fossil fuels

How accurate were the predictions made around the time of the first Earth Day in 1970? The answer: “The prophets of doom were not simply wrong, but spectacularly wrong,”

Harvard biologist George Wald estimated that “civilization will end within 15 or 30 years [by 1985 or 2000] unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind.”

Somini Sengupta: This summer of fire and swelter looks a lot like the future that scientists have been warning about in the era of climate change, and it’s revealing in real time how unprepared much of the world remains for life on a hotter planet. Scientists point out that with significant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and changes to the way we live — things like reducing food waste, for example — warming can be slowed enough to avoid the worst consequences of climate change.

Climate Change is Normal not Man Made! ---Yes, CO2 by man does nothing to change the weather. ---Yes, the IPCC is made up of Greenpeace top level people and has its own agenda with 23 lobbyists in DC.

“The most profound questions with the most surprising answers are often the simplest to ask. One is: Why is the climate always changing? Historical and archaeological evidence of global warming and cooling that occurred long before the Industrial revolution, require natural explanations”

C3 Headlines website for Climate, Conservative, Consumer:As this article lays out, the doomer-cult scary predictions of increased frequency and increased intensity of hurricanes simply has not happened. And the adjacent charts reveal the indisputable empirical evidence, much to the angst of Greta and friends. The photos show climates at several places on the globes. Some where you might not expect. Mother Nature and the sun are the dominant players determining Earth's different climates.

John Dunn, MD, JD: This is my second exhibit to refute Dr. NG's assertion that the NAS, AAAS, Government Agency sponsored scientists who make up the "establishment" of science create a reliable "consensus" and Dr. Happer's committee is an offense to the science integrity project.

The IPCC (United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) has no geologists among the hundreds of authors of its last major report (2013/14) and at most 1 geologist in the next report. Thus IPCC focuses on only the last 170 years (since multiple reliable thermometer measurements began, ~1850), yet Earth is 26 million (sic) times older, 4.5 billion years. Geologists know that throughout this time Earth has constantly warmed or cooled (never static). Thus 'climate change' (warming or cooling) is perfectly usual. During the last 11,650 years, our current ‘Holocene’ interglacial epoch, climate change has repeatedly been fast enough to cause collapse of civilizations.

The IPCC’s very existence relies on public belief in ‘Anthropogenic (man-made) Global Warming' (AGW) by CO2 emissions. Most IPCC authors, mainly government and university researchers, are biased by strong vested interests in AGW - Anthropogenic Global Warming (publications; reputations; continuance of salaries; research grants).

The "greenhouse effect... a slight misnomer" (Wiki; in fact a complete misnomer;)... "is the process by which radiation from a planet's atmosphere warms the planet's surface". This bold claim that Earth's land- and ocean surfaces are warmed by the air is 'backwards'. In truth the (solar-warmed) ocean warms the atmosphere, as shown by three observations: (1) ocean-surface water (covering ~70% of Earth) is almost everywhere warmer (fractionally) than the air above it; (2) changes in global average surface air temperature lag 1 to 1.5 months behind corresponding changes in global sea-surface temperature; and (3) Antarctica has failed to warm in the last several decades (attributed to the ice sheet's high elevation delaying the landward penetration of ocean-warmed air). These facts indicate that heat (only capable of flowing one way, from warmer to cooler) flows outward, from the ocean to the air, not vice versa. A truthful summary of the greenhouse effect is that solar energy absorbed at Earth’s surface is radiated back into the atmosphere as heat, some of which is absorbed on its way out to space by greenhouse gases. Thus greenhouse gases cause no warming; instead they reduce the air's heat loss to space, exactly in the manner demonstrated by the great John Tyndall (Bullet 2B), who experimentally confirmed (1860) what is now called the greenhouse effect.

“We’ve got to ride this global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic and environmental policy.“ – Timothy Wirth Former President of the UN Foundation

Ray DiLorenzo, Editor, Stand Up America US Foundation: Recent observations of phenomena such as glacial retreats, sea-level rise and the migration of temperature-sensitive species are not evidence for abnormal climate change, for none of these changes has been shown to lie outside the bounds of known natural variability...It is not possible to stop climate change, a natural phenomenon that has affected humanity through the ages. Press Release: U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works.

The World Economic Forum — also known as “Davos” — is an exclusive talking shop for the rich and powerful. As a symbol of the neoliberal order it’s long been a target for the anti-capitalist Left. More recently, it’s also become a bugbear of the populist Right. That’s not just because the WEF champions globalisation, but also because of what some see as an elitist plot to radically change our lifestyles. Peter Franklin, The Post, February 11, 2022

Apparently, a shadowy cabal is dead set on getting us to eat bugs instead of real meat and to live in pods instead of proper flats and houses. Needless to say, the conspiracy theories are overblown; but, as I explain here, insect protein and tiny homes are definitely on the Davos agenda.

Eric Jelinski, Mechanical Engineer, President of Environmentalists for Nuclear - Canada, Ed Berry, atmospheric physicist, Simon Aaegert, physicist: Ed Berry presents a physics flow analysis for man-made carbon dioxide and concludes that it does not remain in the atmosphere a long time and does not contribute significantly to man-made global warming, climate change or climate disruption (all terms President Obama's Science Advisor has used. Simon Aegerter states that all additional atmospheric carbon dioxide for the last 150 years or so is from fossil fuels, that it remains in the atmosphere for many decades and is the cause of the warming experienced over the same time. Eric Jelinski endorses Ed Berry's physics flow analysis and conclusions. This is an important endorsement.

As we reflect back over the day, we are no less than astounded by the degree to which radiation processes have already been harnessed to enrich our life. Recognizing this enormous progress, we can only dream in wonderment over what the future of radiation technology may hold for us and our children. See this article and more at: www.NuclearConnect.org

Dr. Moore says we were literally running out of carbon before we started to pump it back into the atmosphere, “CO2 has been declining to where it is getting close to the end of plant life, and in another 1.8 million years, life would begin to die on planet Earth for lack of CO2.” According to Moore it is life itself that has been consuming carbon and storing it in carbonaceous rocks.

Howard Cork Hayden, Emeritus Physics Professor, University of Connecticut: At no time during the last billion years has the climate not been changing. Therefore, it is trivially useless to claim that the climate is changing. It is a serious offense for man-made climate change alarmists to call anyone a CLIMATE DENIER or CLIMATE CHANGE DENIER. The atmosphere has had, at times in the past, many multiples of the present concentration of carbon dioxide. The case for nuclear power is very strong. Don't dilute the strength of the case with weak arguments, like that of "climate change ( nee Global Warming).

Gary Young, retired engineering manager: It is lamented that far too few of the electorate have any real understanding of the hard sciences. This lack of understanding has given rise to embracing poor (junk) science at even some of the highest levels of academic and political thought. The current concept of most concern is all the political rhetoric about renewables such as solar and wind providing our energy. There is only one well understood technology at the present time that could produce vast amounts of power in addition to fossil fuels and that is nuclear. We are held back from the nuclear solution by unfounded fear. The root of the fear is the very wrong doctrine of “liner no threshold” concerning the biological effects of radiation. In truth, there are thresholds and almost nothing in science is linear.