Mike wrote: CO2 is good for you. Trees love it, use it, and give off oxygen. Oxygen is good for you. We need more CO2. Don't choose ignorance, like Gates and Gore do. Choose CO2. Be responsible, and increase your carbon footprint today.
Yes, this is important to keep in mind when the next Ice Age starts up
CO2 is good for you. Trees love it, use it, and give off oxygen. Oxygen is good for you. We need more CO2. Don't choose ignorance, like Gates and Gore do. Choose CO2. Be responsible, and increase your carbon footprint today.
Shhh! I E, Bill Gates may decide to stop working on climate stuff , and start making a real nuisance of himself if he starts thinking about other things.
Karl Mathiesen wrote: As well as his work on health through the foundation, Bill has made climate change and clean energy a personal mission. The foundationâ€™s annual letter for 2015 says their achievements could be undone by the advancing climate crisis.
â€śIt is fair to ask whether the progress weâ€™re predicting will be stifled by climate change. The most dramatic problems caused by climate change are more than 15 years away, but the long-term threat is so serious that the world needs to move much more aggressively â€“ right now â€“ to develop energy sources that are cheaper, can deliver on demand, and emit zero carbon dioxide. Bill is investing time in this work personally (not through our foundation) and will continue to speak out about it.â€ť
--[URL=http://tinyurl.com/ycuu4lzc]]]http://tinyurl.com/ycuu4lzc (What is the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation?) [/URL]
CO2-not the â€ścontrol knobâ€ť of the climate There is scant connection between higher levels of CO2 &warming. Post Flood- Ice Age? CO2 levels were 10 times higher than they are today! There are many, many factors which impact climate â€“ including volcanoes, wind oscillations, solar activity, ocean cycles, volcanoes, tilt of the Earthâ€™s axis, and land use. CO2 is just one factor, and not the control knob of the climate. Todayâ€™s levels of roughly 400 parts per million (PPM) of CO2 ?not alarming -- Global temperatures have been holding nearly steady for almost two decades, according to satellites from the Remote Sensing Systems (RSS) and the University of Alabama at Huntsville (UAH). Global warming proponents, based on heavily altered surface data, declared 2005, 2010, 2015, and 2016 to be the â€śhottest yearsâ€ť on record. But a closer examination revealed the claims were â€śbased on year-to-year temperature data that differ by only a few HUNDREDTHS of a degree to tenths of a degree Fahrenheit â€“ differences that were within the margin of error in the data.â€ť MIT climate scientist Dr. Richard Lindzen ridiculed these â€śhottest yearâ€ť claims. â€śThe uncertainty here is tenths of a degree. Itâ€™s just nonsense. This is a very tiny change period,â€ť Tiny- teeny weeny itsy bitsy
Mike wrote: Climate change existed long before industrialization. Over time it warms and it cools, and has for millennia. You can trust that. Climate change is as natural as the sunrise. Global warming, on the other hand, is a hoax. It was dropped in favor of "climate change," so as to hide the deception behind a reality. Simultaneously it was/is put forth as a problem caused by man so as to continue extracting monies from the populace of the wealthier nations to fight the non-existent problem. It's all about greed, folks, not climate.
There's a whole lot of greed going on Mike, as should be a closing URL of mine, [URL=http://billmoyers.com/episode/the-deep-state-hiding-in-plain-sight/]]]http://billmoyers.com/episode/the-deep-state-hiding-in-plain-sight/[/URL]
We have plenty of greed to take care of in our country, without feeding other countries greed.
As I said it's pollution one has to worry about first of all, and that's why India and China got on board, their own air and other pollution is just killing off too many of their own people. Say, if it makes the hot-earth people happy at the same time, hey that's just a bonus.
No it's those rascally termites out-gassing methane that is causing global warming
The other main plank is the virtual worship of "Mother Earth", and a campaign of massive reduction of the world's human population by voluntary and even involuntary and compulsory sterilisation, contraception, abortion, euthanasia, and interference with DNA and even selective breeding and eugenics.
God will judge this and will in His time and His way confound all their counsels, and set them to nought. See Psalm 2!!!
Of course this scientific study blows "climate change" and "global warming" environmentalism myths out of the water.
However the "one world government" globalism types won't take this lying down, and we can be sure that these scientists will be blacklisted, hounded out of their universities and professions, and a campaign of the politicians, liberal media, backed up by Hollywood stars, pop stars and other popular entertainers, as well as the evolutionist establishment will keep on plugging for their one world government, one world economy, (cashless of course, which requires an indelible chip implanted in all citizens), and even a one world religion, as the only way that we can "save the planet".
Evidence Against Global Warming: Leading &Authoritative Anti-Global Warming Websites &Sources: - wattsupwiththat.com - climatedepot.com - cfact.com - forbes.com - globalwarming.org - climateaudit.org - rsr.org/warming - petititionproject.com
Cf-Calvin Biesner, Cornwall Alliance, open letter to Francis the talking pope, against global warming
Global warming hockey stick* Missing Hockey Stick Data: From the "You Can't Make This Stuff Up" file, the data has gone missing for that infamous â€śhockey stickâ€ť graph, admits lead scientist.
* Warming Ended Almost 20 Years Ago: The UK's National Weather Service, the Met Office, released global weather data in 2012 showing that the slight 16-year warming trend from 1981 to 1997 had then been followed by 16 years of cooling. The Met's finding is roughly consistent with the U.N.'s own "Pause in Warming" finding. As Britain's Daily Mail put it, "Global warming stopped 16 years ago." - PauseGate follows 2015 Paris Climate Conference as a top NOAA scientist exposes NOAA's own fraudulent report- cover up of coverup of frauds.
--Gen8:22 "While the earth remaineth, seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease."
Climate change existed long before industrialization. Over time it warms and it cools, and has for millennia. You can trust that. Climate change is as natural as the sunrise. Global warming, on the other hand, is a hoax. It was dropped in favor of "climate change," so as to hide the deception behind a reality. Simultaneously it was/is put forth as a problem caused by man so as to continue extracting monies from the populace of the wealthier nations to fight the non-existent problem. It's all about greed, folks, not climate.
Foreign governments should realize by now it takes two to tangle for foreign treaties to be accepted, The President and the Senate, this is why [URL=http://tinyurl.com/yabuqjvx]]]http://tinyurl.com/yabuqjvx (Kyoto Treaty Fizzled, But Climate Talkers Insist Paris Is Different)[/URL]--but they ended being the same. Two Democratic Presidents wanted the respective treaties and two Republican controlled Senates didn't.
Actually, I'm not sure how the Transpacific treaty compared to the Paris Accord, but after reading the segment on the Transpacific treaty on Bill Moyer's [URL=http://billmoyers.com/episode/the-deep-state-hiding-in-plain-sight/]]]http://billmoyers.com/episode/the-deep-state-hiding-in-plain-sight/[/URL]. I'm against it also
Unfortunately the pull-out of he Paris Accord, Does make the U.S. look something like,
Isaiah 36:6 Behold, you are trusting in Egypt, that broken reed of a staff, which will pierce the hand of any man who leans on it. Such is Pharaoh king of Egypt to all who trust in him.---ESV
But the world will probably get over it, unless we turn into another Venus.
As you'll note Mike, some of problems created aren't about climate but about trust--as my first note's URL pointed out.
Jim Lincoln wrote: Mike, has some serious news source like the New York Times taken note of it? I think the wnd said that it hadn't been backed up by other people. ---
Another distraction. You already know the paper written about isn't sourced from WND. Aside from that, why on Earth would you actually think the NY Times is a serious news source? Since they are part of the global warming myth-makers club, (along with other myths they promote)surely you don't expect me to see them in the same dark.
btw, your link stating the US is already reducing dependence on fossil fuels without Paris Accord should tell you one of two things:
1. If we are reducing fossil fuel use without participating in the P. Accord, we don't have reason to be part of it.
2. There would have to exist actual global warming, backed by actual data, before the idea that fossil fuel might cause it could rightfully be put forth. Therefore reducing fossil fuel use does nothing in that realm. If you want to reduce actual pollution, tell China.
Jim Lincoln wrote: --- Somebody besides WND will have to make these claims before I pay any attention to what amounts to a joke article. http (World Net Daily (WND)--Right Biased )[/URL].
Joke article? Believe what you have to in order to maintain the myth, Jim. The research paper and journal of publication is listed in the article. WND isn't the source. Maybe some fact checking of your own would help?
Mike of NY, all that may be true, but there is certainly such things as air pollution which China and India have recognized. Also, some of the large states and cities in this country are going to recognize the Accord.
United States may reach the target, that it agreed to in the Paris Accords without even straining itself because it's heading towards cleaner emissions for power plants anyway.
Somebody besides WND will have to make these claims before I pay any attention to what amounts to a joke article.
Media Bias/Fact Check wrote: RIGHT BIAS These media sources are moderately to strongly biased toward conservative causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports and omit reporting of information that may damage conservative causes. Some sources in this category may be untrustworthy....
Factual Reporting: MIXED
---[URL=https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/world-net-daily-wnd/]]]http://tinyurl.com/y9x4vssr (World Net Daily (WND)--Right Biased )[/URL].
blending nations, losing borders, one world currency and bank
any nation not under IMF .... invaded... because they "have an evil leader"
its all very orchestrated and purposeful.
while we debate every talking point they put out....as if they are that whelmed about polar bears...
if they are so whelmed about polar bears instead of polar bear costumes and making little children cry about them, why don't they rejoice when the polar bear populations go up? (instead of covering up the information)
ABC radio News wrote: Exiting the Paris Agreement could hurt the United Statesâ€™ relationship with other countries because the country could be seen as willing to go back on its promises....
Global leaders strongly encouraged the U.S. to stay in the agreement, but many big players also said in recent days that they will honor their own commitments even if the U.S. retreats. After the G7 summit last week, German Chancellor Angela Merkel made it clear she thought Europe would need to lead in this area, while both China and India have made aggressive investments and promises to reduce pollution and emission in their own countries.
---[URL=http://tinyurl.com/ya36g29h]]]http://tinyurl.com/ya36g29h (Debunking myths about the Paris climate accord)[/URL].
I don't think the other 19 nations of the G20 who are sticking to the treaty, are going to pay too much attention to the WND article.
The new study, he explained, will expose a crucial mathematical flaw in the current narrative of â€śclimate alarmists.â€ť
He said the results had already been confirmed by a government laboratory.
Response by Zeller and Nikolov:
The authors responded to much of the criticism by arguing that the critics were not understanding the full implications of the study, and that they continue trying to leave a role for greenhouse gases in temperatures when there is none.
Nikolov also provided lengthy but highly technical responses to the criticisms offered by Happer and Monckton.
For example, Nikolov argued that Happerâ€™s explanation, which is also found in some textbooks, confuses local drivers of weather with the drivers of the global climate.
â€śYou cannot argue against empirical data,â€™ Nikolov said.
On a broader level, he suggested that the lack of widespread and enthusiastic support for the new study was to be expected in science.
â€śThe reason you are getting mixed responses to our paper even from skeptics is not because there is something scientifically wrong with our results, but because the implications of our empirical findings are so different from any existing climate concept at the moment,â€ť Nikolov told WND - Hockey pucks trust old fake hockey stick