Only Three Months Left For Planet Earth( and other false doomsday predictions)

[canada-man]

America had a very hot, dry past, and previous generations endured extreme weather which the current generation can't comprehend. In this video I show how and why the heat of America's past is being erased by NASA and NOAA.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_nmhTZuFGGE

 

[canada-man]

1930 : Climate Cycles Correspond Closely With Sunspot Cycles

 

[Frankfooter]

1930 : Climate Cycles Correspond Closely With Sunspot Cycles

https://freeexxonpics.ru/rGQNWz3/Image180942201g][/url][/QUOTE]

More fake news clippings about old research?

 

[canada-man]

More fake news clippings about old research?

Crying fake clippings is not an argument libraries and archivists preserve old news papers. Too bad you only read sources linked to hamas and are funded by elite traitorous families like the rockefellers

 

[canada-man]

Science Vs. The Extinction Rebellion

The expansion of life on earth peaked when CO2 was at its maximum 540 million years ago.




https://www.sciencenewsforstudents.org/article/when-life-exploded

Meanwhile 15th century thugs being financed by people like George Soros and Tom Steyer, continue their war against science and civilization.

 

[Frankfooter]

Meanwhile 15th century thugs being financed by people like George Soros and Tom Steyer, continue their war against science and civilization.

Way to sneak in an anti-semitic trope in your creepy denial junk, CM.
You're really getting out there with big sleazy as the conspiracy duo.

Are you going to also come out as an anti-vaxxer like him?
And 9/11, don't forget that one as well.

How 'organized climate change denial' shapes public opinion on global warming

https://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/...l-think-tank-sceptic-misinformation-1.5297236

Though at least you don't appear to be trending towards the incels, like smallcock.

 

[JohnLarue]

Hey CM.

I hereby challenge you to find one climate change denier prediction that's better then James Hansen's 30 year old prediction.
https://www.theguardian.com/environ...out-hansens-amazing-global-warming-prediction

If you fail, you will have to admit that the IPCC and consensus are better.

Go ahead.
I dare you.

 

[Frankfooter]

Two problems:
1) That chart contains no predictions by deniers
2) That chart compares surface temp projections and atmospheric readings.

 

[canada-man]

climate change is a religion similar to the roman catholic church during the dark ages. scientists are getting fired for objecting to this alarmism and one has been shot at.

“The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those that speak it.”

― George Orwell


A University Of Alberta VP was fired for telling the truth about climate and CO2.




https://globalnews.ca/news/5968266/...&utm_referrer=https://globalnews.ca/edmonton/


The Delaware State climatologist was also fired for telling the truth.



About a decade or more ago, I was told by someone that I had been placed on a federal “Do Not Fund” list. Undaunted, I applied for a grant from NASA. Well, the proposal was rejected but the letter back from NASA contained only a single review sheet that was blank except for the following note written in the comments section: “NCDC [National Climatic Data Center in Asheville NC] should be funded to do this research.” When I contacted the program officer, Jared Entin, he indicated that he was on vacation but would investigate right away. I have called and e-mailed; I have yet to hear back from him.

Several years later, I applied to the USDA to leverage weather radar to enhance agricultural forecasting. My proposal was submitted electronically and was listed as “Under Review”. In due course, I received a note from the USDA that all proposals had been either rejected or accepted and they thanked me for my submission. Since I had not heard from them, I went on-line and checked my proposal. It was listed as “Under Review”. I sent an e-mail to the program officer and one of his assistants responded. She seemed so friendly and helpful and wanted to know more about the proposal that I had submitted. When I gave her the proposal ID number, I received a terse reply: “You will have to take this up with the Program Officer”.

So, I did. We played the same game again — he then stopped answering e-mails or phone calls. Eventually, I got the University Research Office to inquire. They said they were told by the Program Officer that “we cannot be responsible for system problems.” Sure…right.

I have submitted a total of 5 federal grants since I was told. All five have met the same fate. No bad reviews…no reviews at all. And the Program Officer cuts off all communications.

In the 1980s, John Darcy was convicted of fraud — he had made up data and nearly fifty papers were rejected. His penalty? He was forbidden from getting grants from the NIH for ten years. I have been convicted of nothing…indeed, I have been charged with nothing. But I have been black-listed…and just today, the DailyKos runs a piece on how difficult the “believers” have been treated…

Sorry for the rant,

David

The Oregon State Climatologist was fired for telling the truth about climate.



https://www.oregonlive.com/breakingnews/2008/02/george_taylor_of_oregon_climat.html

Roger Pielke Jr. was investigated by Democrats in Congress for telling the truth about climate.



https://theclimatefix.wordpress.com/2015/02/25/i-am-under-investigation/


Nicholas Drapela at Oregon State University was fired for telling the truth about climate.



https://ovalpike.com/climate-change-skeptic-nicholas-drapela-fired-from-oregon-state-university/

Professor Peter Ridd was fired for telling the truth about climate



https://www.theguardian.com/austral...-dismissal-case-against-james-cook-university

The Alabama State Climatologist was shot at for telling the truth about climate.



https://www.drroyspencer.com/2017/04/shots-fired-into-the-christyspencer-building-at-uah/

There are many other scientists who have suffered similar treatment, including Dr. Willie Soon at Harvard. All climate scientists know the consequences of butting heads with the orthodoxy,

This is how “consensus” is maintained – through the same thuggery used to silence Galileo hundreds of years ago. A return to the Dark Ages, by the same people who tell us they are “progressives.”

 

[canada-man]

Only Global Communism Can Prevent 1-4 Meters Of Sea Level Rise By 2030

In 1988, the Guardian , UK Commonwealth and Canberra Times said we needed global communism to prevent 1-4 meters of sea level rise by the year 2030. Because this is all about the best science by our top scientists.





https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/120906718/12982929

 

[bver_hunter]

Weather Channel Spanks Neo Nazi Climate Deniers at Breitbart.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UyRFIyPOSV0

 

[canada-man]

Weather Channel Spanks Neo Nazi Climate Deniers at Breitbart.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UyRFIyPOSV0

Godwin's law (or Godwin's rule of Hitler analogies)[1][2] is an Internet adage asserting that "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1";[2][3] that is, if an online discussion (regardless of topic or scope) goes on long enough, sooner or later someone will compare someone or something to Adolf Hitler or his deeds, the point at which effectively the discussion or thread often ends. Promulgated by the American attorney and author Mike Godwin in 1990,[2] Godwin's law originally referred specifically to Usenet newsgroup discussions.[4] It is now applied to any threaded online discussion, such as Internet forums, chat rooms, and comment threads, as well as to speeches, articles, and other rhetoric[5][6] where reductio ad Hitlerum occurs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law

 

[bver_hunter]

climate change is a religion similar to the roman catholic church during the dark ages. scientists are getting fired for objecting to this alarmism and one has been shot at.

The Ideology of Climate Change Denial in the United States:
The concerted effort to discredit the scientific consensus over man-made global warming has been continuing for two decades in the United States, and shows no sign of weakening. It is very often described as an attempt on the part of corporate America, most notably the fossil fuel industries, to hinder governmental regulations on their activities. While emphasising this dimension of the US climate denial movement, this article also aims to show the complexity of the movement, rather than the mere defence of the narrowly-defined and short-term economic interests of the oil and gas industries, by shedding light on two additional factors which have been instrumental in blocking strong climate action. First, climate denial stems from the strong ideological commitment of small-government conservatives and libertarians to laisser-faire and their strong opposition to regulation. Second, in order to disarm their opponents, US climate deniers often rest their case on the defence of the American way of life, defined by high consumption and ever-expanding material prosperity. It is the contention of this article, therefore, that the US climate denial movement is best understood as a combination of these three trends.

https://journals.openedition.org/ejas/10305

 

[bver_hunter]

Godwin's law (or Godwin's rule of Hitler analogies)[1][2] is an Internet adage asserting that "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1";[2][3] that is, if an online discussion (regardless of topic or scope) goes on long enough, sooner or later someone will compare someone or something to Adolf Hitler or his deeds, the point at which effectively the discussion or thread often ends. Promulgated by the American attorney and author Mike Godwin in 1990,[2] Godwin's law originally referred specifically to Usenet newsgroup discussions.[4] It is now applied to any threaded online discussion, such as Internet forums, chat rooms, and comment threads, as well as to speeches, articles, and other rhetoric[5][6] where reductio ad Hitlerum occurs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law

So the terminology "Global Communism" takes a pass then??

 

[Moviefan-2]

We are at 1.1ºC increase already.

"Already"?

That temperature increase dates back to the 19th century -- hardly an overnight phenomenon.

Unless Frankfooter still believes the "pre-industrial age still refers to the year 1990: https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...armer-Planet&p=5394609&viewfull=1#post5394609. :biggrin1:

BTW, the answer to Frankfooter's question is that it would take another 80 years to get to 1.5ºC, assuming that energy continues to be produced the same way in the future as it is produced today -- which is a preposterous assumption.

Projecting the present onto the future is absurd.

 

[Frankfooter]

"Already"?

That temperature increase dates back to the 19th century -- hardly an overnight phenomenon.

Unless Frankfooter still believes the "pre-industrial age still refers to the year 1990: https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...armer-Planet&p=5394609&viewfull=1#post5394609. :biggrin1:

BTW, the answer to Frankfooter's question is that it would take another 80 years to get to 1.5ºC, assuming that energy continues to be produced the same way in the future as it is produced today -- which is a preposterous assumption.

Projecting the present onto the future is absurd.

From a 4 year old thread in which you didn't think the global temperature would ever rise to 0.83ºC?
That sure makes your claims look stupid.

http://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/

If that's the chart you're saying will hit 0.83 at the end of 2015, we definitely have a bet.

2016 hit 0.98ºC, by the way.

This September hit 1.2ºC, with 2019 likely to break new records and without the aid of an El Nino event, like 2016 required.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/weat...ced-its-hottest-september-heads-record-books/

 

[Smallcock]

Immaculate research by Canada-Man.

The climate change people are the same type of people that want to vote in the first fake native (Pocahontas) into the presidency. What does that tell you? They love and fall for fakery.

 

[Moviefan-2]

From a 4 year old thread in which you didn't think the global temperature would ever rise to 0.83ºC?

Ah, yes -- Frankfooter's only defence when it comes to his assertion that the "pre-industrial age" refers to 1990 is by -- once again -- lying about what I said.

That's because he can't defend his insane comments.

(I won't even try to understand how Frankfooter thinks it's relevant that he made his statement about the "pre-industrial age" four years ago. Was it supposed to have been plausible in 2015 to think the "pre-industrial age" referred to 1990? :biggrin1

Indeed, reading Frankfooter's characterization of my quote and his assertion that I didn't think the temperature increase would "ever rise" to 0.83ºC, it seems Franky now thinks the world came to an end at "the end of 2015."

Funny, it doesn't feel like the world no longer exists. :Eek:

 

[JohnLarue]

Two problems:
1) That chart contains no predictions by deniers
2) That chart compares surface temp projections and atmospheric readings.

1. Skeptic know that Climate is a nonlinear chaotic system and computer modeling would require solving for the Navier-stokes equations for the fluid dynamics of the atmosphere
Good luck isolating at the interdependent variables and solving the equations
I believe there is a million dollar priZe available for anyone that can do that. Been available for some time now
Skeptics know the computer models do not work, so they do not publish predictions which they do not believe in
That is why there are no skeptics predictions

2. The greenhouse effect occurs in the atmosphere and there is a reason millions of weather balloons have been sent up over the decades
Besides the surface record is incomplete and is flawed by all kinds of data issues

 

[Frankfooter]

Ah, yes -- Frankfooter's only defence when it comes to his assertion that the "pre-industrial age" refers to 1990 is by -- once again -- lying about what I said.

That's because he can't defend his insane comments.

I didn't say anything about pre-industrial age being 1990, so I just ignored your comments since most of what you post is bullshit.
But since you asked, your claim is total bullshit.

I challenge you to prove it or admit you're lying again.