Well, this isn´t awfully surprising....
----------------------------------
Cold weather far more deadly than hot weather
OCTOBER 8, 2015
Cold weather kills 20 times as many people as hot weather, according to study. The study analyzed more than 74 million deaths between 1985 and 2012 in thirteen different countries displaying a wide range of climates, from cold to subtropical.
Data on daily average temperature, death rates, and confounding variables (eg, humidity and air pollution) were used to determine the temperature of minimum mortality (the optimal temperature). The researchers then estimated the relative contributions of heat and cold, from moderate to extreme temperatures.
“It’s often assumed that extreme weather causes the majority of deaths, with most previous research focusing on the effects of extreme heat waves,” says lead author Dr Antonio Gasparrini from the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine in the UK. “Our findings, from an analysis of the largest dataset of temperature-related deaths ever collected, show that the majority of these deaths actually happen on moderately hot and cold days, with most deaths caused by moderately cold temperatures.”
According to Dr Gasparrini, “Current public-health policies focus almost exclusively on minimising the health consequences of heat waves. Our findings suggest that these measures need to be refocused and extended to take account of a whole range of effects associated with temperature.”The study was funded by UK Medical Research Council.
http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(14)62114-0/abstract
http://www.alphagalileo.org/ViewItem.aspx?ItemId=152855&CultureCode=en
Topic: Reddit’s science forum banned climate deniers. - page 99. (Read 636455 times)
Monbiot always had a sort of pure intellectual honesty and rigorous thinking, but still this is surprising....
http://pjmedia.com/eddriscoll/2011/05/04/prominent-environmentalist-finally-discovers-his-religions-catch-22/
[George Monbiot of the Guardian] also acknowledges the contradictory and inconsistent nature of the green solutions. He acknowledges that there is no prospect for democratic politics to impose the draconian limits on consumption and economic activity that green dogma requires. Every ‘solution’ the greens have come up with has a fatal flaw of some kind; none of it works, none of it makes any sense. As Monbiot concludes,“All of us in the environment movement, in other words – whether we propose accommodation, radical downsizing or collapse – are lost. None of us yet has a convincing account of how humanity can get out of this mess. None of our chosen solutions break the atomising, planet-wrecking project. I hope that by laying out the problem I can encourage us to address it more logically, to abandon magical thinking and to recognise the contradictions we confront. But even that could be a tall order.”
This is an awesome admission of categorical intellectual, political and moral failure. For two decades greens have arrogated to themselves the authority of science and wrapped themselves in the arrogant certainty of self-righteous contempt for those who oppose them. They have equated skepticism about their incoherent and contradictory policy proposals with hatred of science and attacked their critics as the soulless hired shills of the oil companies, happy to ruin humanity for the sake of some corporate largesse.
Monbiot has worked his way through to a cogent description of the dead end the global green movement has reached, but he has not yet diagnosed the cause. In particular, he remains a staunch Malthusian...
As long as Monbiot and his eco-ilk remain humanophobes with pinko-ish and eugenicist tendencies they'll be useful enough to their corporatist/technocratic enablers to continue to facilitate. When they grow beyond these mindsets they'll be discarded like a crusty jiz-rag.
lie to president of russian federation... only dare... stop president of russian federation from speaking... only dare... it's fun when a former slave want to tell a free man how to live.
he should take example on Carson, brainmed is true, even on board of the entreprise... like a punch of tyson, like so many other... but why him? blackmail? does he fuck the lady of the un? you know the black on...
CONDIE SAVE US!
he should take example on Carson, brainmed is true, even on board of the entreprise... like a punch of tyson, like so many other... but why him? blackmail? does he fuck the lady of the un? you know the black on...
CONDIE SAVE US!
A person can only explain so many times why an idea is not true- eventually to keep the page reasonable some have to be blocked. When I went on and on for hours repeating some nonsense as a kid my mother would finally have enough of it and slap me silly. Unfortunately we can't do the same for people on web sites so the next best thing is to block them
What if you tell your mom over and over to stop smocking crack? Would she be right to slap you silly? The banning on reddit lacked the same perspective.
This is rather amazing as public testimony.
https://youtu.be/Sl9-tY1oZNw
I would particularly like to hear comments from people that do believe Earth is heating up and we are the evil villians on this testimony.
On the surface, it simply appears to make NO SENSE.
the guy is a robot.
And a dumb robot to boot: he had to ask for data input multiple times. Then he switched to safe mode.
sure, altho what mainly concerns me is, they are already among us !
The way I see it: the robots among us are as strong as the brain controlling them. Once the brain is shut off the robots will look for new codes to fill their emptiness...
Monbiot always had a sort of pure intellectual honesty and rigorous thinking, but still this is surprising....
http://pjmedia.com/eddriscoll/2011/05/04/prominent-environmentalist-finally-discovers-his-religions-catch-22/
[George Monbiot of the Guardian] also acknowledges the contradictory and inconsistent nature of the green solutions. He acknowledges that there is no prospect for democratic politics to impose the draconian limits on consumption and economic activity that green dogma requires. Every ‘solution’ the greens have come up with has a fatal flaw of some kind; none of it works, none of it makes any sense. As Monbiot concludes,“All of us in the environment movement, in other words – whether we propose accommodation, radical downsizing or collapse – are lost. None of us yet has a convincing account of how humanity can get out of this mess. None of our chosen solutions break the atomising, planet-wrecking project. I hope that by laying out the problem I can encourage us to address it more logically, to abandon magical thinking and to recognise the contradictions we confront. But even that could be a tall order.”
This is an awesome admission of categorical intellectual, political and moral failure. For two decades greens have arrogated to themselves the authority of science and wrapped themselves in the arrogant certainty of self-righteous contempt for those who oppose them. They have equated skepticism about their incoherent and contradictory policy proposals with hatred of science and attacked their critics as the soulless hired shills of the oil companies, happy to ruin humanity for the sake of some corporate largesse.
Monbiot has worked his way through to a cogent description of the dead end the global green movement has reached, but he has not yet diagnosed the cause. In particular, he remains a staunch Malthusian...
A person can only explain so many times why an idea is not true- eventually to keep the page reasonable some have to be blocked. When I went on and on for hours repeating some nonsense as a kid my mother would finally have enough of it and slap me silly. Unfortunately we can't do the same for people on web sites so the next best thing is to block them
What if you tell your mom over and over to stop smocking crack? Would she be right to slap you silly? The banning on reddit lacked the same perspective.
This is rather amazing as public testimony.
https://youtu.be/Sl9-tY1oZNw
I would particularly like to hear comments from people that do believe Earth is heating up and we are the evil villians on this testimony.
On the surface, it simply appears to make NO SENSE.
the guy is a robot.
And a dumb robot to boot: he had to ask for data input multiple times. Then he switched to safe mode.
sure, altho what mainly concerns me is, they are already among us !
The way I see it: the robots among us are as strong as the brain controlling them. Once the brain is shut off the robots will look for new codes to fill their emptiness...
Have your new codes ready to fill their emptiness
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Op0qrTGRcxk
A person can only explain so many times why an idea is not true- eventually to keep the page reasonable some have to be blocked. When I went on and on for hours repeating some nonsense as a kid my mother would finally have enough of it and slap me silly. Unfortunately we can't do the same for people on web sites so the next best thing is to block them
What if you tell your mom over and over to stop smocking crack? Would she be right to slap you silly? The banning on reddit lacked the same perspective.
This is rather amazing as public testimony.
https://youtu.be/Sl9-tY1oZNw
I would particularly like to hear comments from people that do believe Earth is heating up and we are the evil villians on this testimony.
On the surface, it simply appears to make NO SENSE.
the guy is a robot.
And a dumb robot to boot: he had to ask for data input multiple times. Then he switched to safe mode.
sure, altho what mainly concerns me is, they are already among us !
The way I see it: the robots among us are as strong as the brain controlling them. Once the brain is shut off the robots will look for new codes to fill their emptiness...
A person can only explain so many times why an idea is not true- eventually to keep the page reasonable some have to be blocked. When I went on and on for hours repeating some nonsense as a kid my mother would finally have enough of it and slap me silly. Unfortunately we can't do the same for people on web sites so the next best thing is to block them
What if you tell your mom over and over to stop smocking crack? Would she be right to slap you silly? The banning on reddit lacked the same perspective.
This is rather amazing as public testimony.
https://youtu.be/Sl9-tY1oZNw
I would particularly like to hear comments from people that do believe Earth is heating up and we are the evil villians on this testimony.
On the surface, it simply appears to make NO SENSE.
the guy is a robot.
And a dumb robot to boot: he had to ask for data input multiple times. Then he switched to safe mode.
sure, altho what mainly concerns me is, they are already among us !
A person can only explain so many times why an idea is not true- eventually to keep the page reasonable some have to be blocked. When I went on and on for hours repeating some nonsense as a kid my mother would finally have enough of it and slap me silly. Unfortunately we can't do the same for people on web sites so the next best thing is to block them
What if you tell your mom over and over to stop smocking crack? Would she be right to slap you silly? The banning on reddit lacked the same perspective.
This is rather amazing as public testimony.
https://youtu.be/Sl9-tY1oZNw
I would particularly like to hear comments from people that do believe Earth is heating up and we are the evil villians on this testimony.
On the surface, it simply appears to make NO SENSE.
the guy is a robot.
And a dumb robot to boot: he had to ask for data input multiple times. Then he switched to safe mode.
A person can only explain so many times why an idea is not true- eventually to keep the page reasonable some have to be blocked. When I went on and on for hours repeating some nonsense as a kid my mother would finally have enough of it and slap me silly. Unfortunately we can't do the same for people on web sites so the next best thing is to block them
What if you tell your mom over and over to stop smocking crack? Would she be right to slap you silly? The banning on reddit lacked the same perspective.
This is rather amazing as public testimony.
https://youtu.be/Sl9-tY1oZNw
I would particularly like to hear comments from people that do believe Earth is heating up and we are the evil villians on this testimony.
On the surface, it simply appears to make NO SENSE.
the guy is a robot.
A person can only explain so many times why an idea is not true- eventually to keep the page reasonable some have to be blocked. When I went on and on for hours repeating some nonsense as a kid my mother would finally have enough of it and slap me silly. Unfortunately we can't do the same for people on web sites so the next best thing is to block them
What if you tell your mom over and over to stop smocking crack? Would she be right to slap you silly? The banning on reddit lacked the same perspective.
This is rather amazing as public testimony.
https://youtu.be/Sl9-tY1oZNw
I would particularly like to hear comments from people that do believe Earth is heating up and we are the evil villians on this testimony.
On the surface, it simply appears to make NO SENSE.
Mr. Mair are you familiar with the concept of a "turing test". Because Mr. Mair, at this time, you appear to be failing it.
However I have heard, reasoned, rational arguments for each of these points of view.
Mair does not seem to even have an argument.
Anyone on this forum could out argue him.
Now I would make one analogy. Haven't we seen similar behavior on this thread, where Warmer afficionados would make an assertion, make it again, make it again, then vanish, never really addressing the issues?
Very strange.
Just because everyones in it doesn't mean it isn't a cult.
A person can only explain so many times why an idea is not true- eventually to keep the page reasonable some have to be blocked. When I went on and on for hours repeating some nonsense as a kid my mother would finally have enough of it and slap me silly. Unfortunately we can't do the same for people on web sites so the next best thing is to block them
What if you tell your mom over and over to stop smocking crack? Would she be right to slap you silly? The banning on reddit lacked the same perspective.
This is rather amazing as public testimony.
https://youtu.be/Sl9-tY1oZNw
I would particularly like to hear comments from people that do believe Earth is heating up and we are the evil villians on this testimony.
On the surface, it simply appears to make NO SENSE.
Mr. Mair are you familiar with the concept of a "turing test". Because Mr. Mair, at this time, you appear to be failing it.
However I have heard, reasoned, rational arguments for each of these points of view.
Mair does not seem to even have an argument.
Anyone on this forum could out argue him.
Now I would make one analogy. Haven't we seen similar behavior on this thread, where Warmer afficionados would make an assertion, make it again, make it again, then vanish, never really addressing the issues?
Very strange.
A person can only explain so many times why an idea is not true- eventually to keep the page reasonable some have to be blocked. When I went on and on for hours repeating some nonsense as a kid my mother would finally have enough of it and slap me silly. Unfortunately we can't do the same for people on web sites so the next best thing is to block them
What if you tell your mom over and over to stop smocking crack? Would she be right to slap you silly? The banning on reddit lacked the same perspective.
This is rather amazing as public testimony.
https://youtu.be/Sl9-tY1oZNw
I would particularly like to hear comments from people that do believe Earth is heating up and we are the evil villians on this testimony.
On the surface, it simply appears to make NO SENSE.
Mr. Mair are you familiar with the concept of a "turing test". Because Mr. Mair, at this time, you appear to be failing it.
Trio Of Academics Fight Global Warming By Travelling A Combined 8,426 Miles For A One-Hour Meeting On Climate Change…
Two taxpayer-funded college presidents and the president of America’s largest university-based climate alliance traveled a combined 8,426 miles this week to meet for slightly over an hour to discuss strategies for carbon reduction.
The “climate leadership meeting” occurred on Monday at Agnes Scott College, a private, all-female bastion of about 1,000 students in the Atlanta suburb of Decatur.
The meeting lasted one hour, seven minutes and 21 seconds, according to the YouTube video which captured it for posterity.
Speakers at the meeting included Ball State University president Paul Ferguson, Portland State University president Wim Wiewel and Tim Carter, the president of Second Nature, a Boston, Mass.-based coalition of colleges dedicated to fighting climate change.
http://dailycaller.com/2015/10/06/trio-of-academics-travel-8426-miles-for-one-hour-climate-change-meeting/
A person can only explain so many times why an idea is not true- eventually to keep the page reasonable some have to be blocked. When I went on and on for hours repeating some nonsense as a kid my mother would finally have enough of it and slap me silly. Unfortunately we can't do the same for people on web sites so the next best thing is to block them
What if you tell your mom over and over to stop smocking crack? Would she be right to slap you silly? The banning on reddit lacked the same perspective.
This is rather amazing as public testimony.
https://youtu.be/Sl9-tY1oZNw
I would particularly like to hear comments from people that do believe Earth is heating up and we are the evil villians on this testimony.
On the surface, it simply appears to make NO SENSE.
Less jobs. Less humans. More concentrated power for the few.
A person can only explain so many times why an idea is not true- eventually to keep the page reasonable some have to be blocked. When I went on and on for hours repeating some nonsense as a kid my mother would finally have enough of it and slap me silly. Unfortunately we can't do the same for people on web sites so the next best thing is to block them
What if you tell your mom over and over to stop smocking crack? Would she be right to slap you silly? The banning on reddit lacked the same perspective.
This is rather amazing as public testimony.
https://youtu.be/Sl9-tY1oZNw
I would particularly like to hear comments from people that do believe Earth is heating up and we are the evil villians on this testimony.
On the surface, it simply appears to make NO SENSE.
A person can only explain so many times why an idea is not true- eventually to keep the page reasonable some have to be blocked. When I went on and on for hours repeating some nonsense as a kid my mother would finally have enough of it and slap me silly. Unfortunately we can't do the same for people on web sites so the next best thing is to block them
What if you tell your mom over and over to stop smocking crack? Would she be right to slap you silly? The banning on reddit lacked the same perspective.
A person can only explain so many times why an idea is not true- eventually to keep the page reasonable some have to be blocked. When I went on and on for hours repeating some nonsense as a kid my mother would finally have enough of it and slap me silly. Unfortunately we can't do the same for people on web sites so the next best thing is to block them
....
What pisses me off is that back then forty plus years ago we really did have genuine environmental problems here in the U.S. I was there and I remember them. We took things fairly seriously and did a damn good job of fixing them. Instead of getting credit and getting these scumbags off our ass, these one-world eugenicist motherfuckers won't let them go because they are so politically useful and they are so invested in the milking the problems that they simply indoctrinated the kids into believing things which just are not there. At least here in the U.S. and most of the West.
I had a nice car that the paint was basically ruined from "acid rain."What pisses me off is that back then forty plus years ago we really did have genuine environmental problems here in the U.S. I was there and I remember them. We took things fairly seriously and did a damn good job of fixing them. Instead of getting credit and getting these scumbags off our ass, these one-world eugenicist motherfuckers won't let them go because they are so politically useful and they are so invested in the milking the problems that they simply indoctrinated the kids into believing things which just are not there. At least here in the U.S. and most of the West.
Right now, yes there are a lot of imaginary and mythical evil monsters being promulgated under the raised scepter of "settled science."
And there's no acid rain.
All Those Climate Change Pledges Are A Farce, New York Times Says
...
http://news.investors.com/blogs-capital-hill/092815-773048-climate-change-pledges-made-so-far-wont-stop-global-warming.htm
...comments...priceless......
http://news.investors.com/blogs-capital-hill/092815-773048-climate-change-pledges-made-so-far-wont-stop-global-warming.htm
...
Another one that I happened across. Whoever this might be
Quote
tvwweek • 2 hours ago
What is interesting is that the film 'Survival of Spaceship Earth' made to introduce a UN program at a big Stockholm conference (1972) already contained elements of 'man made global warming', but in a primitive way which relied on simplistic thermodynamics. It must have been clear fairly quickly that that that dog simply would not hunt scientifically. By the Earth Summit in Rio 20 years later the culprit for the same supposed catastrophe had become more sophisticated (and more useful.) By that time it had become CO2.
What is interesting is that the film 'Survival of Spaceship Earth' made to introduce a UN program at a big Stockholm conference (1972) already contained elements of 'man made global warming', but in a primitive way which relied on simplistic thermodynamics. It must have been clear fairly quickly that that that dog simply would not hunt scientifically. By the Earth Summit in Rio 20 years later the culprit for the same supposed catastrophe had become more sophisticated (and more useful.) By that time it had become CO2.
BTW, here is a vid of the mentioned propaganda film:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-Em9A_Alck
In my research I have found it fascinating and important to understand some of this historical context.
What pisses me off is that back then forty plus years ago we really did have genuine environmental problems here in the U.S. I was there and I remember them. We took things fairly seriously and did a damn good job of fixing them. Instead of getting credit and getting these scumbags off our ass, these one-world eugenicist motherfuckers won't let them go because they are so politically useful and they are so invested in the milking the problems that they simply indoctrinated the kids into believing things which just are not there. At least here in the U.S. and most of the West.
All Those Climate Change Pledges Are A Farce, New York Times Says
After decades spent playing up the dangers of a warming planet, the New York Times admits that even if every country lived up to their current carbon reduction pledges, it won't make any difference.
Pointing to a "new analysis,' the Times notes that the planet would still heat up by 6 degrees Fahrenheit, which is too high to prevent global catastrophes from raining down.
The analysis comes from Climate Interactive, which is the source of carbon calculations used by the U.S. and other governments. It concluded the current pledges — made in advance of the big Paris conference on climate change — would reduce the expected global warming to 6.3 degrees, from 8.1 degrees that would occur without those pledges.
Keep in mind that climate scientists say that any warming above 3.6 degrees will be really, really bad. (Some even say this threshold is too high.)
So what's the point? Why should countries undertake a hugely expensive effort to reduce carbon emissions, when the climate scientists themselves are saying it won't do any good? Because they want to feel better about themselves? Get some good headlines?
Some might argue that taking this first step could lead to many more, which could produce still more CO2 reductions down the road.
But that, too, ignores an inconvenient fact that President Obama, Al Gore and everyone else proselytizing against fossil fuels won't admit. If climate scientists are right, keeping the global temperature increase under 3.6 degrees will require the entire planet to go completely carbon free in about 60 years, something nobody is proposing to do, or say what it would entail.
And after that, we'd need to be removing massive amounts of carbon from the atmosphere each year, something nobody has a clue how to accomplish.
Of course, it's also possible that the climate scientists are wrong, both about future warming and about the harm it will cause, and we don't need to worry about CO2 at all.
Either way, all those pledges to cut carbon emissions would be pointless.
Feel-good policies that do nothing but massively raise costs and kill jobs aren't something to be celebrated. Nor should the leaders who propose them.
http://news.investors.com/blogs-capital-hill/092815-773048-climate-change-pledges-made-so-far-wont-stop-global-warming.htm
Yep.
top 3:
Quote
The ridiculous assumption that the complicated and ever changing climate of this planet rests upon the fallacy of a carbon dioxide induced greenhouse effect and the hysterical indictment of a single parameter of 0.04% (400ppm) of Carbon Dioxide (CO2), which amounts to nothing more than 1 molecule of CO2 out of every 2500 molecules that comprise the atmosphere, of which only .0016% (16ppm) or 4% of the total Atmospheric CO2 has been attributed to human influence, which the Catastrophic Global Warming Fanatics and Lunatics would now have everyone believe precipitates Climate Change is not only absurdly implausible it is absolutely ludicrous!
Quote
It is obvious why they chose CO2, because humans exhale CO2, and the ultimate goal of these environmentalists is a 1 billion world population. At some point, if successful in their narrative, they will blame people for global warming and have a rationale (although false) for reducing the world population through limiting births or plain out killing folk to get to their goals. And if you don't think that these folk would go to that extreme, then you are kidding yourself.
Quote
Joseph Goebels:
"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”
"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”
Jump to: