500 Scientists Signed Letter to UN Stating, “There Is No Climate Emergency”

Joined
Apr 16, 2017
Messages
2,100
Likes
3,073
#81
We have scientific data on it.
Well now we are back to believing what we are being told, where my line of questioning was predicated on your claim you could observe climate change yourself. Do you have persoanl access to this scientific data? Will you share it with us here on the forum? Can you verify the accuracy of the data or is it interpolations based on models?
 





Joined
Aug 4, 2019
Messages
1,022
Likes
1,750
#82
You can go on living believing that everyone is against you, thats on you.
No I don't believe everyone is against me and certainly not in this case, well at least not personally.
Its not about best interest of the people
Really? I thought governments worked for the best interest of the people or at least they are suppose to.
climate change causes problems (like floods we are having) and then governments have to spend money and fix their problems,
But they are not fixing the problem. They are either willfully complicit in creating disasters by means of weather warfare(HAARP, DEW) or at the very least allowing natural occurrences to happen and then putting blame on man made climate change.See - http://whale.to/b/weather.html
anyone in their right mind would prefer to not have the problem in the first place.
I agree but we are dealing with control freaks and psychopaths who like to play god.
 





Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
3,405
Likes
5,631
#83
Well now we are back to believing what we are being told, where my line of questioning was predicated on your claim you could observe climate change yourself. Do you have persoanl access to this scientific data? Will you share it with us here on the forum? Can you verify the accuracy of the data or is it interpolations based on models?
What are you even talking about? We can see it yes. Can i measure the data? No, my education is around biological sciences, humans and diseases etc. But people who are physicists and so on are saying that this is real and this is a problem and they are giving valid proofs and scientific data. You are choosing to ignore that.

No I don't believe everyone is against me and certainly not in this case, well at least not personally.

Really? I thought governments worked for the best interest of the people or at least they are suppose to.

But they are not fixing the problem. They are either willfully complicit in creating disasters by means of weather warfare(HAARP, DEW) or at the very least allowing natural occurrences to happen and then putting blame on man made climate change.See - http://whale.to/b/weather.html

I agree but we are dealing with control freaks and psychopaths who like to play god.
The entire world is not the US.
 





Joined
Apr 16, 2017
Messages
2,100
Likes
3,073
#84
What are you even talking about? We can see it yes. Can i measure the data? No, my education is around biological sciences, humans and diseases etc. But people who are physicists and so on are saying that this is real and this is a problem and they are giving valid proofs and scientific data. You are choosing to ignore that.
That's why I asked to see the data. How can I ignore what I haven't seen?
 





Joined
Apr 16, 2017
Messages
2,100
Likes
3,073
#86
You said before that despite the weather channels "bombarding" you with climate change data, you dont believe it because you haven't seen climate change yourself lol
None of the data confirms or prooves that climate change is man made. Besides, there is a signifcant difference in charts on the weatherchannel and peer reviewed scientific report's with abstracts explaining where the data came from and what methods were used to interpret the data and verify it's accuracy. Have you ever seen any of that? If you have can you please direct me to the reports and the data you have seen? If not then we are just going around and around in circles. Propoganda has a tendency to cause that...
 





Joined
Apr 16, 2017
Messages
2,100
Likes
3,073
#87
Here is an example of how scientific data is interpreted and imperfect models are created in an attempt to arrive at accurate conclusions. (And yes I specifically choose an article about a topic that looked at a potential benefit of increased CO2 emissions to make a point). https://www.climatecentral.org/news/study-finds-plant-growth-surges-as-co2-levels-rise-16094

Though this article claims that a long debated effect of CO2 emissions has finally been confirmed, the article itself contains phrases such as "their model suggested", " it’s very difficult to be sure ", "would be the best explanation", "In the end, they teased out..", "calculated that this could account for", "It could also be good news for biodiversity". Does that sound like phrases used to describe conclusions that are absolutely and undeniably 100% correct? Not really. But that is the kind of language that is often used in scientific reports, becasue human understanding of the connectedness of everything is still relatively limited. We are still incapable of understnading and predicting every single consequence or result of any physical event or phenomenon.

When creating models there are always assumptions and best guesses or compromises that have to be made because no single model can include every single variable that might effect the outcome of the model. As an Engineer who uses analytical thought methods at my job everyday, I know how easy it is manipulate or skew data to show the wanted or expected result.

How often do maninstream media outlets tell us about the assumptions and compromises used to arrive at the conclusions about climate change that they report as undeniable fact? The average person has little idea how scientific methods work or how scientists actually arrive at thoeries or conclusions that get reported by mainstream media as fact.
 





Joined
Jan 29, 2018
Messages
4,081
Likes
4,479
#88
In the video you posted, the presenter questions and is critical as to why the list of changes needed to "save the environment" is aimed mainly at society and not going after large corporations, who are the largest polluters. As he said "It's just a drop in the bucket."

Again, this is because its not about the environment, it's about control of the masses. The wording in the Guardian story mirrors UN Agenda 2030 initiatives that were based on globalist think tank jargon created decades ago. All fear based propaganda meant to further the NWO and the culling of the masses.

View attachment 28147

"The common enemy of humanity is man.

In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up

with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming,

water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these

dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through

changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome.

The real enemy then, is humanity itself."​

-Club of Rome,​

premier environmental think-tank,​

consultants to the United Nations​


"The emerging 'environmentalization' of our civilization

and the need for vigorous action in the interest of the entire global

community will inevitably have multiple political consequences.

Perhaps the most important of them will be a gradual change

in the status of the United Nations. Inevitably, it must

assume some aspects of a world government."​

- Mikhail Gorbachev,​

State of the World Forum​


"A keen and anxious awareness is evolving to suggest that

fundamental changes will have to take place in the world order

and its power structures, in the distribution of wealth and income.

Perhaps only a new and enlightened humanism

can permit mankind to negotiate this transition."​

- Club of Rome,​

Mankind at the Turning Point​


"We are on the verge of a global transformation.

All we need is the right major crisis..."​

- David Rockefeller,​

Club of Rome executive member​


"A reasonable estimate for an industrialized world society

at the present North American material standard of living

would be 1 billion. At the more frugal European standard

of living, 2 to 3 billion would be possible."​

- United Nations,​

Global Biodiversity Assessment​


"...the resultant ideal sustainable population is hence

more than 500 million but less than one billion."​

-Club of Rome,​

Goals for Mankind​
I agree with him that corporations are responsible for the majority of the problem, but not the vast majority of it......
 





Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
3,405
Likes
5,631
#89
Industries and corporations are run by people and they ARE a massive contribution to the rapid rate at which the change is happening. Man made doesn't have to mean that Stacie down the block is burning too many plastic wrappers, industries etc still are man made.
 





Joined
Jan 29, 2018
Messages
4,081
Likes
4,479
#91
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
8,458
Likes
4,046
#92
Please feel free to refute this if you are able Lisa.......
I like how all the bad are in the future...so we always have a chance to stop it...:rolleyes: then when it comes to the time when the last guy said the world was gonna end and we are still plugging along..they keep extending it...it just gets tiresome really.
 





Joined
Jan 29, 2018
Messages
4,081
Likes
4,479
#93
I like how all the bad are in the future...so we always have a chance to stop it...:rolleyes: then when it comes to the time when the last guy said the world was gonna end and we are still plugging along..they keep extending it...it just gets tiresome really.
So what you are saying is that you dont have any factual or scientific info/evidence to refute the video with eh?
 





Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
8,458
Likes
4,046
#94
So what you are saying is that you dont have any factual or scientific info/evidence to refute the video with eh?
What I’m saying is how many times have we heard in the last 20 or more years that we only have 10 years to save the planet..think Al Gore..that time came and went and we are still here. Yet they keep using that same stuff to freak people out. I don’t fall for it anymore and neither should you.

Apparently I’m not the only one who thinks this...
The ever receding climate goalpost: IPCC and Al Gore “12 years to save the planet” (again)
Anthony Watts / October 8, 2018
Ah, it’s beginning to sound like a broken record. The same message over and over again. It’s as if these folks don’t pay attention to history.

The United Nations has once again issued another dire climate change report (SR15, see it here) claiming we must act before it’s too late.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/10...nd-al-gore-12-years-to-save-the-planet-again/
 





Joined
Jan 29, 2018
Messages
4,081
Likes
4,479
#95
What I’m saying is how many times have we heard in the last 20 or more years that we only have 10 years to save the planet..think Al Gore..that time came and went and we are still here. Yet they keep using that same stuff to freak people out. I don’t fall for it anymore and neither should you.

Apparently I’m not the only one who thinks this...
The ever receding climate goalpost: IPCC and Al Gore “12 years to save the planet” (again)
Anthony Watts / October 8, 2018
Ah, it’s beginning to sound like a broken record. The same message over and over again. It’s as if these folks don’t pay attention to history.

The United Nations has once again issued another dire climate change report (SR15, see it here) claiming we must act before it’s too late.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/10...nd-al-gore-12-years-to-save-the-planet-again/
I have no idea what you have been hearing for 20plus years Lisa, but I do know that the report issued by the DoD is very new so your imaginary history lesson here doesn't really matter. What does mater is the facts you could produce to refute it with... and instead you post another study which confirms the pentagon's findings lol
 





Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
8,458
Likes
4,046
#96
I have no idea what you have been hearing for 20plus years Lisa, but I do know that the report issued by the DoD is very new so your imaginary history lesson here doesn't really matter. What does mater is the facts you could produce to refute it with... and instead you post another study which confirms the pentagon's findings lol
I posted an article that talks about what I’ve been saying...we have x amount of years to save the planet again.
 





Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
8,458
Likes
4,046
#99
@TempestOfTempo
Honestly, they can’t say more than 10 years because people will tune it out..but they don’t know what they are talking about...the failed attempts at scaring people in the past proves it.
 





Joined
Jan 29, 2018
Messages
4,081
Likes
4,479
@TempestOfTempo
Honestly, they can’t say more than 10 years because people will tune it out..but they don’t know what they are talking about...the failed attempts at scaring people in the past proves it.
God wants us to love and protect his creation, including this planet that we were given.... so why do you hate God's will so much Lisa? Why are you so rebellious against what God almighty wishes for us to do?