.html
> a network of interconnected factors…Systems Theory…Systems Thinking
True, true. Good stuff there, Christophorus. It may interest you to look into Tim Garrett’s (whom I reference several times above) work that uses System Theory; e.g., he writes, “For atmospheric scientists like myself, forecasting future human behavior becomes relevant where the goal is to provide society with forecasts of climate change. […] It seems extraordinary, but the implication is that we can begin to think of seemingly complex human systems as simple physical systems.” [资源]
In addition, factored into how humans respond to climate change is the concept of “time preference,” a topic covered even here at Unz. A journal article entitled Time perspective and climate change policy states, “The long delay between the times when society incurs the cost and reaps the benefit of climate policy may make cost benefit analysis sensitive to the discount rate [30,6,7,22,35]. Few people would defend the view that today’s generation should ignore the welfare of all generations in the distant future, but standard discounting assumptions imply approximately that attitude.”
Just like Negroes have too low IQ and too low time preference to succeed in civilized society, I’m afraid that all humans, Whites and northeast Asians included, have too low IQ and too low time preference to successfully navigate the current worldwide experiment of evaporating earth’s vast coal beds and oil fields into our thin atmosphere. We’re like monkeys with our hands caught in a monkey trap, and we self-styled sapient great apes just can’t let go of the fossil fuel bait.
> For the past 19 years I have directly witnessed the climate of SW Ontario go from harsh long winters of five months duration to short very mild winters
Same here, just watching how climate has quite obviously changed in my neck of the woods was my impetus to study global warming in more detail.
> we have RAIN in January the last five years!!!
Hell, even Santa’s workshop now sees unprecedented thunderstorms with rain and lightning. Crazy!
> even when it’s warm outside
假。
Climate denialists: Heatwaves have happened before.
Science says: Global warming is increasing the frequency, duration and intensity of heatwaves.
https://skepticalscience.com/heatwaves-past-global-warming-climate-change.htm
> Climate change will never be the same with solar particle forcing
LOL! Wrong.
The body of scientific research has determined that GCRs [Galactic Cosmic Rays] are actually not very effective at seeding clouds. However, the hypothesis is also disproven just by examining the data. Over the past five decades, the number of GCRs reaching Earth has increased, and in recent years reached record high numbers. This means that if the GCR-warming hypothesis is correct, this increase in GCRs should actually be causing global cooling over the past five decades, and particularly cold temperatures in recent years.
On the contrary, while GCRs are up, global temperatures are also way up, and temperatures in recent years reached record highs.
https://skepticalscience.com/cosmic-rays-and-global-warming.htm
Hot Arctic today, but guess what everybody’s talking about…
Why? Google “weakened polar vortex,” or “warm arctic, cold continents phenomenon,” or “wavy jet stream” to learn why.
After I checkmated you last time on the last global warming thread, you are at it again.
I clearly proved that CERN has proven that cosmic rays cause cloud condensation nuclei to form on biogenic aerosols. And that in the entire southern hemisphere clouds are formed by biogenic aerosols. Probably a significant part of the northern hemisphere’s clouds are as well since 60% is covered by water. And I proved that it is the sun that determines the cosmic ray bombardment of the earth. Svensmark has been proven right and the sun does dictate our climate
Clearly clouds are a much bigger driver of climate than CO2.
But you guys are relentless in your zeal. Just like the Swedish child who is going to lecture us all and who is probably clueless about who Svensmark is. The earth is doomed because of people like you.
You begged me 观看 the CERN Cloud experiment video. I watched it. This is what it said at approx. 3 minutes and 24 seconds into the video:
You’re the midwit dolt who checkmates himself by proving himself wrong. All the CERN experiments will do is make the global warming models more precise. That’s it. Go watch the video you begged me to watch.
> probably clueless about who Svensmark is
You’re the one clueless about the many journal articles that consider and disprove his hypothesis, as addressed 点击此处, 点击此处及 点击此处.
It was 4 degrees below zero in White Sulfur Springs Montana this morning and 18 degrees where I live in Montana with snow on the ground after a three day snow storm and record cold temps through out the state.
Indeed, record lows and highs are constantly being set in our nation. However, fewer and fewer record lows—lows which deniers emphasize—are being set, while more and more record highs—highs which deniers never seem to remember—are set. The resources below, for which you have paid with your tax dollars, will help you understand. Avail yourself of them, as follows:
Climate Change Indicators: High and Low Temperatures
https://www.epa.gov/climate-indicators/climate-change-indicators-high-and-low-temperatures
Source: Findings of the U.S. Global Change Research Program Climate Science Special Report
https://science2017.globalchange.gov/chapter/executive-summary/
To help you understand better: Global warming causes the jet stream or polar vortex to weaken and become “wavy” or “wobbly,” which, like leaving open a freezer door, allows blasts Arctic air to wander far south. Meanwhile, the Arctic is much hotter, a phenomenon scientists are calling “warm arctic/cold continents.” Forbes has a great article on it, with this graph from NOAA’s website:
A couple other resources you may peruse, of which I will take some screenshots. The first here is from http://earth.nullschool.net, showing the polar vortex/jet stream (winds at 250 hPa height) in the pattern just like the above NOAA chart. Notice how “wavy” or “wobbly” the jetstream is, dipping way below normal latitude and causing the freakish cold you feel.
第二是 http://climatereanalyzer.net which shows that “warm arctic/cold continents” phenomenon we’ve seen this week:
All that cold “polar vortex” air you felt in Montana used to be contained further north when the polar vortex wasn’t so wavy-gravy.
The activities of Termites result in more CO2 being emitted into the atmosphere than the activities of all of humankind together. The AGW theory is not a scientific theory (falsifiable theory that can be tested by repeatable experiment) so the author is wrong to give it any credence whatsoever.
It is a nonsense to deny that human activity contributes to changes in the climate. This is because human activity must be an input into the system that results in the output that is “climate”.
It is also an impossibility to deny that sloths and herring contribute to changes in the climate, via the same logic.
It is also an impossibility to claim to be able to determine what any single input (contributed by any category of being over any course of time) will have on the final output (global climate) as the interaction between all the many millions of inputs is too complex for humans to comprehend.
Correlation with your theory does not imply causation (at all). Temperatures in the US are not representative of global climate. Widescale measurements of temperature (said to be representative of the entire landmass ‘the USA’) are unreliable now, and the idea that they were accurate in 1850 is laughable. You’re jumping on correlations in the manner of a zealot convinced that the manifestation of every physical phenomena proves the existence of his/her God.
The cycle of life, including termites, adds no 净 CO2 to the atmosphere. Animals breath out CO2, but they also eat plants that take up CO2.
> falsifiability [Karl Popper]
Wrong again. You’re 0-2.
> Correlation with your theory does not imply causation (at all).
Wrong. First, yours is a false statement, a lie-by-omission. The shortest true statement that can be made about causality and correlation is one of the following: (a) “Empirically observed covariation is a necessary but not sufficient condition for causality.” (b) “Correlation is not causation but it sure is a hint.” Second, causality has been established, despite your idiotic braying that it hasn’t.
> 靠不住
错误。
> sloths and herring contribute to changes in the climate
Wrong. The carbon cycle of life between plants and animals adds zero net carbon to the atmosphere. You forgot the other half of the carbon cycle that most people learned in 7th grade science class. Time to bone up on what you’ve lost…
If animals eat plants that take up CO2, then surely this leads to an increase in CO2 in the atmosphere. In what respect is that a counterbalance to a produce a net zero (as you suggest above)? In what respect are the particulars of Termite behavior different to the particulars of human behaviour such that Termites’ CO2-producing behavior can be rationalized and excluded as being part of the “cycle of life” or “the regular carbon cycle” or as being “natural”, whereas humans’ behaviors cannot? Misanthropy. Nonsense. If Termites take over the planet, and the particular nature of their lives results in net CO2 output, then that would be part of the “regular carbon cycle” which cannot exist in a stasis.
A falsifiable prediction used to inform a statistical model of a complex natural system does not mean that separate theory as to how that system will behave in future is falsifiable/can be subjected to repeated observation.
– The theory is that human activity will lead to catastrophic warming in climate in the near future.
– A model is an attempt to replicate a complex system, such that you can determine which inputs lead to which outputs
Neither represent falsifiable theories or conclusions, which can be subject to repeated experimentation. For example, an exact representation of all global and extraterrestrial inputs into the earth’s atmosphere at any single point in time, or over a long period of time, can never be replicated as inputs into a computer model, such that you can actually test whether the computer’s calculated input matches the output in the real world. N.O.N.S.E.N.S.E
Your report states;
But you stated above that AGW theory was a falsifiable theory that could be subject to repeated experimentation? Strange that the paper you reference explicitly contradicts that statement.
This is a study which states that, where any change in real-world phenomena is consistent with modelling, that correlation can be taken as validation of the relevant model’s explanation of the cause of that change. This is NONSENSE, does NOT meet the scientific standard, is completely insane with respect to any complex modelling. It is INSANE. If you do complex modelling of e.g. a financial market, you do not take any single instance of a trend in the market which is consistent with what your model predicts as absolute validation of your modelling. That is SO WRONG.
Humans are animals, so according to your stated theory above, human activity adds zero net carbon to the atmosphere. Thanks and great that you’ve given up your cause so early.
I stated the idea that there was in any way, an accurate record going back to 1850 is ridiculous. The link above just states that people are trying hard in the year 2011. So not relevant to my point. And your link is superficial in any case. In isolation, 30,000 thermometers (located overwhelming on the land and concentrated in particular areas) obviously do not measure the “global temperature” (single digit) such that we can say that the “global temperature” (singularly) is going up or down. Garbage again.
Must see Russian take on this.
Greta’s handlers: political pedophiles
“This 10 minute segment is from “In the Evening,” a news talk show from the Motherland. They absolutely nail the climate scam…”
和：
https://thepeoplescube.com/peoples-blog/greta-s-handlers-political-pedophiles-t20961.html
You imagine that philosopher Karl Popper is the Grand Poupon and sole arbiter of science. He’s not. Basically, you’re trying to invalidate science that can’t be done in a laboratory setting. Studying sunspots? INVALID! Studying the ocean? INVALID! You sound like you’re retarded, which when it comes to science deniers like yourself, it pretty close to reality.
> If animals eat plants that take up CO2, then surely this leads to an increase in CO2 in the atmosphere.
Wrong, halfwit. That is an idiotic statement, but it leads me to think you probably believe in perpetual motion machines too.
> If Termites take over the planet…
They already have taken over the wooden blockhead on you shoulders.
Trying to be as clever as Slick Willy isn’t helping you. Let’s break it down Barney style for you:
1. By breathing, humans add no CO2 to the carbon cycle.
2. By burning fossil fuels, they do add tons of CO2 to the atmosphere.
Got the difference?
While your objections are hare-brained garbage, you would do well to consider the work of 伯克利地球, folks who “found merit in some of the concerns of skeptics. They organized a group of scientists to reanalyze the Earth’s surface temperature record, and published their initial findings in 2012.” http://berkeleyearth.org/about/ They found that the several temperature records are accurate, and even more conservative in measuring global warming than theirs. You can see their chart, compared to NASA’s GISTEMP in my comment #442.
At any rate, even if humans hadn’t ever invented thermometers, polar and glacial ice around the globe is melting rapidly. Do you have any idea what melts ice?
Any clue at all, my little thermometer-doubter?
单向阀 地球工程观察网 和 停止犯罪网 和 地球脉动网.
Thank you for your constructive reply. I read with interest the article from Tim Garrett and was pleased to find there ideas similar to mine, e.g. that the laws of nature (called the laws of physics by Garrett) are universal, i.e. they are also valid in fields different from those of the natural sciences as are economy, sociology or psychology. This fact allows for useful cross references between domains of human activity.
Another interesting finding was the notion of time preference. Indeed, this is an important parameter of human decision taking. It describes the degree of our reponsability with respect to the future of the planet. 100% would mean that we assume our role in the evolution as any other species on the planet even independent of what the outcome will be.
You made my day. I’m glad that you found those two topics of interest; it’s a pleasure to make such a connection.
> they are also valid in fields different from those of the natural sciences as are economy, sociology or psychology
Indeed, I heartily concur! Even to the extent that life itself is merely a subset of physics, i.e., the 4th law of Thermodynamics, a.k.a. Maximum Power Principle (Lotka, 1922; Odum, 1994). Another young whippersnapper has figured it out too.
Some peoples’ disagreeable political reactions to a science do not negate the science evidence. If you could cancel scientific evidence by equivocating “guilt by association” to some peoples’ political reactions to the science, you then could overrule the validity of E=MC2 because you don’t like the politics of MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) that has kept you hometown under a nuclear Sword of Damocles since 1949. Sure, it’s bat-shit crazy, but it doesn’t follow that E=MC2 is a “scam.”
The only scam here is your avoidance of the evidence behind what melts ice on a global scale.
– You said that climate science was a falsifiable theory which could be tested via repeatable experimentation.
– I show you that a study that you’ve just cited explicitly states that it is not. In its introduction.
Just say you’re wrong. It’s not hard. Modelling a complex system is fine, but it isn’t a way of testing or proving a theory about the behavior of that complex system. Stop being a fraud and pretending that is.
If plants take CO2 out of the atmosphere (their existence reduces the volume of CO2 in the atmosphere), how can consumption of (destruction of) plants by animals offset the volume of CO2 that those animals expel into the atmosphere?
自我解释。
I thought human AGW zealots usually tried to offset carbon emissions by PLANTING trees and vegetation, not by eating them.
请解释一下。
Of course, ice melt in a particular location in the Swiss Alps might demonstrate warmer temperature at that particular location. But I thought you were claiming that the entire globe was getting warmer in a singular fashion? Surely you wouldn’t take evidence of warmer temperature in one particular location as evidence of your grand theory, would you? Surely you couldn’t be so unremittingly stupid? Or does evidence of decades of ice increases in various locations (e.g. Antartica) show that the entire globe is cooling? You wouldn’t claim otherwise would you, my little thermometer-doubter?
And again your link didn’t address the points I made, the study group just checked whether the readings should be adjusted for urban heat effects, which isn’t what I was talking about.
让我为你分解一下。
1. By breathing, termites, human-beings and all other beings add no net CO2 to the atmosphere, according to your hippy GAIA theory. You claim this is offset because animals often *破坏* vegetation (??!?) (I think you mean aid in the reproductive processes of vegetation)
2. By burning fossils, humans do add CO2 to the atmosphere. As a result of their particular behavior in consuming dead foliage, termites emit CO2 into the atmosphere, as a result of their particular digestion process (of which CO2 and methane are by-products).
You’re an idiot who doesn’t understand 7th grade science class on the cycle of carbon. Animals eat carbon based life, they breath carbon into the atmosphere, the rather undestroyed vegetation of earth takes up that carbon again, and round and round it goes. Stop braying like a jackass about things you can’t get, but the average 7th grader can.
Ice is melting glaciers and ice caps all around the globe, not in a single location, moron.
> decades of ice increases in various locations (e.g. Antartica)
错误。
> 城市热效应
Wrong. Yet another denialist PRATT.
Deliberately misrepresenting a simple 7th grade science lesson about the carbon cycle doesn’t help you efforts to deny science. Animals have been eating plants for millions of years, and surprisingly, plants are still around. Explain how you can’t grasp that.
> 你说 | No, I didn’t. Re-read what I said and what I quoted, and stop trying your various strategies at misrepresentation. Some aspects of climate science are falsifiable, as noted by the American Geophysical Union, which I quoted, and you wish to misquote. Which makes you the fraud.
> 造型。 | And now it’s onto the 6th most favorite PRATT (Points Refuted A Thousand Times) of all time. You’re like a dog returning to eat its vomit. Sadly, you don’t even understand what science is. As John von Neumann stated, “The sciences do not try to explain, they hardly even try to interpret, they mainly 制作模型设立的区域办事处外，我们在美国也开设了办事处，以便我们为当地客户提供更多的支持。“
No I EXPLICITLY said in my reply to you that i was NOT talking about urban heat effects. Obviously you feel unable to retort the points I’ve made to you. Hard luck.
Two links claiming that ice is increasing in Antartica:
doi:10.3402/polar.v28i2.6120.
https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/nasa-study-mass-gains-of-antarctic-ice-sheet-greater-than-losses
Because there is measurement indicating that ice volumes are increasing in one geographic region (the Antartic), this must mean the entire globe is cooling (<— pastiche of your "logic").
谢谢。
Again, what you originally said to me was:
Please explain to me – given what you wrote above – how the process of animals eating plants 结余 their expelling CO2 via respiration, such that it becomes net zero. Please explain this to me. Or just admit you don’t understand the theory you’re trying to expound to me. Because you’ve clearly got it wrong haven’t you, you total idiot. Again, no-one goes around trying to offset their carbon emissions by eating trees or more vegetation – they do so by 种植 more vegetation. You total clown.
来自世界各地的科学家越来越多地 拒绝 热衷分子使用情绪化和政治化的恐吓策略来宣扬未经证实的假设，即灾难性的人为全球变暖（CAGW）即将来临。
对于资金雄厚的热派团体来说，他们的预测不断失败，这重要吗？没有永不。他们只是不断推迟“气候灾难的日子”。这种花招使他们的假设无法被证伪。
我们必须缓和他们政治化的确定性和情绪化。全球平均气温的温和上升也可能对人类有利，特别是当人们考虑到二氧化碳的广泛环境效益时。
因此，必须抵制狂热的歇斯底里。理性必须占上风。
https://abruptearthchanges.com/2019/07/07/90-leading-italian-scientists-sign-petition-anthropogenic-origin-of-global-warming-is-an-unproven-hypothesis-catastrophic-predictions-not-realistic/
> 世界各地的科学家越来越拒绝 |错误的。恰恰相反。 97%是旧数字； 99%+是新的 同意的科学家百分比。
> 他们只是不断反击 |又错了。恰恰相反。 比预期快 是新的口号。
• 欧洲变暖 快于预期 由于气候变化，28年2019月XNUMX日，美国地球物理联盟
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/08/190828100544.htm
• 科学家一直低估气候变化的速度
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/scientists-have-been-underestimating-the-pace-of-climate-change/
• 新的气候模型预测气候变暖激增
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2019/04/new-climate-models-predict-warming-surge
> 我们必须磨炼
Can’t do that without credibility, and denying the nose on your face and other science-denying tactics, is the best way to shoot your credibility in the foot.
Funnily enough, I wasn’t disputing there has been coexistence of animals and plants for a long time. You don’t seem to be able to understand what is under dispute. Oh dear. What I would like you to explain is 选择您 theory, that 您 posited above, which is that:
1. animals respire CO2
2. plants take in CO2, and animals eat plants.
3. the above two facts equate to all (non-human) animals having net zero CO2 output (because these non-human animals necessarily eat plants (in itself not true))
THIS IS THE THEORY YOU HAVE POSITED NUMEROUS TIMES ABOVE. FOR THE 10th OF ASKING, PLEASE CAN YOU TELL ME HOW IT MAKES ANY SENSE AT ALL.
> Please explain this to me. | Carbon cycle. 7th grade science lesson.
Do I have to explain what a cow is too?
You actually need to read the NASA study you linked to, if you can read. First sentence mentions “the increased losses from its thinning glaciers.” That’s from global warming. And yes, ice mass is increasing in part of Antarctica, the Eastern side, because of increased snowfall from global warming, i.e., “the air became warmer and carried more moisture.” Got it? The scientists who wrote the study you’re trying to misconstrue actually have warned that denialists like you would misconstrue their study. That makes them behavioral scientists too, with precise predictive powers of liars like you.
Why this 2015 NASA study is beloved by climate change skeptics
https://bigthink.com/politics-current-affairs/2015-nasa-study-antarctic-ice-climate-change-skeptic
Play your games all you want, nobody is fooled by your misrepresentations. And there are more current studies that you ignore. Why are you ignoring them, if you think NASA is a great source, hmm?
说过：
“Trump obviously believes in human caused (by CO2) global warming, because he says so, made such a statement, and signed his name to that unequivocal statement.”
“Obviously” LOL Where?
You are simply lying, he has never said that CO2 is responsible for “global warming” and you have not, cannot show that he has.
我注意到 您 added “(by CO2)”.
You are in over your head here.
have another:
Trump Administration Targets CO2 Standards for Vehicles: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/trump-administration-targets-co2-standards-for-vehicles/
再见。
Trump didn’t have to scientifically explain the mechanics of global warming or mention the specific chemical CO2 when Donald J. Trump signed the document that stated this:
How else do you think Donald J. Trump meant to “control climate change,” other than by reducing CO2, hmm? Cook up one of your grand conspiracy theories about that.
显然，科学家之间存在分歧。然而，关于人为“全球变暖”的炮制“97％的科学共识”（哎呀！让其成为“气候变化”）正在悄然搁置。
事实上，所谓的“97%共识”从一开始就是一个骗局。可悲的是，不诚实的行为贯穿了温暖主义社区的血液。我们真正的怀疑论者（不是你们“怀疑论者”网站上的假“怀疑论者”）什么时候才能得到全球变暖阴谋集团的承认，他们错了 反复 在他们的预测中？反复。
你就不能承认你的时间表已经偏离了很远吗？他们有。那么为什么不承认呢？来吧：坦白。它可能会让你成为一个更好的人。
事实：北极地区的北极熊数量健康且不断增加。北极海冰并没有像预测的那样融化。灾难性的海平面上升尚未发生。植物和农作物不会因天气的微小（和正常）变化而受到干扰（粮食占平均家庭预算的百分比处于历史最低水平）。你的世界末日场景只是一个大汉堡。我们不买它。
现在吃药并上床睡觉。
> 然而“全球变暖”（哦哦！让“气候变化”）
That never was the case, liar. Climate change was a term in existence in 1956, long before global warming was coined in 1975. I’ve explained it comments #41 and #295 already, with good references to the original articles, yet you continue to lie and lie and lie some more about it. And the remainder of your post is a Gish快乐 of more lies, misrepresentations that have been refuted a dozen times already in this thread. I’m not going over all them for the third time with you.
> 现在吃药并上床睡觉。
Oh, so you’ve got your credentials to practice online Soviet Psychiatry now. Did that come with your Barbie and Ken house?
确实很让人烦恼。确实。
w h a t a r e y o u s p o o k s u p t o ?
It’s telling how lower-IQ half of the Stupid Party acts like a pack of feral Negroes in attacking a girl for acting White.
The government has been spraying chemtrails over Montana for the past week and today Sunday the 13 of October , they sprayed all night and this morning and have a grayish haze across the sky, and this is to ionize the atmosphere to enable HAARP to send microwaves to attempt to control the weather by guiding the jet stream and guiding storms, hurricanes, tornadoes , cold fronts etc..
单向阀 地球工程观察网
OK, I don’t get it.
You’ve posted ~175x in this thread, issuing a Biblical flood of hair-on-fire warnings both that “climate change/global warming” will have catastrophic consequences for humans and all other life, 和 that nothing can be done about it.
I agree that if “climate change/global warming” is in fact underway, then the planet is on a climactic trajectory that we can do nothing/infinitesimally little to change.
However, the notion of embracing and politically weaponizing this useless info to reverse decades of entrenched immigration policy is as deranged as trying to stop “climate change/global warming” itself.
In any case, only you see the memetic connection between them, and you haven’t bothered to articulate either that or any strategy you might use had you successfully shown it.
IOW, you’re just another source of noise.
所以，它就是这样。
Some of those who subscribe to “global warming” embrace the change and plan for survival, others head for their graves with their hair on fire. As one whose jury is still out (and fully expected to remain so), I simply hedged my bets.
> only you see
Wrong, my opinion is backed by published science.
> to reverse decades of entrenched immigration policy is as deranged
Ok, Mr. Soros, we know you want everybody to think reversing immigration policy is “deranged.”
> you haven’t bothered to articulate
Actually, I have. You haven’t bothered to read, or don’t have the ability to comprehend. Oh well.
> you’re just another source of noise.
No, one does not write six paragraphs to dismiss mere 噪声. Something is bothering you, most likely mortality salience, and your defense mechanism to assuage your mortality salience is denial.
> plan for survival
Survival of a species requires habitat. When habitat is destroyed, extinction results. Remember, the Trump administration has already promised a 〜4°摄氏度 increase in global average temperature within a single human lifetime.
> others head for their graves
You’re not dodging a dirt nap in the Sixth Mass Extinction that humans are causing on the planet.
> hair on fire
Ok, Mr. Soros.
Um, either you have a reading comprehension problem, or are simply disingenuous. Your snipping of quotes out of context is so patently obvious as to suggest the latter. Below, I added and highlighted the relevant context, exposing your ravings as the attempt to create maximum noise. To whit….
No science, published or otherwise, could establish a 模因 link btwn climate and immigration, or anything else, which is presumably why you cut out the salient part of what I wrote.
No, as is clear from the contextualized quote, I don’t “want everybody to think” immigration is irreversible. It can certainly be reversed, but not by waving charts & graphs with your hair on fire. As in Bismarck’s day, the great questions of the day will not be decided by fine speeches and majority votes, but by blood and iron. It’ll take plenty of both.
Oh, where have you articulated the memetic link btwn climate and immigration, pray tell?
I’ve seen estimates based on genetic studies that the eruption of Mt Toba 75k yrs ago reduced the planets human population to ~2k individuals. Whether 2k, 20k or 200k, humans survived and eventually multiplied because they could adapt their habitat to their needs and/or seek out other habitats. Whether the species survives or not will be decided in the fullness of time, but I’ll never know. All I know is that me and mine will survive in the event of a rapid onset of global warming. Likely, in reasonable comfort.
If you haven’t hedged, well I’m sure everyone here will agree that you won’t be missed.
As for writing six paragraphs “to dismiss mere noise”, welcome to Unz Review. Fools aren’t gladly suffered here. They’re taken down in flames.
> link btwn climate and immigration | Got it for you, 模因 or not, in my comment #3, i.e., “How Immigration May Affect Climate Change Mitigation: Immigration Overloads our Resources Needed to Mitigate Extreme Weather Events,” a title mimicking the one found here: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/immigrations-effect-on-evironment/
> will survive in the event of a rapid onset of global warming | Oh cool! How? Are you transforming into below-squirrel-size, warm-blooded dinosaurs? Me too; see ya in Qikiqtaaluk. Wanna go Eskimo with our wives as we “do the evolution?” (Pearl Jam, 1998) Yaba-daba-doo! 🙂 Keep in mind the hothouse temps a comin’, i.e., “如果二氧化碳排放量持续增加，地球将回到三叠纪时期-甚至更糟设立的区域办事处外，我们在美国也开设了办事处，以便我们为当地客户提供更多的支持。“ Oh wait, that’s not your wife’s nasty pussy, what the hell is that smell coming in the air tonight, Oh Lawd?
No it hasn’t. There are no “chemtrails”, what you are seeing are condensation trails(often called contrails) the vast majority of which are formed by commercial air transport aircraft. You can prove this for yourself by using Flightradar24
https://www.flightradar24.com
When you see a “chemtrail” being formed look on FR24 and you can see all about the aircraft which is forming the trail.
You made my night. I slept well after receiving your encouraging comment. Thank you. It is refreshing to meet a being with human reactions in this basket of crabs.
If the cause of the climate is not determined with certainty (what I don’t believe), it is precautious to undertake the necessary steps to reduce the CO2 emission. The time scale of the warming periods are long. We cannot wait several thousand years to be sure that another natural cooling cycle is under way. It would be interesting to know whether data collected with ice cores allow for a Fourrier analysis to know more about the fine structure of temperature cycles.
But my preoccupations are on another frontline. Our minds are stuck in the cartesian-newtonian worldview (paradigm) which is not suited to confront the complexity of the ecological crisis. We lack a meta-level of understanding, a meta-view. This meta-level mind should not only comprise a strong rational component, but also an intuitive-spiritual component which intervenes when we reach the limits of science. The two components should form an interactive loop in order to control each other. At present, forces are at work which try imperatively that this new mind cannot arise (see “The Crucifixion of the Goddess” on Unz Review). More on this subject in “From Reason to Consciousness” on my website (indicated above). I should be interested to read your comment. I appreciate the discussion with you.
After perusing your website, it elicited in my mind the following Jungian-inspired dream art entitled Anima mit Lichterkrone painted by Peter Birkhäuser and published in his book Licht aus dem Dunkel:
We humans often vainly speak of Mother Nature (or God/Creator) in nurturing tones, a 盖安 parent who loves her offspring, but Peter Ward argues that Mother Earth has no problem murdering her children like the Greek mythological goddess 美狄亚. He posits in his text “美狄亚假说：地球上的生命最终会自我毁灭吗？” that multicellular life, understood as a superorganism, is suicidal, attempting to return the Earth to the microbial-dominated state it has been for most of its history. We humans are repeating the PETM mass extinction, in short, (1) increase CO2, (2) change ocean state to fatal warm/anoxic, (3) 95% extinction rate from hydrogen sulfide produced by anaerobic purple sulfur bacteria. These three steps are outlined in Ward’s text “Under a Green Sky设立的区域办事处外，我们在美国也开设了办事处，以便我们为当地客户提供更多的支持。“
I wish we humans weren’t committing suicide. We could avoid planetary suicide by, as you say, taking the “necessary steps to reduce the CO2 emission.” But the concerned individual is powerless, because their conservation efforts only makes fossil fuel cheaper for the next bastard to buy. Plus, riding a bicycle along side road-raging SUVs is suicidal in itself; hence I’ve got a couple SUV behemoths myself. Which makes me sort of two-faced, like this next Jungian-inspired dream-painting by Birkhäuser, Der Gespaltine (The Cloven Man):
I’m certain several of Unz’s basket of crabs (I’m crabby too! 😉 ) feel the same 分裂, as many have expressed sorrow at the way the earth’s environment is being destroyed through various ways (even if they don’t accept the scientific evidence of global warming) yet still unavoidably participate in that destruction.
也许是 系统思维 we need to realize the most is that God/Mother Nature/the Creator might be murderous, like Medea. This is hard to admit. We’ve all had in our heads that the Earth is some creamy nougat upon which to endlessly feast our appetites, all the while Mother Nature/Creator/God is an evil witch enticing us with treats into her oven. A wizened child admits a parent has flaws.
In closing, I’ll leave you a treat by marine biologist Bonnie Eldred [1910-1991], a book of her poetry and stipple art, something all biologists have to learn in undergrad, entitled “Mother Earth is a Bitch” (Valkarie Press, 1974.) God/Momma is a killer bitch. We need to deal with that fact, systematically. How? I yet do not know.
While you dumbly call PIOMAS (Arctic sea ice volume) and global warming a hoax because you don’t understand the math or scientific models, neither Russia nor China are so stupid as you.
Charts Source: https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/russia-announces-massive-nuclear-war-games-arctic-week
There will be serious strategic consequences for science-denial nation.
对不起，格蕾塔，但你错了。
摆脱工业文明，一石二鸟——人口下降和全球变暖。有人把泰德叔叔从 SuperMax 中救出来来引导 勒德肥沃。 🙂
我是一名岩土工程师，研究过地质学并且一直对此感兴趣。我会说一件事——搜索世界各地火山释放的二氧化碳，并比较人类释放的二氧化碳。
气候变化是真实存在的，而且以前也发生过。然而，一座大火山可以释放出足够人类数千年都无法释放的二氧化碳。所以我的观点是——如果大自然想要气候变化，人类就无能为力。它就会发生！
Are humans not part of nature? Duh! That’s the big mistake you’re making. Humans are changing the climate 方式 比二叠纪末期火山灭绝的速度还要快。
“将全球升温幅度限制在摄氏XNUMX度并不能防止破坏性和致命的气候影响，正如一度希望的那样，数十名专家在周一发布的一系列科学研究中得出了结论。
长期以来被视为气候安全星球的最高温度高达2摄氏度（华氏3.6度）的世界可能会因海平面上升，人均收入下降，区域粮食和淡水短缺而导致大规模流离失所，以及动植物物种的流失速度加快。
根据英国皇家学会《哲学交易》 A的研究，亚洲，非洲和拉丁美洲的贫穷和新兴国家将遭受最严重的打击。
布里斯托大学副教授丹恩·米切尔（Dann Mitchell）说：“我们正在发现2C世界对气候的巨大影响，因此应采取措施避免这种情况。”
于197个国家签署的巴黎气候条约于2015年签署，誓言要与2世纪中叶的水平相比，在“远低于” 19C的条件下停止变暖，并“努力”将上升幅度限制在1.5C。
https://phys.org/news/2018-04-degrees-longer-global-guardrail.html#jCp
“抽象的
根据对 100 年前 11,602 个月发表的 7 篇有关“气候变化”和“全球变暖”的同行评审文章的审查，研究科学家对人为全球变暖的共识已达到 2019%。
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0270467619886266?journalCode=bsta#articleShareContainer
What basic science? That CO2 is a greenhouse gas? Is that it? So what?
What hasn’t been known till very recently is how the sun, which was assumed to be a constant, and which had no effect on climate on human timescales, is not the constant it was presumed to be. More and more science is proving the contrary, and that our sun is more variable than we had thought and thus it impacts climate in ways we did not know.
For example, we now know that the solar wind has a huge role to play in climate. We know this because we now know that galactic cosmic radiation causes cloud condensation nuclei to form. The more cosmic radiation, the more clouds and the cooler the earth gets. And the solar wind dictates how much cosmic radiation the earth gets. High solar winds protect the earth much better from galactic cosmic radiation than low solar winds do. And the solar wind is in constant flux.
During high solar magnetism the solar wind is strong. During low solar magnetism the solar wind is weak. The sun flips its magnetic poles every solar cycle — about every eleven years. So the solar wind is in a constant state of flux meaning the amount of cosmic rays that hit the earth fluctuate also. And the sun has long periods of week solar magnetism and long periods of strong solar magnetism. During the 20th century the sun was highly magnetic, perhaps more magnetic than in the last thousand years. So the solar wind was stronger last century than in times past and there were fewer cosmic rays to create clouds to cool the earth.
But that may well be changing. The last two cycles have produced weaker solar winds than occurred in the 20th century. It has recently been cloudier than during most of the twentieth century. That is expected to occur for the next solar cycle as well. And if so, there will be more time with more clouds and we may eventually see cooling if it stays cloudy long enough.
And that is not all that scientists now know about the sun’s role. Actual sunlight dims slightly during low solar magnetism, and this dimming, though very slight, primarily occurs in the UV spectrum. UV penetrates the atmosphere and the oceans far more than IR. So this dimming has already caused the atmosphere to shrink due to less solar radiation. The reduced solar radiation of the last two cycles, has shrunk the atmosphere so much that satellites are staying in orbit far longer than expected because they have much less atmospheric drag than they used to have. So the atmosphere is clearly cooling from reduced UV.
Moreover reduced UV is really important for the oceans. UV penetrates to depths of 100 feet while IR only penetrates to depths of a few feet. So there will be much less ocean absorption of solar radiation. And the ocean is the primary heat sink of our planet, far more so than the atmosphere.
More and more research on the sun is proving that it has more and more impact on climate than we thought. These things about the sun and its effects were not really understood when it was declared that the science was settled.
And it may turn out that it was the sun that caused most of the global warming since the 1800’s.
Not only that, but Svensmark’s theory, that galactic cosmic rays cause cloud condensation nuclei to form, and cosmic rays are regulated by the solar wind, has far more application in the southern hemisphere which is cloudier than in the northern hemisphere.
The weaker the solar wind, the more cosmic radiation hits the earth, and the more clouds are created due to cosmic ray enhancement of cloud formation. (Svensmark’s theory in a nutshell). Lots of evidence and studies show that cosmic rays enhance cloud creation.
The southern oceans cover 80% of the southern hemisphere and only have 10% of the world’s population, which means we have very little actual surface temperature data in the Southern hemisphere where changes in cloud cover due to cosmic rays are likely to occur the most.
Sulfuric acid from pollution also enhances cloud formation and in the northern hemisphere it may be the dominant means of enhancing cloud formation where 90% of the world’s population lives. But even in the northern hemisphere where 60% of the surface is covered with water, a sizeable portion of cloud cover is still enhanced by cosmic rays.
Every time you post a chart you shoot yourself in the foot.
In this case it is the actual instrumental record which shows a whopping .5 C increase in global temperature from 1900 to 2020.
Not much cause for alarm.
And of course the lines on solar activity have no basis or explanation as to why they are included in the graph.
任何引用怀疑科学的人都不能被认真对待。 SS 是一个由左撇子活动人士组成的热门网站，其领导者是一位迷恋纳粹的失业漫画家。批评意见将被编辑或删除。没有任何专业人士或学者会链接到它。连名字都是骗人的。
您引用的图表作为证据只是猜想，即某人的意见。你声称能够预测未来吗？
二氧化碳是一种微弱的温室气体，完全被真正的温室气体水蒸气所掩盖。二氧化碳的小幅增加可能导致每平方米净能量输入增加 2 瓦，或者不到平均日照值的三分之一，小于太阳在 2 年太阳周期中的自然变化。由于这种必需的微量气体的轻微增加，地球上的植物生命得以蓬勃发展。据我了解这个词的含义，不存在全球紧急情况。
不管怎样，继续写吧。每发一个帖子都会进一步削弱你的观点。
该图表显示，CO2 影响最大的波长已经被约 100% 阻挡——无论添加多少，CO2 的作用都微乎其微。
但你会说，反馈效应会让保温性的小幅增加变成一场灾难。不会——因为对流的影响比辐射大得多，它可以带走热量：更多的热量意味着更多的上升空气意味着更多的热量被带走：
http://climate12.weebly.com/major-climate-controls.html
（顶部的图像显示辐射能量如何进入和离开地球。请注意，进入的能量 = 100% = 离开的能量，（30% 为光 – 短波）（6% 为直接从表面辐射的红外线）
并且……（64%由云、水蒸气、二氧化碳排放）——这2%是来自入射光的64%，其余部分从地表辐射，被二氧化碳、水蒸气吸收，其他气体通过对流层对流上升（较低）大气），一路辐射能量。）
所有关于“阅读科学”的谩骂——事实是，AGW 危言耸听的网站从来没有讨论过这种情况如何发生的基本物理原理。
诈骗者的特点是拒绝解释，当他们被迫解释时，他们就会采取混淆视听和谩骂的手段。他们的谎言造成了很大的混乱，而试图反驳他们的谎言则会因为给予他们任何信任而增加混乱。人们已经厌倦了让腐败的骗子控制我们的政府。
“二氧化碳在整个大气中均匀分布，而水蒸气则不然——它会迅速上升（2 H 和 2 O）。这就是为什么水蒸气很少的地区（云层上方、沙漠和夜间晴空）
凉得这么快”
正如我所怀疑的
Main Scream Media 是反基督的平台
女性阵营追随者
Only retired people can go against the “climate change” fraud. If you go against it you will lose your job. Peter Ridd, in Australia, needs financial help to keep fighting against the fraud. I have personally contributed over(slightly) US$10,000 to his cause, also slightly over US$10,000 to Dr Jennifer Marohasy, another scientist who tells the truth. Please donate to them.
https://catallaxyfiles.com/2019/04/17/james-cook-university-and-bob-carter/
另一方面，蒂姆·弗兰纳里（Tim Flannery）继续因发表他的气候废话而获得两笔可观的收入。 他不发表科学论文，他只是通过 MSL* 和大众媒体散播垃圾。 由于他的胡说八道，澳大利亚在三个不需要的海水淡化厂上浪费了10,000,000,000澳元。 这笔钱本来可以更好地用于儿童保健。
对于此评论的构建质量低下，我深表歉意。
*主流骗子
很棒的文章！ 如果人们愿意关掉电视并稍微研究一下，他们就会看到更大的图景。
但你对希特勒和第三帝国知之甚少。 关于希特勒的传闻大多是胡说八道。 全球变暖背后的骗子与反希特勒宣传机器背后的骗子是同一类。 如果没有希特勒，欧洲到 3/1934 年就已经变成了苏联共产主义国家。 它在边缘！
希特勒知道民主总是会被犹太人颠覆。 唯一的解决办法是独裁。 一个国家和社会政府将他们从他们的职位上撤职，以阻止对欧洲的渗透和破坏。 可悲的是，大多数其他欧洲国家都不了解这种危险，或者已经落入犹太人之手，我们今天看到了结果。