The 'climategate' emails that Corbett (who often gets the wrong end of the (hockey) stick) and others refers to alleged fudging of data and conflates two separate issues; mike's trick and hiding the decline in an email by Professor Phil Jones of the University of East Anglia. Mike's trick is simply the ubiquitous technique of using reconstructed temperatures from ice cores and tree rings with actual thermometer measurements on the same graph. The decline referred to is not a decline in temperatures but rather a decline in tree ring thickness which should have correlated with the rise in thermometer temperatures, but which diverged in the 1960s due to local pollution in some areas. It has been publicly discussed since 1995. In 2009 stolen emails were investigated; yet 9 independent studies showed that nothing affected the science.
I've been there too. However, covid made the realize the following is true:
If governments around the world are pushing a narrative that will
1) give them more control over the people and/or
2) give them an excuse to raise taxes and steal land from the people,
they are LYING!
As a result of this realization, I looked into climate change in more detail and found that it leaves so much out! (lies by omission). Like 98% of all greenhouse gases is water vapor. CO2 is a fraction of that other 2%! Like why wasn't climate warming prior to 1970? Like what about solar output, what about shifts of molten core of earth which was responsible for recent warmup of ocean temps in only a matter of weeks. Ocean temps could not have risen that fast from any other source. Like what about the recent Hunga Tonga-Hunga Haʻapai volcanic eruption which increased water vapor in the atmosphere by 10 to 13%...
All these things are taken into account by scientists because they are the ones who described them. Water vapour is indeed a greenhouse gas and the effect of co2 is greatly increased by its presence. Co2, trace minerals and arsenic are still important in tiny amounts. The Hunga Tonga may have contributed to about 0.3C but solar activity, decrease in marine oil, volcanoes, the molten core have all been taken into consideration and play a role. The climate is trends. Yes there was a big jump in ocean temperature. Yes the 10 year average trend is upward. https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/monitoring/climate-at-a-glance/global/time-series/globe/ocean/1/7/1850-2023
The career experts who are excluded because they refused to chant the mantra disagree with you.
My limited research tells me you’re incorrect, at best.
Did you mention that atmospheric [CO2] has been very much higher than today, including during ice ages?
What ended the ice ages?
Ice core data shows that surface temperature changes preceded changes in CO2.
The source & destination of that CO2 is the oceans. Warming water holds less dissolved CO2. The thermal inertia of the oceans is huge compared with that of the atmosphere, hence the substantial phase delay.
Why are the models continually wrong? Why did Algore tell us 20 years ago that ocean front cities would be flooded by now?
Here is a sensible take on all this by a long time meteorologist and climate scientist who does believe the climate is warming, but that we are NOT facing a climate emergency and are NOT at a climate tipping point. He says we have at least 100 years to figure out solutions, and the damage we would do now to people's lives, the suffering we would create by implementing rushed solutions is both unnecessary and counter productive
oh, and I am very skeptical of any government website. NOAA is pushing an agenda. You know Australian weather "scientists" recently got caught LYING about the temperature record.
The article lists the greenhouse gases in the atmosphere: CO2, NO, Methane, and Florinated gases. But there is NO MENTION of Water Vapor! The amount of water vapor in the atmosphere is orders of magnitude greater than those 4 greenhouse gases combined. Why don't they list H2O as a greenhouse gas? Because they don't, the obvious conclusion is they are trying to hide that fact. Why? Because they are pushing a narrative, so they lie by omission.
Your not alone Kaylene, I'm am also guilty of blindly believing the Climate BS.. Only after doing a deep dive into Covid-19 and seeing all the lies. Then looking deep into Ukraine war, more lies, then all the climate BS !.. So many lies being perpetrated by our gov an mainstream media. The first 54 years of my life I can honesty say, I was asleep..
Aug 29, 2023·edited Aug 29, 2023Liked by Joel Smalley
Someone "explained" to me recently (as it was bucketing down and a bit chilly in August) how the weather will get worse now due to global warming. That is, the temperature will go down because the temperature is going up. I'd liken these people to characters from The Wicker Man, except that seems to give them too much intelligence.
Prove it. Because by your logic if the oceans are heating, then severe storms should be increasing in my country as cyclones are driven by low pressure and warm oceans. Aint happening, in fact the data clearly shows that cyclonic activity in Australia is decreasing. Just for stumps, Ten years ago we noticed anomalies with the temperature data being published by the BOM in this country from the buoys' in the Indian Ocean that resulted in temps showing a rise. They were taken to task over that and went all out to shut down every line of questioning and cut access to the data off and denying all requests, the buoys were online, the data was being dropped. You have made a number of claims now, back em up.
Of course climate only looks at trends, which will go up and down in the short time ie the weather. Climate change makes things more likely in the long term
Is your position that the human output of CO2 is the cause of the rising anomalies in this chart; that human emissions of CO2 are primary mechanism behind this increase in temperature of the oceans; that without humans and the industrial revolution, these anomalies would not be rising?
This is why the censorship is going up and up, necessarily, because the further removed from reality a narrative gets, the more easily it is to take it down through exposing the contradictions or hypocrisy, and to laugh it away.
The problem in convincing people there is an issue, is because there isn’t one. And climate change is an outcome, not a cause. An outcome cannot be its cause! It is changing weather patterns over long periods of time that indicate a shift in climate, but when there is no change in weather patterns, there cannot be a shift in climate. In any case changes in climate are not linear, so any trend in one direction, could change later to a different, even reverse direction. It is not sensible to consider climate change in periods less than tens of thousands of years. The island of Britain is between a huge land mass to the East, a huge water mass to the West and the Arctic to the North. That makes our weather ‘interesting’ - in Britain climate change is a quarter-hourly event. That is why British people don’t take climate change seriously and all the breathless nonsense about hot June, and heavy rainfall, and no snow in Winter as ‘evidence’ of climate change because it’s just business as normal. July and August have been cold and wet- what we call typical English Summer.
Remember the long hot Summer 1976, eight weeks of relentless heatwave, dry reservoirs, drought, roads melting, track buckling on the railways? Then it stopped abruptly end of August to be followed weeks of torrential rain and floods.
The 1970s were supposedly a period of climate change too with dire warnings - of rapid global cooling towards a new ice age.
Yes I remember the heatwave, standpipes and basically enjoying the summer.
My mother worked the twilight shift at Jarvis Porters back then, she said they could hear the crickets chelping away inside of the factory, due to the heat there was an explosion in population of them.
Actually in the seventies the Club of Rome and the governments of all countries were pushing "Global Warming", that was working well for them till they got caught out in the lie by their own data and those who practiced science in its pure form. They had no choice but to try something else. We are still in a cooling cycle, but now they have redefined the measurement period for "Climate change" and the only acceptable data is that from the last thirty years, they declared all other data basically invalid as it was not collected entirely by satellite or "Electronically". A private audit of all weather monitoring sites in the US found a vast majority have been sited in urban areas including car parks with black top surfaces, in between buildings, on concrete pads. All of which will result in higher temperature readings. All in an effort to add weight to the warming argument.
This is also rubbish. They have been used interchangeably for decades but aren't actually the same thing. Global warming which most scientists agree is happening, yes concensus!, causes climate change.
I get it. It's similar to COVID-19, really. If someone is 85 years old with multiple serious health conditions and tests positive for COVID-19, they definitely died of COVID-19. If that same type of person dies within a week of having a COVID-19 'vaccine', it was the co-morbidities that finished them off as the vaccine would have saved them otherwise.
My problem isn’t whether there is climate change! My problem is that the Elite are manipulating the climate. Ifyou want the climate to not change stop the Elite from sending airplanes with chemtrails. Stop them from doing DEW and stop them from hiring people to put forests on fire
Did you know that Maui is a base for the US Directed Energy programme? Just over the mountain in the Central North. They proudly showed off their newly perfected plane based platform in 2016.
Not saying it was the cause of the fire, but they do have DEW right there, that can't be denied.
This is a video on Maui and the unhappy confluence of tropical storm low, hurricane Dora and an opposite high on either side of the island that created the 100 mph winds.
Same man has an example of using something to stop hurricane Hilary in it's tracks. What did that?
And this, at the 47 minute mark is the Hawaiian Air Force Optical and Supercomputing site on Maui where the directed energy weapons where showcased in 2016:
I can understand why temperatures should be compared with others taken at the same time each day (there's a big difference between the morning and the afternoon), that stations should be moved if they end up inside a city, that just because the 21 are the only one still extant more should be looked at (when they are thousands to add to a composite), especially as the 21 over represent the US, UK and Europe and are themselves weighted to cooler temperatures.
"especially as the 21 over represent the US, UK and Europe and are themselves weighted to cooler temperatures"
So, we take the 21 stations for which we have unambiguous, model- and interpretation-free data. We can't find a problem. Then we add a bunch of other data that is partly direct and raw, but also substantially extrapolated and inferred and estimated and so on. We find that this effort - done by people who rely on grants that are based on global warming being a problem - produces a world that is warming. Then, we just designate the original data - the only raw, model-free and unambiguous data we have - as not good enough, because it is "weighted to cooler temperatures" (aka does not demonstrate what we want).
What people like you don't understand is that people like me who do this for a living, who have to find the actual truth in systems (or the product fails and maybe we lose a job) see this time and again. This kind of thing is on page one of the "watch out for these archetypal mistakes" manual. Only amateurs reason like this and see no problem with it. These comments simply tell me you have no idea how to do this.
"just because the 21 are the only one still extant more should be looked at"
Right. But now you have two unknowns 1) what was the temperature and 2) how do we calibrate temperatures measured using position/apparatus/algorithm A with those using position/apparatus/algorithm B. When you get to your conclusion, you don't know which contributed - maybe the temperature is rising, or maybe the model you chose to do the calibration is the source of the anomalies.
So you focus on one at a time - you eliminate 2, and start from the dataset where only 1 can be the cause. The model can evolve later - you don't have to stick with just that unambiguous data, but you do have to start from it.
This is obviously what John Dee is doing. This is basic - unconscious routine procedure - for people who do numerical detective work on systems where the conclusions actually matter ie. where you have to find the actual truth, and not just find something you can justify with waves of the hand.
You've got to read this to believe it. In the Guardian, a few choice quotes from 'scientists' who are determined to have us believe that the weather is climate (except when it isn't) or something:
"Extreme weather is ‘smacking us in the face’ with worse to come, but a ‘tiny window’ of hope remains, say leading climate scientists."
“While some of the records being set in 2023 are just crazy off-the-charts, everything is actually tracking within the range of projections of how Earth would respond to increasing greenhouse gas emissions – projections we’ve had now for the last 30-plus years,” said Prof Matthew England, of the University of New South Wales (UNSW), Australia.
Dr Shaina Sadai, of the Union of Concerned Scientists in the US, said: “This year has been disturbing with the severe, unrelenting and record-breaking heat, but it is in line with what climate scientists and climate models have long predicted.”
“The temperature increase has particularly accelerated since about the 1960s [as emissions accelerated] and is continuing to rise steadily,” said Prof Jana Sillmann, of Hamburg University in Germany.
But the scientists said there was no evidence for any sudden, new acceleration.
“[Global] warming is remarkably steady, and that’s bad enough,” said Prof Michael Mann, of the University of Pennsylvania, US. “There is no reason to invent an ‘acceleration’ that isn’t there to make the case for urgency. The impacts of warming make the case for urgency.”
Global warming and extreme weather has accelerated . . . . . but it hasn't, and the steady rise is exactly in line with what climate models predicted. That's all clear then!
“July has been the hottest month in human history and people around the world are suffering the consequences,” said Prof Piers Forster, of the University of Leeds, UK. “But this is what we expected at [this level] of warming. This will become the average summer in 10 years’ time unless the world cooperates and puts climate action top of the agenda.”
Eh?
What's happening is just what they expected, but it's just the tip of the iceberg compared to what they expect in the future:
Prof Natalie Mahowald, of Cornell University, US, said: “What we are seeing this year is just the tip of the iceberg, so to speak, of what we expect to happen.” Meinshausen said: “If we do not halt global warming soon, then the extreme events we see this year will pale against the ones that are to come.”
But then again it's not what they expected and it's like, really, really scary:
“The impacts are frighteningly more impactful than I – and many climate scientists I know – expected,” said Prof Krishna AchutaRao, of the Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi. Prof Francisco Eliseu Aquino, of the Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil, said: “I have also been scared by these extreme events in the last weeks and months. They are more intense and going beyond what we expected for this decade.”
“My expertise is in heatwaves, and I’m not surprised most of the northern hemisphere has had heatwaves this summer, but the intensity is greater than I expected,” said Sarah Perkins-Kirkpatrick, an associate professor at UNSW. “We are hitting record-breaking extremes much sooner than I expected. That’s frightening, scary and concerning, and it really suggests that we’re not as aware of what’s coming as we thought we were.”
Wait, no, this is all getting confusing; it IS what they expected, it's just that our human societies and ecosystems are more vulnerable than they expected. There, sorted.
“The weather is changing as expected and predicted by scientists, but our societies and ecosystems are more vulnerable to even small changes than expected previously, and so the damages are worse,” said Dr Friederike Otto, of Imperial College London, UK.
No we weren't around billions of years ago when it was well hot. But now we have 8 billion people dependent on industrial farming and each others economies and the world will look abit different when the ice caps melt.
There is no mania as far as I can see, apart form Mann and some others getting a bit excited. Weeks go by with nothing in the news.
Unfortunately, "no-one" is far from the truth. Fortunately, it's a hellava lot more than it was 3 or 4 years ago but still very much in the minority. The NPCs are still dominating.
Aug 29, 2023·edited Aug 29, 2023Liked by Joel Smalley
For covid, NPCs dominating without any question - I think the cognitive dissonance there is off the charts, because admitting you took an injection that is at best ineffective and at worst dangerous that you knew nothing about, because you were told to by obvious psychopaths like Chris Witty and Matt Hancock.... This is too much to own up to for most. But for the climate change and net zero stuff, I suspect it's much better. Three people recently - all vaxxed - have volunteered memes and jokes to me about how it's obviously a scam. I guess partly because it's hitting people's pocket, like these "clean air zone" charges.
Aug 29, 2023·edited Aug 29, 2023Liked by Joel Smalley
Hi everyone, how's the weather where you are? It's a beautiful late summer here in the mid west US. Leaves haven't started to change color just yet but am looking forward to the magnificent hues in the near future ; )
Leaves changing is a sure sign of climate change. Damn us all to hell for destroying the planet and making the trees change color and drop their leaves... lol
South Australia here and pretty normal for end of winter beginning of spring. Hot and cold in equal measure. Rain was down a bit, but hey, last year it was up. That's SA.
Decades ago, pre digital, I went to the Adelaide bureau and looked up the records for a mid north country town we were moving to. As far back as records went there was absolutely nothing consistent. Up, down, hot cold, no two consecutive years the same. Some years floods in mid summer, others, barely enough rain for the farmers to get seed for the next year.
If it snows in April in a place that never gets snow past February, it’s just weather. If you get a thunderstorm on a summer afternoon it’s climate change. Got it!
A concluding para from a forthcoming email (without links):
Does anyone reading this still not accept that the climate change agenda is a gigantic junk science hoax? Thankfully it is starting to fall apart due to the arrogance and anti-humanity nihilism of those driving it. Their desperation shows in their frenzied unscientific attempts to blame imperceptible alleged man-made global warming for such normal events as occasional summer heatwaves and a few seasonally-commonplace wildfires caused by accidents, lightning strikes, fallen power line sparks, environmental mismanagement or arson, certainly not by spontaneous ignition due to any miniscule temperature increase.
Wildfires are often deliberately started, but get out of hand due to it being so hot and dry. Climate change doesn't cause anything. But makes them more likely. Like say an athlete on steroids suddenly getting 20% more home runs than before he started taking them. He still has to hit the ball.
If it’s not hot, it’s asymptomatic climate change.
But if it is hot, it's a false positive PCR test!
Lol
😂🤣 ♥️
Got it !
To my cringing shame I confess .....I once brought the whole deal. So grateful to be able to think my own thoughts now.
I was somewhat sold, until Climategate. I read the emails.
Total bullshit, laid bare.
Where can I read them?
Here, 10 minutes of you time will put your mind at rest - https://rumble.com/v1nwj66-kary-mullis-on-climate-change.html?fbclid=IwAR20QnhFSL1wbTHj7w44kmCbRincwQNZ5Xvatjvnjxbt3yX_EJe46dss9Lc
The 'climategate' emails that Corbett (who often gets the wrong end of the (hockey) stick) and others refers to alleged fudging of data and conflates two separate issues; mike's trick and hiding the decline in an email by Professor Phil Jones of the University of East Anglia. Mike's trick is simply the ubiquitous technique of using reconstructed temperatures from ice cores and tree rings with actual thermometer measurements on the same graph. The decline referred to is not a decline in temperatures but rather a decline in tree ring thickness which should have correlated with the rise in thermometer temperatures, but which diverged in the 1960s due to local pollution in some areas. It has been publicly discussed since 1995. In 2009 stolen emails were investigated; yet 9 independent studies showed that nothing affected the science.
Funny how they admit they fiddled the data in those same emails that you are defending. Gotta erase that blip so they can get their funding.
You lying turd
I've been there too. However, covid made the realize the following is true:
If governments around the world are pushing a narrative that will
1) give them more control over the people and/or
2) give them an excuse to raise taxes and steal land from the people,
they are LYING!
As a result of this realization, I looked into climate change in more detail and found that it leaves so much out! (lies by omission). Like 98% of all greenhouse gases is water vapor. CO2 is a fraction of that other 2%! Like why wasn't climate warming prior to 1970? Like what about solar output, what about shifts of molten core of earth which was responsible for recent warmup of ocean temps in only a matter of weeks. Ocean temps could not have risen that fast from any other source. Like what about the recent Hunga Tonga-Hunga Haʻapai volcanic eruption which increased water vapor in the atmosphere by 10 to 13%...
All these things are taken into account by scientists because they are the ones who described them. Water vapour is indeed a greenhouse gas and the effect of co2 is greatly increased by its presence. Co2, trace minerals and arsenic are still important in tiny amounts. The Hunga Tonga may have contributed to about 0.3C but solar activity, decrease in marine oil, volcanoes, the molten core have all been taken into consideration and play a role. The climate is trends. Yes there was a big jump in ocean temperature. Yes the 10 year average trend is upward. https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/monitoring/climate-at-a-glance/global/time-series/globe/ocean/1/7/1850-2023
The career experts who are excluded because they refused to chant the mantra disagree with you.
My limited research tells me you’re incorrect, at best.
Did you mention that atmospheric [CO2] has been very much higher than today, including during ice ages?
What ended the ice ages?
Ice core data shows that surface temperature changes preceded changes in CO2.
The source & destination of that CO2 is the oceans. Warming water holds less dissolved CO2. The thermal inertia of the oceans is huge compared with that of the atmosphere, hence the substantial phase delay.
Why are the models continually wrong? Why did Algore tell us 20 years ago that ocean front cities would be flooded by now?
Here is a sensible take on all this by a long time meteorologist and climate scientist who does believe the climate is warming, but that we are NOT facing a climate emergency and are NOT at a climate tipping point. He says we have at least 100 years to figure out solutions, and the damage we would do now to people's lives, the suffering we would create by implementing rushed solutions is both unnecessary and counter productive
https://cliffmass.blogspot.com/2022/11/climate-tipping-points-real-threats-or.html
oh, and I am very skeptical of any government website. NOAA is pushing an agenda. You know Australian weather "scientists" recently got caught LYING about the temperature record.
here's what you get if you google "greenhouse gases"
https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases
The article lists the greenhouse gases in the atmosphere: CO2, NO, Methane, and Florinated gases. But there is NO MENTION of Water Vapor! The amount of water vapor in the atmosphere is orders of magnitude greater than those 4 greenhouse gases combined. Why don't they list H2O as a greenhouse gas? Because they don't, the obvious conclusion is they are trying to hide that fact. Why? Because they are pushing a narrative, so they lie by omission.
Me too, I even got solar panels, I benefit with the subsidy for 20 years, but not the planet.
Your not alone Kaylene, I'm am also guilty of blindly believing the Climate BS.. Only after doing a deep dive into Covid-19 and seeing all the lies. Then looking deep into Ukraine war, more lies, then all the climate BS !.. So many lies being perpetrated by our gov an mainstream media. The first 54 years of my life I can honesty say, I was asleep..
Good to know I have company….especially during these days.
Someone "explained" to me recently (as it was bucketing down and a bit chilly in August) how the weather will get worse now due to global warming. That is, the temperature will go down because the temperature is going up. I'd liken these people to characters from The Wicker Man, except that seems to give them too much intelligence.
John Malone they said this at least 20yrs ago, as the climate heats up then we’ll get colder wetter summers.
We’ve had several heatwaves and scorching summers since their announcement in the 90’s.
I find it’s best to ignore them altogether, if you really want to know what the weather is doing, we’ll it’s best to look outside yourself.
Likewise they are pointing to sea temperatures now, despite it being caused by warming of the atmosphere apparently, which isn't heating.
90% of the warming that's happening is happening is accounted for in the oceans, only 2% in atmosphere. They are both heating.
Prove it. Because by your logic if the oceans are heating, then severe storms should be increasing in my country as cyclones are driven by low pressure and warm oceans. Aint happening, in fact the data clearly shows that cyclonic activity in Australia is decreasing. Just for stumps, Ten years ago we noticed anomalies with the temperature data being published by the BOM in this country from the buoys' in the Indian Ocean that resulted in temps showing a rise. They were taken to task over that and went all out to shut down every line of questioning and cut access to the data off and denying all requests, the buoys were online, the data was being dropped. You have made a number of claims now, back em up.
https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/monitoring/climate-at-a-glance/global/time-series/globe/ocean/1/7/1850-2023
Of course climate only looks at trends, which will go up and down in the short time ie the weather. Climate change makes things more likely in the long term
Is your position that the human output of CO2 is the cause of the rising anomalies in this chart; that human emissions of CO2 are primary mechanism behind this increase in temperature of the oceans; that without humans and the industrial revolution, these anomalies would not be rising?
This is why the censorship is going up and up, necessarily, because the further removed from reality a narrative gets, the more easily it is to take it down through exposing the contradictions or hypocrisy, and to laugh it away.
The problem in convincing people there is an issue, is because there isn’t one. And climate change is an outcome, not a cause. An outcome cannot be its cause! It is changing weather patterns over long periods of time that indicate a shift in climate, but when there is no change in weather patterns, there cannot be a shift in climate. In any case changes in climate are not linear, so any trend in one direction, could change later to a different, even reverse direction. It is not sensible to consider climate change in periods less than tens of thousands of years. The island of Britain is between a huge land mass to the East, a huge water mass to the West and the Arctic to the North. That makes our weather ‘interesting’ - in Britain climate change is a quarter-hourly event. That is why British people don’t take climate change seriously and all the breathless nonsense about hot June, and heavy rainfall, and no snow in Winter as ‘evidence’ of climate change because it’s just business as normal. July and August have been cold and wet- what we call typical English Summer.
The uk can have sun, rain, sleet snow and hailstones all in the same day.
Been the same since my childhood and my parents before, no amount of tax increases is going to stop it either.
Remember the long hot Summer 1976, eight weeks of relentless heatwave, dry reservoirs, drought, roads melting, track buckling on the railways? Then it stopped abruptly end of August to be followed weeks of torrential rain and floods.
The 1970s were supposedly a period of climate change too with dire warnings - of rapid global cooling towards a new ice age.
Yes I remember the heatwave, standpipes and basically enjoying the summer.
My mother worked the twilight shift at Jarvis Porters back then, she said they could hear the crickets chelping away inside of the factory, due to the heat there was an explosion in population of them.
I remember this. I visited London in August 1976.
It drizzled a misted rain CONSTANTLY.
It was cool and very damp and smelled of kitchen cleanser.
The British Museum was a gas.
The Egyptian exhibit focused on the gear of ordinary Egyptians.
Back in America, people were in a frenzy to insulate their homes.
The inference was that the ice sheets were going to soonly scour Canada clean, and all the Canadians would need to move south.
And where would we put them all.
Same BS, different day.
Actually in the seventies the Club of Rome and the governments of all countries were pushing "Global Warming", that was working well for them till they got caught out in the lie by their own data and those who practiced science in its pure form. They had no choice but to try something else. We are still in a cooling cycle, but now they have redefined the measurement period for "Climate change" and the only acceptable data is that from the last thirty years, they declared all other data basically invalid as it was not collected entirely by satellite or "Electronically". A private audit of all weather monitoring sites in the US found a vast majority have been sited in urban areas including car parks with black top surfaces, in between buildings, on concrete pads. All of which will result in higher temperature readings. All in an effort to add weight to the warming argument.
This is also rubbish. They have been used interchangeably for decades but aren't actually the same thing. Global warming which most scientists agree is happening, yes concensus!, causes climate change.
It was all down to Denis Howell who was successively Minster for Drought, Floods and Snow.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denis_Howell
He holds the record for being the most successful Minister of all time. We need more like him but alas…
Try living in that dump called Melbourne Australia, you get four seasons twice per day.
You are very wrong.
If it’s hot it’s CC.
If it’s cold too
If it doesn’t rain it’s CC
If not, too.
Etc
Climate Change All The Way Down
I get it. It's similar to COVID-19, really. If someone is 85 years old with multiple serious health conditions and tests positive for COVID-19, they definitely died of COVID-19. If that same type of person dies within a week of having a COVID-19 'vaccine', it was the co-morbidities that finished them off as the vaccine would have saved them otherwise.
Nailed it.
Yes, it would have made sense to use the same inclusive criterion for covid and the vax. Just to be super cautious with a new technology. But no.
My problem isn’t whether there is climate change! My problem is that the Elite are manipulating the climate. Ifyou want the climate to not change stop the Elite from sending airplanes with chemtrails. Stop them from doing DEW and stop them from hiring people to put forests on fire
They are no DEWs, at least not these ones https://georgiedonny.substack.com/p/maui-fires-clown-world?utm_source=%2Fsearch%2Fmaui&utm_medium=reader2
Did you know that Maui is a base for the US Directed Energy programme? Just over the mountain in the Central North. They proudly showed off their newly perfected plane based platform in 2016.
Not saying it was the cause of the fire, but they do have DEW right there, that can't be denied.
This is a video on Maui and the unhappy confluence of tropical storm low, hurricane Dora and an opposite high on either side of the island that created the 100 mph winds.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IloaNcyqGJk&t=12s
Same man has an example of using something to stop hurricane Hilary in it's tracks. What did that?
And this, at the 47 minute mark is the Hawaiian Air Force Optical and Supercomputing site on Maui where the directed energy weapons where showcased in 2016:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IloaNcyqGJk&t=12s
Just another psyops. Do you know John Dee Joel? He writes John Dee's climate Normal on Sustack - well worth a read.
Yes, of course. We loosely collaborate, well share data and ideas really...
A little look at some of John Dee's unscientific nonsense https://georgiedonny.substack.com/p/response-to-john-dees-nonsense
"I can't understand why he thinks it's important that the recording is done from the same stations!!"
Can you guess?
I can understand why temperatures should be compared with others taken at the same time each day (there's a big difference between the morning and the afternoon), that stations should be moved if they end up inside a city, that just because the 21 are the only one still extant more should be looked at (when they are thousands to add to a composite), especially as the 21 over represent the US, UK and Europe and are themselves weighted to cooler temperatures.
"especially as the 21 over represent the US, UK and Europe and are themselves weighted to cooler temperatures"
So, we take the 21 stations for which we have unambiguous, model- and interpretation-free data. We can't find a problem. Then we add a bunch of other data that is partly direct and raw, but also substantially extrapolated and inferred and estimated and so on. We find that this effort - done by people who rely on grants that are based on global warming being a problem - produces a world that is warming. Then, we just designate the original data - the only raw, model-free and unambiguous data we have - as not good enough, because it is "weighted to cooler temperatures" (aka does not demonstrate what we want).
What people like you don't understand is that people like me who do this for a living, who have to find the actual truth in systems (or the product fails and maybe we lose a job) see this time and again. This kind of thing is on page one of the "watch out for these archetypal mistakes" manual. Only amateurs reason like this and see no problem with it. These comments simply tell me you have no idea how to do this.
"just because the 21 are the only one still extant more should be looked at"
Right. But now you have two unknowns 1) what was the temperature and 2) how do we calibrate temperatures measured using position/apparatus/algorithm A with those using position/apparatus/algorithm B. When you get to your conclusion, you don't know which contributed - maybe the temperature is rising, or maybe the model you chose to do the calibration is the source of the anomalies.
So you focus on one at a time - you eliminate 2, and start from the dataset where only 1 can be the cause. The model can evolve later - you don't have to stick with just that unambiguous data, but you do have to start from it.
This is obviously what John Dee is doing. This is basic - unconscious routine procedure - for people who do numerical detective work on systems where the conclusions actually matter ie. where you have to find the actual truth, and not just find something you can justify with waves of the hand.
no
I've updated with the rest of part 2 of JD, glad I got part 1 in as it's now behind a pay wall https://georgiedonny.substack.com/p/response-to-john-dees-nonsense
You've got to read this to believe it. In the Guardian, a few choice quotes from 'scientists' who are determined to have us believe that the weather is climate (except when it isn't) or something:
"Extreme weather is ‘smacking us in the face’ with worse to come, but a ‘tiny window’ of hope remains, say leading climate scientists."
“While some of the records being set in 2023 are just crazy off-the-charts, everything is actually tracking within the range of projections of how Earth would respond to increasing greenhouse gas emissions – projections we’ve had now for the last 30-plus years,” said Prof Matthew England, of the University of New South Wales (UNSW), Australia.
Dr Shaina Sadai, of the Union of Concerned Scientists in the US, said: “This year has been disturbing with the severe, unrelenting and record-breaking heat, but it is in line with what climate scientists and climate models have long predicted.”
“The temperature increase has particularly accelerated since about the 1960s [as emissions accelerated] and is continuing to rise steadily,” said Prof Jana Sillmann, of Hamburg University in Germany.
But the scientists said there was no evidence for any sudden, new acceleration.
“[Global] warming is remarkably steady, and that’s bad enough,” said Prof Michael Mann, of the University of Pennsylvania, US. “There is no reason to invent an ‘acceleration’ that isn’t there to make the case for urgency. The impacts of warming make the case for urgency.”
Global warming and extreme weather has accelerated . . . . . but it hasn't, and the steady rise is exactly in line with what climate models predicted. That's all clear then!
“July has been the hottest month in human history and people around the world are suffering the consequences,” said Prof Piers Forster, of the University of Leeds, UK. “But this is what we expected at [this level] of warming. This will become the average summer in 10 years’ time unless the world cooperates and puts climate action top of the agenda.”
Eh?
What's happening is just what they expected, but it's just the tip of the iceberg compared to what they expect in the future:
Prof Natalie Mahowald, of Cornell University, US, said: “What we are seeing this year is just the tip of the iceberg, so to speak, of what we expect to happen.” Meinshausen said: “If we do not halt global warming soon, then the extreme events we see this year will pale against the ones that are to come.”
But then again it's not what they expected and it's like, really, really scary:
“The impacts are frighteningly more impactful than I – and many climate scientists I know – expected,” said Prof Krishna AchutaRao, of the Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi. Prof Francisco Eliseu Aquino, of the Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil, said: “I have also been scared by these extreme events in the last weeks and months. They are more intense and going beyond what we expected for this decade.”
“My expertise is in heatwaves, and I’m not surprised most of the northern hemisphere has had heatwaves this summer, but the intensity is greater than I expected,” said Sarah Perkins-Kirkpatrick, an associate professor at UNSW. “We are hitting record-breaking extremes much sooner than I expected. That’s frightening, scary and concerning, and it really suggests that we’re not as aware of what’s coming as we thought we were.”
Wait, no, this is all getting confusing; it IS what they expected, it's just that our human societies and ecosystems are more vulnerable than they expected. There, sorted.
“The weather is changing as expected and predicted by scientists, but our societies and ecosystems are more vulnerable to even small changes than expected previously, and so the damages are worse,” said Dr Friederike Otto, of Imperial College London, UK.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/aug/28/crazy-off-the-charts-records-has-humanity-finally-broken-the-climate
These people are certifiable.
Yup. Human history? Maybe, that's because we weren't around for the first 4.5 billion years???!
No we weren't around billions of years ago when it was well hot. But now we have 8 billion people dependent on industrial farming and each others economies and the world will look abit different when the ice caps melt.
There is no mania as far as I can see, apart form Mann and some others getting a bit excited. Weeks go by with nothing in the news.
Space aliens did it.
I have proof.
;)
Wot, not Putin?
A 'secret' covert operation of all in black 'Blade Runners' stealing ULEZ cameras; appearing in the Daily Mail- now THAT is funny! https://georgiedonny.substack.com/p/clearly-im-not-the-one-experiencing?utm_source=profile&utm_medium=reader2
You think our heating bills would drop since everything is warming up...
Now apply this concept between bullshit and truth... fodder fed to us on a daily basis via main stream media... no one believes anything anymore.
Unfortunately, "no-one" is far from the truth. Fortunately, it's a hellava lot more than it was 3 or 4 years ago but still very much in the minority. The NPCs are still dominating.
For covid, NPCs dominating without any question - I think the cognitive dissonance there is off the charts, because admitting you took an injection that is at best ineffective and at worst dangerous that you knew nothing about, because you were told to by obvious psychopaths like Chris Witty and Matt Hancock.... This is too much to own up to for most. But for the climate change and net zero stuff, I suspect it's much better. Three people recently - all vaxxed - have volunteered memes and jokes to me about how it's obviously a scam. I guess partly because it's hitting people's pocket, like these "clean air zone" charges.
Maybe, it's a way for them to convince themselves they aren't completely gullible fools?!
I think gullible fools were the ones posting a years old image of a transformer in Chile and saying it was a direct energy weapon causing the Maui fires. https://georgiedonny.substack.com/p/maui-fires-clown-world
Off topic, but here's a link to JJ https://m.twitch.tv/videos/1860996790?desktop-redirect=true . Search GigaOhmBiological, his page. I couldn't share with you thru Mathew's paid substack.
Thanks, I know of JJ, just hadn't seen all his material, since as Mathew says, he needs to write it up. Maybe, he should start a Substack?!
Hi everyone, how's the weather where you are? It's a beautiful late summer here in the mid west US. Leaves haven't started to change color just yet but am looking forward to the magnificent hues in the near future ; )
Leaves changing is a sure sign of climate change. Damn us all to hell for destroying the planet and making the trees change color and drop their leaves... lol
We are so bad.
Not sorry.
Autumn leaves are pretty.
South Australia here and pretty normal for end of winter beginning of spring. Hot and cold in equal measure. Rain was down a bit, but hey, last year it was up. That's SA.
Decades ago, pre digital, I went to the Adelaide bureau and looked up the records for a mid north country town we were moving to. As far back as records went there was absolutely nothing consistent. Up, down, hot cold, no two consecutive years the same. Some years floods in mid summer, others, barely enough rain for the farmers to get seed for the next year.
If it snows in April in a place that never gets snow past February, it’s just weather. If you get a thunderstorm on a summer afternoon it’s climate change. Got it!
Here in Spain it works different. If is snows in April, it is Climate Change as well. If it does not, also climate change. Everything!
A concluding para from a forthcoming email (without links):
Does anyone reading this still not accept that the climate change agenda is a gigantic junk science hoax? Thankfully it is starting to fall apart due to the arrogance and anti-humanity nihilism of those driving it. Their desperation shows in their frenzied unscientific attempts to blame imperceptible alleged man-made global warming for such normal events as occasional summer heatwaves and a few seasonally-commonplace wildfires caused by accidents, lightning strikes, fallen power line sparks, environmental mismanagement or arson, certainly not by spontaneous ignition due to any miniscule temperature increase.
You forgot arson...
No he didn’t “ environmental mismanagement “ .
I’m sooo clever 😇
Wildfires are often deliberately started, but get out of hand due to it being so hot and dry. Climate change doesn't cause anything. But makes them more likely. Like say an athlete on steroids suddenly getting 20% more home runs than before he started taking them. He still has to hit the ball.
No, it's there at the end, highlighted as a link in my full version.
My bad!
* The correct word is 'mistake', not 'bad'. The latter is what Americans use, for the correct word, 'mistake'.
We British people usually use the correct word...
Speaking personally, hoax? Yes... and a dangerous one.
yes me! And it's HUMAN made!!!
They just lie: sure June was not especially warm apart from about 3 days.
It’s all a sham. It’s always been a sham and it will always be a sham. It’s always about taking away freedom and rights.