The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewAndrew Anglin Archive
Weather Hoax Industrial Complex: the World Is “Literally on Fire”
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

The whole world’s coming to an end, Mal.

AP:

Warning that the world is in “great peril,” the head of the United Nations says leaders meeting in person for the first time in three years must tackle conflicts and climate catastrophes, increasing poverty and inequality — and address divisions among major powers that have gotten worse since Russia invaded Ukraine.

In speeches and remarks leading up to the start of the leaders’ meeting Tuesday, Secretary-General Antonio Guterres cited the “immense” task not only of saving the planet, “which is literally on fire,” but of dealing with the persisting COVID-19 pandemic. He also pointed to “a lack of access to finance for developing countries to recover — a crisis not seen in a generation” that has seen ground lost for education, health and women’s rights.

Guterres will deliver his “state of the world” speech at Tuesday’s opening of the annual high-level global gathering. U.N. spokesman Stephane Dujarric said it would be “a sober, substantive and solutions-focused report card” for a world “where geopolitical divides are putting all of us at risk.”

The 77th General Assembly meeting of world leaders convenes under the shadow of Europe’s first major war since World War II — the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, which has unleashed a global food crisis and opened fissures among major powers in a way not seen since the Cold War.

Yet nearly 150 heads of state and government are on the latest speakers’ list. That’s a sign that despite the fragmented state of the planet, the United Nations remains the key gathering place for presidents, prime ministers, monarchs and ministers to not only deliver their views but to meet privately to discuss the challenges on the global agenda — and hopefully make some progress.

At the top of that agenda for many: Russia’s Feb. 24 invasion of Ukraine, which not only threatens the sovereignty of its smaller neighbor but has raised fears of a nuclear catastrophe at Europe’s largest nuclear plant in the country’s now Russia-occupied southeast.

Leaders in many countries are trying to prevent a wider war and restore peace in Europe. Diplomats, though, aren’t expecting any breakthroughs this week.

The loss of important grain and fertilizer exports from Ukraine and Russia has triggered a food crisis, especially in developing countries, and inflation and a rising cost of living in many others. Those issues are high on the agenda.

At a meeting Monday to promote U.N. goals for 2030 — including ending extreme poverty, ensuring quality education for all children and achieving gender equality — Guterres said the world’s many pressing perils make it “tempting to put our long-term development priorities to one side.”

But the U.N. chief said some things can’t wait — among them education, dignified jobs, full equality for women and girls, comprehensive health care and action to tackle the climate crisis. He called for public and private finance and investment, and above all for peace.

But seriously – where do these people get the nerve to claim the world is ending?

Global warming is literally a hoax. They don’t have any evidence of any of this stuff.

The greenhouse effect is a fraction of what determines temperature, carbon dioxide is a fraction of greenhouse gasses, and “manmade” carbon is a fraction of atmospheric carbon.

It’s just basic math that there are so many factors involved, that you could never figure out the statistical significance of manmade carbon – it’s such a fraction of a fraction of a fraction. Maybe it would change the temperature 0.001 degrees in 100 years or something – but maybe not.

Any change it caused would make zero difference in the scheme of things. If anything, raising the temperature a few degrees would be really good for humans, as it would expand grow zones and lengthen grow seasons. That’s just very obvious.

It’s a gigantic hoax.

When it was a small part of the narrative, it was like “okay, well, okay.” But now this is the center of the entire universe of the narrative, and they are saying “the world is on fire”?

It’s an outrage that they expect us to believe something so stupid.

Seriously – I explained the whole thing to you above. You can look this up, you can go argue with “the scientists.” They will not be able to explain anything to you. They will just sputter and call you a denier.

(Republished from The Daily Stormer by permission of author or representative)
 
Hide 106 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. All of it boils down to the desire of organized jewry to dominate all of humanity.

    • Agree: Truth Vigilante
    • LOL: Emslander
    • Replies: @Haxo Angmark
  2. SteveK9 says:

    We really need to address the threat of corrupt Scientific Institutions. Most people, even most other Scientists who are not in the field of the institution, have grown up trusting that these institutions are objective and reliable. The FDA, CDC, WHO, and IPCC are corrupt. What has corrupted them? The usual: money and power. I used to believe Technocracy was a good idea (I am one of those ‘technical experts’), but it did not really occur to me that the institutions could be so easily corrupted. It’s clear that this is the greatest threat to freedom that exists today. The few dissident experts are generally retired Scientists, but they are completely marginalized. I guess we can only hope that even the general public will begin to recognize that they are being lied to.

    • Agree: Dutch Boy, Rich
  3. SZ says:

    carbon dioxide is a fraction of greenhouse gasses, and “manmade” carbon is a fraction of atmospheric carbon.

    Just like cholesterol makes up only a tiny fraction (less than 3%) of the plaque that clogs arteries while calcium is its main component. Just like the clogging of water-pipes. In other words, older people should NOT drink milk but can safely consume eggs.
    It’s not fat but calcification that causes the clogging:
    https://www.bhf.org.uk/informationsupport/heart-matters-magazine/medical/ask-the-experts/calcification-of-arteries

    Though almost all US sources uniformly mention as if cholesterol and other fats are clogging by themselves.
    Cholesterol is probably essential for the body (almost all oils and fats are) and good for you if present in moderate quantities just like CO2 is essential and definitely good for the climate if present in moderate quantity.

    • Agree: Jim Christian
    • Disagree: Twodees Partain
    • Replies: @Ross23
    , @ia
    , @Wade Hampton
  4. Bro43rd says:

    Proud Denier here. Aren’t those watermelons hilariously hypocritical. Pounding out comment after comment on their electrical devices in their conditioned spaces sustaining themselves via food derived by use of carbon based energy all the while calling anybody who disagrees with them a ‘denier’. Irony never even registers.

    • Agree: Emslander
  5. Emslander says:

    Today’s must-read:

    https://americanmind.org/salvo/florida-versus-davos/

    De Santis rips the Left some new ones.

    • Thanks: The Anti-Gnostic
  6. America politics on the Left has choosen the “victim” mentality to advance their agenda.

    What better “victim” than the environment? It can’t tell you if you’re helping or hurting it. It can’t complain or offer constructive ideas. It is also easy to use confuse people by using pollution in their arguments. Ever tell a believer that global warming is bullshit? You’ll usually get a response back like “Oh, you don’t like clean water” or “So you support dumping hazmat out in the open?” Neither response has anything to do with climate change, but you are now on the defensive end of the argument and it’s off topic. Nobody advocates for pollution, but climate change activists do frame it that way, and then act like the “science is settled”.

    • Agree: RoatanBill
  7. Bill H. says:

    The average temperature of Earth’s atmosphere has risen 11 degrees since the last Ice Age, a process which not only has the human race survived, but during which it has thrived and multiplied, but we are told that we will be catastrophically destroyed if the temperature rises another 2 degrees.

    To repeat a bit; we survived an 11 degree rise, but we will not survive a 2 degree rise. Does that sound a little bit stupid to you? Did we lose our ability to adapt? Or did we merely lose our intelligence?

    • Agree: John Pepple
  8. The elite are getting obscenely rich off a Ponzi scheme which they will not endanger.

    It takes extreme cognitive dissonance to not make the connection between flooding the industrialized West with Sun People from the global South, and increasing our global fossil fuel consumption.

    If the UN truly believed the world was facing an existential threat from man-made carbon, they’d be demanding an end to equatorial people moving to cooler, high-consumption, industrialized countries.

    Instead, the UN publishes cheery forecasts of how ‘global migration’ will see millions of Sun People relocating to Western countries in the coming decades.

    Why? Because financial capitalism demands it. The Ponzi scheme must be fed, or it will collapse like a perforated hot air balloon.

    • Replies: @Realist
    , @Ben Sampson
  9. Dutch Boy says:

    There have been many periods of varying average temperature in earth’s history before the Industrial Revolution. The catastrophic variations have been those of global cooling, not warming. There is indeed a relationship between warming and atmospheric carbon dioxide but it is the reverse of the AGW gang’s claim. Warming of the oceans lowers its capacity to dissolve CO2, thus increasing the atmospheric portion of CO2, i.e., warming precedes increases in CO2, not vice versa. The bottom line is not science but money and power. Addressing a natural change in climate with appropriate, scientifically based policies won’t get you either. Whipping up end-of-the-world hysteria means bigger budgets and more power for the state and the AGW scientists/corporations.

    • Replies: @Poupon Marx
    , @fredtard
  10. Ross23 says:
    @SZ

    Yes and take vitamin k2 supplement which moves the calcium from your arteries to your bones where it’s supposed to go.

    As far as global warming is concerned 99.9% of scientists agree with those that fund them.

    Same with doctors, politicians & those invited on tv for their “opinion”

    • Replies: @Liza
  11. The OUN and its spawns should be dismantled and their technocrats and bureaucrats should be sent looking for jobs that require actual skill rather than a talent for bullshitting. The world should return to good old multilateral ways.
    World peace can only be achieved through balance of power. Global institutions don’t bring peace and don’t bring development. They are camouflage for imperialism, grift and spoliation. To hope that they will eventually start to work is just like to hope that communism can work, a pipe dream sold to the feeble-minded. The only way they can work is to turn the world into a dystopian nightmare.

    • Replies: @Ed Case
  12. One look at this guy and yes, first impressions are correct: he is a washed out, inferior, sad sack, weak willed, mediocrity across the board. A sad, stupid, corner street whore, working to satisfy her pimp. His specialty seems to be back passage service.

    The race is on for the the Idiocracy Podium between this wretch and Kamala Harris.

  13. ruralguy says:

    Yes, natural processes in both the land and in Oceans produce 26 times the amount of CO2 that humans produce. BUT, natural processes (e.g. vegetation, etc) ABSORB more than they produce. So, Andrew’s claims that natural processes are the dominant factor in global warming is simply false, because he is only looking at the production 1/2 of the Carbon cycle, ignoring the absorption 1/2 completely. If you look at the NET CO2, produced, human output far exceeds the natural processes, obviously, because the natural process net is absorption.

  14. Alrenous says: • Website

    The “”environmentalist”” tribe has been condemned to burn for being full of shit literally from sole to crown.
    Reality: “I am on fire.”
    Narcissism: “The world is on fire.”

    Call it allegorically true.

  15. Liza says:
    @Ross23

    Yes, you’re right. But make sure it is the MK-7 variety of K2. Thanks.

    • Replies: @Drapetomaniac
  16. EdwardM says:

    You can use heuristics to conclude that it’s a hoax (as Instapundit says, when they start acting like it’s a crisis, I will believe that it’s a crisis). It’s all just a cover for the totalitarian left’s goals, which were around long before “climate change”: deindustrialization and depopulation, global government and wealth redistribution, central planning, and general societal control. It’s really the perfect boogeyman for which all of these solutions are ideal.

    Obviously the treatment of dissenters is one major tell that their theories don’t hold water.

    They don’t talk about the benefits of warming as Andrew points out (e.g., more space and time for crops, more shipping lanes through the Arctic, less death by cold (which outnumbers death by heat)), or the costs of mitigation. Even if climate change were real, and even if it were caused by humans, and even if it were theoretically possible to mitigate it — all big ifs — it doesn’t automatically follow that these solutions would pass cost-benefit tests. It’s just “solutions” at all cost, which is irrational to the point of being insane.

    They never accept discussion of geoengineering, like placing a sulfur cloud in the atmosphere to block the evil sun’s rays or farming algae in the oceans to soak up carbon. These may or may not work, but the hoaxers aren’t interested in discussing them, because such solutions don’t fit their agenda. If global warming or global cooling or climate change or whatever were truly the cataclysm they claim, all creative approaches would be on the table.

    They refuse to curb migration from the third world to the civilized world, which would address a major factor increasing emissions. They don’t accept the obvious solution of nuclear power, because that would be a panacea making their fantasies to control all economic activity moot.

    The list goes on. None of the left’s dialogue (or monologue) about solving the supposed problem matches their claims about how serious it supposedly is.

    • Replies: @John Pepple
  17. ia says:
    @SZ

    older people should NOT drink milk

    Article doesn’t say that:

    The calcium deposits in your arteries are not related to your diet or any supplements you may be taking. They occur because the cells in your blood vessels are not working as they should.

    • Replies: @SZ
  18. @Liza

    The Japanese prescription dose:

    45,000 mcg., 37500% of daily value
    as menaquinone-4

    I use Mega Vitamin K2.

    • Thanks: Liza
  19. @SteveK9

    “We really need to address the threat of corrupt Scientific Institutions.”

    Start with the cause.

    Everything government touches turns to crap. – Ringo Starr

  20. What if Earth’s crude oil reserves are almost tapped out, though? Obviously global climate crisis emergency change is a hoax, but maybe we should conserve oil and reserve it for plastics, electronics, fertilizer, roads etc and quit lighting it on fire. Or maybe the clotshots will kill billions and we won’t hafta worry about it for another couple centuries. It is clear that TPTB burning 10,000 gallons of jet fuel every week whilst living inches from the ocean in mansions consuming \$5,000 of electrons every month don’t buy the climate hoax at all.

  21. Anon[644] • Disclaimer says:

    It’s been known for years that temperature measuring stations are much too close to man-made heat sinks like buildings and concrete, and this artificially raises temperatures. Every city in the country is a heat sink. It’s simply not practical to position every temperature station well away from all human habitation, but it’s the only way to get accurate numbers. The Global warming theory is entirely based on old, distorted data.

    https://www.foxnews.com/science/distorted-data-feds-close-600-weather-stations-amid-criticism-theyre-situated-to-report-warming

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/05/03/big-news-verified-by-noaa-poor-weather-station-siting-leads-to-artificial-long-term-warming/

    • Thanks: Je Suis Omar Mateen
    • Replies: @UncommonGround
  22. War Is Peace. Freedom Is Slavery. Ignorance Is Strength. God Don’t Care.

    • Thanks: The Anti-Gnostic
  23. Warning that the world is in “great peril,” the head of the United Nations says leaders meeting in person for the first time in three years must tackle conflicts and climate catastrophes, increasing poverty and inequality — and address divisions among major powers that have gotten worse since Russia invaded Ukraine.

    We’ve heard this speech before.

  24. “Expand grow zones.” It’s not that obvious. What is obvious is that a “grow zone” needs dirt. Sand and bare rock are barren at the equator just as they are at 60° latitude. Sand might have a small cover of humus in which case conifers and perhaps a few huckleberries can grow. Much of Canada is not agricultural land at any temperature. Ditto the Russian far east and much of Patagonia. Narvik will never be mistaken for Des Moines even if its frost free period goes to 250 days somehow. “Lengthen the growing season” also not obvious. Raised Temps are averages. A growing season is shortened by one killing frost. A growing season is longer in a cool place that does not freeze than in a warm place subject to occasional frosts. This argument and its putative simplicity and obviousness is neither simple nor obvious but quickly becomes tiresome.

  25. Global warming is literally a hoax. They don’t have any evidence of any of this stuff.

    Sorry, don’t be silly. Matters that have to do with climate are not a question of preference and what you find nice or not nice. Scientists talked about the role of CO2 more than 100 years ago and meanwhile they understand it pretty well. If you want to know how a greenhouse functions just go inside one and see the temperature there. Have you thought how thin the glas is in comparison with the atmosphere and what a difference this thin glas makes for the temperature inside of the greenhouse?

    First people said years ago that there was no warming. The oil industry told them that and they believed. But a lot of clever people who worked outside knew that temperatures were rising. They didn’t need physics to tell them that. Rangers, woodmen saw what was happening, also biologists who saw in their gardens insects which were supposed to exist only hundreds of km away in the South.

    There is no doubt that global warming is real and that it’s caused by men. We are seeing that results will be catastrophic. A few weeks ago a German physics said that he didn’t understand the conflicts in Palestine as it wont take long until humans won’t be able to live there because of global warming. Robert Hunziker, a journalist who has writen about climate change since a long time says that privately scientists think, but don’t tell publicly, that global warming is going to kill 90% of humanity.

  26. @Anon

    You didn’t notice that ice in Artic and Antartic regions are melting quite fast? The same is happening with glaciers everywhere. You didn’t notice that forest are burning, even in the north? Have you never thought that scientists and even school children know about this heat sink and consider it in their work? Scientists have very good data.

  27. @Robert Dolan

    that’s about it. As (((Rahm Emmanuel))) said,

    “never let a good crisis go to waste”. And,

    if there’s no crisis available to tighten the grip of Zionist tyranny,

    (((they))) just invent one. To quote (((Anna Judith Piller)))

    alias “Anna Baltzer”,

    “the Climate Crisis is now!”.

    the Piller-Baltzer, having abandoned her anti-Israel pose,

    is now a glorified secretary @ Earth Justice in San Francisco;

    “Earth Justice”: home of 90K/year go-out-for-pizza Jewesses,

    and \$900 per hour litigation lawyers.

  28. @UncommonGround

    “It’s an outrage that they expect us to believe something so stupid.”
    Thank you for that. Uncommon ground go back to common High School where you should have learned what makes this theory without evidence idiotic.

    • Replies: @loveshumanity
  29. World Economic Monopoly (WEM). Billionaires Purchase Planet Earth.

  30. @UncommonGround

    There is a correlation between CO2 output and temperature increase, but the climate models (which inform public policy) are not as powerful as the politicians tell us.

    As usual, Anglin is a nutcase.

    • Replies: @Truth Vigilante
  31. Where is mulga marxistfuck? Surely this Australian Climate Marxist would have something to counter hated NAZI ANDREW ANGLIN’S anti-anti-climate change opinion?

    LOL

    • Agree: dimples
  32. @Lorenzo daPonte

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keeling_Curve

    Keeling Curve + Greenhouse effect = global warming

    But no, Earth is not going to become like Venus, even though Al Gore says so

  33. @UncommonGround

    For your sake, I hope you’re employed by the global climate warming weather chaos emergency disruption crisis change industry because otherwise you’re a total sucker and a simp.

    Three retardeds:
    1) global warming change as religion
    2) global crisis chaos as employment
    3) climate emergency disruption as means of power, money, and control
    4) pure unadulterated sanctimony

    Otherwise, think global, act local: kill yourself 😍😍😍

  34. Tracking Recent Climate History | Randall Carlson.

  35. EH says:

    Interesting color wheel on the UN podium – 17 segments. It’s an odd collection of colors, too – 4 blue, 3 green, 4 red and the other six something like non-white skin tones. No black, no white.

    Why do 17s keep popping up in headlines? I’ve seen some interesting speculations, but nothing definite. Maybe symbolism will be their downfall but the code is still obscure.

  36. @UncommonGround

    You don’t need any charts or graphs or scientific papers to tell you that “climate change” is an absurd scam, although those charts/graphs/papers exist. You just need to observe three things to see that it’s nonsense:

    1) None of the dire climate predictions that have been made over the decades have ever even come close to coming true.

    2) None of the biggest climate change screechers do anything to show that they have actual concern for climate issues. They build multiple massive homes on coasts that should disappear next year, they spend most of their time traveling around in private planes or massive auto entourages, they’re extraordinarily wasteful in their day-to-day lives, etc.

    3) Every “solution” for climate issues involves Westerners, specifically white Westerners, giving up freedoms and ceding more power and money to greedy and vicious elite psychopaths. Now why would that be? It’s especially odd considering how environmentally unfriendly massive non-Western nations like China and India are.

    It is all a scam, and an obvious one at that. The fact that you fell for it means that you’re an idiot.

  37. Ed Case says:
    @Passing By

    The United Nations is the term the Anti-Fascist Countries used to call themselves during WW2.
    Not many people are old enough to remember that, so check out the newspapers of the day.
    Bottom Line:
    they were out to get you then, and they haven’t given up.

    • Replies: @Twodees Partain
  38. Biff says:

    In speeches and remarks leading up to the start of the leaders’ meeting Tuesday, Secretary-General Antonio Guterres cited the “immense” task not only of saving the planet, “which is literally on fire,” but of dealing with the persisting COVID-19 pandemic. He also pointed to “a lack of access to finance for developing countries to recover — a crisis not seen in a generation” that has seen ground lost for education, health and women’s rights.

    task not only of saving the planet

    The planet is fine; billions of years old, and will last billions more – the people are fucked.

    dealing with the persisting COVID-19 pandemic

    Biological warfare terrorism – call it what it is, and expect more of the same(from terrorists).

    lack of access to finance for developing countries to recover

    “Predatory lending, loan sharking, kosher finance, and humanity crushing debt needs to be increased into full spectrum dominance of all financial markets, or our kosher house of Wall Street cards will crash and burn.”

    education, health and women’s rights.

    Education and health = mind and body – “We will be in control of both”

    By increasing Women’s rights we will have to limit everybody’s else’s rights. It is the perfect excuse to control and manage everybody’s rights – until there are none.

  39. SafeNow says:

    When I hear global-warming jargon-speech, I sometimes think of a term used by people who analyze playwrights’ dialogue techniques: “Compressionism.” I expect to hear this speech style in a play or movie, but it is a new thing in real life. Maybe it’s an effect of Twitter. I think it mostly results from lack of a proper education; people didn’t learn to speak in the traditional way.

    • Replies: @UncommonGround
  40. Athena says:

    The hypocrisy of the West:

    UK-NATO think tank (Chatham House) who wants to shape Europe’s thinking:

    Europe should become the top priority for Liz Truss
    https://www.chathamhouse.org/2022/09/europe-should-become-top-priority-liz-truss

    ‘She is in a position to persuade European leaders to remain united in Ukraine’s support while planning better how they are going to source energy. She could expand on that to help the EU find a way through its many other problems, such as upholding democratic values throughout the bloc or finding a response to migration.

    There is also a chance for the UK to shape Europe’s thinking on the development and regulation of digital technology and medicine, energy, and the environment.’

    UK Prime Minister Truss Challenged Over Bolsonaro Links
    https://www.brasilwire.com/uk-pm-truss-challenged-over-bolsonaro-links/

    ‘Shadow Minister Fabian Hamilton of the Labour Party directly challenged Truss on her relationship with Bolsonaro: “Given that the Foreign Secretary, who is shortly to become Prime Minister, has spent so much time cosying up to President Bolsonaro, rather than challenging on the destruction of the Amazon rainforest and the attack on fundamental human rights in Brazil, will the Minister use her diplomatic pressure to help ensure these elections are able to be independently observed, with all sides respecting the outcome and result afterwards?”
    ,,,

    ‘Amongst the biggest beneficiaries in the shift to privatisation since the 2016 coup, an economic path deepened by Bolsonaro, are UK based Oil multinationals BP and Shell, whilst AstraZeneca was the first and only Covid-19 vaccine procured by the Bolsonaro government in 2020, despite it being unready for production.

    Truss is a former Shell employee and BP has been a generous donor to her political career.’

  41. @Je Suis Omar Mateen

    Imagine the emission reductions we could see if only all the people who took a mysterious Jew concoction would instead take a rusty butter knife and commit hara-kiri. It’s safe and effective(*).

    I don’t know if it would fix the weather, but it would certainly fix a lot of things.

    *: Tested on three jellyfishes and one had to be excluded from the study after a case of sudden death

  42. @SZ

    CO2 is plant food. The more of it in the atmosphere, the better plants grow. It’s a good thing. We should stop spending money on CO2 sequestration measures immediately.

    The planet responds to higher levels of CO2 in the atmosphere by growing more algae in the oceans. It’s a homeostatic process.

    The only thing dangerous about this whole situation is that clowns like the UN head and Schwab are trying to use it as a pretext to centralize power in a fascist world government.

    Germany is committing economic suicide over this. Low IQ dingbats like AOC want the US to follow suit. Luckily for their citizens, Russia and China aren’t.

    • Thanks: Emslander
    • Replies: @Realist
    , @James Charles
  43. When one reads a pig ignorant, possibly mendacious, screed like this, full of moronic false assertions, it seems even more appropriate that this sort of deranged denialism is finally being defined, as it must be, as a form of psychosis.
    It cannot end there however. Enemies of Life on Earth are anathema under all sane religions, so these monsters need to be denounced by religious leaders, and excommunicated from whatever creed they follow. And, finally, the laws punishing ecocide and crimes against Life on Earth need to be made as strict and unremitting as those against genocide. When the fate of humanity and much of Life on Earth hangs by a thread we can no longer tolerate those working to sever that thread.

  44. @Not Important

    Yet another poisonous and psychopathic cretin.
    1) The evidence from reality has been WORSE than even the most fire IPCC Reports, dumbed down for ‘consensus’ with climate change denying gangster regimes like Saudi Arabia and Austfailia.
    2)The biggest climate-change screechers are irrelevant. Around the world tens of millions of sane and decent people ie your exact opposite, are working to save Life on Earth, but being thwarted at every turn by Evil psychopaths like you.
    3)China and India are doing much to avert climate destabilisation because they will suffer most from it, and because their Governments have no insane Life-hating psychopaths like you in the ranks. It is NO surprise to see that you are a nasty racist to boot-it goes with the type.

    • Replies: @Not Important
  45. @Je Suis Omar Mateen

    If climate destabilisation realism is a religion, it is one of and for Life on Earth. The denialist cult, in total contrast, is pure Evil in that it worships and pursues universal death on this planet. That there will be much work to do, for decades, to repair ecological damage, is a boon, not a debit.
    Climate emergency disruption will be used by the elites to pursue money and power, just as their control of fossil fuels is in pursuit of money and power. It is what they exist for, and does not change the scientific reality, save in the minds of hard Right imbeciles. And being prepared to defend Life on Earth need not necessarily be sanctimonious, but arguing against reality and for universal death is ALWAYS purely Evil, no matter how stupid and brainwashed you are.

  46. Bro43rd says:
    @mulga mumblebrain

    Oh MM, my hero! LOL, what a good little minion you are. Holier than though, never providing any documentation of the spurious claims you make other than a hissy fit of the ‘science is settled’. Sheesh, what an oblivious government narrative spewing tool. Not even bright enough to be a troll. Trolls get paid, you are a prostitute who gives it away.

  47. Emslander says:
    @ruralguy

    If you look at the NET CO2, produced, human output far exceeds the natural processes, obviously, because the natural process net is absorption.

    Ridiculous!

  48. Realist says:
    @SteveK9

    We really need to address the threat of corrupt Scientific Institutions.

    There is no such thing as a corrupt Scientific Institution…if it is corrupt it isn’t scientific.

  49. Realist says:
    @Wade Hampton

    Germany is committing economic suicide over this. Low IQ dingbats like AOC want the US to follow suit. Luckily for their citizens, Russia and China aren’t.

    So true, and this will give Russia and China a big leg up.

  50. FifthDim says:

    The scientific community began to unite for action on climate change in the 1980s concurrently with Margaret Thacher’s decision to shut down the coal mines in England, and the warnings have only escalated since; the smart-for-business saw the narrative as an opportunity to bank a huge amount of wealth, they convinced governments to tax us to defeat not Global Warming but Climate Change, therefore we will be taxed on both ends of the thermometer.

    Now they go for Europe’s total deindustrialization.

    It is very suspicious that the mainstream flow of thoughts is focused on Global Warming but no strong words on Global Contamination.

    The same media reports that as a result of to the Russia-Ukraine war tens of millions will starve due to food shortage; but the latest U.N. report estimates 17 per cent of the food produced globally each year is wasted. That amounts to 931 million metric tons (1.03 billion tons) of food.

  51. @Not Important

    1- Even old predictions of scientists about climate change were quite accurate.The science is settled, and has been for a long time.

    2- Contrary to what you say, most people who have big houses and private airplanes don’t care about the climate and most of the people who care about the climate don’t have big houses and private airplanes.

    3- Solutions will have to involve everybody, including the Chinese and Indians, as Mulga says in his answer.

    4- I reccomend that you read some books about this subject by authors who understand it. There are hundreds of such books. Right now I’m reading a book by Jason Hickel, Less is More. How degrowth will save the world. It’s not specifically about climate change because the author writes from a social and economic standpoint. But it tells about our possible ways to deal with ecological problems.

  52. @SafeNow

    I think it mostly results from lack of a proper education; people didn’t learn to speak in the traditional way.

    It doesn’t help to speak in the “traditional way” if you didn’t learn how to get information and to think by yourself.

  53. @EdwardM

    Yes. And here is another point. They hate suburbs and cars. They want us in cities using mass transit. (They also encourage anti-social behavior that makes cities and mass transit unpleasant, but that’s another issue.) But I cannot recall them specifying which cities they want us in. Obviously, those cities in mild climates don’t need to use as much energy for heating and cooling as those in more extreme climates do, so they should be preferred, but no green talks like that.

    My home town of Minneapolis has ridiculous extremes of temperature, but no one feels guilty about staying there. But why not? It should be about 1/10 the size it now is. I now live in central Ohio where it is warmer in the winter and no hotter in the summer. That should be a big plus for me in terms of lowering my carbon footprint, but I’ve never seen this mentioned.

    It’s because they aren’t really interested in people’s carbon footprint. They just have these other goals that they can push via global warming.

  54. @SteveK9

    The WEF has revealed that they are the main pusher of the “climate change” hoax. They are meeting in NYC this week :

    https://dossier.substack.com/p/wef-hosts-new-york-climate-crisis?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

    It’s too late to try to get any scientists to present an opposing view to the big push. The WEF is saying that they must be allowed to take the reins, worldwide, to address the nonexistent crisis. Their proposal is to stop economic growth.

    Anyone should be able to see that, as longs as humans continue to reproduce, economies must grow to provide for the growing population. That being the case, the logical conclusion would be that part of the proposal will have to be a drastic reduction in the world population. Few people seem to be making the connection there.

    You, and the relative handful of humanity who understand the danger of technocracy, will be the only opposing force to the globalist agenda. Even though it seems futile, we have to try to do what we can to inform others. Good luck and God bless us all.

    • Replies: @Brad Anbro
  55. @mulga mumblebrain

    You’re like a parody of a gullible leftoid cultist. Honestly it’s hilarious. I’m sure you consider suicide frequently. Stop considering and go through with it.

  56. Realist says:
    @UncommonGround

    WTF, I am out of Buttons, but I have to give this a LOL

  57. @ruralguy

    The sun trumps any other possible cause of atmospheric warming. I would call that a natural phenomenon. Carbon dioxide has nothing at all to do with causing the warming and/or cooling of the atmosphere. The increase of CO2 occurs after a warming of the atmosphere.

  58. @loveshumanity

    LovesHumidity writes”

    There is a correlation between CO2 output and temperature increase

    In a controlled laboratory environment where all other variables are maintained constant, an increase in CO2 yields an infinitesimal increase in temperature.

    However, in the real world we live in, there are a multiplicity of other variables at play, many of which work to counteract or nullify and thus tend to a reversion to the mean.

    Case in Point: At the moment the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere is approximately 400 ppm (parts per million).
    According to the Climate Alarmists, a doubling to 800 ppm and it’ll get super hot and kill off countless millions and cause catastrophic environmental damage.
    Needless to say, an increase to 1200 ppm will see us all burnt to a crisp according to them.

    If so, HOW do they explain the fact that the Earth, several hundred millions of years ago, went into an ICE AGE when CO2 was between 2000 and 3000 ppm ??

    And for those that don’t comprehend what is meant by ‘Ice Age’, it means that most of the larger cities in Nth America and western Europe WERE UNDER SEVERAL MILES OF ICE.

    Clearly, CO2 is NOT anywhere near to being a major determinant in the average Earth temperature.

    HINT: Look in the sky at the big ball of fire.

    SOLAR activity is the overwhelming major determinant.

    • Replies: @mulga mumblebrain
  59. @Ed Case

    “they were out to get you then, and they haven’t given up. ”

    True, and even if they aren’t out to get you, that doesn’t mean that they won’t.

  60. 1. Things aren’t true just because you say they are. A starter list of failed eco-doomsday predictions: https://www.aei.org/carpe-diem/50-years-of-failed-doomsday-eco-pocalyptic-predictions-the-so-called-experts-are-0-50/

    2. A statement that is basically unprovable and irrelevant. However, I can easily show you that the biggest climate alarmists/people who benefit most from yapping about it like Leo DiCaprio, Al Gore, Obama, the little fetal alcohol goblin Greta, live in ways that show they clearly do not believe or care about any of the climate nonsense they spew.

    3. This isn’t relevant to the point I made. The only “solutions” that will ever even be considered for the invented climate doom scenarios will be ones that involve white Westerners giving more power and money and ceding more freedom to wealthy and powerful, mostly jewish psychopaths.

    4. See (3). Also, it never raised any red flags for you that “climate change” (previously marketed as “global warming”) has a lucrative industry surrounding it?

  61. @mulga mumblebrain

    Mulga writes:

    The denialist cult, in total contrast, is pure Evil in that it worships and pursues universal death on this planet.

    No question about it.

    The denialist cult (of whom you are one of its chief advocates), will indeed result in universal death as climate targets, by necessity, means countless millions will freeze in winter or not have enough money to put food on the table as the working classes are unable to afford their energy bills because reliable fossil fuel derived power costs an arm and a leg.

    That’s due to the fact that it has to subsidise inefficient Zio owned solar and wind turbines – you know, those same wind turbines that are chopping up tens of millions of birds every year around the world (30 sec video) :

    So Mulga, come over from the dark side of the denialists and join us as we listen to a REAL scientist who’s tells it as it is in this video titled ‘Nobel Laureate Smashes the Global Warming Hoax :

    • Agree: Brad Anbro
    • Replies: @mulga mumblebrain
  62. fredtard says:
    @Dutch Boy

    You’re on target re: levels of gases dissolved in oceans decreasing as ocean temps rise. So, warming could be the cause, not the effect, of increased atmospheric CO2. And everyone knows that plants (and algae) consume CO2 and produce oxygen.

    Great. Then how do we explain decreasing levels of atmospheric O2 simultaneous with increasing levels of atmospheric CO2? I mean, if indeed there’s more trees than ever, something else must be going on.
    https://www.oxygenlevels.org/

  63. Denier is just the modern version of the term heretic. If you don’t buy into their religion, they will likely burn you at the stake, but assuage any misgivings about offing you by declaring the act to be carbon neutral.

    • Replies: @mulga mumblebrain
  64. @The Alarmist

    It’s borrowed from ‘Holocaust denier’, because the mentally unsound denialist psychopaths deny reality. Not that I presume to know the ‘reality’ of the Nazi Judeocide, but I do know the reality of climate destabilisation. However, even if was six million Jews murdered by the Nazis (I think the number was more in the three to four million range, but still a monstrous crime)the number who will die because of these denialists is hundreds of times greater than that, and they were once prospective victims, who could have been saved. So climate destabilisation denialism is a much greater Evil and more murderous than ‘Holocaust’ denialism.
    Simply put, anthropogenic climate destabilisation denialists are either extremely wicked, or psychotically deranged. That is the truth that seems, finally, to be dawning on the sane members of the human race.

  65. @Truth Vigilante

    The same old idiocies-wind and solar are now the cheapest forms of energy, wind turbines cause VASTLY fewer bird deaths than cats, buildings and other human constructions, and climate change is ALREADY killing billions of birds a year (I love your chutzpah in pretending to be concerned about birds while advocating for their mass extinction), if millions freeze that will be the fault of the economic system NOT science, and Ivar Giaevar, a physicist, is a hard Right tool of the libertarian Heartland Institute, (so his delusions or lies are no doubt rewarded more generously than yours)and ONLY a deranged moron would take one, superannuated, hard Right hack in preference to tens of thousands of actual climate scientists,

  66. I haven’t read the other comments yet. These are just some rough thoughts about climate science. I don’t have very strong opinions but I do think that GW is a religion to some people.

    Things like the Paris climate accord have lead to countries trying to meet emissions goals. I think the idea is that if all the countries meet their goals, then we won’t raise the average earth temperature.

    I’m not convinced this is a good idea. Isolating the metric of average earth temperature and making it our goal to minimize our impact seems a bit odd.

    Why is the Earth’s average temperature such an interesting metric? Just polution itself has led to fish having microplastics and lead in their systems. Same with humans and lead.

    The other thing: I am willing to believe that *certain* local projections, usually over a short period and small area are possible from first physical principals (“solid science”). In these scenarios, it’s probably safe to get the data from the science community.

    But when it gets too hard to do it from first principals, we resort to finding numerical solutions to a set of differential equations (navier stokes), and (iirc) using Keeling’s data.

    1) depending on the type of projection we want to do, even seemingly infinitesimal errors will have a massive impact on the numerical solutions (butterfly effect). Whether the data has integrity depends on the type of projection we’re doing.

    2) at this point we have to admit it’s not “solid science”. The best thing we can do is make our models more accurate. We are looking at the statistical accuracy of solutions. Is this science? Looks a bit more like alchemy to me.

    3) let’s say someone actually does come up with analytic solutions to the NV equations. Will our data then be good enough to make long term projections about large areas of the planet?

    4) there is a bias in academia to only publish results which conform to the usual narrative (climate alarmism).

    Regards,
    loveshumanity

    • Replies: @loveshumanity
  67. @Truth Vigilante

    Your first para is UNMITIGATED bullshit. Already we have had 1.2 degrees Celsius rise since 1880, hardly ‘infinitesimal’ as these things go. And any cretin who believes that the Earth is the same as it was SEVERAL HUNDRED MILLION YEARS ago, needs ECT, quick.
    Today the Sun is hotter, the distribution of continents and oceans vastly different, the contributions of methane, nitrous oxide and anthropogenic greenhouse chemicals take the level to 500 ppm CO2 equivalent, and, crucially, the change now is greatly more rapid than at any other time we know of (at least ten times as fast as in the PETM).
    And yes the Sun is the major determinant of almost everything that occurs on Earth-what a Big Brain you truly are. But, I hate to tell you, Brains, it is NOT the ONLY determinant. Greenhouse gases count, planetary albedo counts, the Milankovitch Cycles count, and the people who study all those greatly concur in the theory, and the evidence from reality backs up their conclusions. Only the wicked or mentally insane can contradict the facts anymore. As a ‘libertarian’ you are presumably both.

  68. Things I am in favour of:

    Making grid more efficient, battery technology, nuclear, some policy to prevent pollution.

    Hard to deal with the problem in the third world, but it does need to be addressed.

  69. @ruralguy

    BUT, natural processes (e.g. vegetation, etc) ABSORB more than they produce.

    What!? So according to this rationale, C02 has been steadily declining throughout the history of the world, right up until man started eating beef and driving cars. Plant life was on a suicidal path, absorbing more C02 than the natural processes could produce.

    • Replies: @ruralguy
  70. I basically sort of consider myself to be a progressive/liberal but I don’t like being pigeon-holed (who does?)

    The academia to policy pipeline is one thing, but the academia to media pipeline is a bigger concern for me.

    I question how much integrity the most extreme stories have, and I feel that it impatcs my friends (for GW and other polarizing issues).

  71. Anon[145] • Disclaimer says:

    This is from an article dated 26 September 1988 “A gradual rise in average sea level is threatening to completely cover this Indian Ocean nation of1196 small islands within the next 30 years”. https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/102074798
    The islands average 1.5 meters above sea level, and yet here we are 34 years after the above article was written and what has happened?
    “Since 2013, opened 30 new resorts. Eleven new resorts came into operation in 2016, followed by at least 15 new resorts in 2017 and 20 new properties last year. Maldives will welcome 12 new resort openings in 2022, while 143 resorts were in operation when the new government took over in November 2018. That number has now increased to 160.”
    Also take a look at property sales there. Who would buy a house there? They must be cheap, right?
    https://www.primelocation.com/overseas/property/maldives/

  72. @mulga mumblebrain

    The idiocy is exemplified by the statement that power produced by wind and solar is cheaper than conventional sources. Perhaps unit by unit, and only if you ignore the energy inputs needed to convert the raw materials into a form where they can be used to manufacture solar cells and turbines. Then there’s the environmental impact of sourcing raw materials and the impact of disposing of these at end of life. Plus you need roughly six times the generative capacity to begin to replace conventional sources with any hope of reliability, and really big poisonous batteries.

    Kid: “We’re saving the environment! Huzzah!”
    Parent: “Maybe, but you’re poisoning and strip mining the planet to save it.”

    Yes, we are destroying Earth to save its environment. Huzzah!

    • Agree: Truth Vigilante
  73. @mulga mumblebrain

    The fact that you believe that wind turbines are a reliable way to produce energy and that they are friendlier to the environment than other forms of energy production is hard evidence that you’re a clueless idiot.

    • Agree: Emslander
  74. Well, doesn’t really matter that the weather is exactly the same as I remember as a kid in the 70s. White Women have seen this lie repeated so many times in the media they assume it has to be true. Furthermore it’s all just matter of simply ordering onion rings instead of fries with your meal with this, “let’s have windmills and solar instead of fossil fuels” pipe dream. Has anyone done any real graphic videos of how large a solar or wind facility would have to be to replace the typical coal fired power plant or a nuclear reactor which for some reason the green quacks are taking offline despite their complete lack of CO2 production. Like with planets or stars where they use CGI to back off and slowly compare the Moon to Earth to Jupiter to the Sun to Sirius then Rigel and finally a red giant like Betelguese where the sun is smaller than a grain of sand compared to a beachball? Really, seeing \$30,000 worth of solar panels covering a single average suburban home’s roof then backing off and showing an area the size of the state of Iowa being the equivalent of a couple coal plants and the quadrillion dollars needed to build it not to mention the physical destruction? Four Million Windmills covering entire states costing ridiculous sums? The public simply does not understand the infeasibility of the green quackery, its got to be shown to them very simply the way Johnny Cochrane pulled the OJ “glove don’t fit=acquit” stunt. One Trillion has already been spent on windmills, what for like 2-4% of our power…only when the wind is blowing. Anyone serious about CO2 could have probably completely nuclearized the electric grid for that money. Still, “green” is a religion to the secular left spoiled brat coastal elite, they are basically buying the 21st century of papal indulgences to ease their neurotic souls at the expense of the west’s economic health. This “green” crap very well could be as big of a boondoggle as Mao’s Great Leap Forward that wrecked the economy and starved millions, does anyone really think AOC is smarter than Mao? These people could well be even worse.

    • Agree: Truth Vigilante
    • Replies: @mulga mumblebrain
  75. @UncommonGround

    Greta agrees. You’re in good company.

    • Replies: @Brad Anbro
  76. ruralguy says:
    @Sam Hildebrand

    I never said “CO2 has been steadily declining throughout the history of the world.” Like all feedback processes, the Carbon Cycle is frequently out of equilibrium, but feedback corrects it. The danger occurs if this is no longer stable. There have been 5 previous global extinction events. The National Academy of Science says we are in the beginning of a 6th extinction event.

  77. @ruralguy

    The National Academy of Science says we are in the beginning of a 6th extinction event.

    I checked this claim out on NAS’s website. You are right, NAS is predicting the beginning of a extinction event. From NAS’s website:

    “The U.S. National Academy of Sciences (NAS) is regarded as the most prestigious honorary scientific society in the country. But it also has a reputation for being old, white, and male. Today its members took a big step toward changing their image by inviting a younger and more diverse group of scientists to join them.”

    The planned extinction is of white, male scientists from their organization.

    • LOL: Passing By
  78. ruralguy says:

    LOL, .. that is the 7th mass extinction event. I shouldn’t say LOL, though, because as an older white male, I know these woke leftists aren’t just trying to harass us. They really do want to kill us all, as evidenced by the recent 100 years of leftist pogroms that have killed over 150 million.

    The National Academy of Science uses solid evidence to show we are in a 6th extinction event. It’s a shame so many view this as a political issue. That precludes a compromised approach to address the problem early, while compromises between the economy and the environment can be worked out.

  79. @Twodees Partain

    Tim Ball, PhD, is one REAL scientist who is not on board with the climate change hoax. Check him out!

    • Troll: mulga mumblebrain
    • Replies: @Truth Vigilante
  80. @Carroll price

    Yes, I am SURE that she knows! How many millions of dollars / kroner is her family worth now? As with EVERYTHING, follow the MONEY!

  81. @ruralguy

    The National Academy of Science says we are in the beginning of a 6th extinction event.

    The HIERARCHY of various western academies of science, just like the hierarchy of all the western health bureaucracies during the Covid Psyop and the hierarchy of western academia, are indeed in lockstep peddling Zio dictated nonsense.

    This tiny proportion of CORRUPT individuals have been, over many years, MANOEUVRED into positions of power, just as they have been in the field of politics.
    (Case in Point: Justin Trudeau, Emmanuel Macron, Boris Johnson, Creepy Joe Biden, Anthony Fauci ….. do I really have to go on ?).

    When you have MULTIPLES OF U.S GDP of financial wherewithal, with the potential to digitally create SCORES OF TRILLIONS more through your ownership of the U.S Federal Reserve and other western central banks, the Zionist Usury Banking Cartel (the same entity that orchestrated the Covid Psyop, the 9/11 False Flag, the murder of JFK, RFK, JFK Jr, MLK Jr, Malcolm X, James Forrestal and COUNTLESS OTHER EGREGIOUS CRIMES and False Flags), said cartel of inbred misfits has MORE THAN ENOUGH MONEY TO BUY all the people it needs in key positions and threaten/intimidate the rest into compliance.

    Meanwhile, let’s have a look at what the OVERWHELMING BULK OF RANK & FILE SCIENTISTS have to say about the veracity of Anthropogenic [Man-Made] Global Warming ?

    See for yourself in this video titled ‘Global Warming; 31,487 Scientists say NO to Alarm’ :

    That video was from 2014. There are a hello of a lot more that have signed up to that petition today than there were then.

    BOTTOM LINE: The fiction about the ‘consensus’ of 97% of scientists asserting that man-made CO2 emissions are endangering the planet is ONE OF THE GREATEST LIES OF HUMAN HISTORY (perhaps only exceeded by the lies told during the Covid Psyop and the B.S of the Holohoax).

    If you’re stupid enough to believe it, you are one very gullible dumb fuck indeed.

    • Replies: @mulga mumblebrain
  82. @Brad Anbro

    Absolutely right Brad.

    Emeritus Professor Tim Ball is a Climatology Colossus, but more importantly, he is an individual of UNIMPEACHABLE INTEGRITY.

    The Zio cabal have pulled every trick in the book to smear him and bankrupt him.
    But he has REAL SCIENCE on his side and succeeded in demolishing his depraved opponents through litigation, where he WIPED THE FLOOR with them – such was the feeble challenge mounted by the Climate Loons seeing as their beliefs are based on bogus ‘science’.

    Watch him here in this masterclass (start at 3:30):

    • Replies: @mulga mumblebrain
  83. @Truth Vigilante

    Ball is a busted flush, denying the undeniable for ideological reasons, and doing nicely out of it. These renegades are just a handful compared to tens of thousands in opposition to them, but like all mentally ill denialists you choose the lone renegade with your ideology in preference to those others. Ball’s Wikipedia entry is educative.

  84. @Truth Vigilante

    As your Uncle Adolph recommended, tell a Big Lie. This one is SO demented that I believe you must be entering the end-stage of your psychiatric and moral disease. I think most loud-mouthed denialists are beginning to fear the justice that will surely come their way when the serfs FINALLY realise they are for the high jump. People will get VERY agitated then, believe me.

  85. @Sebastian Hawks

    This troll’s mental illness is at least so florid as to be quite amusing. And what better way to signal your Rightist psychopathy than to add some racism and an healthy dose of misogyny to the stew. Bravo, psycho!

  86. @Wade Hampton

    “While there are direct ways in which CO2 is a pollutant (acidification of the ocean), its primary impact is its greenhouse warming effect. . . . too much warming has severe negative impacts on agriculture, health and environment.”
    https://skepticalscience.com/co2-pollutant.htm

  87. @James Charles

    Jimmy Charles writes:

    “While there are direct ways in which CO2 is a pollutant (acidification of the ocean), its primary impact is its greenhouse warming effect. . . . too much warming has severe negative impacts on agriculture, health and environment.”

    DEAD WRONG !!

    CO2 is the GAS OF LIFE. Not only is it NOT a pollutant possessing infinitesimally small greenhouse warming properties relative to say water vapour for example, but it is:

    1) COLOURLESS

    2) ODOURLESS

    3) TASTELESS

    4) and 100% NON-TOXIC.

    Because CO2 is today around 400 ppm (as opposed to about 280 ppm 150 years ago), it is estimated that AGRICULTURAL OUTPUT IS UP ONE-SIXTH MORE than it would’ve otherwise been – all other factors being equal.

    Yes dummy. THE EARTH IS GREENING BECAUSE OF THE EXTRA CO2 and all the major deserts of the world are CONTRACTING.
    Land that was previously borderline suitable for agricultural purposes is now classified as arable land.

    Read this article titled ‘STUDY: Excess CO2 is greening the planet, not killing it’ :

    https://www.naturalnews.com/2021-09-21-excess-co2-greening-planet-not-killing-it.html

    As you can see in the map below, the areas of the world that are undergoing significant greening due to extra CO2 are places like western Australia, western India, the southern fringes of the Sahara desert, southern Africa and the vicinity of the Horn of Africa :

    Bottom Line: For 91% of Earth’s history, both poles were ICE FREE.

    In only 9% of Earth’s history has EITHER pole been frozen, let alone BOTH frozen as we have now – meaning that we are in one of the colder* periods of the planet’s history.

    (*NOTE: If the average Earth temperature were to rise 2 degrees Celsius for example, THIS DOES NOT MEAN that a place like Baghdad in Iraq which regularly gets to 44 deg C (over 110 F) in summer will suddenly now reach 46 deg C.

    The regions near the equator and in the temperate zones will experience NEGLIGIBLE (if any) temperature increases.

    THIS IS SOMETHING THE CLIMATE LOONS WILL NEVER TELL YOU – because it damages their alarmist narrative.

    What it DOES MEAN is that places like the tundra regions of northern Canada and Russia where the soil is subject to PERMAFROST all year round, and cannot be used for agriculture, will now thaw out.

    In these places where average temps range from – 40 C in winter to 15-20 deg C in summer, temps will rise by say 5 – 8 deg C (more so in winter than in summer), and make them LIVEABLE.

    Moreover, it will open up VAST TRACTS OF PRESENTLY UNUSABLE LAND to farming – much like Greenland was during the Medieval Warm Period when the Vikings settled there.

    We KNOW FOR A FACT that CO2 concentrations have next to no effect on average earth temperature.

    We KNOW that because a few hundred million years ago, the Earth was in the grip of a severe ICE AGE when CO2 concentration were between 2000 ppm and 3000 ppm.

    Yes, humans were not around during that period.

    BUT our primate ancestors (assuming you give credence to Darwin’s theories) were around during that time and their respiratory systems are more or less identical to that of humans.

    SUMMARY: The primates not only survived when CO2 was between 2000 and 3000 ppm, THEY THRIVED.
    And the Earth was a tropical paradise with bountiful agricultural output.

    • Replies: @mulga mumblebrain
  88. @Truth Vigilante

    No, Baghdad won’t go from 44 degrees C to 46-it will go to 50 degrees, on occasions, as it did THIS year. And last year, and 2020, when it reached 51.8 degrees. And, of course, in your diseased, psychopathic, pig ignorant, ‘mind’, there were eight billion plus primates ‘thriving’ a few hundred million years ago, when there were NO primates, or even close ancestors, in existence!!! I do enjoy reading your screeds because they provide myriad opportunities to guffaw at the depth of pig stupidity and arrogant, Dunning-Krugerite, certainty, of the lower depths of the genus Homo.

  89. @James Charles

    Oh dear, James-where did you come from? A voice of sanity among the barking baboonery of the fanatic denialists. You can’t educate these freak, you do understand.

  90. where do these people get the nerve to claim the world is ending?

    Foot note 39 on page 470 in Die Entstehung einer Weltreligion VI (Verlag Schiler &Mücke, Berlin und Tübingen 2021): “Cf l’étude classique de P.D.Hanson, The Dawn of Apocalyptic – The historical and sociological roots of Jewish Apocalyptic Eschatology, Philadelphia, 1979 (2nd edition), cf p. 90 “The common element running through the history of the Divine Warrior Hymn, from its point of origin in ancient myth to its late application in apocalyptic compositions, is a scenario depicting the cosmic battle of the Divine Warrior (originally the storm god) and his subsequent temple building, banquet and glorious reign.” Bold writing mine.

    • Replies: @mulga mumblebrain
  91. In the 1970s it was the Global Cooling – Earth was supposed to get colder and colder, till it turns into Snowball Earth. It did not happen.

    Then suddenly some “scientist” decided it is Global Warming. It ran for about 2 decades; then people started noticing that there is no significant warming either.

    Now it is “Climate Change”. As if climate will stand still if humans disappear.

    Destruction of forests and animals is a real thing, and it can be reduced to a large extent. Forests no longer are the main source of raw material.

    But this Climate Change is an insidious trick to destroy the human world as we know it, and to take us all back to a 5th Century feudalism.

    • Replies: @mulga mumblebrain
  92. @Old Brown Fool

    Another old favourite cretin is back, trailing shit as he lands. ‘Global Cooling’ was NEVER the scientific consensus in the 70s, just a MSM beat-up, then an axe for the denialist psychopaths to wield. Global warming was not ‘discovered’ in the 70s-an assertion so moronic that we know this is a true omega denialist.
    The hypotheses and theories of anthropogenic global warming caused by greenhouse gases, principally CO2, go back to the 1840s and the likes of Foote, Fourier and Tyndell. Yes climate always changes, but slowly, like your mental processes. It is now changing one of two orders of magnitude faster than at any time for at least 55 million years, and that rapid change in a dynamic, chaotic, system has robbed us of the stability that allowed ‘civilization’ to rise and produce omnicidal monsters like you. And even fifth century feudalism (long before feudalism really was established, generally thought to be the ninth century, but your pig ignorance is global, isn’t it)is preferable to human extinction, at least to rational, non-psychotic minds.

  93. @René Fries

    That was a hoot. Viv Forbes turns out to be a superannuated geologist, therefore one of that group of last resorters and die-in-the-ditchers with fossil fuel industry careers to protect, who mostly died out, save in hard Right psycholand, when the geological societies joined the scientific consensus. His contribution was, in my opinion, pig ignorant, whether from his own stupidity, or to appeal to denialist omniciders one cannot be sure, and, as with all good denialist gurus, presumes that scientific/technological progress will not occur in the field of renewable energy. Pure villainy.

  94. @René Fries

    The human world is ending, not ‘the world’. An epoch is over, that of human dominance over Nature. The Holocene stability produced human ‘civilization’ but it was often obliterated in places as it rose, by natural forces of drought, flood, comet or meteor strike, disease, earthquake, tsunami, cyclonic storms etc, beyond human control, hence the eschatology. The Anthropocene that replaced it didn’t last long, replaced as it was by the Pyrocene, the Age of Fire, as in the song, ‘ God sent Noah the rainbow sign, No more water-the Fire next time’.

    • Replies: @René Fries
  95. @beavertales

    Yes! That’s right! So fighting immigration is good but the best way to fight it is to get the western elites out of Africa trying to stop pipeline development and so much else.. so the ‘SUN PEOPLE’ can produce the oil etc. they need to raise their living standards

    If they can do that THE SUN PEOPLE WILL STAY HOME BECAUSE THAT IS WHERE THEY WANT TO BE, MAKING A GREAT LIVING..AT HOME! AND IN THAT CASE NO INDUCEMENT THE CAPITALISTS CAN WAVE WOULD GET THEM TO FLOOD THE NORTH WOULD WORK

    Don’t be cursing out immigrants, hating on Black people, allowing yourselves to be manipulated into race war . Get up and take back your politics and get the politicians to do what is necessary for your survival…our survival. It is time to accept the multi polar world, racial diversity and the rights of everyone to life and opportunity to use their very own resources to build decent lives. By that you can secure your own by control of your leaders/elites as is your responsibility and make then institute to right polices for that purpose

    Take back your political lives Americans, and in doing so you will get your elites to stay home, get him out of Africa and leave the people to their own lives so that they can stay home and out of yours. And where where they have been in the west for hundreds of years they would be able finally to go back home. And in their independence, the new and proper America would be able to work with them and others in Asia etc., to build the peaceful multi polar world we need to survive as a species

    And we must also go after Gates and Soros and Schwab and put them away for their crimes against humanity.

    Here this is 11 years old…demonstrates how far back you guys really are:

    This is recent:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o0Bi-q89j5Y

  96. @mulga mumblebrain

    The human world is ending, not ‘the world’

    …may I understand “the human world as we know it (etc)”?

  97. @mulga mumblebrain

    Mulga the Mumbler says these things to ‘Old Brown Fool’ :

    Another old favourite cretin is back, trailing shit as he lands …. Global warming was not ‘discovered’ in the 70s-an assertion so moronic that we know this is a true omega denialist …. but your pig ignorance is global …

    To be talking like that to the brown skinned fellow is all the proof we need that YOU’RE A RACIST.

    Anyway Mulga, I give you credit for correctly stating that Global Warming was not conjured up in the 1970’s.

    Anyone who’s done the research knows it can be traced to the foundation of the Club of Rome in 1968, when certain malevolent entities got together and conspired to conjure up this hoax.

    Of course, it didn’t get much traction in the beginning, seeing as the Earth went into a cooling cycle in the decade that followed, so they kept it under wraps for a while.

    But when the cooling ended and some negligible increases in average Earth temp (measured in the hundredths of a degree Celsius) were observed, (which is to be expected since temperatures were coming off a LOW BASE after the cooling episode), said cabal of conspirators moved into high gear with the propaganda that was swallowed uncritically by the likes of gullible fools like yourself.

  98. @mulga mumblebrain

    Never knew science was decided by consensus. If it was a consensus, it is an opinion, not a fact. The very statement “scientific consensus” is wrong – there are no “scientific” consensus; a consensus is a generally agreed opinion, and it may be logical or illogical, nothing scientific about it. Just because a “scientist” states an opinion does not make it “scientific”. What is the opinion of a musician, “musical”?

    As for the increased CO2, yes, it is bound to be, because humans are burning hydrocarbons for energy, turning them back into CO2 and H2O. Whether this increased CO2 is bad or good is yet to be clearly seen. Past records show that an increase in atmospheric CO2 leads to more greening, not less. Not just humans, all life change the climate. Even primitive life forms changed the constituents of the atmosphere, billions of years ago.

    The concern for the “ecology” is possible only in a world of cheap energy and cheaper credit. The moment the western world falls on bad times, all these “green initiatives” will die a quiet death, like we saw after the Great Recession of 2008, when all the “organic” produce suddenly disappeared from the shelves, because people could no longer afford it. Just like as soon as the reality of Ukrainian war hit the Europeans, they started their coal power plants again.

    • Agree: Truth Vigilante
Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply -


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
$
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Andrew Anglin Comments via RSS
PastClassics
Analyzing the History of a Controversial Movement
Talk TV sensationalists and axe-grinding ideologues have fallen for a myth of immigrant lawlessness.