interesting arguments. and while animal farming as practices is not sustainable, it seems to me that nor are current agri-business farming practices. and frankenmeats, in whatever form, via bugs or gmoed 'crap', aren't going to do much beyond the active 'health' practices of making people unwell.
and i'm curious how you factor in what seems to be the warming of the earth itself from within. i've done just a bit of reading on that, so not enough to aver anything with surety - although the measurements of the ice melting in the antarctic with below zero surface temperatures is interesting, as well as all the recent hot spots opening on the oceans floors. and what about the giant underground volcanic event of 2023 that no one is talking about? to what extent is the earth itself heating up, for whatever reason? is it?
You are ridiculous, Jo. The idea that a trace gas like CO2 can work like a greenhouse is absurd. The Earth spins and is heated in daytime. Much of this heat is left during night and dissipates slowly. The atmosphere, independent of "trace gases" insulates to a degree. You are falling for Club of Rome propaganda.
Now you are totally absurd. The Club of Rome strongly supports and finances the global warming "climate change" fake science you so value. I oppose their propaganda.
BTW: The climate propaganda leads governments to regulate production and exploration which reduces the supply or oil and, thus, raises the price. Big Oil, lead by the Rockefellers thus reaps higher profits by selling a smaller volume at a higher price without drilling and exploration costs. Textbook case of monopoly behavior: lower supply at higher price.
Nobody (other than perhaps you) is falling for the climate scam anymore. Even back in the late 80s whilst researching as part of my degree I had worked out it was BS!
That's the lowest number I have seen, it's usually between 3 % and 30%, which just shows you, that they don't actually have a clue about how much C02 is produced by humans.
CO2 doesn't climb up into the sky; it feeds plants that both humans and animals eat. Without that, the circle of life WILL stop. The rulers are planning to eliminate a LOT more than humans produce, which will manage to exterminate a LOT of people by starvation. The rest will be left around to play in the sandbox a bit longer:
Do you have any references on CO2 causing warming? I've only seen scientists who say it doesn't. I see them saying we actually are in danger of going too low when it comes to CO2. It's hard to know who to trust when it comes to geologists and possible conflicts of interest.
yes rockefeller founded the club of rome- well done.
No he's using it to promote resistance to climate change and promote his industry. He's a very clever fella.
'The petrochemical industry itself originally funded research into its impact on the planet. At the start there were concerns that population growth in non-whites would mean resources for whites, who were seen as superior, would run out. This turned out not to be a problem but has morphed into modern day cartoon villains wanting to depopulate us.'
We need CO2 otherwise all life would cease to exist. What I've read is that CO2 increases after temperatures rise, not before. The founder of Greenpeace was on video talking about it too. Also, humans only cause 4% of CO2, the rest is natural. What is not mentioned is weather modification projects that has been carried out for decades, with US military bragging how they already can control the weather and have used it, for example, in Vietnam, causing heavy rains to hamper the enemy. We've known about HAARP for a long time and more than one installation globally plus, of course, the trails produced by all those unidentified planes in the sky!
They've actually banned you, Jo? That seems extreme.
I was an ardent climate activist and I cannot say I don't believe at all in CO2 and dangerous warming now, however, I just feel so disillusioned with "science" I feel quite uncertain and I certainly cannot feel the least concern about it whether it really is of concern or not - I simply cannot do it. Previously, I used to think that the majority of scientists arguing against AGW were simply funded by the fossil fuel companies but now I see they aren't necessarily and genuinely believe what they say (which doesn't automatically make them right, of course, but they certainly put a lot of effort into their argument that's for sure). One guy is a retired PSO/G7 UK government scientist and former head of a statistical modelling section who saw things amiss from an insider's perspective although he's very discreet on that side of things because of disclosure rules. He has two substacks, one on covid and one on climate: https://jdeeclimate.substack.com/
I used to treat Skeptical Science as my bible on climate change and I thought they presented a very credible response to all the naysaying arguments, however, they tended to lose credibility when they banned me for what I said on covid in their little foray into that subject on the most ludicrous grounds. Their arguments against the naysayers on climate change still seem reasonable to me, however, I think the science of climate change is just so complicated that I find it quite impossible to work out.
I posted an article on the case put forward by Dutch geologist, Koen Vogel, for geomagnetism aligning better with temperature variations than CO2 and I think he makes a very good case.
Just to say: I've noticed that to see comments now you need to refresh the page, comments don't automatically appear any more. It isn't a case of that is it?
I can easily understand that they don't like what you say as in they don't agree with it, however, ban you simply because they don't agree?? Are you sure? Substack can be glitchy and the Baileys simply do not strike me as the kind of people who would block people on their substack unless what they said was really extreme.
Just having a debate would be nice, let alone a scientific one.
It would be interesting to send a questionnaire to all substack writers asking them if they believed what they wrote, if they knew it to be true and who pays them to write it. All this doubting authenticity is tiring and not much fun.
I gave a presentation in the late '90's - college level, economics class, regarding the loss of the Amazon forest due to MacDonald's, Taco Time, et al PAYING the locals to burn the forest as the soil was too weak to sustain grass growth more than a year so the march through the forest continues - almost 30 years later. What I found most interesting was that there is no column on the GNP sheet for the cost of destruction against Mother Nature. It's free! And, it's limited...
Yes, Imperialism and this destruction for profit must stop.
Do you mean the GND? I have no knowledge of what's on it. It's been used as the epitome of evil green left wing policy. If it doesn't have the cost of destruction involved in addressing the climate crisis by using the sun, wind and plants instead of extraction, burning and animals then that's a big problem with it.
We really don't need to worry about the state of the earth and it's atmosphere. According to knowledgeable source the earth will stand to times indefinite even forever. If trust this source (the earth's creator) we don't need to worry about claims climate change that's being used as a fear mongering technique. Thanks to people like the Baileys who I'm sure get some things wrong, we know there are no viruses and reduces the power of the fear mongering once again. I have also been banned from sites like Sasha Latypova's because she did't like what I said. I don't justify liars like Dr. McCullough, Mercola, Del Bigtree, Malone and others in that category for their self centered lies, But the Bailey's, Yeadon, Cowan and Lanka seem to be making an earnest effort to make people aware of what is going on around them. Just my observation and who am I/ Just a nobody. So you can take it 0r leave it. Hope we can all navigate these rough waters with knowlege for 70n or 80 years before we ar done. On that note. Hope you have a great day.
hola, jw.
interesting arguments. and while animal farming as practices is not sustainable, it seems to me that nor are current agri-business farming practices. and frankenmeats, in whatever form, via bugs or gmoed 'crap', aren't going to do much beyond the active 'health' practices of making people unwell.
and i'm curious how you factor in what seems to be the warming of the earth itself from within. i've done just a bit of reading on that, so not enough to aver anything with surety - although the measurements of the ice melting in the antarctic with below zero surface temperatures is interesting, as well as all the recent hot spots opening on the oceans floors. and what about the giant underground volcanic event of 2023 that no one is talking about? to what extent is the earth itself heating up, for whatever reason? is it?
You are ridiculous, Jo. The idea that a trace gas like CO2 can work like a greenhouse is absurd. The Earth spins and is heated in daytime. Much of this heat is left during night and dissipates slowly. The atmosphere, independent of "trace gases" insulates to a degree. You are falling for Club of Rome propaganda.
No, you are.
Now you are totally absurd. The Club of Rome strongly supports and finances the global warming "climate change" fake science you so value. I oppose their propaganda.
BTW: The climate propaganda leads governments to regulate production and exploration which reduces the supply or oil and, thus, raises the price. Big Oil, lead by the Rockefellers thus reaps higher profits by selling a smaller volume at a higher price without drilling and exploration costs. Textbook case of monopoly behavior: lower supply at higher price.
CO2 is heavier than O2, anyway. Fermentation can produce it in a cellar, but it doesn't go upstairs even when there are stairs. :)
Nobody (other than perhaps you) is falling for the climate scam anymore. Even back in the late 80s whilst researching as part of my degree I had worked out it was BS!
Good for you.
Human activities account for 0.3% of carbon dioxide production.
Chemtrails do more than whatever is being claimed about them; they are part of a complex system to re-engineer the weather:
https://rayhorvaththesource.substack.com/p/geoengineering-entails-more-than
Anyway, the problem is that a worldwide dictatorship is forming.
That's the lowest number I have seen, it's usually between 3 % and 30%, which just shows you, that they don't actually have a clue about how much C02 is produced by humans.
CO2 doesn't climb up into the sky; it feeds plants that both humans and animals eat. Without that, the circle of life WILL stop. The rulers are planning to eliminate a LOT more than humans produce, which will manage to exterminate a LOT of people by starvation. The rest will be left around to play in the sandbox a bit longer:
https://rayhorvaththesource.substack.com/p/interchangeable-roles-of-victims
We can all see through the climate scam and you are a fool for believing in it. Weather events are no evidence of climate change you numpty.
why was I blocked then?
Do you have any references on CO2 causing warming? I've only seen scientists who say it doesn't. I see them saying we actually are in danger of going too low when it comes to CO2. It's hard to know who to trust when it comes to geologists and possible conflicts of interest.
https://www.nature.com/articles/nature14240
https://www.pnas.org/doi/abs/10.1073/pnas.1305332110
Yes well referenced here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3GRyURjqoxI&list=PLS1_3FQqr488J15Glq_d6o7rN9plYFn-n&index=2 direct measured of warming in description
There are plenty of global warming references, but they are all bought and paid for by the Club of Rome oligarchs such as the Rockefellers, etc.
Why would oil barons go to the trouble of faking climate change which would mean people avoided their products?
Aren't they more likely to make us think that they faked climate change so that we continue to buy their products?
They aren't faking climate change. They are lying!
yes rockefeller founded the club of rome- well done.
No he's using it to promote resistance to climate change and promote his industry. He's a very clever fella.
'The petrochemical industry itself originally funded research into its impact on the planet. At the start there were concerns that population growth in non-whites would mean resources for whites, who were seen as superior, would run out. This turned out not to be a problem but has morphed into modern day cartoon villains wanting to depopulate us.'
https://jowaller.substack.com/p/rockefeller-and-big-petrochemicals?utm_source=publication-search
We need CO2 otherwise all life would cease to exist. What I've read is that CO2 increases after temperatures rise, not before. The founder of Greenpeace was on video talking about it too. Also, humans only cause 4% of CO2, the rest is natural. What is not mentioned is weather modification projects that has been carried out for decades, with US military bragging how they already can control the weather and have used it, for example, in Vietnam, causing heavy rains to hamper the enemy. We've known about HAARP for a long time and more than one installation globally plus, of course, the trails produced by all those unidentified planes in the sky!
yes i know we need co2.
Did you actually read the post- it's about temperaturre rising before co2?
You believe climate change nonsens so unfollowed you.
Yeah I know, it’s so uncool to care.
They've actually banned you, Jo? That seems extreme.
I was an ardent climate activist and I cannot say I don't believe at all in CO2 and dangerous warming now, however, I just feel so disillusioned with "science" I feel quite uncertain and I certainly cannot feel the least concern about it whether it really is of concern or not - I simply cannot do it. Previously, I used to think that the majority of scientists arguing against AGW were simply funded by the fossil fuel companies but now I see they aren't necessarily and genuinely believe what they say (which doesn't automatically make them right, of course, but they certainly put a lot of effort into their argument that's for sure). One guy is a retired PSO/G7 UK government scientist and former head of a statistical modelling section who saw things amiss from an insider's perspective although he's very discreet on that side of things because of disclosure rules. He has two substacks, one on covid and one on climate: https://jdeeclimate.substack.com/
I used to treat Skeptical Science as my bible on climate change and I thought they presented a very credible response to all the naysaying arguments, however, they tended to lose credibility when they banned me for what I said on covid in their little foray into that subject on the most ludicrous grounds. Their arguments against the naysayers on climate change still seem reasonable to me, however, I think the science of climate change is just so complicated that I find it quite impossible to work out.
I posted an article on the case put forward by Dutch geologist, Koen Vogel, for geomagnetism aligning better with temperature variations than CO2 and I think he makes a very good case.
https://petraliverani.substack.com/p/does-geomagnetism-explain-climate
Yes it does. I'm wondering what I'm saying that they don't like.
Just to say: I've noticed that to see comments now you need to refresh the page, comments don't automatically appear any more. It isn't a case of that is it?
I can easily understand that they don't like what you say as in they don't agree with it, however, ban you simply because they don't agree?? Are you sure? Substack can be glitchy and the Baileys simply do not strike me as the kind of people who would block people on their substack unless what they said was really extreme.
Just having a debate would be nice, let alone a scientific one.
It would be interesting to send a questionnaire to all substack writers asking them if they believed what they wrote, if they knew it to be true and who pays them to write it. All this doubting authenticity is tiring and not much fun.
I gave a presentation in the late '90's - college level, economics class, regarding the loss of the Amazon forest due to MacDonald's, Taco Time, et al PAYING the locals to burn the forest as the soil was too weak to sustain grass growth more than a year so the march through the forest continues - almost 30 years later. What I found most interesting was that there is no column on the GNP sheet for the cost of destruction against Mother Nature. It's free! And, it's limited...
Yes, Imperialism and this destruction for profit must stop.
Do you mean the GND? I have no knowledge of what's on it. It's been used as the epitome of evil green left wing policy. If it doesn't have the cost of destruction involved in addressing the climate crisis by using the sun, wind and plants instead of extraction, burning and animals then that's a big problem with it.
Invisible threat = check
"Scientific" consensus/ "science" is settled = check
Censorship of dissent = check
Endless propaganda = check
Pushed by the same people = check
Now, the measures:
Stay home = check
Digital ID/carbon credits = check
Restriction of freedoms = check
Climate change is a carbon copy of the covid scam.
We really don't need to worry about the state of the earth and it's atmosphere. According to knowledgeable source the earth will stand to times indefinite even forever. If trust this source (the earth's creator) we don't need to worry about claims climate change that's being used as a fear mongering technique. Thanks to people like the Baileys who I'm sure get some things wrong, we know there are no viruses and reduces the power of the fear mongering once again. I have also been banned from sites like Sasha Latypova's because she did't like what I said. I don't justify liars like Dr. McCullough, Mercola, Del Bigtree, Malone and others in that category for their self centered lies, But the Bailey's, Yeadon, Cowan and Lanka seem to be making an earnest effort to make people aware of what is going on around them. Just my observation and who am I/ Just a nobody. So you can take it 0r leave it. Hope we can all navigate these rough waters with knowlege for 70n or 80 years before we ar done. On that note. Hope you have a great day.