Although the subject is rather "dry" for a neophyte like me, thank you for this very interesting and enlightening article. You ask "are we being misled to serve a different agenda...? ». I think so. For my part, I have thought that this discourse of climate panic serves only the interests of this ultra-rich-powerful minority that wants to grab even more – everything else – of the resources of this planet. I also think that, to acheive this, they intend to clean up (already well begun) a good part of the useless little people like us. But no they shall fail.
Your description of CO2 exchanges in our bodies is fascinating. And seems to me a beautiful analogy between the microcosm of the human and the environment where we evolve in symbiosis…?
Thank you. A wonderfully clear and articulate look at climate.
I've not been convinced of the climate doomsday argument. I laugh at the need to kill cows to save the planet. Before the invasion of North America by the plundering invaders, so to speak, there were 60million or 100million buffalo. Many millions of caribou, and who knows how many deer. I don't think killing even a few million cows is going to save us. Such an empty, insane totally illogical and unintuitive solution to a 'so-called' problem.
Yes, our respect for the planet is a serious problem. All of us likely have the presence of microplastic particles in our cells. Killing the life of the oceans and the earth is not going to serves us well. And there are certainly practical and relatively inexpensive ways to stop the fast paced greed motivated need for instant excess everything.
Thank you for this excellent look at the climate hoax.
As a former climate activist, lobbying politicians with Citizens' Climate Lobby for several years, I would never have questioned the "climate science" until I saw the same people who debunked "climate denial" get to work on "inoculating people against misinformation about the vaccines". The penny dropped. I think I have been, as JJ Couey describes it, Scoobydood! My "climate hero" Bill McKibben, despite having written chapters in his book Falter about the trans humanist/ technocrats' agenda, was mysteriously silent about them during the pandemonium. So were all my Green climate activist friends. One could almost believe that if/when they found out it was a plandemic, they decided to turn a blind eye because their anti-human-ecology-loving philosophy supports the idea of a "cull" - possibly they were totalitarians who believe they know best "for-the-greater-good" all along?
Really great piece! Enjoyed the breakdown and story telling of what I also found to be the most important pieces of scientific data and conversation for people to consider on this topic. By and large, most people I know have not taken the time to truly look at the science on C02 and climate and thus have a very limited scope of how controversial the conversation truly is. Similar to vaccines, they are being shamed into accepting the mainstream narrative without question and nuance.
First of all the fact that Al Gore said it made it immediately meaningless. No science needed (and no I didn't vote for Bush or Gore). Secondly, of course, the miniscule change is meaningless. And, of course, the if one is really concerned (which we should not be), plant more trees or just watch nature grow. The whole thing was ridiculous from the start. Again, no science needed. All one has to do is look at things from a macro level. All of this micro-analysis is unnecessary to determine what is or what isn't total B.S. This is just another grift to steal from the many to give to the few (again refer to Gore being involved (and everyone else).
If we start with...1968 creation and agenda of the “Club of Rome”, the originators of the global warming/climate change theatre...personaly, at least after these last 3 years, I think that we do not need any other data, studies, "science", stories about this subject to understand what is realy going on.
This is an issue that bothers me every day as I watch the clear skies daily receive the toxics from these planes. When that happens, the sunny day is gone. Also Dr Ana Mihalcea has studied toxins in people. She too writes on Substack.
Every stable system has one or more negative feedback loops. The fact that CO2 is as stable as it is indicates that there are indeed such loops. Further, negative feedback loops typically give ever stronger negative feedback as the variable in question moves further in a given direction.
I've never seen anything to explain why the negative feedback suddenly becomes positive feedback in the case of CO2. I think the 'climate researchers' are lost in the weeds.
The fact that you actually used real factual information is telling me your moving from the left side of the political spectrum to the right. Facts to someone on the left is like krypton to Superman. Something to avoided at all costs.
But you could have saved yourself time and just asked who said that this climate is normal? Why wasn’t the climate that created the last ice age normal? What caused it? No one can tell you what caused it they only have theories. Why have there been multiple ones long before Homo sapiens inhabited the earth. And why would we think that it can not happen again. Climate change is nothing but a religion for those who want to be tyrant’s.
A Convenient LIE
Although the subject is rather "dry" for a neophyte like me, thank you for this very interesting and enlightening article. You ask "are we being misled to serve a different agenda...? ». I think so. For my part, I have thought that this discourse of climate panic serves only the interests of this ultra-rich-powerful minority that wants to grab even more – everything else – of the resources of this planet. I also think that, to acheive this, they intend to clean up (already well begun) a good part of the useless little people like us. But no they shall fail.
Your description of CO2 exchanges in our bodies is fascinating. And seems to me a beautiful analogy between the microcosm of the human and the environment where we evolve in symbiosis…?
I would highly encourage you to read "The Hockey Stick Illusion" by A. W. Montford. https://www.amazon.com/Hockey-Stick-Illusion-W-Montford-ebook/dp/B005A54KEM?
It is quite revealing!
I also enjoy Judith Curry's website "Climate Etc" https://judithcurry.com
Follow the funding
By the way, Your presentation at the Sudbury Library was fabulous!
Thank you. A wonderfully clear and articulate look at climate.
I've not been convinced of the climate doomsday argument. I laugh at the need to kill cows to save the planet. Before the invasion of North America by the plundering invaders, so to speak, there were 60million or 100million buffalo. Many millions of caribou, and who knows how many deer. I don't think killing even a few million cows is going to save us. Such an empty, insane totally illogical and unintuitive solution to a 'so-called' problem.
Yes, our respect for the planet is a serious problem. All of us likely have the presence of microplastic particles in our cells. Killing the life of the oceans and the earth is not going to serves us well. And there are certainly practical and relatively inexpensive ways to stop the fast paced greed motivated need for instant excess everything.
Thank you for this excellent look at the climate hoax.
Great article. Amazing actually.
As a former climate activist, lobbying politicians with Citizens' Climate Lobby for several years, I would never have questioned the "climate science" until I saw the same people who debunked "climate denial" get to work on "inoculating people against misinformation about the vaccines". The penny dropped. I think I have been, as JJ Couey describes it, Scoobydood! My "climate hero" Bill McKibben, despite having written chapters in his book Falter about the trans humanist/ technocrats' agenda, was mysteriously silent about them during the pandemonium. So were all my Green climate activist friends. One could almost believe that if/when they found out it was a plandemic, they decided to turn a blind eye because their anti-human-ecology-loving philosophy supports the idea of a "cull" - possibly they were totalitarians who believe they know best "for-the-greater-good" all along?
Really great piece! Enjoyed the breakdown and story telling of what I also found to be the most important pieces of scientific data and conversation for people to consider on this topic. By and large, most people I know have not taken the time to truly look at the science on C02 and climate and thus have a very limited scope of how controversial the conversation truly is. Similar to vaccines, they are being shamed into accepting the mainstream narrative without question and nuance.
First of all the fact that Al Gore said it made it immediately meaningless. No science needed (and no I didn't vote for Bush or Gore). Secondly, of course, the miniscule change is meaningless. And, of course, the if one is really concerned (which we should not be), plant more trees or just watch nature grow. The whole thing was ridiculous from the start. Again, no science needed. All one has to do is look at things from a macro level. All of this micro-analysis is unnecessary to determine what is or what isn't total B.S. This is just another grift to steal from the many to give to the few (again refer to Gore being involved (and everyone else).
If we start with...1968 creation and agenda of the “Club of Rome”, the originators of the global warming/climate change theatre...personaly, at least after these last 3 years, I think that we do not need any other data, studies, "science", stories about this subject to understand what is realy going on.
This is an issue that bothers me every day as I watch the clear skies daily receive the toxics from these planes. When that happens, the sunny day is gone. Also Dr Ana Mihalcea has studied toxins in people. She too writes on Substack.
https://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/nanoparticle-contamination-cover-up-answers-from-a-scientist/
"It is true that CO2 levels are the highest they have ever been per our best historical data." Are you sure about that?
I've long read that we are actually near historical lows compared to the ancient past, or do you just mean within human history?
Ben Davidson shows the CO2 climate warming hoax regularly in his daily reports on the sun, see https://m.youtube.com/@Suspicious0bservers/featured
True, until you realize that they have a history of lying.
It’s amazing how the “experts” are not so expert. I too fell for Al Gore’s movie.
WE HAVE BEEN FED A BUNCH OF LIES 99% LIES AND 1% OF HALF TRUTHS
Save the planet Plant a Tree. and DO NOT listen too the experts. imo
Every stable system has one or more negative feedback loops. The fact that CO2 is as stable as it is indicates that there are indeed such loops. Further, negative feedback loops typically give ever stronger negative feedback as the variable in question moves further in a given direction.
I've never seen anything to explain why the negative feedback suddenly becomes positive feedback in the case of CO2. I think the 'climate researchers' are lost in the weeds.
The fact that you actually used real factual information is telling me your moving from the left side of the political spectrum to the right. Facts to someone on the left is like krypton to Superman. Something to avoided at all costs.
But you could have saved yourself time and just asked who said that this climate is normal? Why wasn’t the climate that created the last ice age normal? What caused it? No one can tell you what caused it they only have theories. Why have there been multiple ones long before Homo sapiens inhabited the earth. And why would we think that it can not happen again. Climate change is nothing but a religion for those who want to be tyrant’s.