And Another One Bites The Dust

[PoliticalChic]

It's not just about Jan6 or the Covid Hoax that the truth is fighting its way through. The Climate Warming Scam, too.


"Climate activist Greta Thunberg deleted a tweet from 2018 warning that humanity would be wiped out “unless we stop using fossil fuels over the next five years.” Here we are, five years later, and the world didn’t end. If the “experts” were wrong about climate change, what else are they wrong about, and why are we still listening to them?"

‎Fireside Chat with Dennis Prager: Ep. 280 — Why Do You Still Trust Them? on Apple Podcasts

‎Show Fireside Chat with Dennis Prager, Ep Ep. 280 — Why Do You Still Trust Them? - Mar 16, 2023

podcasts.apple.com

 

[Manonthestreet]

Shut up they said.....

 

[Rambunctious]

Anyone taking their lead from a 20 something is as foolish as the 20 something....

 

[citygator]

So PC has moved from copying and pasting other people's writings to now simply posting an audio recording of other people talking? And I didn't think PC's threads could get less engaging. Guess I was wrong.

 

[PoliticalChic]

So PC has moved from copying and pasting other people's writings to now simply posting an audio recording of other people talking? And I didn't think PC's threads could get less engaging. Guess I was wrong.

You are, of course, an immutable imbecile.


I love getting under the scales of you morons, who swallow whole every lie the Left tells you.



Here's another expert you might want to debate:



"... an article by award-winning climate activist Michael Shellenberger, in which he apologizes "for the climate scare we created over the last 30 years."


Authored by Michael Shellenberger via Environmental Progress (emphasis ours)

On Behalf Of Environmentalists, I Apologize For The Climate Scare


On behalf of environmentalists everywhere, I would like to formally apologize for the climate scare we created over the last 30 years. Climate change is happening. It’s just not the end of the world. It’s not even our most serious environmental problem.
I may seem like a strange person to be saying all of this. I have been a climate activist for 20 years and an environmentalist for 30.
But as an energy expert asked by Congress to provide objective expert testimony, and invited by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to serve as Expert Reviewer of its next Assessment Report, I feel an obligation to apologize for how badly we environmentalists have misled the public.
Here are some facts few people know:

• Humans are not causing a “sixth mass extinction”
• The Amazon is not “the lungs of the world”
• Climate change is not making natural disasters worse
• Fires have declined 25% around the world since 2003
• The amount of land we use for meat — humankind’s biggest use of land — has declined by an area nearly as large as Alaska
• The build-up of wood fuel and more houses near forests, not climate change, explain why there are more, and more dangerous, fires in Australia and California
• Carbon emissions are declining in most rich nations and have been declining in Britain, Germany, and France since the mid-1970s
• Adapting to life below sea level made the Netherlands rich not poor
• We produce 25% more food than we need and food surpluses will continue to rise as the world gets hotter
• Habitat loss and the direct killing of wild animals are bigger threats to species than climate change
• Wood fuel is far worse for people and wildlife than fossil fuels
• Preventing future pandemics requires more not less “industrial” agriculture

I know that the above facts will sound like “climate denialism” to many people. But that just shows the power of climate alarmism"
Forbes Censors Award-Winning Environmentalist's Apology Over Three-Decade 'Climate Scare' - So Here It Is

"We environmentalists have misled the public."
www.zerohedge.com



I've noticed that an awful lot of Democrat voters buy the Global Warming Scam.....

....what could the connection between believing lies and voting for Leftists be??????

 

[Sunsettommy]

Leftist stupidity never ends as they push so many failed claims that have blown up in their faces, yet they continue in denial of their failures.

There is NO Climate Crisis developing.

NO Hot Spot existing.

NO Positive Feedback Loop.

NO Prosecution charges against Trump by Special Counsel Mueller posted over the Russia Hoax claims.

NO evidence that CO2 is a..... he he...... ha ha ha.... ooohhhhh, Pollutant.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!



Leftists ideology is a sign of mental illness, and the cure is obvious, but they can't understand it.

 

[Sunsettommy]

So PC has moved from copying and pasting other people's writings to now simply posting an audio recording of other people talking? And I didn't think PC's threads could get less engaging. Guess I was wrong.

Bla bla bla bla bla.

You could have EXPLAINED why you think it is wrong but Nooooooo!

 

[Sunsettommy]

So PC has moved from copying and pasting other people's writings to now simply posting an audio recording of other people talking? And I didn't think PC's threads could get less engaging. Guess I was wrong.

When are YOU going ENGAGE in a discussion/debate over a high school dropout who can't articulate in her own words about anything.

Smirk!

 

[BackAgain]

So PC has moved from copying and pasting other people's writings to now simply posting an audio recording of other people talking? And I didn't think PC's threads could get less engaging. Guess I was wrong.

You most often are.

 

[citygator]

Bla bla bla bla bla.

You could have EXPLAINED why you think it is wrong but Nooooooo!

We've had enough climate threads. At the end of the day we have scientists on one side and politicians, companies, and conspiracy theorists on the other.


As someone who has spent over a decade studying the climate change denial movement, many of the political tactics mainstreamed by Donald Trump and the populist right around 2015–2016 seemed familiar. Attack the experts. Launch personal attacks on opponents. Frame an email scandal to maximize political gain. Delegitimize mainstream media sources. Cast yourself as the savior of traditional American life. Climate change deniers practiced these tactics years before the Republican Party transformed from a Reagan coalition of social conservatives and small-government libertarians to a party of the populist right. While arguing against scientific consensus will always present an uphill battle, the organizers of climate change denial repeatedly prove their ability to strategically adapt to their political environment, seamlessly shifting between narratives of “climate change is not happening,” “climate change is happening but humans are not driving it,” and “climate change is happening but it is nothing to worry about.”

Considering the economic incentives of continued fossil fuel development, I expect that climate change deniers will adapt to shifting political winds for years to come and will continue to employ political tactics. In this article, I review a few facts and events to illustrate this point. For a more comprehensive overview of the players involved in obstructing action on climate change, read “From Denial to Obstruction: A Sociological View of the Effort to Obstruction Action on Climate Change” by Robert Brulle and Riley Dunlap in this issue. Ultimately, members of the climate change denial movement do not concern themselves with building fact-based objections to mainstream scientific consensus. Rather, they are focused on how to coordinate political reactions to any sort of mitigation policy effort that detracts from fossil fuel-based economic growth strategies. Thus, in my view, the tactics used to frame scientists as corrupt, activists as antiprogress, corporations as “woke,” or journalists as liars, represent a crucial element of the contemporary climate change denial movement.

The Structure and Culture of Climate Change Denial | American Sociological Association

As someone who has spent over a decade studying the climate change denial movement, many of the political tactics mainstreamed by Donald Trump and the

www.asanet.org

 

[Sunsettommy]

We've had enough climate threads. At the end of the day we have scientists on one side and politicians, companies, and conspiracy theorists on the other.


As someone who has spent over a decade studying the climate change denial movement, many of the political tactics mainstreamed by Donald Trump and the populist right around 2015–2016 seemed familiar. Attack the experts. Launch personal attacks on opponents. Frame an email scandal to maximize political gain. Delegitimize mainstream media sources. Cast yourself as the savior of traditional American life. Climate change deniers practiced these tactics years before the Republican Party transformed from a Reagan coalition of social conservatives and small-government libertarians to a party of the populist right. While arguing against scientific consensus will always present an uphill battle, the organizers of climate change denial repeatedly prove their ability to strategically adapt to their political environment, seamlessly shifting between narratives of “climate change is not happening,” “climate change is happening but humans are not driving it,” and “climate change is happening but it is nothing to worry about.”

Considering the economic incentives of continued fossil fuel development, I expect that climate change deniers will adapt to shifting political winds for years to come and will continue to employ political tactics. In this article, I review a few facts and events to illustrate this point. For a more comprehensive overview of the players involved in obstructing action on climate change, read “From Denial to Obstruction: A Sociological View of the Effort to Obstruction Action on Climate Change” by Robert Brulle and Riley Dunlap in this issue. Ultimately, members of the climate change denial movement do not concern themselves with building fact-based objections to mainstream scientific consensus. Rather, they are focused on how to coordinate political reactions to any sort of mitigation policy effort that detracts from fossil fuel-based economic growth strategies. Thus, in my view, the tactics used to frame scientists as corrupt, activists as antiprogress, corporations as “woke,” or journalists as liars, represent a crucial element of the contemporary climate change denial movement.

The Structure and Culture of Climate Change Denial | American Sociological Association

As someone who has spent over a decade studying the climate change denial movement, many of the political tactics mainstreamed by Donald Trump and the

www.asanet.org

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

You babbled all over the place as you made a word salad rant how charming.

It is clear you completely misunderstood my post.

How come this was too hard for YOU to understand?

=====

Fact: NO Hot Spot exist.

Fact: NO Positive Feedback Loop exist.

Fact: NO Climate Crisis exist.

These facts are well established which I have backed many times to see poor to no replies at all to them.

I have discovered that this article which draws from original sources such as the following:

NASA, NOAA, AMDAT, IMBIE, NATURE, BOM, JMA, CMA, KNMI, NCEI, Berkely Earth, EPA, IUCN and more with several published science papers.

Where is the Climate Emergency?

is so TERRIFYING that not once in two years since I have posted it in several forums has a single warmist/alarmist address any of the CONTENT of the article this after 750+ accumulated posts.



I KNOW you will avoid it too since they are not refutable, and you know it!

 

[jc456]

We've had enough climate threads. At the end of the day we have scientists

Name one

 

[citygator]

Name one

Name what? A thread, a scientist.. what?

 

[PoliticalChic]

We've had enough climate threads. At the end of the day we have scientists on one side and politicians, companies, and conspiracy theorists on the other.


As someone who has spent over a decade studying the climate change denial movement, many of the political tactics mainstreamed by Donald Trump and the populist right around 2015–2016 seemed familiar. Attack the experts. Launch personal attacks on opponents. Frame an email scandal to maximize political gain. Delegitimize mainstream media sources. Cast yourself as the savior of traditional American life. Climate change deniers practiced these tactics years before the Republican Party transformed from a Reagan coalition of social conservatives and small-government libertarians to a party of the populist right. While arguing against scientific consensus will always present an uphill battle, the organizers of climate change denial repeatedly prove their ability to strategically adapt to their political environment, seamlessly shifting between narratives of “climate change is not happening,” “climate change is happening but humans are not driving it,” and “climate change is happening but it is nothing to worry about.”

Considering the economic incentives of continued fossil fuel development, I expect that climate change deniers will adapt to shifting political winds for years to come and will continue to employ political tactics. In this article, I review a few facts and events to illustrate this point. For a more comprehensive overview of the players involved in obstructing action on climate change, read “From Denial to Obstruction: A Sociological View of the Effort to Obstruction Action on Climate Change” by Robert Brulle and Riley Dunlap in this issue. Ultimately, members of the climate change denial movement do not concern themselves with building fact-based objections to mainstream scientific consensus. Rather, they are focused on how to coordinate political reactions to any sort of mitigation policy effort that detracts from fossil fuel-based economic growth strategies. Thus, in my view, the tactics used to frame scientists as corrupt, activists as antiprogress, corporations as “woke,” or journalists as liars, represent a crucial element of the contemporary climate change denial movement.

The Structure and Culture of Climate Change Denial | American Sociological Association

As someone who has spent over a decade studying the climate change denial movement, many of the political tactics mainstreamed by Donald Trump and the

www.asanet.org

For more than 50 years Climate Alarmists in the scientific community and environmental movement have not gotten even one prediction correct, but they do have a perfect record of getting 41 predictions wrong.

LIST OF DOOMSDAY PREDICTIONS THE CLIMATE ALARMIST GOT WRONG

Here is the source for numbers 1-27. As you will see, the individual sources are not crackpots, but scientific studies and media reports on “expert” predictions. The sources for numbers 28-41 are linked individually.

1. 1967: Dire Famine Forecast By 1975
2. 1969: Everyone Will Disappear In a Cloud Of Blue Steam By 1989 (1969)
3. 1970: Ice Age By 2000
4. 1970: America Subject to Water Rationing By 1974 and Food Rationing By 1980
5. 1971: New Ice Age Coming By 2020 or 2030
6. 1972: New Ice Age By 2070
7. 1974: Space Satellites Show New Ice Age Coming Fast
8. 1974: Another Ice Age?
9. 1974: Ozone Depletion a ‘Great Peril to Life
10. 1976: Scientific Consensus Planet Cooling, Famines imminent
11. 1980: Acid Rain Kills Life In Lakes
12. 1978: No End in Sight to 30-Year Cooling Trend
13. 1988: Regional Droughts (that never happened) in 1990s
14. 1988: Temperatures in DC Will Hit Record Highs
15. 1988: Maldive Islands will Be Underwater by 2018 (they’re not)
16. 1989: Rising Sea Levels will Obliterate Nations if Nothing Done by 2000
17. 1989: New York City’s West Side Highway Underwater by 2019 (it’s not)
18. 2000: Children Won’t Know what Snow Is
19. 2002: Famine In 10 Years If We Don’t Give Up Eating Fish, Meat, and Dairy
20. 2004: Britain will Be Siberia by 2024
21. 2008: Arctic will Be Ice Free by 2018
22. 2008: Climate Genius Al Gore Predicts Ice-Free Arctic by 2013
23. 2009: Climate Genius Prince Charles Says we Have 96 Months to Save World
24. 2009: UK Prime Minister Says 50 Days to ‘Save The Planet From Catastrophe’
25. 2009: Climate Genius Al Gore Moves 2013 Prediction of Ice-Free Arctic to 2014
26. 2013: Arctic Ice-Free by 2015
27. 2014: Only 500 Days Before ‘Climate Chaos’
28. 1968: Overpopulation Will Spread Worldwide
29. 1970: World Will Use Up All its Natural Resources
30. 1966: Oil Gone in Ten Years
31. 1972: Oil Depleted in 20 Years
32. 1977: Department of Energy Says Oil will Peak in 90s
33. 1980: Peak Oil In 2000
34. 1996: Peak Oil in 2020
35. 2002: Peak Oil in 2010
36. 2006: Super Hurricanes!
37. 2005: Manhattan Underwater by 2015
38. 1970: Urban Citizens Will Require Gas Masks by 1985
39. 1970: Nitrogen buildup Will Make All Land Unusable
40. 1970: Decaying Pollution Will Kill all the Fish
41. 1970s: Killer Bees!

Sorry, Experts… Sorry, Scientific Consensus… Only a fool comes running for the 42nd cry of wolf.

Mark Simone

 

[citygator]

For more than 50 years Climate Alarmists in the scientific community and environmental movement have not gotten even one prediction correct, but they do have a perfect record of getting 41 predictions wrong.

LIST OF DOOMSDAY PREDICTIONS THE CLIMATE ALARMIST GOT WRONG

Here is the source for numbers 1-27. As you will see, the individual sources are not crackpots, but scientific studies and media reports on “expert” predictions. The sources for numbers 28-41 are linked individually.

1. 1967: Dire Famine Forecast By 1975
2. 1969: Everyone Will Disappear In a Cloud Of Blue Steam By 1989 (1969)
3. 1970: Ice Age By 2000
4. 1970: America Subject to Water Rationing By 1974 and Food Rationing By 1980
5. 1971: New Ice Age Coming By 2020 or 2030
6. 1972: New Ice Age By 2070
7. 1974: Space Satellites Show New Ice Age Coming Fast
8. 1974: Another Ice Age?
9. 1974: Ozone Depletion a ‘Great Peril to Life
10. 1976: Scientific Consensus Planet Cooling, Famines imminent
11. 1980: Acid Rain Kills Life In Lakes
12. 1978: No End in Sight to 30-Year Cooling Trend
13. 1988: Regional Droughts (that never happened) in 1990s
14. 1988: Temperatures in DC Will Hit Record Highs
15. 1988: Maldive Islands will Be Underwater by 2018 (they’re not)
16. 1989: Rising Sea Levels will Obliterate Nations if Nothing Done by 2000
17. 1989: New York City’s West Side Highway Underwater by 2019 (it’s not)
18. 2000: Children Won’t Know what Snow Is
19. 2002: Famine In 10 Years If We Don’t Give Up Eating Fish, Meat, and Dairy
20. 2004: Britain will Be Siberia by 2024
21. 2008: Arctic will Be Ice Free by 2018
22. 2008: Climate Genius Al Gore Predicts Ice-Free Arctic by 2013
23. 2009: Climate Genius Prince Charles Says we Have 96 Months to Save World
24. 2009: UK Prime Minister Says 50 Days to ‘Save The Planet From Catastrophe’
25. 2009: Climate Genius Al Gore Moves 2013 Prediction of Ice-Free Arctic to 2014
26. 2013: Arctic Ice-Free by 2015
27. 2014: Only 500 Days Before ‘Climate Chaos’
28. 1968: Overpopulation Will Spread Worldwide
29. 1970: World Will Use Up All its Natural Resources
30. 1966: Oil Gone in Ten Years
31. 1972: Oil Depleted in 20 Years
32. 1977: Department of Energy Says Oil will Peak in 90s
33. 1980: Peak Oil In 2000
34. 1996: Peak Oil in 2020
35. 2002: Peak Oil in 2010
36. 2006: Super Hurricanes!
37. 2005: Manhattan Underwater by 2015
38. 1970: Urban Citizens Will Require Gas Masks by 1985
39. 1970: Nitrogen buildup Will Make All Land Unusable
40. 1970: Decaying Pollution Will Kill all the Fish
41. 1970s: Killer Bees!

Sorry, Experts… Sorry, Scientific Consensus… Only a fool comes running for the 42nd cry of wolf.

Mark Simone

Still trying to get this thread off the ground?

Let's just agree that less pollution into the atmosphere is better than more and work toward moving to green energy to make less pollution rather than more. That isnt contriversial. It's like committing to drinking more water and less soda. Sure you can live off soda, but water is better for you. Why put so much energy into trying to push more polluting methods rather than less?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Still trying to get this thread off the ground?

Let's just agree that less pollution into the atmosphere is better than more and work toward moving to green energy to make less pollution rather than more. That isnt contriversial. It's like committing to drinking more water and less soda. Sure you can live off soda, but water is better for you. Why put so much energy into trying to push more polluting methods rather than less?

The problem is the intellecual pollution to which you have succumbed. Dunce.

 

[jc456]

Name what? A thread, a scientist.. what?

Yeah, name a scientist

 

[jc456]

Still trying to get this thread off the ground?

Let's just agree that less pollution into the atmosphere is better than more and work toward moving to green energy to make less pollution rather than more. That isnt contriversial. It's like committing to drinking more water and less soda. Sure you can live off soda, but water is better for you. Why put so much energy into trying to push more polluting methods rather than less?

Moving to green? Why?

 

[citygator]

The problem is the intellecual pollution to which you have succumbed. Dunce.

So no argument just name calling. Brilliant.

 

[jc456]

So no argument just name calling. Brilliant.

Incorrect, she claimed you’re arguing pollution! Then she called you a dunce. Seemed practical