The Attempt to Establish a Climate Ministry of Truth

Discussion in 'Environment & Conservation' started by Jack Hays, Jan 6, 2021.

  1. Jack Hays

    Jack Hays Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2020
    Messages:
    27,371
    Likes Received:
    17,358
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The Ministry of Truth "disappears" data contrary to the approved narrative.
    Inconvenient Tornado Data Disappears
    Guest Blogger
    All we have is the chart, along with a table, which dishonestly claims that tornadoes have become progressively more common. . . .
     
  2. Jack Hays

    Jack Hays Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2020
    Messages:
    27,371
    Likes Received:
    17,358
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    bringiton likes this.
  3. mamooth

    mamooth Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    6,415
    Likes Received:
    2,182
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Svensmark was conclusively debunked many years ago. He predicted climate would go one way based on cosmic rays. It went the opposite way.

    It doesn't matter how elegant your theory is. If reality contradicts it, it's wrong. Reality contradicts denier claims, so those claims are wrong.
     
  4. mamooth

    mamooth Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    6,415
    Likes Received:
    2,182
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Since AGW theory made no predictions regarding tornadoes, this is a really dumb conspiracy theory.

    What? You cult didn't tell you the truth? It fed you a big lie that AGW theory predicted more tornadoes? Well how about that.
     
  5. Jack Hays

    Jack Hays Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2020
    Messages:
    27,371
    Likes Received:
    17,358
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    NOAA did.
    "It is blindingly apparent that NOAA found their original assessment far too inconvenient . . . "
     
    Robert likes this.
  6. Jack Hays

    Jack Hays Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2020
    Messages:
    27,371
    Likes Received:
    17,358
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Nope. Your claim is false. His most recent published paper:

    Diffuse sunlight and cosmic rays: Missing pieces of the forest growth change attribution puzzle?
    Bontemps, J-D. & Svensmark, H., 2022, In: Science of the Total Environment. 806, 6 p., 150469.
    Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
     
    Last edited: Oct 23, 2021
    Sunsettommy, bringiton and Robert like this.
  7. Robert

    Robert Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2014
    Messages:
    68,085
    Likes Received:
    17,134
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Why is it the Democrats posting heap insults and taunts on posters, like Jack Hays who has supplied them with valuable research links and facts?
     
    Sunsettommy likes this.
  8. Robert

    Robert Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2014
    Messages:
    68,085
    Likes Received:
    17,134
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The question is: why? The answer is simple: fossil fuels. Inexpensive, abundant, reliable fossil fuels have turned 10,000 years of stagnant human existence into flourishing and prosperity. Illnesses that took the lives of kings and peasants alike are nearly eradicated thanks to medicine and refrigeration and electricity. All of this growth for one degree of temperature increase. That’s quite the bargain.

    Without fossil fuels humanity would still be mired in misery and darkness. Do we really want to ban that miracle? Do we want to ‘keep it in the ground’ as the green movements cry? That’s a conversation we need to have.

    The reader might argue that I’m wrong. My claims are just conjecture, he might say, and not based on science or data. Yet what if thousands of thinkers and philosophers agree with me? Is that enough to engage in this debate? It is thus curious that Google in its announcement calls denying the ‘scientific consensus around the existence and causes of climate change’ reason enough to get deplatformed. The evidence of the causes of climate change are far weaker than the evidence of fossil fuels causing the past 200 years of human flourishing, but neither is scientific fact. Could there be any intellectual framework less scientific than ‘consensus’?

    This discussion now cannot take place on the platforms of the Big Tech thought police, and we are all worse for it.
    https://spectatorworld.com/topic/big-tech-censoring-climate-change-debate/
     
    Jack Hays, Sunsettommy and bringiton like this.
  9. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    11,394
    Likes Received:
    3,008
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No, that's just another false claim from you.
    No it didn't. Climate has cooled in the last five years, just as Svensmark predicted, which actually debunks the AGW CO2-controls-temperature hypothesis. Your claims are just false.

    It doesn't matter how elegant your theory is. If reality contradicts it, it's wrong. Reality contradicts hysterical anti-fossil-fuel nonscience claims, so those claims are wrong.
     
    Sunsettommy and Robert like this.
  10. mamooth

    mamooth Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    6,415
    Likes Received:
    2,182
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Grow up. You and all the deniers are far more insuluting than the rational people. You just choose lie about it, so you can pretend to be the poor oppressed victims.

    Jack generally links to debunked bad denier science, then forgets to mention that the massive piles of studies that say the opposite. The fact that you endorse such cherrypicking doesn't make you look good.
     
  11. Sunsettommy

    Sunsettommy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2017
    Messages:
    1,677
    Likes Received:
    1,435
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    :roflol:

    You are so removed from reality that you fail to see your own insults you post calling people names and with sweeping ones too such as "deniers" which really exposes your deficit in your ability to discuss the topic.

    The sweeping claims of a "massive pile of studies" of which you don't provide indicate that you are not interested the threads topic.

    Once again you say nothing of substance just more of your usual screaming nonsense is the best you can do.
     
    bringiton likes this.
  12. mamooth

    mamooth Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    6,415
    Likes Received:
    2,182
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I'm trying to puzzle it out Svensmark there. I think it goes ...

    More cosmic rays means more clouds.
    That makes the sunlight more diffuse.
    That makes forest grow faster.
    That removes CO2 from the atmosphere.
    That would cause cooling.

    That's still a fail. The cosmic ray count has been going up since 1990. Svensmark's theory ... even his latest one ... says that would decrease temperature, but temperatures have steadily increased instead (contrary to the claims of certain delusional persons).
     
  13. FreshAir

    FreshAir Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    Messages:
    150,175
    Likes Received:
    62,815
    Trophy Points:
    113
    and Trump creates it

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Oct 25, 2021
  14. mamooth

    mamooth Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    6,415
    Likes Received:
    2,182
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Bzzzzt, thanks for playing.

    I have never denied that I use insults. You're making that story up.

    I'm just pointing out that your side is constantly more insulting.

    A saying about heat and kitchens comes to mind. If insults offend you, then stop being so insulting.
     
  15. Jack Hays

    Jack Hays Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2020
    Messages:
    27,371
    Likes Received:
    17,358
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    That paper has little to do with temperature.
    Well explained in this new thread.
    The Svensmark Revolution Continues
     
    Last edited: Oct 25, 2021
  16. Sunsettommy

    Sunsettommy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2017
    Messages:
    1,677
    Likes Received:
    1,435
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    You are so removed from reality that you fail to see your own insults you post calling people names and with sweeping ones too such as "deniers" which really exposes your deficit in your ability to discuss the topic.

    The sweeping claims of a "massive pile of studies" of which you don't provide indicate that you are not interested the threads topic.

    Once again you say nothing of substance just more of your usual screaming nonsense is the best you can do.
     
  17. Robert

    Robert Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2014
    Messages:
    68,085
    Likes Received:
    17,134
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    So this leads me right back to this question.
    Why is it the Democrats posting heap insults and taunts on posters,
     
    Sunsettommy and Jack Hays like this.
  18. Robert

    Robert Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2014
    Messages:
    68,085
    Likes Received:
    17,134
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I was watching a video 2 days back that I will link for you describing the creation of Elements. And his lecture was very extensive and he went into the Sun in great detail. He says the Sun is slowly turning into a Red Giant and the surface gets closer to Earth.
    As a Scientist himself, it seems worth listening to him.
    Naturally as he says a Red Giant gets hotter and that can account for temperature changes in parts of Earth. Still we have many parts of Earth where the highest all time temperature happened over 100 years ago, not recently.

    Don't let the title kid you, he talks about what I said he does.

    PS, clouds are an enormous factor in the climate of Earth.

    '
     
  19. Robert

    Robert Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2014
    Messages:
    68,085
    Likes Received:
    17,134
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    But he admitted on this thread he insults all the time.

    I resent him calling me a climate denier. I have as others can testify spoken often of the climate changing. It is as natural as breathing.
     
    Last edited: Oct 25, 2021
  20. Robert

    Robert Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2014
    Messages:
    68,085
    Likes Received:
    17,134
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Let's try this video on for size then so you do not make more errors.

    I have since the 1990s been bringing up Clouds into the discussion yet notice that they get ignored by the Alarmists.
    So let's have this scientist explain it better than I have been able to.
    When I fly airplanes or ride in them, I can't help noticing the elephant in the room, clouds. They are far more important than the Alarmists want them to be.

     
    Last edited: Oct 25, 2021
  21. Robert

    Robert Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2014
    Messages:
    68,085
    Likes Received:
    17,134
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I am going to try to use the Occam's razor form to correct the Democrats.

    First we know many facts about Earth.
    We know it once was much hotter.
    We know it has experienced a variety of ice age events.
    We know the changes made were not possible to blame on humans.
    We know for instance how the great lakes were formed and Yosemite Valley, in CA were formed.
    Glaciers formed all.
    We know from research due to locating enormous mosquitos in the Arctic and other tropical matter that it was once much hotter there, where scientists say it was tropical.
    Back in those days, man was not present. Man was not consuming so called carbon fossils.

    The fossil fuel grift is simply not plausible.
     
    Sunsettommy and Jack Hays like this.
  22. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    11,394
    Likes Received:
    3,008
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The term, "denier" is itself irrational and disingenuous propaganda.
    You haven't shown that any of the papers Jack has linked to have been debunked. It's just a baldly false claim that you think you can get away with.
    Where? Oh, no, wait a minute, that's right: you can't provide a single one.
    All argument requires cherry picking because you can't include everything, just what establishes your case. Cherry picking only good, honest science is the way to truth.
     
    Sunsettommy, Jack Hays and Robert like this.
  23. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    11,394
    Likes Received:
    3,008
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Here's a test to see if you know any science: why is the argument you just made above fallacious?
    No they haven't. They've been dropping for five years.
     
    Sunsettommy, Jack Hays and Robert like this.
  24. Jack Hays

    Jack Hays Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2020
    Messages:
    27,371
    Likes Received:
    17,358
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The SEC has been brought into The Ministry of Truth.
    Progressive Craziness Of The Day: SEC Obsesses Over "Climate" Risk Disclosures
    October 25, 2021/ Francis Menton
    [​IMG]

    • This makes three posts in a row on the subject of a “progressive craziness of the day.” But then, there’s enough progressive craziness to have such a post every day; or, really, multiple. There is an endless supply.

    • As a reader of this blog, you may rarely pay much attention to what comes out of the Securities & Exchange Commission. If you should ever look, it probably all seems like a lot of inside baseball mumbo jumbo. On the other hand, if you are a senior executive or board member at a public company, or maybe a corporate lawyer at one of the big law firms, you must pay close attention to everything the SEC does. The Commission wields oodles of arbitrary and unaccountable power. When the SEC says “jump,” corporate America responds, “how high?”

    • Needless to say, the SEC is one of those government places filled with seemingly “smart” people with no practical sense or knowledge about how the world actually works. But they think that with their brilliance they can bring about perfection and utopia in the world with just a few more regulations and micromanagement of the little people.

    • Then — as has happened in the past few months — the real world intervenes, and shows what dopes these people are.
    READ MORE
     
    bringiton and Robert like this.
  25. dagosa

    dagosa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    22,147
    Likes Received:
    5,897
    Trophy Points:
    113
    How about outright fabrications by the right ?
     

Share This Page