CC3 -- Why I believe that a third option is needed for climate change

Akrasia · 23-01-2020 4:48pm

Gaoth Laidir wrote: »

Which "entire nations have been wiped out by hurricanes"? Your words.

Ok, not entirely wiped out, but if you lived on Grand Bahama in September you'd probably agree that the most destructive hurricane to hit them in recorded history did more than a smattering of damage

The people of Haiti took a massive hit from Matthew 4 years ago and are still not recovered from the infrastructure destruction

posidonia · 23-01-2020 4:49pm

Oneiric 3 wrote: »

What scientists are saying that the world is to end in 10 years? Regardless, it is a politician's job to be an advocate for the people, not for scientists and experts. They tried that over in the UK just recently, but my God, how that backfired.

Do you think would we start eating the dead and babies Retrogamer? Would you if 'working scientists' said it was okay?

Hello, looks like your keen to use loaded questions.

Oneiric 3 · 23-01-2020 4:52pm

posidonia wrote: »

Hello, looks like your keen to use loaded questions.

Mother of God!

Retr0gamer · 23-01-2020 4:52pm

Oneiric 3 wrote: »

What scientists are saying that the world is to end in 10 years? Regardless, it is a politician's job to be an advocate for the people, not for scientists and experts. They tried that over in the UK just recently, but my God, how that backfired.

Do you think would we start eating the dead and babies Retrogamer? Would you if 'working scientists' said it was okay?

10 years might admittedly be a bit hyperbolic. However the scientific community do agree that we are getting closer to a run away greenhouse event, basically a greenhouse gas concentration where it is impossible to reverse the damage done and it will only get worse. Could be 10 years, could be longer. The fact is it's absolute madness to gamble on when it will happen for profit (it eventually will happen given enough time) when the means to reduce emissions are in our hands.

A good real world example is what happened to Venus.

oriel36 · 23-01-2020 4:53pm

Retr0gamer wrote: »

.

Also saying the final solution has anything to do with science is nonsense. It has nothing to do with Darwinism or evolution.

If people expect these 'climate change' modelers to come to their senses or recognise the crude 'scientific method' then the crematoria remain a testament to the influence of the mid 19th century empirical proponents who hijacked biological and geological evolutionary sciences via human population control -

"One day something brought to my recollection Malthus's "Principles of
Population," which I had read about twelve years before. I thought of
his clear exposition of "the positive checks to increase"--disease,
accidents, war, and famine--which keep down the population of savage
races to so much lower an average than that of civilized peoples. It
then occurred to me that these causes or their equivalents are
continually acting in the case of animals also..... because in every
generation the inferior would inevitably be killed off and the
superior would remain--that is, the fittest would survive.... The more I
thought over it the more I became convinced that I had at length found
the long-sought-for law of nature that solved the problem of the
origin of species." Darwin/Wallace notion via Malthus

Most people who visit Auschwitz-Birkenau will leave numb and be unable to put the atrocities into context but the convictions expressed above did exist among empire builders and they existed to incite an entire nation to go on an extermination and invasion rampage during WWII. All 'climate change' does today is expose the same 'scientific method' convictions of people who begin with conditions in a common greenhouse and conclude that humanity must control planetary temperatures. Unlike the holocaust it is not a national monstrosity but plaguing global society.

The cretins who imagine the holocaust has nothing to do with academic policy are the same people screaming holocaust denier, science denier of climate change denier. I consider it a phenomena that such a self-promoting and self-protecting subculture exists at the heart of the education system even without someone else affirming it, after all, people who are subject to a consistent series of slogans and doctrines find it almost impossible to escape those empirical convictions.

posidonia · 23-01-2020 4:53pm

Oneiric 3 wrote: »

Mother of God!

You're a strange one all right.

You ask someone if they would eat babies. I mean, wtf are you thinking?

Akrasia · 23-01-2020 4:54pm

Nabber wrote: »

But it’s not unprecedented in Australia.
It’s not the largest and we are already seeing the plant and fauna boom in the wake of the fire.

It’s almost like these animals adapted to fire, like over the course of 1000s and millions of years their gene pool naturally selected those best suited to survival. Hold onto your seat, this is going to knock you back, but I reckon fires in Australia are natural and that the current fires are also natural.

Plus the people who ignited the fires are somehow more accountable than my family car sitting in my driveway.

Just my non expert opinion!!!

Gotta love the climate change denier logic
~deep breath
Humans cannot possibly be responsible for warming the planet, we're much too insigificant
Nature cannot possibly be held responsible for the biggest wildfires in Australian recorded history, it was those human who did it
~Exhale

Water John · 23-01-2020 4:59pm

A number of Oil co CEOs meeting in Davos to see how they might reduce GHG from fossil fuels they sell.
Aren't they wasting their time when they should have come to the expertise on this thread to find out that they don't need to.

Akrasia · 23-01-2020 5:00pm

Gaoth Laidir wrote: »

Retro, your attribution to the deaths of fire crew to climate change is pretty shaky. Firefighting is an annual fact of life there. Regardless of whether this year was drier or not, there would still have been fires in the country. This year they were worse, but was that fire due to climate change or one of the many that occur anyway?

Also, Akrasia has not bothered to clarify which entire nations have been wiped out by hurricanes. Do you know which ones he was talking about?

This was an american crew brought in to help with the unprecedented wildfires. They would not have been there if it was just a normal wildfire season.

Danno · 23-01-2020 5:00pm

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Science deals with observations and truth.

It could be a figment of my imagination, but a few pages back I recall in this thread we spent quite a while showing this not to be the case.

A particular case in point showed how the "science" altered Valentia for no valid reason. Altered observations are not science and are not within an asses roar of truth.

Oneiric 3 · 23-01-2020 5:01pm

posidonia wrote: »

You're a strange one all right.

You ask someone if they would eat babies. I mean, wtf are you thinking?

Why is it a shocker if I ask that question, but OK when it suggested by the girl in the video? You don't see the wider picture, in that constant talk of climate doom is resulting in increased irrationally by gullible people. If you and scientists are OK with this, then so be it.

Retr0gamer · 23-01-2020 5:03pm

oriel36 wrote: »

If people expect these 'climate change' modelers to come to their senses or recognise the crude 'scientific method' then the crematoria remain a testament to the influence of the mid 19th century empirical proponents who hijacked biological and geological evolutionary sciences via human population control -

"One day something brought to my recollection Malthus's "Principles of
Population," which I had read about twelve years before. I thought of
his clear exposition of "the positive checks to increase"--disease,
accidents, war, and famine--which keep down the population of savage
races to so much lower an average than that of civilized peoples. It
then occurred to me that these causes or their equivalents are
continually acting in the case of animals also..... because in every
generation the inferior would inevitably be killed off and the
superior would remain--that is, the fittest would survive.... The more I
thought over it the more I became convinced that I had at length found
the long-sought-for law of nature that solved the problem of the
origin of species." Darwin/Wallace notion via Malthus

Most people who visit Auschwitz-Birkenau will leave numb and be unable to put the atrocities into context but the convictions expressed above did exist among empire builders and they existed to incite an entire nation to go on an extermination and invasion rampage during WWII. All 'climate change' does today is expose the same 'scientific method' convictions of people who begin with conditions in a common greenhouse and conclude that humanity must control planetary temperatures. Unlike the holocaust it is not a national monstrosity but plaguing global society.

The cretins who imagine the holocaust has nothing to do with academic policy are the same people screaming holocaust denier, science denier of climate change denier. I consider it a phenomena that such a self-promoting and self-protecting subculture exists at the heart of the education system even without someone else affirming it, after all, people who are subject to a consistent series of slogans and doctrines find it almost impossible to escape those empirical convictions.

You've kind of answered your own question there. They hijacked actual scientific research and theory and used it to back up their own sick delusional fallacy. There is nothing scientific about the final solution and to suggest otherwise is a complete falsehood. There was no scientific method, it was the exact opposite to it. Similarly climate change deniers have hijacked actual science to support their own delusional fallacies.

posidonia · 23-01-2020 5:05pm

Oneiric 3 wrote: »

Why is it a shocker if I ask that question, but OK when it suggested by the girl in the video? You don't see the wider picture, in that constant talk of climate doom is resulting in increased irrationally by gullible people. If you and scientists are OK with this, then so be it.

The girl makes O36's posts seem sane...

Sigh, I suppose I have to defend myself though? No, of course I wouldn't eat babies, or condone anyone doing that.

Struth, again, wtf are you thinking?

Danno · 23-01-2020 5:06pm

Retr0gamer wrote: »

A good real world example is what happened to Venus.

So, all the cow burps, diesel engines and coal burning fecked up Venus. Luckily for us the Earth was around when the last few remaining humans left Venus in their rocket ship. It's a pity they didn't have Solar Panels invented then - with them being so close to the sun and all. They might have been saved. :pac:

posidonia · 23-01-2020 5:08pm

Danno wrote: »

It could be a figment of my imagination, but a few pages back I recall in this thread we spent quite a while showing this not to be the case.

A particular case in point showed how the "science" altered Valentia for no valid reason. Altered observations are not science and are not within an asses roar of truth.

For no valid reason you're prepared to understand...

If it's a big conspiracy, why didn't they adjust all the Ireland records in the same way?

Akrasia · 23-01-2020 5:10pm

Danno wrote: »

It could be a figment of my imagination, but a few pages back I recall in this thread we spent quite a while showing this not to be the case.

A particular case in point showed how the "science" altered Valentia for no valid reason. Altered observations are not science and are not within an asses roar of truth.

Nobody demonstrated that there was no valid reason for those adjustments.

In fact, it would be more suspicious if the raw data was never adjusted at all given the changes in obervation procedures and instruments that have happened at that station over the preceeding century and a half.

The fact that the details for every single adjustment are not easy to find via google, does not mean that they are not recorded in the appropriate places and available for researchers to access when they need them.

The fact that not one of the 'sceptics' contacted the people at Valentia or the NOAA or NASA to ask them where this data can be found shows that there is an over reliance on jumping to conclusions without first stopping to check the facts.

As someone who does not believe that the global scientific climate and weather monitoring services are all in on a big conspiracy to falsify the data, I am happy to assume that there was a valid justification for these measurements and that they have been appropriately validated using the approved methods some of which I outlined in a post many pages ago.

Oneiric 3 · 23-01-2020 5:10pm

posidonia wrote: »

Struth, again, wtf are you thinking?

Exactly what I have posted?

Akrasia · 23-01-2020 5:11pm

posidonia wrote: »

The girl makes O36's posts seem sane...

Sigh, I suppose I have to defend myself though? No, of course I wouldn't eat babies, or condone anyone doing that.

Struth, again, wtf are you thinking?

(Can I not have a little one??)

posidonia · 23-01-2020 5:13pm

Oneiric 3 wrote: »

Exactly what I have posted?

"Do you think would we start eating the dead and babies Retrogamer? Would you if 'working scientists' said it was okay?"

Wtf do you think he thinks?

Do you eat babies? Of course you don't! Don't imply other people would!

Danno · 23-01-2020 5:15pm

posidonia wrote: »

For no valid reason you're prepared to understand...

If it's a big conspiracy, why didn't they adjust all the Ireland records in the same way?

They adjusted Knock Airport's data too and magically inputted data from the 1930s, some half century before the Airport existed.

Either it's a deliberate act in altering the data or a foolish one. Either way, the data has been altered and no solid reason given. We've done this to death a few pages back. The climate alarmists had no defence.

posidonia · 23-01-2020 5:17pm

Danno wrote: »

They adjusted Knock Airport's data too and magically inputted data from the 1930s, some half century before the Airport existed.

Either it's a deliberate act in altering the data or a foolish one. Either way, the data has been altered and no solid reason given. We've done this to death a few pages back. The climate alarmists had no defence.

Ok, that's two. But, why not adjust them all?

'...no solid reason' you're prepared to go to the trouble of understanding.

Oneiric 3 · 23-01-2020 5:20pm

posidonia wrote: »

"Do you think would we start eating the dead and babies Retrogamer? Would you if 'working scientists' said it was okay?"

Wtf do you think he thinks?

Do you eat babies? Of course you don't! Don't imply other people would!

There's toooooo much COtwoooooooo.

Danno · 23-01-2020 5:25pm

Akrasia wrote: »

The fact that not one of the 'sceptics' contacted the people at Valentia or the NOAA or NASA to ask them where this data can be found shows that there is an over reliance on jumping to conclusions without first stopping to check the facts.

As said before - no need to contact Valentia. I'll say it again just to be really sure: Met. Eireann. Did. Not. Alter. The. Data.

This has been verified by GL who used Met Eireann data to create his chart.

O3 requested data from NOAA/NASA before and didn't get a response. So it is reasonable to say that they don't engage with the public.

Your answers as to why the Valentia data was changed was answered with a link to why some USA stations were changed following the 1950s - totally inappropriate.

You then tried to imply that the data was changed because of F to C, daylight savings time, observational times, etc... each of these was debunked.

You gave up by telling people who had questions to "ask them"

It is akin to a massive Liverpool FC fan being asked why he believes the team this year is one of their best ever only for him to reply - umm, ask the players! :rolleyes:

oriel36 · 23-01-2020 5:27pm

Retr0gamer wrote: »

You've kind of answered your own question there. They hijacked actual scientific research and theory and used it to back up their own sick delusional fallacy. There is nothing scientific about the final solution and to suggest otherwise is a complete falsehood. There was no scientific method, it was the exact opposite to it. Similarly climate change deniers have hijacked actual science to support their own delusional fallacies.

The biological and geological evolutionary road goes through people like Steno, Smith and ends early last century with Wegener who used the antecedent insights to fit together the principle of crustal motion/evolution (Plate tectonics) through the fossil and rock strata records -

https://www.geolsoc.org.uk/~/media/shared/images/education%20careers/KS4/Chapter%201/chapter%201%20slide%2018.jpg?la=en

Biological and geological records already had an evolutionary narrative in place as the oldest rocks also had the oldest lifeforms with abrupt changes such as the KT boundary which left clues to a change in surface conditions thereby ending the period of the dinosaurs. It remains a thrilling story that should continue with the mechanism which links plate tectonics and the Earth's spherical deviation between polar/equatorial diameters with rotational dynamics beneath the fractured crust.

Instead the Royal Society empiricists hijacked evolutionary biology and reformatted it to suit conclusions based on a backwards looking narrative from white skin tone people back to gorillas by using native Australians and Africans as evolutionary props -

"At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries,
the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate and replace throughout the world the savage races. The break will then be rendered
wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilised state, as we
may hope, than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead
of as at present between the negro or Australian and the gorilla."
Darwin, Descent of Man

I see a desperate attempt by the proponents and opponents within the 'scientific method' umbrella to get back to their graphs and data without being able or have the courage to put the 'climate change' ideology into context as another monstrosity dumped on humanity because it suits the self-promoting and self-protecting empirical subculture.

The word 'denier' was borrowed from the holocaust by academics who themselves are completely detached from the very academic principles that created the idea of human and subhuman through cultural distinctions.

Oneiric 3 · 23-01-2020 5:44pm

oriel36 wrote: »

"At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries,
the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate and replace throughout the world the savage races. The break will then be rendered
wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilised state, as we
may hope, than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead
of as at present between the negro or Australian and the gorilla."
Darwin, Descent of Man

"Thus we find every tyrant backed by a Jew, as is every pope by a Jesuit. In truth, the cravings of oppressors would be hopeless, and the practicability of war out of the question, if there were not an army of Jesuits to smother thought and a handful of Jews to ransack pockets.

… the real work is done by the Jews, and can only be done by them, as they monopolize the machinery of the loanmongering mysteries by concentrating their energies upon the barter trade in securities… Here and there and everywhere that a little capital courts investment, there is ever one of these little Jews ready to make a little suggestion or place a little bit of a loan. The smartest highwayman in the Abruzzi is not better posted up about the locale of the hard cash in a traveler’s valise or pocket than those Jews about any loose capital in the hands of a trader… The language spoken smells strongly of Babel, and the perfume which otherwise pervades the place is by no means of a choice kind".

-- Karl Marx.

oriel36 · 23-01-2020 6:09pm

Oneiric 3 wrote: »

-- Karl Marx.

No, no, no, no, no !

The trajectory of reasoning refers strictly to the 'scientific method' which amounts to the application of analogies/experiments to large scale sciences -

"Rule III. The qualities of bodies which are found to belong to all bodies within the reach of our experiments, are to be esteemed the universal qualities of all bodies whatsoever." Newton

If you do not have the ability to contend with that overreaching monstrosity of an opinion then stay away because the Darwin/Wallace notion is based on superficial distinctions within the human race to achieve the pan-biological notion that aggression is the centre of life on Earth. It was this that killed millions when adopted by the national socialists -

"One day something brought to my recollection Malthus's "Principles of
Population," which I had read about twelve years before. I thought of
his clear exposition of "the positive checks to increase"--disease,
accidents, war, and famine--which keep down the population of savage
races to so much lower an average than that of civilized peoples. It
then occurred to me that these causes or their equivalents are
continually acting in the case of animals also..... because in every
generation the inferior would inevitably be killed off and the
superior would remain--that is, the fittest would survive.... The more I
thought over it the more I became convinced that I had at length found
the long-sought-for law of nature that solved the problem of the
origin of species." Darwin/Wallace notion via Malthus

Highlighting it or putting it in italics will not penetrate closed or easily led minds and especially academic minds but this was how you get from the mid 19th century Royal Society monstrosity to the crematotia of Auschwitz .

The exciting principles where evolutionary and geological evolution was written in rock strata from remote antiquity remains separate to the 'scientific method' or Rule III imprint . To invert the entire system where white tone skin people back to gorillas using Africans and aborigines formed the empirical narrative for evolution was the same principle which slaughtered the European Jewish culture by creating a human/subhuman division whereas genuine evolutionary research begins and ends with rock strata and the fossil record from remote antiquity up to the present.

Nobody needs to know whether white skin people are superior to black tone skin people within an evolutionary narrative because it is boring, stupid, silly and terminally crude unless you are complete gob****e. What an effin mess by 10th rate minds so don't wonder how Hitler got the German nation to go on a rampage, it is built into everyone here like a toxin flowing through their brains -

"At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate
and replace throughout the world the savage races. The break will then be rendered wider, for it will intervene between man in
a more civilised state, as we may hope, than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as at present between
the negro or Australian and the gorilla." Darwin

If you can't read it and appreciate what is being said then leave it be.

Akrasia · 23-01-2020 6:10pm

Danno wrote: »

They adjusted Knock Airport's data too and magically inputted data from the 1930s, some half century before the Airport existed.

Either it's a deliberate act in altering the data or a foolish one. Either way, the data has been altered and no solid reason given. We've done this to death a few pages back. The climate alarmists had no defence.

'They' didn't invent the knock temperature data, someone reported it to them, possibly in error, or possibly it was from an old defunct weather station that used to exist at a nearby location, so it has been lumped in with the modern Knock station data

And if the data was wrongly reported, as sometimes happen, especially going back a hundred years, how would you suggest that the GHCN should deal with such data? Should they just plug in the raw numbers into their model without validating it or checking it (as you 'raw data rulezzz' brigade keep banging on in favour of?
Or you're only in favour of using raw data when it gives you the answer you are looking for
Given the faintest whiff of an 'urban heat island' that you think is reading too hot, you guys are out in force demanding that the station should be excluded from the records or adjusted downwards to compensate for that bias

Retr0gamer · 23-01-2020 6:15pm

Danno wrote: »

So, all the cow burps, diesel engines and coal burning fecked up Venus. Luckily for us the Earth was around when the last few remaining humans left Venus in their rocket ship. It's a pity they didn't have Solar Panels invented then - with them being so close to the sun and all. They might have been saved. :pac:

I never said that. Confirmation bias still working for your little fallacy it seems.

What is true is that the large amount of CO2 in the atmosphere means the planet is much hotter than Mercury which is closer to the sun.

I'd stop pretending to be an expert in science when you quite clearly aren't. It makes people look spectacularly foolish.

SeaBreezes · 23-01-2020 6:20pm

Retr0gamer wrote: »

I never said that. Confirmation bias still working for your little fallacy it seems.

What is true is that the large amount of CO2 in the atmosphere means the planet is much hotter than Mercury which is closer to the sun.

And yet according to Dr. Nikolovs and Hellers peer reviwed published paper if it was the CO2 it would be MUCH hotter. It's the size and Atmospheric pressure that dictate temp according to these scientists. He actually uses Venus as an example why CO2 CANT warm a planet.

https://www.wnd.com/2017/07/study-blows-greenhouse-theory-out-of-the-water/

Gaoth Laidir · 23-01-2020 6:27pm

Akrasia wrote: »

Ok, not entirely wiped out, but if you lived on Grand Bahama in September you'd probably agree that the most destructive hurricane to hit them in recorded history did more than a smattering of damage

The people of Haiti took a massive hit from Matthew 4 years ago and are still not recovered from the infrastructure destruction

You seem to be immune to the fact that you spout untrue hyperbole on a daily basis, kind of like The Guardian source you so often refer to. The problem is you're not the only one doing it, and many people are believing it, including impressionable schoolkids. Then we have that AOC who has more looks than braincells, yet although she's running around shouting the end of the world is nigh, she's "doing what a politician should do, acting on the information provided to her by sciensts and experts in those areas", according to Retrogamer. This is the level of nonsense we're dealing with here.

posidonia wrote: »

Hello, looks like your keen to use loaded questions.

Akrasia wrote: »

Gotta love the climate change denier logic
~deep breath
Humans cannot possibly be responsible for warming the planet, we're much too insigificant
Nature cannot possibly be held responsible for the biggest wildfires in Australian recorded history, it was those human who did it
~Exhale

posidonia wrote: »

"Do you think would we start eating the dead and babies Retrogamer? Would you if 'working scientists' said it was okay?"

Wtf do you think he thinks?

Do you eat babies? Of course you don't! Don't imply other people would!

More high-quality contributions...

CC3 -- Why I believe that a third option is needed for climate change

Comments