'EcoFascism' and related Acts of Criminality.

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: 'EcoFascism' and related Acts of Criminality.

Postby DrEvil » Sat Jul 23, 2022 6:12 pm

Oh no! The mass media added a heat map to their weather forecast! It's all a lie!


Another "quick" note on this: when you see a graphical effect like this start popping up all over, it's usually not a conspiracy, it's the software company supplying the graphics adding another function to their software (if you're one of the poor sods who still watch TV it's very noticeable in commercials. Suddenly every other commercial has the same effect, which means After Effects or Nuke or whatever software package added another filter or particle effect, not that some shadowy cabal decided that all commercials should now use this one specific smoke effect).

There's also just the simple fact that a heat map gives a better visual of how warm different parts of the country is (and shockingly, during a heatwave it's going to be a lot of red, because that's the established norm for visualizing temperatures). You don't have to scan the entire map and compare numbers; more information in less time, which means more time for ads. Do the same image for winter and it's going to be all shades of blue, which I'm eagerly awaiting the deniers posting in six months along with comments like "it's cold outside, take that climate change!"
"I only read American. I want my fantasy pure." - Dave
User avatar
DrEvil
 
Posts: 3971
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2010 1:37 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 'EcoFascism' and related Acts of Criminality.

Postby Joe Hillshoist » Sun Jul 24, 2022 12:13 am

Belligerent Savant » 23 Jul 2022 07:10 wrote:.
Yea. that's a trendy retort among the rubes (applicable both to 'climate change' and 'covid').

"Trust the experts". "Trust the science". Dogma and zealotry.

It's not just my "gut feeling", despite attempts to frame it that way. There are actual persons out there with years of experience in this space that are saying similar things.

But no matter: proceed as you deem fit.

Germany - 2017 & 2022. The reliable media.
Image


Look you're not gonna take it seriously whatever anyone says.

I've been writing fire permits for fire season where I live since the 90s. When I started fire season started in October. Now it starts in September and has for most of this century. And in three or four of those years we started fire season in earlier months - June, July and August. One year (2019) we didn't start it at all cos it didn't stop from the year before. 20-25% of those fire seasons started earlier than September. This would have been unheard of before 1994.

In that time I've seen and fought at some of the worst fires in Australian history. In that time there have more serious fires than the previous ... well several thousand years maybe as long as human habitation depending on soil samples.

My mum did a PhD in plant genetics in the late 60s/early 70s at the University of Tasmania. Lots of Antarctic researchers stopped by, it has an Antarctic research school. They would discuss their new possibly groundbreaking research into what might be global warming. So from when I was old enough to start thinking about things seriously I was told about AGW being most likely a thing. In the early/mid 1980s, about 15 years old. So it was a theory that may not be real back then and I remember talking with mum and basically we came to the conclusion that if it was real certain things would have happened by the time I was 50. Most of them have.

Increased average temps.

Cause fires, drought crop loss etc etc and snow pack melting.

More moisture in the air means more flooding and serious weather events, including cyclones/hurricanes, happening in a progression thru tropical depressions to cyclones to mega cyclones. There have only been a few of those last things but there weren't any on record 50 years ago afaik. There are now signbificantly more tropical depressions than there were in 1990 and they cause alot more flooding. last time I checked (years ago) the rate of cyclones hadn't increased but even then tropical depressions and the huge floods than went with them were increasing and now they are a regular problem across the world. More and more places that never experienced serious flooding are getting damaged or destroyed by it.

You don't need to rely on experts to see this, you just have to open your eyes and ears to what happens in the world. I mean how often worst ever storms and floods and fires happen.

As for all this media pressure to blame climate change.

In Australia its basically taboo to question whether any severe weather event is associated with climate change or made worse by climate change. Politicians always qualify their discussion of the increasingly severe disasters by saying "there is no evidence climate change caused this event!".

When someone questions that in the public the media pile on is intense. Only now, after basically five years of apocalyptic events is it starting to abate.

It doesn't matter anyway. Its too late.

These days climate modelling is underestimating the speed and severity of change. We're fucked. The only thing that will save global society is a return to pre agricultural lifestyles. Hunter/gathering basically.
Joe Hillshoist
 
Posts: 10594
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 10:45 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 'EcoFascism' and related Acts of Criminality.

Postby DrEvil » Sun Jul 24, 2022 5:14 pm

Your last points about the media and politicians bears repeating. If climate change was just another brick in the future dystopian wall alongside covid and whatnot, we would already have strict environmental regulations, carbon taxes, subsidies for insulation, solar panels and electric cars, restrictions on meat consumption, billions of government dollars poured into wind, batteries, thermal, tidal, fission and fusion power, expanded public transit, and a removal of the trillions of dollars in subsidies to the fossil fuel industry.

Except we haven't. It's been business as usual with just enough lip service paid to avoid getting mauled. The people pushing for action have been the underdogs all along, with many prominent politicians and media outlets going out of their way to demonize climate protesters (and Jesus Christ, don't get me started on the treatment of Greta Thunberg *), just like the people speaking up about vaccine mandates and lockdowns, so it baffles me how someone can be on the side of the underdog on one side, and then do a 180 and be on the side of some of the largest, most destructive and most profitable corporations in the world on the other.

* For a gut-churning taste, read the comments here (https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/esg-f ... oil-stocks), on the article BelSav conveniently failed to link to (viewtopic.php?f=8&t=42029&start=150#p704776) so it would look like a Bloomberg piece, and not another shitty Zerohedge article.
"I only read American. I want my fantasy pure." - Dave
User avatar
DrEvil
 
Posts: 3971
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2010 1:37 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 'EcoFascism' and related Acts of Criminality.

Postby Harvey » Mon Jul 25, 2022 11:31 am

Fascinating and hopeful discussion with Vandana Shiva on the subject to hand.

And while we spoke of many things, fools and kings
This he said to me
"The greatest thing
You'll ever learn
Is just to love
And be loved
In return"


Eden Ahbez
User avatar
Harvey
 
Posts: 4165
Joined: Mon May 09, 2011 4:49 am
Blog: View Blog (20)

Re: 'EcoFascism' and related Acts of Criminality.

Postby Belligerent Savant » Mon Jul 25, 2022 1:01 pm

.
Joe - what you typed above can not be tied directly to human-based (or more specifically, 'commoner consumer-based') activity as primary cause. Industry and related large-scale exploitation of land/ resources remains the primary cause of emissions, by far, though the extent these emissions are the direct/primary cause of current weather patterns remains a question (despite highly funded selective data that screams otherwise).

I'll also add the more controversial consideration here that weather manipulation should not be ruled out, though of course all manner of limited hangouts/poison well narratives exist out there on this topic, which tells me there is something tangible there. Near impossible to find good signal given all the noise, however.

In any event, these weather fluctuations certainly do not justify current 'solutions' being offered by those who do not have the interests of the majority in mind. The solutions that have been promoted over the years (solar/wind/electric batteries) are not only inefficient but also a net drain to the environment.

The more critical concerns however -- per my last few posts in this thread -- are with respect to additional 'solutions' directly impacting human agency, rights, and well-being.

(I'm not suggesting that no action be taken, needless to say, but similar to covid hysteria over the last ~2yrs, "any action" does not = good/useful/beneficial action. And as we've seen, most if not all actions proposed seem to benefit the very few at the expense of the great majority)

This here:

DrEvil » Sun Jul 24, 2022 4:14 pm wrote:Your last points about the media and politicians bears repeating. If climate change was just another brick in the future dystopian wall alongside covid and whatnot, we would already have strict environmental regulations, carbon taxes, subsidies for insulation, solar panels and electric cars, restrictions on meat consumption, billions of government dollars poured into wind, batteries, thermal, tidal, fission and fusion power, expanded public transit, and a removal of the trillions of dollars in subsidies to the fossil fuel industry.


Is almost comical tunnel vision, an apparent blissful blindness of developing circumstances apparent to anyone interested in sober assessment.

"we would already have..." -- they ARE implementing this, actually. The wheels have already been in motion. But also: it does not happen overnight. We must be proactive and diligent, NOT reactive. Your statements are quite premature. Let's see where we are in another year or two, which is still -- relatively-speaking -- a short ramp.

Another point: it's like you typed the above in a world where 2020/covid hysteria never happened. Look at the egregious/criminal overreach implemented under the guise of 'covid mitigation', some of which remain in place, since 2020. Clearly, very similar or worse programs can be -- and already have been, within certain 'focus groups'/'pilot program' regions -- implemented and put into motion under the ostensible guise of "EMERGENCY POWERS"/"IMMINENT THREAT MITIGATION".

None of this is to say that the more draconian aspects of planned "mitigation" will come to pass. People are resisting (see SRI LANKA, where a number of these measures have already been implemented. Things are happening outside curated bubbles, you see). It remains possible the people can help prevent earnest implementation of this.


Harvey: will check that video when I next have spare time -- thanks for sharing.
User avatar
Belligerent Savant
 
Posts: 5215
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:58 pm
Location: North Atlantic.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 'EcoFascism' and related Acts of Criminality.

Postby DrEvil » Mon Jul 25, 2022 4:49 pm

Belligerent Savant » Mon Jul 25, 2022 7:01 pm wrote:.
Joe - what you typed above can not be tied directly to human-based (or more specifically, 'commoner consumer-based') activity as primary cause. Industry and related large-scale exploitation of land/ resources remains the primary cause of emissions, by far, though the extent these emissions are the direct/primary cause of current weather patterns remains a question (despite highly funded selective data that screams otherwise).


No one is saying climate change is the direct cause of this or that extreme weather event. They're saying climate change is increasing the odds of those events happening. You can't say "it's one degree warmer, therefore this specific forest fire happened". You can say "it's one degree warmer, therefore forest fires like this one are more likely to happen".
It's a subtle difference, but you keep getting hung up on it as if you were making a valid point, which you are not.

And please, show us the data that isn't highly funded and selective (in what way. What's being omitted?) that refutes humanity being the main culprit.

I'll also add the more controversial consideration here that weather manipulation should not be ruled out, though of course all manner of limited hangouts/poison well narratives exist out there on this topic, which tells me there is something tangible there. Near impossible to find good signal given all the noise, however.


You're the only one supplying noise here. Everyone who knows what they're talking about is saying the same damn thing, and the more time they spend researching it, the more they agree. If there was something to your compulsive skepticism, shouldn't that be the other way around, just like with covid?

And really, weather modification? Do you have any idea the kind of energy required to change weather patterns on a global scale over decades? Hint: approximately the total energy output of human civilization, which is manipulating the weather. We call it climate change.

In any event, these weather fluctuations certainly do not justify current 'solutions' being offered by those who do not have the interests of the majority in mind. The solutions that have been promoted over the years (solar/wind/electric batteries) are not only inefficient but also a net drain to the environment.


"Weather fluctuations". You really don't have a fucking clue what you're talking about, do you? You're just being reflexively paranoid, as usual, assuming everything is a lie (unless you already agree with what they're saying, obviously).

The more critical concerns however -- per my last few posts in this thread -- are with respect to additional 'solutions' directly impacting human agency, rights, and well-being.

(I'm not suggesting that no action be taken, needless to say, but similar to covid hysteria over the last ~2yrs, "any action" does not = good/useful/beneficial action. And as we've seen, most if not all actions proposed seem to benefit the very few at the expense of the great majority)


I've yet to see you propose any kind of acceptable action, although I've asked you several times. What should we do?

This here:

DrEvil » Sun Jul 24, 2022 4:14 pm wrote:Your last points about the media and politicians bears repeating. If climate change was just another brick in the future dystopian wall alongside covid and whatnot, we would already have strict environmental regulations, carbon taxes, subsidies for insulation, solar panels and electric cars, restrictions on meat consumption, billions of government dollars poured into wind, batteries, thermal, tidal, fission and fusion power, expanded public transit, and a removal of the trillions of dollars in subsidies to the fossil fuel industry.


Is almost comical tunnel vision, an apparent blissful blindness of developing circumstances apparent to anyone interested in sober assessment.

"we would already have..." -- they ARE implementing this, actually. The wheels have already been in motion. But also: it does not happen overnight. We must be proactive and diligent, NOT reactive. Your statements are quite premature. Let's see where we are in another year or two, which is still -- relatively-speaking -- a short ramp.

Another point: it's like you typed the above in a world where 2020/covid hysteria never happened. Look at the egregious/criminal overreach implemented under the guise of 'covid mitigation', some of which remain in place, since 2020. Clearly, very similar or worse programs can be -- and already have been, within certain 'focus groups'/'pilot program' regions -- implemented and put into motion under the ostensible guise of "EMERGENCY POWERS"/"IMMINENT THREAT MITIGATION".

None of this is to say that the more draconian aspects of planned "mitigation" will come to pass. People are resisting (see SRI LANKA, where a number of these measures have already been implemented. Things are happening outside curated bubbles, you see). It remains possible the people can help prevent earnest implementation of this.


Harvey: will check that video when I next have spare time -- thanks for sharing.


That was my point: covid measures were implemented practically overnight, but the same forces have to spend decades implementing strict environmental measures, and are still only in the early stages?
"I only read American. I want my fantasy pure." - Dave
User avatar
DrEvil
 
Posts: 3971
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2010 1:37 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 'EcoFascism' and related Acts of Criminality.

Postby Joe Hillshoist » Mon Jul 25, 2022 6:58 pm

Belligerent Savant » 26 Jul 2022 03:01 wrote:.
Joe - what you typed above can not be tied directly to human-based (or more specifically, 'commoner consumer-based') activity as primary cause. Industry and related large-scale exploitation of land/ resources remains the primary cause of emissions, by far, though the extent these emissions are the direct/primary cause of current weather patterns remains a question (despite highly funded selective data that screams otherwise).

I'll also add the more controversial consideration here that weather manipulation should not be ruled out, though of course all manner of limited hangouts/poison well narratives exist out there on this topic, which tells me there is something tangible there. Near impossible to find good signal given all the noise, however.

In any event, these weather fluctuations certainly do not justify current 'solutions' being offered by those who do not have the interests of the majority in mind. The solutions that have been promoted over the years (solar/wind/electric batteries) are not only inefficient but also a net drain to the environment.

The more critical concerns however -- per my last few posts in this thread -- are with respect to additional 'solutions' directly impacting human agency, rights, and well-being.

(I'm not suggesting that no action be taken, needless to say, but similar to covid hysteria over the last ~2yrs, "any action" does not = good/useful/beneficial action. And as we've seen, most if not all actions proposed seem to benefit the very few at the expense of the great majority)

This here:

DrEvil » Sun Jul 24, 2022 4:14 pm wrote:Your last points about the media and politicians bears repeating. If climate change was just another brick in the future dystopian wall alongside covid and whatnot, we would already have strict environmental regulations, carbon taxes, subsidies for insulation, solar panels and electric cars, restrictions on meat consumption, billions of government dollars poured into wind, batteries, thermal, tidal, fission and fusion power, expanded public transit, and a removal of the trillions of dollars in subsidies to the fossil fuel industry.


Is almost comical tunnel vision, an apparent blissful blindness of developing circumstances apparent to anyone interested in sober assessment.

"we would already have..." -- they ARE implementing this, actually. The wheels have already been in motion. But also: it does not happen overnight. We must be proactive and diligent, NOT reactive. Your statements are quite premature. Let's see where we are in another year or two, which is still -- relatively-speaking -- a short ramp.

Another point: it's like you typed the above in a world where 2020/covid hysteria never happened. Look at the egregious/criminal overreach implemented under the guise of 'covid mitigation', some of which remain in place, since 2020. Clearly, very similar or worse programs can be -- and already have been, within certain 'focus groups'/'pilot program' regions -- implemented and put into motion under the ostensible guise of "EMERGENCY POWERS"/"IMMINENT THREAT MITIGATION".

None of this is to say that the more draconian aspects of planned "mitigation" will come to pass. People are resisting (see SRI LANKA, where a number of these measures have already been implemented. Things are happening outside curated bubbles, you see). It remains possible the people can help prevent earnest implementation of this.


Harvey: will check that video when I next have spare time -- thanks for sharing.


This is rubbish.

Every serious weather event in the last 30 years is worse because of global warming. The more heat in the atmosphere, the more energy in the system, the more intense storms will be. Same for droughts and associated problems.

But specific events driven by climate change? Here you go...

On the 8th of October 2019 the fire that destroyed Rappville was driven by extreme drought and heat but also by 50 - 100km/hr Westerly winds that had never been recorded in October before. Those winds come in winter and are gone by Spring because of the way the large systems that dominate the Southern Ocean behave. Not only were they never recorded by white Australians they were shocking to local indigenous people who have thousands of years of weather knowledge and viewed that wind as the equivalent of Spring coming in late May (here, that's the equivalent of Spring arriving in November in the Northern Hemisphere.)

Its incredibly difficult to associate aany weather event with climaate change alone, even tho every weather event is made more intense by climate change.

None the less what happened at Rappville that day can be put solely on the head of the warming climate. Those winds were a unique event that's never happened before.

Since 2000 an atmospheric channel of water has developed that can pump rain from the middle of the coral sea onshore over the eastern most part of Australia, ie from Byron Bay north to Noosa approximately before it comes onshore. This so called "atmospheric river" is responsible for about a third of SE Australian rainfall across our most important agricultural area (the Murray darling basin.) The behaviour of this system has changed this century and it brings more moisture (when its active) than it ever used to and alot of that river is further south so it hits the East Coast mountains around the area I mentioned instead of travelling further north across lower mountains into the upper Darling catchment.

Its still undecided whether the behavioural change this atmospheric river has undergone is explicitly caused by climate change or just heavily influenced by it. A moot point anyway cos the change is real and happens. People die in those associated floods. Killed by climate change. Frankly you don't know enough about the weather to have an opinion worth listening to and you certainly don't know anything about the weather here so you have no understanding of the severe unporecedented changes we inn Australia are seeing that correspond to an increase in c02 and other greenhouse gasses.

But further to that, for the last 20 years certain plants that are dependent on Spring heat to flower have been flowering earlier every year. Again like the earlier fire seasons we now experience imported flowers like Jasmine flower as ealy as JUly (midwinter) some years instead of beginning to flowere in late August./early spring.

Every time I bring up these real world examples of decades long ongoing change you ignore them. Pretending they don't exist won't make them go away.

BTW I think this bears repeating:

And really, weather modification? Do you have any idea the kind of energy required to change weather patterns on a global scale over decades? Hint: approximately the total energy output of human civilization, which is manipulating the weather. We call it climate change.

You think if these cunts could create 2km high tornadoes made out of fire not air they'd be bothering with conventional weapons?
Joe Hillshoist
 
Posts: 10594
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 10:45 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 'EcoFascism' and related Acts of Criminality.

Postby Belligerent Savant » Tue Jul 26, 2022 10:50 am

.
You two are quite the duo. Keep holding on tight. Don't budge!

Re: weather modification. Here's an 'official' source that acknowledges and lists non-Federal weather modification projects.

Of course, this list will never include any black budget programs, etc. Is it truly a stretch to speculate that such things exist? I mean, it's like you both just joined from a NASA fan blog.

https://library.noaa.gov/Collections/Di ... ct-Reports

Weather Modification Project Reports

Publication History & Scope


In the late 1940's and 1950's many deemed "the deliberate or the inadvertent alteration of atmospheric conditions by human activity", also known as weather modification, as a promising science of the future. Currently, the most common form of weather modification is cloud seeding, which increases rain or snow, usually for the purpose of increasing the local water supply. Weather modification can also have the goal of preventing damaging weather, such as hail or hurricanes, from occurring.

As part of Public Law 92-205 (1972), all non-Federal weather modification activities must be reported to the U.S. Secretary of Commerce, via the NOAA Weather Program Office. Below is a list of these reports and is updated on an annual basis.


On Edit, I'd be remiss without also including this Bloomberg piece as another mainstream source. Sounds a bit concerning, eh? But only China would consider/undertake such projects, right? Not the good 'ol U.S. of A., and its sterling reputation promoting the well-being of its citizenry (let alone humans elsewhere).

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/artic ... #xj4y7vzkg
Has China Mastered Weather Modification? Should We Worry?
Using rockets and pickup trucks, Chinese officials are seeding clouds and bringing the rain. But do they have other uses in mind?

ByAdam Minter
December 16, 2020 at 7:00 PM EST


Oh, and here's another item from a .gov site, with a sample screenshot of table of contents:

https://www.nsf.gov/nsb/publications/1965/nsb1265.pdf

WEATHER AND CLIMATE MODIFICATION

SPECIAL COMMISSION ON WEATHER MODIFICATION

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION


Image


A few other breadcrumbs:

"Climate change over the next 20 years could result in a global catastrophe costing millions of lives in wars and natural disasters."
@guardian, 2004

Image


Image

Image

Perhaps time to re-consider years-long programming.
User avatar
Belligerent Savant
 
Posts: 5215
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:58 pm
Location: North Atlantic.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 'EcoFascism' and related Acts of Criminality.

Postby DrEvil » Wed Jul 27, 2022 3:49 pm

Belligerent Savant » Tue Jul 26, 2022 4:50 pm wrote:.
You two are quite the duo. Keep holding on tight. Don't budge!


Yeah, God forbid other people should see climate change happening with their own lying eyes and tell you about it.
You keep saying it's not real, but you have yet to supply anything of substance to refute what we're saying. Nothing. Best you can come up with is some random graphs with no commentary or context. Use your words.

Re: weather modification. Here's an 'official' source that acknowledges and lists non-Federal weather modification projects.

Of course, this list will never include any black budget programs, etc. Is it truly a stretch to speculate that such things exist? I mean, it's like you both just joined from a NASA fan blog.

https://library.noaa.gov/Collections/Di ... ct-Reports

Weather Modification Project Reports

Publication History & Scope


In the late 1940's and 1950's many deemed "the deliberate or the inadvertent alteration of atmospheric conditions by human activity", also known as weather modification, as a promising science of the future. Currently, the most common form of weather modification is cloud seeding, which increases rain or snow, usually for the purpose of increasing the local water supply. Weather modification can also have the goal of preventing damaging weather, such as hail or hurricanes, from occurring.

As part of Public Law 92-205 (1972), all non-Federal weather modification activities must be reported to the U.S. Secretary of Commerce, via the NOAA Weather Program Office. Below is a list of these reports and is updated on an annual basis.


On Edit, I'd be remiss without also including this Bloomberg piece as another mainstream source. Sounds a bit concerning, eh? But only China would consider/undertake such projects, right? Not the good 'ol U.S. of A., and its sterling reputation promoting the well-being of its citizenry (let alone humans elsewhere).

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/artic ... #xj4y7vzkg
Has China Mastered Weather Modification? Should We Worry?
Using rockets and pickup trucks, Chinese officials are seeding clouds and bringing the rain. But do they have other uses in mind?

ByAdam Minter
December 16, 2020 at 7:00 PM EST


Oh, and here's another item from a .gov site, with a sample screenshot of table of contents:

https://www.nsf.gov/nsb/publications/1965/nsb1265.pdf

WEATHER AND CLIMATE MODIFICATION

SPECIAL COMMISSION ON WEATHER MODIFICATION

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION


Image


Local cloud seeding to change local conditions. Not the same as changing the climate of an entire planet, or creating floods, droughts or extreme storms. Duh.

A few other breadcrumbs:

"Climate change over the next 20 years could result in a global catastrophe costing millions of lives in wars and natural disasters."
@guardian, 2004

Image


Couldn't possibly have anything to do with either the population going up by 6 billion in that span, or infrastructure, healthcare, search and rescue, communications and warning systems improving immensely since 1920.

Image

Image


Ah, the oldest and dumbest of denier arguments: it's fine where I live so everywhere else is also fine. Come December I expect you to proudly post pictures of a snowball.

Perhaps time to re-consider years-long programming.


So you're saying we're lying? Both of us have been repeatedly telling you we can see it happening where we live, yet you keep pretending we never said any of that. You also didn't answer any of my questions from my previous post, which of course is par for the course with you. All gut feeling and no substance. Have you ever considered that your gut is a moron?

You're the one being programmed. You see conspiracies everywhere, except for the well-documented and publicly known one that you're spouting the talking points of. Still waiting on your data that refutes the last few decades of climate research (and by data I mean actual, serious research. Not Bloomberg opinion pieces, random graphs off the Guardian or some dude's blog. And abso-fucking-lutely no Twitter screengrabs!).
"I only read American. I want my fantasy pure." - Dave
User avatar
DrEvil
 
Posts: 3971
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2010 1:37 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 'EcoFascism' and related Acts of Criminality.

Postby Joe Hillshoist » Thu Jul 28, 2022 7:01 am

Belligerent Savant » 27 Jul 2022 00:50 wrote:.
You two are quite the duo. Keep holding on tight. Don't budge!

Re: weather modification. Here's an 'official' source that acknowledges and lists non-Federal weather modification projects.

Of course, this list will never include any black budget programs, etc. Is it truly a stretch to speculate that such things exist? I mean, it's like you both just joined from a NASA fan blog.

https://library.noaa.gov/Collections/Di ... ct-Reports

Weather Modification Project Reports

Publication History & Scope


In the late 1940's and 1950's many deemed "the deliberate or the inadvertent alteration of atmospheric conditions by human activity", also known as weather modification, as a promising science of the future. Currently, the most common form of weather modification is cloud seeding, which increases rain or snow, usually for the purpose of increasing the local water supply. Weather modification can also have the goal of preventing damaging weather, such as hail or hurricanes, from occurring.

As part of Public Law 92-205 (1972), all non-Federal weather modification activities must be reported to the U.S. Secretary of Commerce, via the NOAA Weather Program Office. Below is a list of these reports and is updated on an annual basis.


On Edit, I'd be remiss without also including this Bloomberg piece as another mainstream source. Sounds a bit concerning, eh? But only China would consider/undertake such projects, right? Not the good 'ol U.S. of A., and its sterling reputation promoting the well-being of its citizenry (let alone humans elsewhere).

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/artic ... #xj4y7vzkg
Has China Mastered Weather Modification? Should We Worry?
Using rockets and pickup trucks, Chinese officials are seeding clouds and bringing the rain. But do they have other uses in mind?

ByAdam Minter
December 16, 2020 at 7:00 PM EST


Oh, and here's another item from a .gov site, with a sample screenshot of table of contents:

https://www.nsf.gov/nsb/publications/1965/nsb1265.pdf

WEATHER AND CLIMATE MODIFICATION

SPECIAL COMMISSION ON WEATHER MODIFICATION

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION


Image


A few other breadcrumbs:

"Climate change over the next 20 years could result in a global catastrophe costing millions of lives in wars and natural disasters."
@guardian, 2004

Image


Image

Image

Perhaps time to re-consider years-long programming.


This is a joke right. Don't insult my intelligence with this rubbish. Some of the data you've posted even shows warming, such as the NYC central park temp ranges. If you don't know what your typing about maybe don't type at all...
Joe Hillshoist
 
Posts: 10594
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 10:45 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 'EcoFascism' and related Acts of Criminality.

Postby Grizzly » Sat Jul 30, 2022 1:07 am

Stop the bullshit.


Image

Here's the paper - An updated assessment of near-surface temperature change from 1850: the1 HadCRUT5 datase
https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadcrut5/HadCRUT5_accepted.pdf

Red is so scary.../s

Image
“The more we do to you, the less you seem to believe we are doing it.”

― Joseph mengele
User avatar
Grizzly
 
Posts: 4722
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2011 4:15 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 'EcoFascism' and related Acts of Criminality.

Postby DrEvil » Sat Jul 30, 2022 6:10 pm

I'm confused. Whose bullshit are you referring to?
"I only read American. I want my fantasy pure." - Dave
User avatar
DrEvil
 
Posts: 3971
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2010 1:37 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 'EcoFascism' and related Acts of Criminality.

Postby Belligerent Savant » Sun Jul 31, 2022 2:51 pm

.
Joe: dismissing my counterpoints with "rubbish" is not a valid rebuke, needless to say.

And indicating there's more "warming" does not in any way prove the current claims Re: causes for fluctuations (or alleged marked increases) in temperature, nor does it justify the myriad proposed (dominant narrative) solutions, which as I mentioned before, will largely negatively impact the average citizen (but will certainly benefit the very few).

One other point of clarification: when I initially raised weather modification, I never suggested that such implementations would occur wide-scale, across regions. But as demonstrated by existing documentation of programs and news reporting of actual implementation of such technology, it may be applied within targeted regions, during specific timeframes. Nothing outlandish or groundbreaking in this statement. Such targeted implementation -- if indeed carried out -- can of course influence sentiment.

Circling back to this:

DrEvil » Fri Jul 22, 2022 12:42 pm wrote:
Haven't read the Off-Guardian article, but as mentioned before, my key reservation/objection is the claim that most of current climate-related issues are due primarily/exclusively to human-related activities


Who should I believe? Your gut feeling, or the thousands of scientists who have studied this for decades and are all in agreement that you are wrong? It's so hard to decide!


You mean scientists that have largely relied on MODELS (and have also received funding by parties with vested interests in perpetuating "climate change" for various ends)?

Fucking models. From covid to 'climate change', models have facilitated acceptance/justification of harmful/deleterious policy, due in part to increasingly docile and passive consumers lacking in discernment (and aided, of course, by reams of propaganda and conditioning over the years).

You're also wrong that it's just "gut feeling" by random anonymous online handles. There are also scientists that rebuke current climate change narratives. You know, based on SCIENCE.

(Ironic, the dogmatic thinking among those that align with "atheism")

Here's one sampling of counter-arguments; I make no firm claims on validity as I haven't yet performed a "deep dive" on this presentation, as it's 232 pages in total. But you'll note the presentation is based on application of science-based methods (this, by itself, doesn't make it "true" of course -- that wouldn't be science; that'd be dogma).

https://www.wm.edu/offices/auxiliary/os ... limate.pdf

A few notable snippets -- if you plan to counter this content please review the far more expansive material in the above pdf link, not the substantively abridged excerpts below. Please note also the sampling of scientists -- not anonymous online handles -- at the bottom of these excerpts openly questioning "climate change" narratives:

What is the Climate Issue?
•What are the physics of the atmosphere?
•What are the hypotheses & theories?
•What are the data sources?
•What predictions do the models make?
•What hypotheses do the data support or
disprove?

Hypotheses
• Warmists: man-made CO2 is driving the thermal balance
• Skeptics: natural processes govern the thermal balance. Recent weather is not unusual

• Nature exhibits cyclic processes not well understood
• El Nino Southern Oscillation (ENSO), Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO), Atlantic

Decadal Oscillation (ADO), Eddy Cycle, De Vries/Suess solar cycle, etc.
• Except Milankovitch cycles are understood, but are very long term

....

Predictions

• Warmists:
Based on computer models, temperatures will rise a
specific amount, storms will become more severe,
droughts will increase, sea level rise will accelerate, polar
ice caps will decrease and more

• Skeptics:
Some warming will occur, but nothing extraordinary, and
not unprecedented
in recent history

Image
Image

40 Years of Observation

• The warmists are wrong.
• There has been no increase in observed water vapor
• There has been no observed “tropic hot spot”, necessary if the
increased water vapor hypothesis were correct
• All their forecasts have failed
• The observed temperature increase is in agreement with the
skeptics’ model
...

EDITS made to charts:
Image
...

Weather is NOT getting more extreme
• Following charts are USHCN data, 1918 to 2018
• Blue lines are annual data
• Red lines are 5 yr averages

Image
Image
Image
...

Model Issues

As climate modeller Syukuro Manabe has said:
“The climate model is a very good tool for
understanding climate, but a very bad tool for
predicting climate”.

Most fields of science don’t accept a model unless it has
been rigorously validated against available data, but
climate science is different; the modelling process itself
frequently seems to be accepted as evidence that the
climate model is correct, a circular chain of reasoning
which leads to positions which outside of climate science
would be considered absurd.

•[C]limatologists tell the models there will
be strong CO2-driven warming; sure
enough, the models tell the climatologists
the same; and the climatologists cite the
outputs of the models as purported
justification for the article of faith that they
had built into the models in the first place.

Image

IPCC’s Statement
• As the IPCC itself said (AR4 WG1): “we should recognise that we are dealing with a coupled nonlinear chaotic system, and therefore that the longterm prediction of future climate states is not possible.”

Propagation of Error and the Reliability of
Global Air Temperature Projections

Front. Earth Sci., 06 September 2019

• A directly relevant GCM calibration metric is the annual average ±12.1% error
in global annual average cloud fraction produced within CMIP5 climate
models. This error is strongly pair-wise correlated across models, implying a
source in deficient theory. The resulting long-wave cloud forcing (LWCF) error
introduces an annual average ±4 Wm–2 uncertainty into the simulated
tropospheric thermal energy flux.
• This annual ±4 Wm–2 simulation uncertainty is ±114 × larger than the annual
average ∼0.035 Wm–2 change in tropospheric thermal energy flux produced
by increasing GHG forcing since 1979
• Patrick Frank, SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, Stanford University,
Menlo Park, CA, United States

Science Mag: “Missed wind patterns are throwing off
climate forecasts of rain and storms”, July 29, 2020

• Excerpts:
• For example, models predicted that the Horn of Africa,
which is heavily influenced by Indian Ocean winds, would
get wetter with climate change. But since the early
1990s, rains have plummeted, and the region has dried.
What’s not clear yet is why climate models get
circulation changes so wrong.

• But until modelers figure out how to confidently forecast
changes in the winds, Smith says, “We can’t take the
models at face value."


----

• I believe the largest model errors are the result of a lack of knowledge of the temperature dependent changes in clouds and precipitation efficiency (thus freetropospheric vapor, thus water vapor “feedback”) that actually occur in response to a long-term forcing of the system from increasing carbon dioxide.

• My main complaint is that modelers are either deceptive about, or unaware of, the uncertainties in the myriad assumptions — both explicit and implicit — that have gone into those models.

-- September 11th, 2019 by Roy W. Spencer, Ph. D.

---

•These flawed models are the ONLY support for the hypothesis that CO2 is driving “climate change”
•These models which have failed in EVERY measurable projection they have made are still relied on to justify a solution by eliminating CO2

---

Maldives Threat of Drowning
• Former president Mohamed Nasheed has been highly
outspoken about this issue, saying in 2012 that "If carbon
emissions continue at the rate they are climbing today, my
country will be under water in seven years.“

• "First of all, I want give you a bit of good news. The good news
is that the Maldives is not about to disappear," President
Waheed said countering the claims by his predecessor that the
Maldives would be be completely submerged in the near future
August 24, 2012
• “Egg on Their Faces: The Maldives Still Above the Waves 30
Years After Environmentalist Prediction”

Maldives to open five new airports in 2019

Mann’s Hockey Stick
• Global Warming Bombshell
“A prime piece of evidence linking human activity to climate
change turns out to be an artifact of poor mathematics.”
MIT Technology Review, October 15, 2004


• McIntyre and McKitrick created some meaningless test data that
had, on average, no trends. This method of generating random data
is called Monte Carlo analysis, after the famous casino, and it is
widely used in statistical analysis to test procedures. When
McIntyre and McKitrick fed these random data into the Mann
procedure, out popped a hockey stick shape!

---

New paleoclimate records from Europe, Scandinavia-Russia,
China, and the northeastern USA indicate there has been no
unusual modern warming. Instead, these newly published
reconstructions show warmer periods and more rapid
centennial-scale warming events occurred in past centuries, or
when CO2 concentrations were much lower than they are now.


None of these Northern Hemisphere temperature
reconstructions indicate there has been any unusual modern
warming relative to the natural temperature variations of the
last few millennia.


• Warmists still deny that the MWP was global or warmer than
now

---

News Clippings:

• Global coal-fired generation capacity saw a net decline of 2.9
gigawatts (GW) from January to June, the first drop on record
for a six-month period, thanks to plant retirements in Europe
and elsewhere, the U.S.-based think tank Global Energy
Monitor (GEM) said in the study.

• SHANGHAI: China has nearly 250 gigawatts (GW) of
coal-fired power now under development
, more than the
entire coal power capacity of the United States, a new
study said on Thursday, casting doubt on the country's
commitments to cutting fossil fuel use.
- Reuters, June 25, 2020, 08:28 IST

Forget Paris: Russia Boosts Coal Production: Will Be
World’s Top Exporter Within Decade

Russia Today, 2 May 2020

The world’s largest coal-producing country, Russia,
plans to increase its output and exports over the
next 15 years. Russia’s share of the global coal export
market is projected to expand to 25 percent from the
current 11 percent.

---

Warren Buffet on Wind Energy

• "I will do anything that is basically covered
by the law to reduce Berkshire's tax rate,"
Buffet told an audience in Omaha, Nebraska
recently. "For example, on wind energy, we
get a tax credit if we build a lot of wind farms.
That's the only reason to build them. They
don't make sense without the tax credit.
"

---

"One thing that has made California’s grid so
vulnerable to soaring demand is the state’s rapid
shift away from natural gas. About 9 gigawatts of
gas generation, enough to power 6.8 million
homes, have been retired over the past five years
as the state turns increasingly to renewables,
according to BloombergNEF. That leaves fewer
options when the sun sets and solar production
wanes."

Image

Summary
• The null hypothesis – “the observed climate is within normal
variations” – has not been disproved. It is well within
statistical bounds
The AGW hypothesis has been disproven, and in fact, there
is no scientific evidence of it.

• All projections of this hypothesis have failed.
The only support of the hypothesis are the computer models
which are known to be in error
The Medieval Warm Period and the Roman Warm Period
demonstrate against the hypothesis that man-made CO2 is
causing unusual global warming

...

So What?
• Massive mis-investment chasing unnecessary and ineffective
solutions regarding CO2
• Inefficient and ecologically harmful “green energy” solutions
• Restrictive regulations
• Carbon tax and subsides distorting market
• Distraction from ecological problems we could solve
• Wetland preservation
• Clean water issues
• Agricultural runoff control
• Chemical and pharma pollutions (Prozac, hormones, cocaine, etc.
in water)

Some Famous Skeptics:

Roy Spencer (born December 20, 1955) is a meteorologist, a principal research scientist at
the University of Alabama in Huntsville, and the U.S. Science Team leader for the Advanced
Microwave Scanning Radiometer (AMSR-E) on NASA's Aqua satellite. He has served as senior
scientist for climate studies at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center.
John Christy is a Professor of Atmospheric Science and Director of the Earth System Science Center
at the University of Alabama in Huntsville (UAH). He has also been Alabama's State Climatologist
since November 2000.
Patrick Moore, co-founder of Greenpeace. PhD in Ecology
Don Easterbrook Geology Professor Emeritus, WWU
Ray Pielke, Jr. has been on the faculty of the University of Colorado since 2001
Richard Lindzen, emeritus professor of meteorology at MIT, Alfred P. Sloan Professor, beginning in
1983. Prior to that he was the Robert P. Burden Professor of Dynamic Meteorology at Harvard
University.
Judith Curry is an American climatologist and former chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric
Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology. Her research interests include hurricanes, remote
sensing, atmospheric modeling, polar climates, air-sea interactions
Bob Carter (9 March 1942 – 19 January 2016) was an English palaeontologist, stratigrapher and
marine geologist. He was professor and head of the School of Earth Sciences at James Cook
University in Australia from 1981 to 1998

Warmists who have become Skeptics:

Claude Allegre, prominent French scientist and socialist
Ivar Giaever, former science advisor to Obama
James Lovelock, developer of the Gaia Principle
William Briggs, Statistician
Caleb Rossiter, Policy expert, Climate statistician
David Bodkin, former Chair Envio. Studies, UCalif.
Richard Tol, IPCC – had his name removed from IPCC report
Philip Stott, Univ. London
Denis Rancourt, Univ. Ottawa
John Theon, Sr. Atmospheric Scientist, NASA
Michael Schellenberger, Prominent Environmental Activist

Peer-reviewed Skeptical Papers Bibliography
http://www.populartechnology.net/2009/1 ... rting.html
• This is a bibliographic resource for skeptics not a list of skeptics.
Lists of skeptical scientists can be found here:
• 31,487 Scientists Reject AGW Alarmism
https://shepherdgazette.com/49-nasa-sci ... -the-fact/
• 1100 Climate Realists sign 'The Manhattan Declaration on Climate Change'
• 1000+ International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming
Claims
• 300+ Eminent Scientists Reject U.N. Climate Change Treaty
https://www.iceagenow.com/More_than_100 ... uke%20Obam
a.htm

“I would like to add something that’s not essential to the
science, but something I kind of believe, which is that you
should not fool the layman when you’re talking as a
scientist. I’m talking about a specific, extra type of integrity
that is not lying, but bending over backwards to show how
you’re maybe wrong, that you ought to do when acting as
a scientist. And this is our responsibility as scientists,
certainly to other scientists, and I think to laymen.”
• Richard Feynman, Cargo Cult Science


Top Recommendations:
• Restoring Scientific Debate on Climate
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2020/10/03/ ... onclimate/
• Excellent extensive set of links to all climate issues, pro and con
https://sealevel.info/learnmore.html
• Video on opening page of 1st link is a complete review of this topic. The link is
“Climate Curious” and the video is “Siegal Climate Movie 2”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06ac0CuFevw
• Many other good videos here
http://www.climatedepot.com/wp-content/ ... _FINAL.pdf

When a politician says, concerning an issue involving
science, that the debate is over, you can be sure of two
things: The debate is raging, and he is losing.


• This first link is a short discussion about the climate debate (you might read this short piece first):
https://rclutz.wordpress.com/the-dysfun ... te-debate/
• The next is probably the most popular skeptic site and is usually updated daily.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/
• This site concentrates on scientific published papers and has a large and detailed subject index
http://www.co2science.org/
• GWPF is a UK organization that provides emails (if you sign up) with current worldwide articles
https://www.thegwpf.org/ Newsletter at Benny Peiser peiser@thegwpf.com
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0Z5FdwWw_c and
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=pa ... 58&mid=902
60FF6BD50034C725A90260FF6BD50034C725A&view=detail&FORM=VIRE Patrick Moore’s talks on CO2
https://realclimatescience.com/ https://judithcurry.com/ http://www.drroyspencer.com/
• A site that explains CO2 and the benefits of (and necessity for) CO2
http://co2coalition.org/
• Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT) https://www.cfact.org/
User avatar
Belligerent Savant
 
Posts: 5215
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:58 pm
Location: North Atlantic.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 'EcoFascism' and related Acts of Criminality.

Postby DrEvil » Sun Jul 31, 2022 4:17 pm

One quick note. I'll try to do a deep dive later:

Mann’s Hockey Stick
• Global Warming Bombshell
“A prime piece of evidence linking human activity to climate
change turns out to be an artifact of poor mathematics.”
MIT Technology Review, October 15, 2004


The MIT piece was written by Richard Muller, who at the time was a climate change skeptic. Later on he was in charge of the Berkeley Earth project, where skeptics decided to do the science from scratch, funded by, among others, the Koch brothers. They found that the current research was correct, and that global warming was real. Even later, in 2012 he said: "Global warming is real .... Humans are almost entirely the cause."

As for the hockey stick itself, tons of research was done on it at the time of the scandal, and the consensus reached was that it was correct (the stick, not the math).

If this is his standard of evidence throughout the rest of his course I'm not very hopeful there's anything worthwhile in there.
"I only read American. I want my fantasy pure." - Dave
User avatar
DrEvil
 
Posts: 3971
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2010 1:37 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 'EcoFascism' and related Acts of Criminality.

Postby Belligerent Savant » Sun Jul 31, 2022 4:32 pm

.

The key here, rather than focus on 1 single contention, is:

How much of current climate change alarmism/laser-focus on CO2 emissions a function of model assessments that may be utilizing preferred sampling/biased selection criteria, rather than long-term observation and other study methods that do not rely primarily on predictive models (particularly given that, increasingly over time, the predictive models turn out to be markedly off-target -- the Maldives example being one of myriad)?

And: is it plausible that there are other agendas in play by those pushing 'climate change as imminent threat' narratives, and their corresponding 'solutions', that are NOT truly aimed at mitigation as a primary focus but instead focused primarily on serving special/narrow interests?

Perhaps there's a middle ground, perhaps not, but as the last 2 years have clearly shown, egregious LiES can and WILL be told to further agendas to the detriment of the majority. Given some of the same entities involved in pushing current 'climate change' dominant narratives, it should not be considered in any way outlandish or outside the bounds of necessary discourse to earnestly revisit what we, collectively, have accepted largely at face value (or accepted in part based on years-long aggressive marketing/propaganda campaigns, all with deep funding).
User avatar
Belligerent Savant
 
Posts: 5215
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:58 pm
Location: North Atlantic.
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 41 guests