TWITTER has become a hotbed of debate between staunch believers of catastrophic anthropogenic global warming (CAGW) and those sceptical of the supposed adverse impacts of mankind’s energy emissions on planet Earth.
THERE is little grey area or middle-ground in often heated debates, with the CAGW camp blaming the burning of fossil fuels, namely coal, not only for a >1 degree celsius warming of the atmosphere since 1850, but on literally anything and everything that moves, shifts, spins or tilts upon contact with colourless, odourless, tasteless, non-reactive, trace gas and plant food carbon dioxide!
HERE’S s a list of everything caused by
global warming climate change as of 2012:
ANY good scientist is a sceptic; if he or she is not, then he or she should not be a scientist. But yet the language of the global warming alarmist, is to accuse anyone who does not believe in man-made climate change as a “denier”, a heretic, a blasphemer. This is the language of religion, not science.
SCEPTICS do not ‘deny’ the existence “climate change” or “global warming”. The earth’s average temperature has been increasing and decreasing since the beginning of time. A climate sceptic is basically ‘sceptical’ of how much of the recent warming can be attributed to the burning of fossil fuels versus natural variation. And, in fact, any slight warming might actually be beneficial. After all, cold weather is twenty times more deadly than hot weather, according to a study published in the British journal The Lancet.
MOREOVER, sceptics acknowledge the remarkable benefits of the essential gas-of-life, carbon dioxide, that has become so politically demonised with a religious zeal rivalling the Spanish Inquisition.
GREENPEACE co-founder and prominent climate sceptic Patrick Moore PhD penned a must read treatise on the benefits of life-giving CO2, noting “This is probably the most important paper I will ever write.“
MOORE looks at the historical record of CO2 in our atmosphere and concludes that we came dangerously close to losing plant life on Earth about 18,000 years ago, when CO2 levels approached 150 ppm, below which plant life can’t sustain photosynthesis. He notes:
A 140 million year decline in CO2 to levels that came close to threatening the survival of life on Earth can hardly be described as “the balance of nature”.
NOW, with 400ppm in the atmosphere, the biosphere is once again booming as many recent studies confirm. He also points out how environmental groups and politicians are using the “crisis” of CO2 increase to drive their own draconian agendas.
CONTROL CO2 and you control energy, thus you control everyone and everything!
AND to the point of this post!
“StormSignalSA” is a rancher and climate sceptic from the great land of South Africa. A recent tweet of his captured the attention of many for a wonderful response to a climate catastrophist who derided “Storm” for his stance on coal.
IT is a brilliant retort in defence of Mother Nature’s mighty black rock that has allowed us to improve human well-being and make the world a better place…
STORED solar energy that will continue to improve the lives of anyone exposed to it and lift millions more out of abject poverty, including the 1.3 Billion who still have no electricity, at all.
ALTERNATIVE energy sources, “unreliables“, are either too expensive, too difficult to access, or simply too inefficient to achieve any meaningful results for the most impoverished.
AMEN to that!
Alternative Energy Related :
- GREEN Energy – Killing The Earth To Save It | Climatism
- TRULY GREEN? How Germany’s #Energiewende Is Destroying Nature | Climatism
- UNRELIABLE Energy – Wind and Solar – A Climate Of Communism | Climatism
- Shock news : UN Carbon Regime Would Devastate Humanity | Climatism
Life-Saving Fossil Fuels Related :
- Saving Lives with Fossil Fuels | Bjorn Lomborg
- Bjørn Lomborg: Why Africa Needs Fossil Fuels, Not Wind Power & Wishes | Climatism
- Fossil Fuels Will Save the World (Really) | Climatism
Plant Food CO2 Related :
- THE Carbon Dioxide Word Game | Climatism
- CO2 In The Atmosphere Is Not Pollution | Climatism
- Bureaucratic Dioxide | Climatism
- China won’t classify CO2 as a pollutant in new environment law | Climatism
- Carbon Dioxide: The Gas of Life – Paul Driessen
CO2 – “The Stuff of Life” – Greening The Planet :
- CSIRO Censoring Their Own Climate Research | Climatism
- The global dance of carbon dioxide and spreading green flora « JoNova
- Greening the Planet and how Fossil Fuels protect world’s Flora & Fauna | Dr. Matt Ridley | Climatism
These are the facts:
* Sea level has remained virtually at the present level over the last 200 years
* In the last 50-70 years sea level has remained perfectly stable in Fiji
* This stability is indicated by the growth of corals (stopped to grow vertically, and forced to grow laterally into microatolls) – and corals do not lie
“Whatever economy, politics and project agendas may want to put in the center, the true scientific community must insist that only facts as revealed in nature itself and in laboratory experiments can provide trustworthy results.”
Nils-Axel Mörner signs off his open letter to Honorable Prime Minister of Fiji and President of COP23 Frank Bainimarama with this slap of reality that goes to the heart of the UN’s pseudoscientific “climate change” agenda to fulfil its (self-proclaimed) wealth-redistribution goals…
“Retournons à la Nature
That is setting field evidence in the center instead of models and ideas driven by political and/or religious agendas.”
Open Letter to Honorable Prime Minister of Fiji and President of COP23 Frank Bainimarama by Nils-Axel Mörner
The community assembled at the COP23 meeting in Bonn badly wants temperature to rise according to models proposed (but never verified, rather seriously contradicted) and sea level changes that may pose serious flooding threats to low lying coasts provided sea level would suddenly start to rise at rates never recorded before (which would violate physical laws as well as accumulated scientific knowledge over centuries).
We have been in your lovely country and undertaken a detailed sea level analysis, which beyond doubts indicates that sea level is not at all in a rising mode, but has remained perfectly stable over the last 50-70 years. Hence all threats of an approaching general sea level flooding is totally unfounded.
Whatever economy, politics and project agendas may want to put in the center, the true scientific community must…
View original post 803 more words
“Scientific experts are paid and encouraged to provide answers. The public does not have much use for a scientist who says, “Sorry, but we don’t know”. The public prefers to listen to scientists who give confident answers to questions and make confident predictions of what will happen as a result of human activities.
“Their predictions become dogmas which they do not question. The public is led to believe that the fashionable scientific dogmas are true, and it may sometimes happen that they are wrong. That is why heretics who question the dogmas are needed.”
FREEMAN DYSON, one the great scientific minds of our time. Well worth reading his entire essay.
I disagree with his statement; “I am not saying that the warming does not cause problems. Obviously it does.”
I would argue slight warming is beneficial to humanity versus the cold which kills at a ratio of 20:1. Cold is also the enemy of food production too.
HE somewhat clarifies by correctly pointing out, “I am saying that the problems are grossly exaggerated.” And the vast amount of public money spent on AGW theory could be better spent on “poverty and infectious disease and public education and public health, and the preservation of living creatures on land and in the oceans.”
By Freeman Dyson
My first heresy says that all the fuss about global warming is grossly exaggerated. Here I am opposing the holy brotherhood of climate model experts and the crowd of deluded citizens who believe the numbers predicted by the computer models. Of course, they say, I have no degree in meteorology and I am therefore not qualified to speak.
But I have studied the climate models and I know what they can do. The models solve the equations of fluid dynamics, and they do a very good job of describing the fluid motions of the atmosphere and the oceans. They do a very poor job of describing the clouds, the dust, the chemistry and the biology of fields and farms and forests. They do not begin to describe the real world that we live in.
The real world is muddy and messy and full of things that we…
View original post 2,206 more words
“This new climate report is not an objective or an honest assessment of the state of the climate, particularly in relation to the US.
Instead, it is a highly partisan and politicised report, designed to promote alarmism.
There has been much talk of the need for red and blue teams, to challenge lazy consensus.
It is now time for this to happen, so that this Report can be constructively assessed and, where appropriate, criticised. One of the tasks of a counter group should be to produce their own state of the climate assessment.
The climate mafia have had it their own way for far too long.”
Spot-on Paul. Great re-reporting to make the non-politicised version available!
The mere fact that activist “scientist” Katharine Hayhoe was a lead on the report, speaks volumes.
Corruption of climate ‘science’ by eco-activists, gobbled up by the sycophant mainstream media without any objective analysis.
Eisenhower was right, warning of the corruption of sciences by govt in 1960:
“The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present and is gravely to be regarded.
Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific technological elite.”
By Paul Homewood
The Federal Climate Science Special Report from the US Global Change Research Program, mandated under the U.S. Global Change Research Act of 1990, has now been published.
As with the draft, which I reported on in August, it is the usual mix of half truths, exaggerations, omissions and outright lies.
Let’s look at the main sections:
View original post 2,389 more words
“It’s now clear that Mitch Taylor was right to be skeptical of sea ice models based on pessimistic climate change assumptions…”
EXCELLENT. Great post SC 🐻
You could call it karma — the death of the polar bear icon after the shameful hubris of polar bear experts back in 2009.
That year, the IUCN Polar Bear Specialist Group booted 20-year member Mitch Taylor out of their organization, explaining that his skeptical views on human-caused global warming were “extremely unhelpful” to their polar bear conservation agenda.
Said chairman Andrew Derocher in his email to Taylor: “Time will tell who is correct.”
It’s now clear that Mitch Taylor was right to be skeptical of sea ice models based on pessimistic climate change assumptions; he was also right to be more optimistic than his PBSG colleagues about the ability of polar bears to adapt to changing sea ice conditions (Taylor and Dowsley 2008), since the bears have turned out to be more resilient than even he expected.
Fat polar bears — not starving ones — dominate photos taken in…
View original post 694 more words