Pages:
Author

Topic: What will happen when people realise that the world is cooling and not warming? - page 2. (Read 697 times)

legendary
Activity: 1904
Merit: 1277
It is not known for certain on whose side the truth is and whether there is any truth here at all.
We have as close to a universal consensus among scientists as is realistically possible, given that there will always be some who are paid off by the climate-hoax lobby, mega-rich oil firms etc. Climate change is real and ongoing and caused by human activity. There is a mountain of evidence as linked to previously.


Remember how it used to be possible to smoke on airplanes, a cigarette advertisement advertised by doctors! And many other examples.
Remember how the entire continent of Australia used to not be on fire?

Always consider what someone's motivation could be. If you work for a cigarette company, or if you're a doctor conducting a study that is funded by a cigarette company, the likelihood is you'll find cigarettes are safe. If you're independent and have no covert interests, you'll find they are dangerous. Same with climate change. Same with everything.


https://time.com/5753584/bushfires-australia-catastrophic-fire-alert/






legendary
Activity: 3318
Merit: 2008
First Exclusion Ever
but muh communism

Like I said, this is why I don't bother having any logical debate with you any more and just call you out for the religious propagandist you are. You worship the religion of communism, and logic has no sway on your beliefs. There are plenty of newer sources on all of those topics (as if being old makes them invalid some how), but I am not going to waste my time throwing pearls before swine. No one said anything was settled except for you. All I am pointing out is the information you claim settles it has already been widely dismissed in spite of the marketing campaign ongoing to push this concept of anthropocentric global warming in order to bring in wealth redistribution and global government.
newbie
Activity: 17
Merit: 0
It is not known for certain on whose side the truth is and whether there is any truth here at all. If everything turns out as you say, then nothing special will happen. Remember how it used to be possible to smoke on airplanes, a cigarette advertisement advertised by doctors! And many other examples.

Therefore, everyone will simply say: "It seems we were mistaken, recently it became clear that everything is not as we thought."
The media will sort it out and give the audience something new.
full member
Activity: 952
Merit: 175
@cryptocommies
spendulus ill come back for you next time

I am not doing this because I know how you operate. When you are presented with facts and documentation contrary to anything that confirms your existing bias you either ignore it completely or make up some absolutely horse shit reason why everything you present is fact and anything anyone who disagrees presents is a lie. Just for fun, here is some documentation as to why your claims are absolutely proven to be horse shit.


" '97% Of Climate Scientists Agree' Is 100% Wrong "
https://www.forbes.com/sites/alexepstein/2015/01/06/97-of-climate-scientists-agree-is-100-wrong/

"Debunking The 97% Climate Consensus Myth"
https://principia-scientific.org/debunking-the-97-climate-consensus-myth/

"The IPCC's Latest Report Deliberately Excludes And Misrepresents Important Climate Science"
https://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2014/03/31/the-ipccs-latest-report-deliberately-excludes-and-misrepresents-important-climate-science/

"UN IPCC Scientist Blows Whistle on Lies About Climate, Sea Level "
https://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/environment/item/31472-un-ipcc-scientist-blows-whistle-on-un-climate-lies

"IPCC Researchers Admit Global Warming Fraud"
https://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/environment/item/6748-ipcc-researchers-admit-global-warming-fraud

"Global Warming Bombshell A prime piece of evidence linking human activity to climate change turns out to be an artifact of poor mathematics."
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/403256/global-warming-bombshell/

"German Climatologist Unloads: ‘IPCC Is To Deceive People’, Hockey Stick Graph A Fake"
https://climatechangedispatch.com/german-climatologist-unloads-ipcc/




The climate change agenda is simply a vehicle to introduce socialism, communism, and wealth redistribution. This is what socialism and communism do best, hide their true goals within other organizations and ideologies and mutate them toward communist goals at the expense of the goals of the original organization. This is of course why you are such an adamant supporter of these claims, not because you truly believe them, but because you think the ends justify the means.
Not one legitimate source on the topic.   You didn't evaluate sources and its been critically damaging to your perspective.  You think you are reading science but are just reading right-wing bullshit straight from the industry.  


Forbes link
Quote
Alex EpsteinContributor
Opinion
Quote
Center for Industrial Progress logo
Formation   2011
Focus   Energy, industry, fossil fuels
Headquarters   San Diego, California
President
Alex Epstein
the new american links
Quote
The New American (TNA) is a far-right print magazine published twice a month by American Opinion Publishing Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of the John Birch Society (JBS), a far-right organizatio
Quote
The John Birch Society (JBS) is an advocacy group supporting anti-communism and limited government.[2][3][4] It has been described as a radical right and far-right organization

climatechangedispatch link
Quote
Climate Change Dispatch(link): Hard-right climate denier blog, more or less.
Quote
The Heartland Institute is an American conservative and libertarian public policy think tank founded in 1984 and based in Arlington Heights, Illinois. The Institute conducts work on issues including education reform, government spending, taxation, healthcare, tobacco policy, global warming, hydraulic fracturing, information technology, and free-market environmentalism.

In the 1990s, the Heartland Institute worked with the tobacco company Philip Morris to attempt to discredit the health risks of secondhand smoke and to lobby against smoking bans.[3][4]:233–34[5] Since the 2000s, the Heartland Institute has been a leading promoter of climate change denial.[6][7] It rejects the scientific consensus on climate change,[8] and says that policies to fight it would be damaging to the economy.[9]

and an ancient technology review article
Quote
Oct 15, 2004
It definitely wasn't settled back in 2004.(At least its a good source, just 25 years too late...
legendary
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1386
This may be true that some parts of the world are cooling like Winter or snowing in some parts of the Middle East, heavy rains in  Dubai, etc Bur If you look on the other side Australia is burning. This is climate change and it seems its an imbalance of nature. Climate change is real, whether it is cooling or warming, people are suffering and lives are lost.

It seems an imbalance of nature? Nature is imbalanced.

Ever been caught in a hurricane? Seen a roof torn off your neighbor's house by a tornado?

Maybe you need to revise what you think nature is?
hero member
Activity: 1414
Merit: 505
Backed.Finance
This may be true that some parts of the world are cooling like Winter or snowing in some parts of the Middle East, heavy rains in  Dubai, etc Bur If you look on the other side Australia is burning. This is climate change and it seems its an imbalance of nature. Climate change is real, whether it is cooling or warming, people are suffering and lives are lost.
legendary
Activity: 1540
Merit: 1029
Many people around the world are already waking up to this reality. Eventually, a tidal wave shift will occur and the farce will be fully revealed. It is only a matter of time.
hero member
Activity: 1330
Merit: 569
Government and political action is geared to climate change, but are they working on the wrong trend, and making things worse for us. We are entering a period of global cooling, but all the publicity is about global warming. We are destroying carbon sinks, and pretending that we are making things better by trying to reduce carbon dioxide - the lifebreath of the oxygen producers. Out world is based on carbon, and we need to recycle it to maintain life as we know it.

So what will happen when the public realises that the whole of the climate change industry is designed to reduce food production, and to reduce life as we know it?

This is something I have been trying to even get another view and I think why the global warming is on the high side is because large portion of the world is witnessing warm compared to the part that are witnessing the extreme cold you are referencing here. People in Canada would disagree strongly strongly that there is global warming because from their end, its like the cold is coming on another level and it does not seems it will stop anytime soon but for someone is West Africa, it seem the earth is further closer to the sun considering the level of heat as well as the extent at which rivers are drying up among other effects of global warming.
legendary
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1386
This is such a sad thread.  There is so much data and explanation available from reputable sources demonstrating how where and why the world is warming.  Its middle school level science.   How can BS be posted and so many users go along with it?  I thought at least we were at the point where science deniers posted links to fake evidence and pseudoscientific explanations of their claims but we don't even have that here. We just have a consistent flow of unsubstantiated nonsense.  

Just to let you know there are some of us here, like you, who have considered the evidence and find it absolutely overwhelming. ...

You likely "considered evidence" that was shaped and formed to make it appear overwhelming.
legendary
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1386
....
I didn't go to google, I simply made two clicks to the FAQ of the page I posted in my previous post.....

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/03/global_cooling_the_real_climate_threat.html

NASA's page on solar influence clearly states that changes in the sun largely determine Earth's atmospheric and surface temperatures.  Astrophysicists and climatologists measure these changes in the sun in terms of quantifiable phenomena such as sunspot activity and solar cycles.

However, in recent times, NASA has succumbed to pressure from climate doomsday proponents.  NASA's original page on the sun's impact on our climate system is now hidden from the public domain.

With the advent of dangerous man-made global warming theory, CO2 has taken the limelight, and the sun has been relegated to a mere spectator.

This could be warming-obsessed alarmists' biggest mistake ever.

http://joannenova.com.au/2019/02/nasa-hides-page-saying-the-sun-was-the-primary-climate-driver-and-clouds-and-particles-are-more-important-than-greenhouse-gases/

So, FROM NASA:

NASA 2010: What are the primary forcings of the Earth system?
The Sun is the primary forcing of Earth’s climate system. Sunlight warms our world. Sunlight drives atmospheric and oceanic circulation patterns. Sunlight powers the process of photosynthesis that plants need to grow. Sunlight causes convection which carries warmth and water vapor up into the sky where clouds form and bring rain. In short, the Sun drives almost every aspect of our world’s climate system and makes possible life as we know it.

Earth’s orbit around and orientation toward the Sun change over spans of many thousands of years. In turn, these changing “orbital mechanics” force climate to change because they change where and how much sunlight reaches Earth. (Please see for more details.) Thus, changing Earth’s exposure to sunlight forces climate to change. According to scientists’ models of Earth’s orbit and orientation toward the Sun indicate that our world should be just beginning to enter a new period of cooling — perhaps the next ice age.

However, a new force for change has arisen: humans. After the industrial revolution, humans introduced increasing amounts of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, and changed the surface of the landscape to an extent great enough to influence climate on local and global scales. By driving up carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere (by about 30 percent), humans have increased its capacity to trap warmth near the surface.

Other important forcings of Earth’s climate system include such “variables” as clouds, airborne particulate matter, and surface brightness. Each of these varying features of Earth’s environment has the capacity to exceed the warming influence of greenhouse gases and cause our world to cool. For example, increased cloudiness would give more shade to the surface while reflecting more sunlight back to space. Increased airborne particles (or “aerosols”) would scatter and reflect more sunlight back to space, thereby cooling the surface. Major volcanic eruptions (such as that of Mt. Pinatubo in 1992) can inject so much aerosol into the atmosphere that, as it spreads around the globe, it reduces sunlight and cause Earth to cool. Likewise, increasing the surface area of highly reflective surface types, such as ice sheets, reflects greater amounts of sunlight back to space and causes Earth to cool.

Scientists are using NASA satellites to monitor all of the aforementioned forcings of Earth’s climate system to better understand how they are changing over time, and how any changes in them affect climate.

According to the Wayback Machine the text disappeared in early 2011 under Obama’s reign. Some people say Trump hides climate science, but Trump deletes propaganda, while Obama denies the Sun.

The Sun drives the climate on Earth
There are many mechanisms that the Sun can change the temperature of Earth (and not just through solar radiation). As we’ve discussed here many times, not only is there Henrik Svensmark’s theory about the solar magnetic effect on clouds through cosmic radiation, there are also potential effects (backed by observations) that magnetic fluxes, solar particle flow (the solar wind) and changes in the spectrum of of the UV and infra red may affect all kinds of climate markers on Earth. That includes atmospheric pressure, jet streams (Rossby waves), clouds, floods in Europe, rain in Asia, groundwater recharge in China, lightning over Japan, and wind and rain over Chile. The pervasive effect of the Sun even correlates surreally with human fertility, lifespan and jellyfish plagues.
sr. member
Activity: 1036
Merit: 279
If that's the case (which is likely not), I'd be very happy. I live in a very moist region that get too much water half of the year so it'll definitely reduce the flooding and storms. Not sure how dry the summers would be but at least they'll be cooler.  Grin

hero member
Activity: 2618
Merit: 548
DGbet.fun - Crypto Sportsbook
Political play is found all around, and now this has got moved towards the climate change. Further on with the statement from Greta Thunberg scenario has changed and the heat on that particular topic reached the peak. Controversies were always part of discussion, but these discussions were always temporary. Once gets hot for a while and in a short when something else happen automatically people get deviated towards other conversation. This way nothing happens good rather than mesmerising by someone's talk.
legendary
Activity: 3318
Merit: 2008
First Exclusion Ever
sr. member
Activity: 1400
Merit: 269
Climate change could be use interchangeably one of its effects is global warming trapping heat creating green house gases that unables it, to go through our ozone layer.
That's causing burning hotter temperature like what happened in Australia bush fire and even Antarctica big blocks of ice to melt increasing the ocean waters changing the geography of a country. You could watch vlogs and documentations of India. One thing is for sure climate change is real based on facts gathered around the world.
legendary
Activity: 3318
Merit: 2008
First Exclusion Ever
You mean NASA's wrong.  And every other major organization of Scientists.  This isn't about me. I simply directed you to their resource. Thats the difference with what I'm doing and what you're doing.  I don't care about my feelings or opinion on the matter.  I'm not using my own ideas to challenge an impeccable body of research. I have faith in the global scientific community.  That doesn't mean its 100% guaranteed to be true.  But the scientific community is a hell of a lot more credible than some randoms on bitcointalk.org.  

I am not doing this because I know how you operate. When you are presented with facts and documentation contrary to anything that confirms your existing bias you either ignore it completely or make up some absolutely horse shit reason why everything you present is fact and anything anyone who disagrees presents is a lie. Just for fun, here is some documentation as to why your claims are absolutely proven to be horse shit.


" '97% Of Climate Scientists Agree' Is 100% Wrong "
https://www.forbes.com/sites/alexepstein/2015/01/06/97-of-climate-scientists-agree-is-100-wrong/

"Debunking The 97% Climate Consensus Myth"
https://principia-scientific.org/debunking-the-97-climate-consensus-myth/

"The IPCC's Latest Report Deliberately Excludes And Misrepresents Important Climate Science"
https://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2014/03/31/the-ipccs-latest-report-deliberately-excludes-and-misrepresents-important-climate-science/

"UN IPCC Scientist Blows Whistle on Lies About Climate, Sea Level "
https://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/environment/item/31472-un-ipcc-scientist-blows-whistle-on-un-climate-lies

"IPCC Researchers Admit Global Warming Fraud"
https://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/environment/item/6748-ipcc-researchers-admit-global-warming-fraud

"Global Warming Bombshell A prime piece of evidence linking human activity to climate change turns out to be an artifact of poor mathematics."
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/403256/global-warming-bombshell/

"German Climatologist Unloads: ‘IPCC Is To Deceive People’, Hockey Stick Graph A Fake"
https://climatechangedispatch.com/german-climatologist-unloads-ipcc/




The climate change agenda is simply a vehicle to introduce socialism, communism, and wealth redistribution. This is what socialism and communism do best, hide their true goals within other organizations and ideologies and mutate them toward communist goals at the expense of the goals of the original organization. This is of course why you are such an adamant supporter of these claims, not because you truly believe them, but because you think the ends justify the means.
legendary
Activity: 1904
Merit: 1277
This is such a sad thread.  There is so much data and explanation available from reputable sources demonstrating how where and why the world is warming.  Its middle school level science.   How can BS be posted and so many users go along with it?  I thought at least we were at the point where science deniers posted links to fake evidence and pseudoscientific explanations of their claims but we don't even have that here. We just have a consistent flow of unsubstantiated nonsense.  

Just to let you know there are some of us here, like you, who have considered the evidence and find it absolutely overwhelming. The fact that human-caused climate change is happening is really established fact now; it's ludicrous that in some spheres it is treated as a theory (like how evolution is treated as a theory to go alongside unscientific unsusbtantiated bible nonsense creationism).

The consensus among climate scientists that humans are causing the planet to heat up has now passed 99%.

You can always find 'evidence' to back up any crazy ideas, but if <1% of scientists are in agreement, the likelihood is it's nonsense... and if >99% of scientists are in agreement, then you should really give what they're saying some serious consideration. They are the experts in this field, they are the highly trained and highly skilled professionals who know what they are talking about.
legendary
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1386
You mean NASA's wrong.  And every other major organization of Scientists.  This isn't about me. I simply directed you to their resource. ....

No you did not. You asserted a page linked to was a responses to an assertion. In fact it was a mid 1990s level of topical scientific opinion.

It is about you, because you don't know what you are talking about, but keep insisting that you do.

Also the very phrase used to indoctrinate the public was changed from Global Warming to Climate Change. Clearly the latter phrase incorporates both cooling and warming.

Why do you want to be a Denier?
full member
Activity: 952
Merit: 175
@cryptocommies
You mean NASA's wrong.  And every other major organization of Scientists.  This isn't about me. I simply directed you to their resource. Thats the difference with what I'm doing and what you're doing.  I don't care about my feelings or opinion on the matter.  I'm not using my own ideas to challenge an impeccable body of research. I have faith in the global scientific community.  That doesn't mean its 100% guaranteed to be true.  But the scientific community is a hell of a lot more credible than some randoms on bitcointalk.org. 
legendary
Activity: 3318
Merit: 2008
First Exclusion Ever
I didn't go to google, I simply made two clicks to the FAQ of the page I posted in my previous post.  I didn't make any conclusions either and never claimed that the post was me doing science.  Its simply a reference to an explanation of scientific information that is presented in a way everyone should be able to understand.  That way, you don't have to trust me or take my word for it.  Even if your claim was true, you would still see a correlation between temperature and solar irradiance over the past 60 years.

Does NASA not employ scientists? 
Does NASA not carry out Science? 
Did NASA somehow get all of that wrong? 
Did NASA just completely overlook the role of the sun on climate?
Is NASA not credible?
Are the dozens of similar organizations all lacking credibility in the same exact way?


If your answer to any of those questions is no...well then you are lost. 

Or it is simply you that is wrong.
full member
Activity: 952
Merit: 175
@cryptocommies

Yawn. 2 clicks shows only how ignorant you are on the subject. You do not even understand the etiology.

Who said the subject was ...

The amount of solar energy received by the Earth has followed the Sun’s natural 11-year cycle of small ups and downs with no net increase since the 1950s. Over the same period, global temperature has risen markedly.

Nobody. Nobody said that was the mechanism by which the Sun affects the climate of Earth. The mechanism appears to be its effect on cloud formation.

It's a bit hilarious, you starting with the conclusion and then trying to affirm it with google. That is not science.




I didn't go to google, I simply made two clicks to the FAQ of the page I posted in my previous post.  I didn't make any conclusions either and never claimed that the post was me doing science.  Its simply a reference to an explanation of scientific information that is presented in a way everyone should be able to understand.  That way, you don't have to trust me or take my word for it.  Even if your claim was true, you would still see a correlation between temperature and solar irradiance over the past 60 years.

Does NASA not employ scientists? 
Does NASA not carry out Science? 
Did NASA somehow get all of that wrong? 
Did NASA just completely overlook the role of the sun on climate?
Is NASA not credible?
Are the dozens of similar organizations all lacking credibility in the same exact way?


If your answer to any of those questions is no...well then you are lost. 

Pages:
Jump to: