This is my most concise expose of climate fraud. Please pass it around to everyone you know and your elected officials. The video is short, but cuts right to the heart of the matter.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Menu There is no diplomatic solutionIsrael should declare three nos;
no to nuclear Iran, no to two-state solution, no to bi-national state
no to nuclear Iran, no to two-state solution, no to bi-national state
IN TEXAS WE CALL “GLOBAL WARMING” WEATHER. Deborah the Prophetess.
@ Bear Klein:
I live at Western most edge of the Great Plains. Tell me, Bear Darlin, how do you grow tress with out water.
@ yamit82:
You Still here. Who’s your god? Bibi?
Planting 1 Trillion trees (Roughly a 33% global increase in trees) would not only absorb an entire decade worth of fossil fuel carbon pollution, as well, would reduce the current carbon dioxide concentration in the atmosphere from 400PPM down to the 300PPM (the 1700’s level).
Start Planting! This is a huge huge huge job. JNF on steroids!
You could employ every unemployed African to do the job needed in Africa.
You could employ every unemployed Asian or Australian to do the job needed in Australia.
Having planted new orchards on the Golan and Negev in my youth this job will also require a lot of tractors to dig tthe holes to insert the trees.
This could be a huge economic boom.
Could be a real win win!
@ Felix Quigley:
Many people have used the phrase but it is mostly attributed to your god Lenin.
Edgar
So good to hear a bit of the old language, and it is old and interesting.
My Irish learning was undertaken by a Hugh McGeown and Hugh was going under the influence of drink by the time I met him. He seemed to me to spend much time saying there is this dialect in Donegal, and this in Connemara but the problem was I knew nothing at all. It was all a mystery. Yet not far from my home was an old lady, certainly old, but who had the gaelic language. How fast it disappeared.
What i needed from Hugh was concentrated rote, like 100 most useful words, and repeat ten thousand times. Then repeat in short sentences giving context.
But no they never could teach me. And it was too “foreign” to me even though that woman I mentioned lived a stones throw from me.
Also I was too childish and immature to organize my own learning methods then.
Also I could see the clique developing too, what James Joyce had Stephen Dedalus remarking on in relation to Sinn Fein and the “language”. All wrong Edgar!
But thinking about it now that Sinn Fein type of politicising was the symptom…The real cause of the problem was that new methods of communication brought in the dross of the world…the Gaelic world was truly destroyed in our own lifetimes, very rapidly, by the mindless rubbish of the networks. At least that is how I rationalise it.
@ Felix Quigley:
O.K. Take your time. I’m fed up with it and all the fuss about what i consider a non-neccessity anyway. The Scientific community can battle it out amongst themselves, they are the ones fit for it. . Slan Leat.
My old teacher-later Headmaster- Edward Cassidy (many-year Commissioner of the Catholic Boy Scouts) used to say (He was from the west, maybe Sligo) that it was more correct to day “Slainte Agat).. A FIERCE 10 foot monster with a progressively well-worn leather strap ( 18” long, about 6 strips all sewn together) like a police baton, he scared the hell out of us.!! Visiting him in after years, he was like a lamb, saying that he had to be hard to make the kids learn up to their potential. He was right. He produced several world famous people from my own very class.
Yamit
I do not want to contradict your ignorance. In fact Lenin never said those words. the reason I do not want to contradict you is that I want to stay as far from you as is possible to get. In the meantime have a happy life or as happy as possible.
@ Felix Quigley:
Here is a quote that seems to fit you well Felix…the term “useful idiot” was the attitude held by Vladimir Lenin towards communist sympathizers in the West. While Lenin and the Soviets held them in utter contempt they also viewed them as tools for dispensing communist propaganda to other countries, thus infecting foreign cultures with their totalitarian tripe. After their mission was complete, they were no longer “useful.” Change “Communist” with “Climate Change Zealot” (“useful idiot”) and you have the plan…. If you accept and believe in… A-Communism, then believing in B- man-made climate change is a natural adaptation…
A DISTINCTION WITHOUT MUCH OF A DIFFERENCE. Same ultimate goals just differenent tools.
Edgar none of this takes away from our work on the Jews of Ireland. I will write later. I am on a tablet with one finger
@ Felix Quigley:
Felix I don’t see that Heller’s presentation has the weakness you mention… that is…assuming that the very long timeline is accurate. I assume that it is. So we can see exactly, as I pointed out in a previous post, that the seismological-like “squiggles” come down from a height, to the lowest point on that chart, and everything behind that point is blocked. Then it starts to climb…Heller says that at THAT point, the Climate scaremongers begin their records.up to where we are today. That is like a stock market 1000 year chart. The longer the time-line the less noticeable the changes.
Because of what you pointed out to me, I checked both Heller and the Professor Ottmar Endenhofer. I found out very little about Heller, but the Prof is one of the world’s leading climatologists. and it appears, that until the time he made that statement which appears on the video (with his picture) he was also a staunch climate change supporter. Then he seems to have done much investigating, and found that there was much more behind it all than appeared. It had to do with spreading the world’s wealth round more equitably. I know that you know all this, So according to him, it is a scam, to damage the most productive and wealthiest nations, He sounded (to me) very informed and persuasive. For the first time, I really looked at this thing, and saw the enormous machinations of politically and economically involved moguls, a cabal is seemed to me. (but I could be completely wrong, and misunderstanding)
You were very right bout needing in depth digging into REAL motives. I wish I had your zeal, and ability.
@ Felix Quigley:
Felix……About this kid Thunberg. No science is involved, just a VERY strong impression I have. I’ve seen her name, that’s all. BUT…… just the other day, looking at youtube, I was caught by the heading, “Thunberg CRUMBLES without her script”…. So I looked at it and her, for the very first time. I saw this little pie faced kid, sitting with horde of grownups, and a reputable reporter asked her a 2 part question. This “veteran” “climatologist” looked very puzzled, looked round for help, then asked ..”what was the question again” .. It was repeated, and she more or less mumbled about 4-5 inaudible words, no more, and said…”next question please . or etc.
You can check this out yourself…as I know you like to get down to the root of things.
I was astonished to see this little schmeck (not the similar but foul word which I would NEVER use) whom you praised so much. So I looked for more. I saw her UN (?) presentation, where she was twisting herself into knots and EMOTING…. that her youth was destroyed or etc. I was too busy watching her “performance” to bother about what she was saying.. All the time she was gyrating around, and AIMING at that microphone, she was glancing down at …obviously her script. I was truly surprised about all the fuss revolving around this “chancer”..
Now Felix, I have had a fair bit of acting experience when young, several of my theatre group became rather famous afterwards, including one whose front tooth I knocked out…for a good reason.
That kid was ACTING. She must have practiced this in front of a mirror for a week or two. If you look at her background or speak to her school teachers, I’ll be very surprised if you don’t find that she is a leading light in drama class, or acting school.
That’s all I wanted to say. .
As a non-scientist who from growing up part of the time in Los Angeles which was the smog capital of the USA due to the climate plus abundance of cars quickly learned that we need to reduce lead and CO2 in the air. We used to cough for a couple of hours after playing basketball for an hour or two at times of bad smog.
They helped clean up the air someone in LA by requiring catalytic converters on cars and California came up with a better blend of gasoline that was cleaner.
So clearly less CO2 in the air is better and healthier.
The USA has seriously reduced CO2 emissions by switching to Gas powered plants in lieu of Coal powered plants all over the country. Wind and Solar can not be brought along quickly or efficiently enough to create enough electricity to supply all the power demands.
The two scientific studies I read that I referenced previously on Israpundit whereby planting an enormous of amount trees in Sub-Saharan Africa plus Australia will reduce CO2 plus lower the temperature of the planet make sense to this now scientist as pragmatic though challenging.
The UN Science study said One Trillion trees need to be planted to work. The Israeli study undertaking with a ten year study in the Negev planting a certain tree that would required to create enough dew to lower the temperature.
I am in favor pragmatic steps like electric cars and more solar energy. However saying you will be required to this in five years or so and getting rid of jet planes is simply not going to happen. So start planting trees!
I am not interested in a debate on climate change. I am in favor of clean and water. I am also interested in a modern economy which requires adequate energy production.
So those most concerned about climate change should be organizing tree plantings in Africa and Australia. I hear some people have already organized volunteers who have so far planted 50K trees. Long way to go!
@ Felix Quigley:
Still waiting mate. If you are not going to communicate with me say so.
@ Frank Adam:
It was a quote…you do understand what a quote is, oh thou righteous one???
And how come you allow people here to not answer my challenges and questions if you are really so righteous?
@ Felix Quigley:
Scatalogical epithets do NOT clarify the arguments. When somebody swears it is because they are out of logic and evidence…
@ Edgar G.:
My comment was not directed to you but was a general comment.
People have such strong positions on this subject that they form opinions but have no capability of discerning the data to see if it is correct or was properly studied because they are not scientists in the field. This includes me.
This is a general comment that includes most commentators on this subject and not just Israpundit commentators.
Edgar
As Bear says we are not scientists but we are trying seriously to understand an issue. It may be a small little issue or it may be the greatest issue ever faced. the complication here is that that is part of the “issue”!!!
But bear is a great example of “the hurler on the ditch” and you and I know this type of person intimately because “the hurler on the ditch” is on every crossroads in Ireland. And what experts they are too.
There is a great key to the situation on Israpundit in the position of Adam. He opts out of the discussion of this issue on Israpundit. There are non Jews over the years who have said that is a Jewish issue so do not comment on that. I have never agreed with that! I have discussed everything. You guess how then I feel about Adam who is actually a Jew and his attempts to censor Ted. And censor me and you too.
The post is presented in a way that leads to problems. The person speaking is Heller. The Dr. guy is there for the visual. He is not the one speaking in the video.
See the looseness.
Then the weakness of Heller is that he says they are cutting off at a critical period. I cannot comment as I do not know. If I did that i would reply let somebody else come in and expand it. no problem!
But that is not the deeper issue behind Heller. That is that 1934 has high temperature but in America while it was a cool year in the earth globe as a whole.
So there is confusion created on dates, and confusion on meaning of facts created as I describe just there.
This is such a vital issue we have to start to ask questions about the earth historically, about what we mean by greenhouse gases, the chemistry and physics involved, and the measurements taken, even the ability to measure accurately int he past.
The great thing about you Edgar as an Irish Jew is that you represent the best and put your ideas out there.
Anyway I am rushed now a friend has interrupted me. Slan!
@ Bear Klein:
I answer this only because the post is immediately after mine, and is possibly referring to it. How right you are…in part. As you are an assiduous poster, you may have observed, that I have,,many times mentioned, that I am NOT a scientist, so that reinforces my assumption that your post, although not addressed, is to me.
My earlier comment specifically referred to the video above, which generated so many posts. I…merely pointed out, in explanation to the kind enquiry of Felix, my reasons for supporting the facts demonstrated by the host, Dr. Ottmar Endenhofer, with the mass of scientific records, stretching back millions of years.
In this, there was no philosophy involved. neither by Felix, nor myself. So perhaps…after all, I misunderstand the direction of your post, really meant for “the world at large”.( to clarify, I mean the whole readership, so excuse my flowery phrase)
Climate Change debates between non-scientists sometimes appear like philosophical debates or debates of religion.
@ Felix Quigley:
Felix, thank you indeed for your expression of your kind feeling towards me. I seriously appreciate it, and it is reciprocated. .
But you didn’t mention my “cogent, logical reasoning”, nor my “incisive literary style”..nor my “undoubted brilliance”…and above all…. you neglected my “extreme modesty”..
All kidding aside, I was plagiarizing, sort of, an old rabbinic tale, from Nathan Ausubel’s “A Treasury of Jewish Humour”.
To explain my post….. maybe you’ll say my explanation is too simple. There comes a point, where, as in this case, one’s belief becomes strong enough, and a decision, (right or wrong,) is made. I made that decision long ago, but the present outbreak has brought a fresh gush of data of ALL scientific shades.
Now to my point. The video above is, in my simple way, as clear as window glass. I actually understand it. Dr. Ottmar Endenhofer displays what, to ME is irrefutable, and all the rest of the posted data, scientifically accurate as it may be, are only tiny parts of a “whole” which is being neglected..
I strongly believe that our total weather patterns, “ages”..”eras”, and etc. are majorly controlled by the Sun’s activity and have accepted this almost since I began to read. Sunspot activity has been recorded for nearly 3,000 years, and more recently has been credibly shown to govern warmer or cooler periods. .
Ottmar’s video shows exactly how the scientific Global Warming side has skewed the system to cause the present doom-sayers..
By “fudged dates”, I mean the way that he displays millennia of scientifically accurate results, across a broad time era, and moves his “LINE” so that the graph neglects the previous period’s zenith and descent to it’s nadir……. from which today’s gurus begin to show the ascend to its present height.
On the seismograph-like display, there have been high -and low- eras before, but, as shown, on the wide scale, they are only a blip. The “long-term” trends, of the scientific supporters are a mere dot on the canvas of time, and human contribution is the same.
That’s my explanation.
So consider this in relation to the claims made by Heller and you should see what a fraud Heller is
https://skepticalscience.com/1934-hottest-year-on-record.htm
I am still waiting for somebody to take some fact out of this Tony Heller video and to put forward for debate. All I have heard is how good the science of this man actually is.
He makes basic mistakes if they are mistakes. he takes the 1930s as being very hot, yes in America 1934 was, but globally it was very cold or cool.
Remember we are talking about global warming emphasis on global.
@ Bud Bromley:
The man called Bud Bromley
And your sources are…
If you cannot provide your sources then you are suspect.
@ Felix Quigley:
I would think myself, Ted, that if this Irish American would be striding into your Toronto office and claiming HE was the expert on law, due to his recent googling, that your reaction might be…bring out your bottle of Bushmills, pour a drink for both of you, AND THEN INTRODUCE HIM TOT HE STREET.
You are that Irish American Ted.
As my wise friend L above says you Ted are dumping the experts, who know, the scientists who know that is why they are scientists, by bad mouthing scientists.
@ Edgar G.:
Edgar I know that you are interested in the result of the election. If Netanyahu is removed by trial even though the claims are pretty laughable, then gantz and others will take the power of the state in their hands, and that will be most dangerous for Israel and Jews.
The thing is I am as well. I am VERY interested. And I had and have proposals.
That DOES NOT MEAN that I am not vitally interested in the Global Warming issue. To me Edgar it is not one or the other.
And it effects Israel, if it is real, in many huge ways.
Adam says he believes that the scientists are right about Global Warming. But he has never said in what they are right. Does he think that CO2 in the atmosphere is causing global warming. What proof does he bring forward. Also will Global Warming have a serious effect on Israel. Again he does not say. He needs to do precisely this. The position of Adam is to attempt a huge censorship blanket over Israpundit. That really will be an age of darkness.
I asked you above, if you have the time, to give some assertions or “facts” from the video you cite that you think are key, for you.
otherwise we may be discussing different things.
@ Bud Bromley:
Bud Bromley define CO2 please before you ramble on any further…Just say here and now like the honest man you are all that you know about Carbon Dioxide and then we may have a basis for some clarity. in simple language please!
@ Felix Quigley:
A further point Yamit. Everyone to his own. If red baiting is your thing go for it. the problem is that you wrap it up inside massive conspiracy theory and THAT is ALWAYS dangerous for Jews, Judaism and Zionism. Have you not noticed that in reeading history?
@ yamit82:
Yamit a mighty lie indeed. Nothing could be further from the truth than that the scientists are communists, they are renowned for their disinterest in all things political. Has been a feature since the emergence of scientists.
And yamit always but always you return to your commie red baiting.
@ Ted Belman:
ted of course there are strong forces opposed to the scientists.
But you do not answer the basic question mentioned by our friend L above which is that you decide not to listen to the scientists.
Enter your office in Toronto…Hey Belman says this brash Irish American with a touch of the inevitable antisemitism
“Take on my project…But I am reading up on google and although i am really an expert in laying concrete on drives and fuck all else, the bog is still dripping off me, I will want you to follow MY learning on the subject of law”
Same thing here Ted.
You ignored my point above so I repeat it. You have decided to ignore the scientists who are the experts and you have not offered any rationale for doing that.
@ Edgar G.:
Edgar as you know I have mucho repect for your life and experiences. But I need you to take this
Could you spell out what he is saying or what you think he is saying in other words give more detail what we are talking about. I need to check we are talking about the same thing.
@ yamit82:
You’re right with it…Reminds me of the crap they used to spread around, that the world -as we knew it-was coming to an end because of Y 2000. The “lemmings” don’t remember that, because after the tens of billions were made, it was quickly swept under the rug s they were going over the cliff.. Then Al Gore became prominent, as stupid and as cunning a nudnik as ever existed. Became High Priest” of the Church of Global Warming. His acolytes used either fake or real scientific data. But those using genuine scientific results “used” them very selectively.
The video above, is a complete giveaway of the completely dishonest means that the faked results are produced. So, in this case, whilst the science is real and accurate, the way it has been hidden and misused is totally dishonest,
It completely ruins any claims the alarmists have ever had. I was satisfied BEFORE seeing the above, that the catastrophe claims were all fake, knowing that the real “culprit” is the SUN, and it is “cyclical”, has been for hundreds of millions of years etc.
All the “blah” whilst perhaps scientifically accurate, doesn’t mean a thing, …except it gave very good salaries, and perhaps a boosted reputation to those who were busy bees in that industry.
After all, how long can a dead horse continue to be “flogged”. The signs of “life” are induced, imagined, and not real.
I’m more interested in how the election will eventually turn out…
@ Felix Quigley:
I and my supporters are not isolated. Everything that American Thinker, Canada Free Press, Breitbart, Gateway Pundit and all the conservative press, publishes take the same position as we do. In addition alarmist never respond to the deniers claims, they just repeat their mantra and take refuge in the “concensus”.
In effect the deniers are foever debunking the alarmist claims and the alarmists ignore the challenges sumitted. Finally many stories have come out reporting on falsification of data by the alarmists or about the censorship of alrmists who are wavering.
@ Edgar G.:
Global warming has become the neo -Global religion of our time… The Communist/leftists have latched on to it because it is an efficient tool to destabilize the West, destroy their economies and make their political systems vulnerable to dictatorial take over of the Western Democratic systems of government and capitalist economies….. Rather than saving the planet, it will destroy it as no free gov or economic system can afford most of their crazy ideas and schemes… I think most who ascribe to warming Hoaxes are stupid/ignorant or have nefarious motives.
@ Felix Quigley:
Felix, with ll due respects to your convictions, based on scientific evidence, (regardless of how it was really obtained or collated) that video above, is FULL of science. His conclusions, very plainly exposed, show how science itself was used to confound and fake up false reports. The fudged dates, and disregarded prior era evidence, is all scientifically obtained.
How can you ignore all this and go off on a hunt in an opposite direction. None of this is neccessary, you have the scientific evidence before your eyes. I am not criticising, but am wanting to know.
The great strength of this young woman Greta Thunberg from Sweden is, that although she has good knowledge on the issue, she says continually “listen tot he science! listen tot he Scientists”.
This is a constant refrain by this girl.
She has many strengths but in the end I believe that this will be her biggest.
So as my friend above L has said in the end it is coming down to those who believe in science and those who are discarding science.
But when you discard science in the interests of profit and money then that is becoming in front of our eyes a treason issue. Just as much a treason issue, though in scale far greater, than the greedy and grasping Bidens in their trip to Ukraine.
The most obvious thing is being overlooked by Ted and his supporters. These masses of scientists are not being paid. They are in secured jobs. Most are not like Francisco Gil White who was sacked because he was not secure. they are mainly in very secure employment. So that is their job. They are the experts too. Science. Does a non expert go along and try to tell ted what is the law when he was working in Toronto. He would not appreciate that. These scientists are not being paid to produce this information.
This may be connected to the internet. People think they can be experts.
Why have scientists? Trump is not a scientist at all.
@ Lorensacho:
Yes the first thing to look at in these articles is who they are? That is the very first thing.
All of these people who Ted introduces to us (we need to look back and review them all) have a known history and we need to know their links with Big Polluters and if they are paid.
@ Bud Bromley:
It does matter!
Everybody who speaks on this subject has go to be looked at, especially to see if they are being paid by Big Oil or Big Coal. It is the most important thing to look at.
And Ted above never gave us the author. I found out by my own digging into the youtube video.
@ Bud Bromley:
THANK YOU FOR YOUR VERY INFORMATIVE COMMENT.
@ yamit82:
Here is point which tends to support your comment-in part….maybe….?? . It is known that at least 90% of icebergs and ice in water generally (perhaps except for thin ice) is BELOW the waterline. In area it is taking up about 10% more space than fluid water. So when melted it should take up about 11% less space. But not for much of Antarctic ice, which is mostly on land.
(I’ve read that the Mt. Pinatubo eruption caused a small (.5%C) global cooling for 2 years. Examining geologists say that this was the smallest by far of many prehistoric eruptions of this Mt. It seemed to have affected Antarctic ice also in some way but I couldn’t find out how.)
Back to water levels… I posted a report from a NASA Oceanographer a month or two ago which says that for the past 20 years, the American Eastern Coastline water levels have been lowering. ( I think averaging about 5 cm a year)
But this video above is more than good enough for me., and everybody else….except for the cranks, or malicious muckrakers, for whom nothing is good enough.
I was editing this sentence and time expired. It should read: Therefore, human-produced CO2 does not cause dangerous or significant global warming.
It does not matter who Tony Heller is. That question is a weak attempt at ad hominem attack. What matters is the exculpatory evidence presented, not the presenter. Don’t shoot the witness.
Here is some more evidence.
There IS a statistically significant correlation between the trend of global average temperature and the trend of net atmospheric CO2 concentration. That is, the INVERSE or NEGATIVE of AGW theory is statistically significant. The warming trend always occurs before the CO2 trend in all de-anomalized, detrended data sets for matched time periods of temperature trend and CO2 trend. Going back millions of years from present (450 million years), there is no direct correlation between CO2 trend and temperature trend. According to the AGW hypothesis, there must be a correlation between CO2 trend and temperature trend. However, the correlation is inverse or negative. There are many peer-reviewed papers that show this. There is direct correlation (0.8 Pearson’s coefficient) between temperature trend and CO2 trend. Temperature trend is driving CO2 trend, CO2 trend is not driving temperature trend.
Also, since the estimated 15% annual increase in CO2 emissions from fossil fuels (300% increase) since 2000 is not forcing a change in the trend of net atmospheric CO2 concentration, then the human contribution cannot be forcing a change in global temperature, nor any of the other bad things alarmists claim to be caused by CO2.
As we all know, Anthropogenic Global Warming hypothesis (AGW) holds that fossil fuels cause an increase in total CO2 which in turn causes an increase in global temperature. In fact, UN IPCC and others hold that human CO2 emissions from fossil fuels are causing MOST of the increase in atmospheric CO2 concentration. In other words, A causes B which causes C, or so the AGW hypothesis holds.
However, since there is no correlation between A and B, then A cannot be causing C. In other words, fossil fuel emissions cannot be causing significant temperature change. Thus, you will find no correlation between CO2 trend followed by temperature trend when the data are properly analyzed. On the other hand, the positive or direct correlation between a temperature trend followed by a CO2 trend can be demonstrated in the data and experimentally.
A correlation does not prove a cause and effect relationship between two variables. However, if there is a cause and effect relationship, then there must be a correlation; there are no exceptions to this rule. CO2 is not causing global warming.
Since the fossil fuel contribution of CO2 to the net atmospheric concentration trend is too small to detect in the overall trend, we do not have data that might inform whether the anthropogenic fraction is so small that it is simply insignificant, lost in the noise of the massive flux of global CO2 emissions and absorptions by nature, or alternatively whether the carbon sinks, sources and balance are adjusting to the injection of gigatons CO2 emissions of fossil fuels, or some combination of these two alternatives.
W. Jackson Davis: Abstract: “Assessing human impacts on climate and biodiversity requires an understanding of the relationship between the concentration of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the Earth’s atmosphere and global temperature (T). Here I explore this relationship empirically using comprehensive, recently-compiled databases of stable-isotope proxies from the Phanerozoic Eon (~540 to 0 years before the present) and through complementary modeling using the atmospheric absorption/transmittance code MODTRAN. Atmospheric CO2 concentration is correlated weakly but negatively with linearly-detrended T proxies over the last 425 million years. Of 68 correlation coefficients (half non-parametric) between CO2 and T proxies encompassing all known major Phanerozoic climate transitions, 77.9% are non-discernible (p > 0.05) and 60.0% of discernible correlations are negative. … This study demonstrates that changes in atmospheric CO2 concentration did not cause temperature change in the ancient climate.” …
“The absence of a discernible correlation between atmospheric CO2 concentration and T over most of the Phanerozoic, as demonstrated above, appears to contravene the widely-accepted view about the relationship between atmospheric CO2 and temperature, by which increases in atmospheric CO2 concentration cause corresponding increases in T owing to increased radiative forcing.” …
“The principal findings of this study are that neither the atmospheric concentration of CO2 nor ?RFCO2 [change in CO2 forcing] is correlated with T over most of the ancient (Phanerozoic) climate. Over all major climate transitions of the Phanerozoic Eon, about three-quarters of 136 correlation coefficients computed here between T and atmospheric CO2 concentration, and between T and ?RFCO2, are non-discernible, and about half of the discernible correlations are negative. Correlation does not imply causality, but the absence of correlation proves conclusively the absence of causality [63]. …“The present findings corroborate the earlier conclusion based on study of the Paleozoic climate that “global climate may be independent of variations in atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration.” [64] (p.198).” https://www.mdpi.com/2225-1154/5/4/76 (pdf)
@ Lorensacho:
This is the perfect example-often sought, but rarely found– of CHUTZPAH.
When I joined Abu Yahuda blog, after several issues I noticed that although the lead articles were very good (which you all know, as many are printed here) they were all coming from one person. So I posted, and asked why are there no articles written by others , as there are many good items available. I had been basing this on my israpundit experiences.
The reply I got was virtually this. “This is my blog, and I run it the way I want to”…
This was written to me by Vic Rosenthal. Well…he was right, and I didn’t attempt to make any silly arguments or diktats. He was more blunt, less diplomatic than Ted, whose wide and varied choice of articles to display, is, to my mind, often bordering on the eclectic.
And you are the proverbial wormy apple in the barrel.
@ JohnF:
I see no difference in total volume and if there is it is marginal. We should be in another ice age before warming will melt enough ice to change the climate or geographical locations adversely.. Much hype & hysteria but no evidence
Ted stop it. Giving science deniers space for their oil paid for ignorance is irresponsible and endangers life. Stick to Jews and Israel and stop pretending to know anything about science.
@ yamit82:
@Yamit82
When you freeze water it expands and is less dense than water and that is why it floats! So when ice melts it takes on a smaller volume as water.
@ Felix Quigley:
Let’s assume you are correct and there is climate change specifically (warming) 2 things you don’t need an advanced degree to come to some basic conclusions.
Take an empty coke bottle and freeze the water, then allow the water to melt. You will see there is no change in volumn same with the oceans. ICE has the same volume as liquid water and even if melted will not raise the sea level above where it is. Only additional raifall can do that. If you want to reduce carbon, Plant billions of trees around the world… With massive desalinization, every dessert can be turned into forests.. Invest a few billion $$$ and problem real or fake will disappear in time… Even if you are right which you are not we gain new forests and all that goes along with them
Tony Heller aka Steve goddard
quote
“Who Is Tony Heller?
Tony FUCKING Goddard
Tony FUCKING Heller
I’m climate change denier Tony Heller. You might know me better by my pen name, “Steven Goddard,” or Twitter handle, @SteveSGoddard. This is my story.
First, you should know that I’m pretty much a nobody in the climate debate. I’m laughed at by all climatologists. I’m not even taken seriously by true climate skeptics. I don’t have a degree in climatology. I haven’t written a single academic paper about climate change and I don’t have a job related to climatology or the weather. What I do have is a blog and a Twitter account. And as it turns out, that’s pretty much all you need to be a somebody in the climate debate.
My blog is a shit stain on the Internet.
My blog is a shit stain on the Internet.
Like a shit stain, my blog is ugly, embarrassing and, as much as you hate to, it’s something you have to deal with. One fellow climate denier described my blog as “the crack house of skepticism.” But enough uneducated morons and right-wing ideologues link to my blog to grant me substantial ranking on Google search results. As a result, any layperson on the Internet who has researched global warming with Google to a fair degree has likely read the bullshit posted on my website where I claim to be able to drive 250,000 visitors to my site every week and have received over 20 million page views as of November 2014. I have also attracted over 4000 11,000 14,000 19,000 Twitter followers with more than 18,000 50,000 84,000 111,000 tweets. And so although a complete nobody in the climate debate, I have a fair amount of influence over thousands, perhaps millions, of impressionable individuals who don’t have a basic grasp of the facts on global warming.”
https://tonyhellerakastevengoddard.com/who-is-tony-heller/
Talk about introducing a can of worms! This guy for science is a nightmare and that voice!!!
Don’t forget to blame Israel for climate change with all the fires in the Gaza area.