4 Reasons Why 'Climate Change' Is a Flat-Out Hoax

[SSDD]

Climate change is no hoax. Technology can save us. State Capitalism all the way!

Cimate change is no hoax...the climate changes all the time and we, being the most adaptable creatures to ever inhabit the planet will do just fine...man made climate change is a very expensive scam...but do feel free to provide some observed, measured evidence to the contrary. You would be the first.

 

[airplanemechanic]

First, after Algore’s rant, it was Global Warming. Not, as that doesn’t seem to be working out so well, it’s Climate Change. What comes next?


Here’s what the author of this piece writes:

First, a disclaimer: I am not a climate scientist. In fact, I am not a scientist of any kind. But I do have a degree in electrical engineering, which I mention only to point out that I am at least as qualified as the next non-scientist to form rational opinions about global warming claims.

In obtaining my degree, I took enough classes in chemistry, physics, and geology to develop a keen appreciation of the scientific method, the best way ever devised for winnowing the truth from fakery and deception. If taking the scientific method into account, no intelligent person can fail to see that the constant drumbeat of wild and hysterical claims about the climate are insults to the search for Truth.

Following are four reasons why I will bet my life that "climate change" is the greatest scientific and political hoax in human history.

1. Rampant scientific fraud

2. The duping of Mr. & Mrs. John Q. Public

3. A long trail of wildly inaccurate predictions

4. Intentional concealment of inconvenient parts of climate history

All of the details and conclusions @ https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/10/4_reasons_why_climate_change_is_a_flatout_hoax.html

The IPCC is still wrong on climate change. Scientists prove it. @ https://www.americanthinker.com/art...ng_on_climate_change_scientists_prove_it.html

Now hear this:

‘Sobering’ New UN Report Challenges Republican Climate Hawks’ Free-Market Dogma | HuffPost

I am 71 hears old and I actually fear reincarnation more than death and this is why. I do not want to come back into a world on fire, plagued by drought, extreme weather, and famine That is where we are headed. The pig headed and greedy conservatives had better wake up and realize that they can't kill the earth for short term profits which is exactly what this is all about.

Younger people had better wake the **** up and think about their future regardless of their spiritual beliefs

A landmark new United Nations report warning of catastrophic global warming doesn’t seem to have shaken many Republican climate hawks’ faith that market tweaks alone can deliver the unprecedented emissions cuts needed to avert disaster.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a U.N. consortium of researchers from 40 countries, said Sunday the reductions needed to avoid average global warming beyond 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) above preindustrial levels require “rapid, far-reaching and unprecedented changes in all aspects of society.”

“The only force that I know of on the planet that can deliver innovation as quickly as we need it is the free enterprise system,” said former Rep. Bob Inglis (R-S.C.), now the executive director of RepublicEn, a group urging Republicans to support a ca

And please spare us the hysterical horsesit which I can already hear about the evil UN plotting to usurp our soverenty and establish a one world government . Get the **** over it.

So a forest fire is a sign of global warming? So it's getting so hot trees are spontaneously combusting? Man it must be hot as **** out there. And here I always thought forest fires were caused by dry conditions and cigs or lightening. I mean even Smokey the ******* bear tells me only I can prevent forest fires. So by definition every forest fire is my fault. I'm fucked.

To deny climate change is to deny the historical facts we know. The climate has always changed, always will. Climate is dynamic. Hell yesterday it was pouring down rain and now its sunny. But what I do not believe is that man has caused it. Considering we have records of climate change dating back BILLIONS of years BEFORE the first homo walked the Earth shows that it has nothing to do with us.

 

[danielpalos]

Climate change is no hoax. Technology can save us. State Capitalism all the way!

Cimate change is no hoax...the climate changes all the time and we, being the most adaptable creatures to ever inhabit the planet will do just fine...man made climate change is a very expensive scam...but do feel free to provide some observed, measured evidence to the contrary. You would be the first.

lassaiz-faire is for the lazy. Our Founding Fathers were wise with the patent power regarding our use of Capitalism "for propulsion".

 

[SSDD]

Climate change is no hoax. Technology can save us. State Capitalism all the way!

Cimate change is no hoax...the climate changes all the time and we, being the most adaptable creatures to ever inhabit the planet will do just fine...man made climate change is a very expensive scam...but do feel free to provide some observed, measured evidence to the contrary. You would be the first.

lassaiz-faire is for the lazy. Our Founding Fathers were wise with the patent power regarding our use of Capitalism "for propulsion".

Not sure what you are getting at. Care to elucidate?

 

[danielpalos]

Climate change is no hoax. Technology can save us. State Capitalism all the way!

Cimate change is no hoax...the climate changes all the time and we, being the most adaptable creatures to ever inhabit the planet will do just fine...man made climate change is a very expensive scam...but do feel free to provide some observed, measured evidence to the contrary. You would be the first.

lassaiz-faire is for the lazy. Our Founding Fathers were wise with the patent power regarding our use of Capitalism "for propulsion".

Not sure what you are getting at. Care to elucidate?

Modern economics technologies can save us.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Climate change is no hoax. Technology can save us. State Capitalism all the way!

Cimate change is no hoax...the climate changes all the time and we, being the most adaptable creatures to ever inhabit the planet will do just fine...man made climate change is a very expensive scam...but do feel free to provide some observed, measured evidence to the contrary. You would be the first.

lassaiz-faire is for the lazy. Our Founding Fathers were wise with the patent power regarding our use of Capitalism "for propulsion".

Not sure what you are getting at. Care to elucidate?

He smokes a lot of weed. His ramblings should be ignored.

 

[SSDD]

Climate change is no hoax. Technology can save us. State Capitalism all the way!

Cimate change is no hoax...the climate changes all the time and we, being the most adaptable creatures to ever inhabit the planet will do just fine...man made climate change is a very expensive scam...but do feel free to provide some observed, measured evidence to the contrary. You would be the first.

lassaiz-faire is for the lazy. Our Founding Fathers were wise with the patent power regarding our use of Capitalism "for propulsion".

Not sure what you are getting at. Care to elucidate?

Modern economics technologies can save us.

Save us from what?

 

[Wuwei]

Naw, it's you that has no idea of what evidence looks like since you don't believe or understand science or instrumentation.

It isn't me who has repeatedly been corrected as to how instruments work, what they are measuring, and how they are measuring it.

Just recently you claimed that a spectrometer works like this...and I quote:

"A detector doesn't measure the difference between input radiation and it's own internal radiation. It measures the sum of those two. As you lower the temperature of the detector all that's left is the external radiation, and that more accurately represents what you are trying to measure."

and you said it HERE

Now a spectrometer is a pretty basic piece of equipment....and it operates nothing like the description you gave. Clearly, you know very little about what instruments are measuring, and how they are measuring them, and what goes into producing the output. Because of your lack of knowledge of instrumentation, you are easily fooled by it....combine that with your willingness to disregard what instruments tell you in favor or your belief in models over reality and you are left with very little credibility when you discuss science.

I repeat, you don't believe or understand science or instrumentation.

Tod made my point a few posts ago. I was talking about detectors in general.

Here is one famous experiment that illustrates that point. In 1965 Robert Wilson and Arno Penzias were testing a radio telescope with a LN cooled detector at 4 degrees K. The telescope aimed at the sky had a noise equivalent temperature higher than the 4 K. Their hypothesis was that the extra energy was from the cosmos.

The thermal energy hitting the detector was the sum of the LN temperature plus the CMB.

That radio telescope was basically a spectrometer. They looked at different incoming frequencies and found the the signal in excess of the LN 4K followed the black body radiation spectrum for a cosmic background radiation of around 3 K.

.

 

[SSDD]

I repeat, you don't believe or understand science or instrumentation.

Tod made my point a few posts ago. I was talking about detectors in general.

Here is one famous experiment that illustrates that point. In 1965 Robert Wilson and Arno Penzias were testing a radio telescope with a LN cooled detector at 4 degrees K. The telescope aimed at the sky had a noise equivalent temperature higher than the 4 K. Their hypothesis was that the extra energy was from the cosmos.

Yeah...that is a good one showing that you really don't have a clue...you are claiming that microwave background radiation was received with a radio telescope...your claim is that microwaves were received with a receiver capable of receiving frequencies between the upper limit of audio and the lower limit of infrared...good one.

Resonant radio waves...not CMB....sorry that this is all so far over your head...it is clear that you simply can't grasp what is being said. If you need a refresher, revisit the original thread or the one after that or the one after that...I won't rehash the topic again...it is pointless because it is over your head.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I repeat, you don't believe or understand science or instrumentation.

Tod made my point a few posts ago. I was talking about detectors in general.

Here is one famous experiment that illustrates that point. In 1965 Robert Wilson and Arno Penzias were testing a radio telescope with a LN cooled detector at 4 degrees K. The telescope aimed at the sky had a noise equivalent temperature higher than the 4 K. Their hypothesis was that the extra energy was from the cosmos.

Yeah...that is a good one showing that you really don't have a clue...you are claiming that microwave background radiation was received with a radio telescope...your claim is that microwaves were received with a receiver capable of receiving frequencies between the upper limit of audio and the lower limit of infrared...good one.

Resonant radio waves...not CMB....sorry that this is all so far over your head...it is clear that you simply can't grasp what is being said. If you need a refresher, revisit the original thread or the one after that or the one after that...I won't rehash the topic again...it is pointless because it is over your head.

you are claiming that microwave background radiation was received with a radio telescope..

Only because it was.

The Large Horn Antenna and the Discovery of Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation

As part of the APS historic sites initiative, on December 9, 2008, APS Vice-President Curtis Callan presented a plaque to Bell Labs to commemorate the discovery of the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMB) that provided evidence for the Big Bang. Bell Labs radio astronomers Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson were using a large horn antenna in 1964 and 1965 to map signals from the Milky Way, when they serendipitously discovered the CMB. As written in the citation, "This unexpected discovery, offering strong evidence that the universe began with the Big Bang, ushered in experimental cosmology." Penzias and Wilson shared the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1978 in honor of their findings.

The CMB is "noise" leftover from the creation of the Universe. The microwave radiation is only 3 degrees above Absolute Zero or -270 degrees C,1 and is uniformly perceptible from all directions. Its presence demonstrates that that our universe began in an extremely hot and violent explosion, called the Big Bang, 13.7 billion years ago.

In 1960, Bell Labs built a 20-foot horn-shaped antenna in Holmdel, NJ to be used with an early satellite system called Echo. The intention was to collect and amplify radio signals to send them across long distances, but within a few years, another satellite was launched and Echo became obsolete.2

With the antenna no longer tied to commercial applications, it was now free for research. Penzias and Wilson jumped at the chance to use it to analyze radio signals from the spaces between galaxies.3 But when they began to employ it, they encountered a persistent "noise" of microwaves that came from every direction. If they were to conduct experiments with the antenna, they would have to find a way to remove the static.

Penzias and Wilson tested everything they could think of to rule out the source of the radiation racket. They knew it wasn’t radiation from the Milky Way or extraterrestrial radio sources. They pointed the antenna towards New York City to rule out "urban interference", and did analysis to dismiss possible military testing from their list.4

Then they found droppings of pigeons nesting in the antenna. They cleaned out the mess and tried removing the birds and discouraging them from roosting, but they kept flying back. "To get rid of them, we finally found the most humane thing was to get a shot gun…and at very close range [we] just killed them instantly. It’s not something I’m happy about, but that seemed like the only way out of our dilemma," said Penzias.5 "And so the pigeons left with a smaller bang, but the noise remained, coming from every direction."6

At the same time, the two astronomers learned that Princeton University physicist Robert Dicke had predicted that if the Big Bang had occurred, there would be low level radiation found throughout the universe. Dicke was about to design an experiment to test this hypothesis when he was contacted by Penzias. Upon hearing of Penzias’ and Wilson’s discovery, Dicke turned to his laboratory colleagues and said "well boys, we’ve been scooped."7

Although both groups published their results in Astrophysical Journal Letters, only Penzias and Wilson received the Nobel Prize for the discovery of the CMB.

The horn antenna was designated a National Historic Landmark in 1990. Its significance in fostering a new appreciation for the field of cosmology and a better understanding of our origins can be summed up by the following: "Scientists have labeled the discovery [of the CMB] the greatest scientific discovery of the 20th century."8

©2009, Alaina G. Levine

Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson

​

Resonant radio waves...not CMB...​

​

DERP!​

 

[Wuwei]

Yeah...that is a good one showing that you really don't have a clue...you are claiming that microwave background radiation was received with a radio telescope...your claim is that microwaves were received with a receiver capable of receiving frequencies between the upper limit of audio and the lower limit of infrared...good one.

That's rather arrogant saying Penzias and Wilson never had a clue and yet they won the Nobel Prize. OK, now I suppose you will come back with some comment denigrating the Nobel Prize. It's so curious to see you lashing out at science like that.

Resonant radio waves...not CMB....sorry that this is all so far over your head...it is clear that you simply can't grasp what is being said. If you need a refresher, revisit the original thread or the one after that or the one after that...I won't rehash the topic again...it is pointless because it is over your head.

Ha! The troll speaks again. You've got to resort to ad hominem.

 

[SSDD]

Here is the deal...I have grown very bored with going over the same discussion over and over and over...it always ends with you not being able to produce any observed, measured example of energy moving spontaneously and simultaneously between two objects. If you feel the need to do this again...start with the observed, MEASURED example of said energy movement and we can proceed from there. I won't rehash the same thing over and over with you any further.

I get it...you believe in models...you believe in them to the extent that you will ignore observed measured reality in favor of them. I don't. Since you can't produce any observed, measured examples to demonstrate what you believe, it remains in the realm of belief. When you can bring them out into reality with observed MEASURED examples, let me know.

And logical fallacies don't constitute argument...

 

[danielpalos]

Climate change is no hoax. Technology can save us. State Capitalism all the way!

Cimate change is no hoax...the climate changes all the time and we, being the most adaptable creatures to ever inhabit the planet will do just fine...man made climate change is a very expensive scam...but do feel free to provide some observed, measured evidence to the contrary. You would be the first.

lassaiz-faire is for the lazy. Our Founding Fathers were wise with the patent power regarding our use of Capitalism "for propulsion".

Not sure what you are getting at. Care to elucidate?

Modern economics technologies can save us.

Save us from what?

from becoming a third world economy.

 

[Wuwei]

Here is the deal...I have grown very bored with going over the same discussion over and over and over...it always ends with you not being able to produce any observed, measured example of energy moving spontaneously and simultaneously between two objects. If you feel the need to do this again...start with the observed, MEASURED example of said energy movement and we can proceed from there. I won't rehash the same thing over and over with you any further.

I get it...you believe in models...you believe in them to the extent that you will ignore observed measured reality in favor of them. I don't. Since you can't produce any observed, measured examples to demonstrate what you believe, it remains in the realm of belief. When you can bring them out into reality with observed MEASURED examples, let me know.

Since you cross-posted this in other threads, I will cross-post my reply.

You are bored? You incorrectly think the second law of thermodynamics says that there is no type of energy that can spontaneously move from a colder to a warmer body. Many experiments show you are totally wrong. No scientist agrees with you.

Here is the bottom line. We all agree that radiation can mediate energy flow. Aim a detector at the hot object, you see it is radiating energy. Aim the detector at the cold object, you see it radiates less energy. No observed measured experiment has shown they cannot radiate simultaneously.

Observed, measured principles of physics say they do. Many here have given you measured observed examples that show you are wrong – the CMB, luminescence, radioactivity, the corona, etc. You counter those examples with made up non-“science” that is totally inconsistent with all other science which you openly and vehemently disparage. None of your “science” can be found in the literature and you are aware of that. You are alone in your belief. So you are bored? I think you are intellectually exhausted.

 

[BookShaka]

There are just as many, if not more, reasons to think the climate change scare is a bunch of hooey. Is our climate changing? Yes. Is it man-made? Probably a little. Is it really as bad as they say? I seriously doubt it.

I do believe in climate change to a certain degree. Do I believe it warrants my constant concern? No. There are lots of other things to worry about.

 

[danielpalos]

technology can "save us"!

 

[SSDD]

Here is the deal...I have grown very bored with going over the same discussion over and over and over...it always ends with you not being able to produce any observed, measured example of energy moving spontaneously and simultaneously between two objects. If you feel the need to do this again...start with the observed, MEASURED example of said energy movement and we can proceed from there. I won't rehash the same thing over and over with you any further.

I get it...you believe in models...you believe in them to the extent that you will ignore observed measured reality in favor of them. I don't. Since you can't produce any observed, measured examples to demonstrate what you believe, it remains in the realm of belief. When you can bring them out into reality with observed MEASURED examples, let me know.

Since you cross-posted this in other threads, I will cross-post my reply.

You are bored? You incorrectly think the second law of thermodynamics says that there is no type of energy that can spontaneously move from a colder to a warmer body. Many experiments show you are totally wrong. No scientist agrees with you.

Here is the bottom line. We all agree that radiation can mediate energy flow. Aim a detector at the hot object, you see it is radiating energy. Aim the detector at the cold object, you see it radiates less energy. No observed measured experiment has shown they cannot radiate simultaneously.

Observed, measured principles of physics say they do. Many here have given you measured observed examples that show you are wrong – the CMB, luminescence, radioactivity, the corona, etc. You counter those examples with made up non-“science” that is totally inconsistent with all other science which you openly and vehemently disparage. None of your “science” can be found in the literature and you are aware of that. You are alone in your belief. So you are bored? I think you are intellectually exhausted.

Nothing but your belief...so in essence...nothing.

 

[Wuwei]

Nothing but your belief...so in essence...nothing.

Nope. Not just belief. Many here have given you measured observed examples that show you are wrong – the CMB, luminescence, radioactivity, the corona, etc. You counter those examples with made up non-“science”.

 

[SSDD]

Your knowledge base is very shallow, and very sketchy....you are obviously easily fooled...none of those things represent the spontaneous movement of energy from a cool (low energy) object to a warm (higher energy) object...as much as you wish it, I am afraid that you are just wrong again...sorry.

 

[Wuwei]

Your knowledge base is very shallow, and very sketchy....you are obviously easily fooled...none of those things represent the spontaneous movement of energy from a cool (low energy) object to a warm (higher energy) object...as much as you wish it, I am afraid that you are just wrong again...sorry.

Wish it? Everyone knows evidence was given that your idea of smart photons simply don't exist. Now your'e just being a troll and liar.