Bitcoin Forum

I believe its absolutely true and we should start thinking about it more before we hit the non-return point.

I think it is arrogant to think we can affect climate change. The earth goes through various cycles which alter conditions. We do have some affect on what happens, but I the extent of our contribution is likely very limited.

Thoughts?

Before I did believe it, but now I do not anymore.  There a lot of unexplained things in this world, but this is something that's possibly just man made only, to promote a more sinister agenda instead.

If you believe in everything that you see and hear on television, radio and now on the Internet, you will probably believe that everything is indeed true (because of the way that our mind is being conditioned and controlled to believe by news and social media altogether).

I'm not saying something it's something that we shouldn't worry about. We have to come up with alternate living solutions to minimize deaths and other catastrophes, but I don't think it's all our fault.

The global warming hypothesis is a scientific theory, Like all scientific theories, it should be subject to continued scrutiny and testing. There also seems to be overwhelming evidence to support that the hypothesis is indeed correct. Regardless, I think that it is good policy to come up with cleaner and more efficient ways to produce energy, as well as other goods and services. In the short term, it may cause production costs to go up. However, in the long term, these costs will go down and everyone will benefit, even if the global warming hypothesis is incorrect.

The more fear the general public has, the more control the world's elite has over them.

Do you think that the global warming/climate change controversy is one of these instances?

I think it is arrogant to think we can affect climate change. The earth goes through various cycles which alter conditions. We do have some affect on what happens, but I the extent of our contribution is likely very limited.

I'm not saying something it's something that we shouldn't worry about. We have to come up with alternate living solutions to minimize deaths and other catastrophes, but I don't think it's all our fault.

Thoughts?

Global warming is definitely happening and it is not a scam. If you go and read up about global warming, it is indeed happening now and it will become more serious as time goes by. In years to come, there most likely will not have North and South Pole anymore.

The more fear the general public has, the more control the world's elite has over them.

Do you think that the global warming/climate change controversy is one of these instances?

I think it is arrogant to think we can affect climate change. The earth goes through various cycles which alter conditions. We do have some affect on what happens, but I the extent of our contribution is likely very limited.

I'm not saying something it's something that we shouldn't worry about. We have to come up with alternate living solutions to minimize deaths and other catastrophes, but I don't think it's all our fault.

Thoughts?

Tell that to people who live in Florida. This would probably be the first place to go underwater because of a global warming.

Yes, but. Think of all the land in Siberia and Canada that would be opened up for habitation because of the warmer weather. And the warmer weather would allow for more evaporation of water from the oceans, so that there wouldn't be as mush coastal loss of land as one might think. And the humid air would deposit much of its moisture on the Sahara and other Deserts, turning them into lush gardens, opening them up for habitation, as well.

We need global warming, just to give us more land for cultivation to support our growing populations.

8)

In the modern world, most people are very used to hearing scientists prophesying of the dangers of man-made climate change, often referred to as global warming, as trapped carbon dioxide in our atmosphere causes the planet's temperature to rise, and the polar ice to melt at an alarming rate.

Now, though, scientists led by Valentina Zharkova at Northumbria University are arguing that we might be about to see the reverse occurring - instead of heating up, starting in 2021, the world is going to enter a period of cooling that's being described as a "mini ice age".

The issue has to do with the sun's decade-long solar cycle. Every ten to twelve years, our sun goes through a fairly predictable pattern of behavior, venting solar radiation, and rising or falling in temperature.

Every cycle is different, and it's not possible to entirely predict what's coming, but by looking at certain signs in the sun's solar activity, Zharkova has made some educated guesses about the upcoming cycle.

...

Miniature ice ages (known scientifically as "Maunder minimum" periods) have come many times in the past - a similar one, for example, was responsible for low temperatures that froze the River Thames in London back in the seventeenth century.

A common theme in our world is misinformation, and if you follow the brilliant work of independent scientists and journalists, you will see it’s currently plaguing the field of mainstream science in multiple areas. This is not just due to error on part of researchers, but the politicization of science, something scientists, especially with regards to medical and climate science, are gathering together and speaking up about every single year.

Credible, dissenting scientific voices go largely unheard by the mainstream media and education. As a result, most of our beliefs and thoughts about what is happening on our planet come from programming, brainwashing and mass marketing heavy with mainstream politicized science.

Overall human consciousness has been influenced by the global elite, simply for the purposes of driving us into acceptance of the limited, and often ridiculous, solutions they pose for the problems that they create. This is why critical thinking and independent research is crucial for citizens. Seeking out multiple sources for information is important while living in the age of information. Thankfully, there are a lot of people waking up right now, and as a result, many things are shifting and new sources are emerging.

A Coming Ice Age?

You will be surprise how much Carbon footprint you leave in every activity you do and to what scale they can affect the environment. Read up!

Can you give us the numbers?

Climate change is real. It would be foolish to suggest that the climate doesn't change from season to season. So, the powers that be have adapted the term climate change to global warming, just so people automatically think that global warming is real like climate change is.

But that isn't what the topic title says. The title says "scam." Even if global warming were the truth, the fact that they use the term climate change rather than global warming, shows that they are attempting to scam you.

8)

The scam that would exist even if there was global warming, is the idea that governmental controls on people could do anything about it. All the one-worlders want is to control the people. They are using GW as a method to do so. And it isn't really a very good method, because GW might not exist. There are mixed studies coming in all the time.

8)

Moore explained how fear and guilt are leveraged by proponents of climate change:

Fear has been used all through history to gain control of people's minds and wallets and all else, and the climate catastrophe is strictly a fear campaign — well, fear and guilt — you're afraid you're killing your children because you're driving them in your SUV and emitting carbon dioxide into the atmosphere and you feel guilty for doing that. There's no stronger motivation than those two.

Scientists are co-opted and corrupted by politicians and bureaucracies invested in advancing the narrative of "climate change" in order to further centralize political power and control, explained Moore.

Moore noted how "green" companies parasitize taxpayers via favorable regulations and subsidies ostensibly justified by the aforementioned narrative's claimed threats, all while enjoying propagandistic protection across news media:

And so you’ve got the green movement creating stories that instill fear in the public. You’ve got the media echo chamber — fake news — repeating it over and over and over again to everybody that they’re killing their children. And then you’ve got the green politicians who are buying scientists with government money to produce fear for them in the form of scientific-looking materials. And then you’ve got the green businesses, the rent-seekers, and the crony capitalists who are taking advantage of massive subsidies, huge tax write-offs, and government mandates requiring their technologies to make a fortune on this. And then, of course, you’ve got the scientists who are willingly, they’re basically hooked on government grants.

I think that if it has an impact, in fact, at an international level it has seen an impact even on the climate, there are places that were very cold and now they are hot, for example where I live, 20 years ago the weather was very cold now it's hot, that's the way this phenomenon has happened in several places, and if you start checking, many glaciers have been thawing little by little.

The majority of environmental impacts must be taken into account to avoid global warming, and I know that a lot of money that was destined to conserve or take care of the way in which it has no impact on global warming is no longer there, I think it is a very sensitive issue and if you need worldwide attention.

The warmest decade in the USA was the 1930s...so what are the natural forces that caused this because it is not possible CO2 did.

The more fear the general public has, the more control the world's elite has over them.

Do you think that the global warming/climate change controversy is one of these instances?

I think it is arrogant to think we can affect climate change. The earth goes through various cycles which alter conditions. We do have some affect on what happens, but I the extent of our contribution is likely very limited.

I'm not saying something it's something that we shouldn't worry about. We have to come up with alternate living solutions to minimize deaths and other catastrophes, but I don't think it's all our fault.

Thoughts?

Mass kill off is coming.

Too late for much to be done about it.

My hope is it comes in 40 years not 10.

As I will be 102 in 40 years. Most likely the ruling forces of the universe will have killed me off by the time of 102.

If you are 20 I will hope it takes a much longer time so you won’t have to see it or suffer from it.

Btw I actively try to create more solar arrays in the hope I am wrong and things work out.

I will not deny the importance of protecting the environment, nor will I deliberately destroy the environment in which I live.It is very difficult for us to solve the environmental problems caused by human existence!But we should still do something to protect the environment.
The saddest thing about us humans is that we always think we are the masters of the world and that we can change the world through our actions.

If anybody thinks that global warming a scam, please just watch weather news around the world and you will get idea what is going on with weather and climate changes.

Before there was “global warming,” there was “global cooling.”

A renowned Time magazine article from the mid-1970s claimed that the earth was rapidly cooling and for the same reasons — human-caused technology and activity. What’s more, the next “Ice Age” was just around the corner, and a large portion of the world’s population would starve to death because of dramatically shortened growing seasons. (See a portion of the article at the Free Republic and the actual link to a snippet of the original article on Time’s website here).

Well, that turned out to be false. So the climate hucksters had to come up with something else to scare the bejesus out of all of us so we’d just turn over all authority — and all our money — to the ‘powers that be.’

The world isn’t cooling, the change went, it is warming, and so much so that we’ve only got a few years to live. Or something like that.

But after years of trying and failing to sell the “global warming” hoax, the Left-wing science propagandists came up with a new phrase — “climate change” — because, after all, who could argue the fact that, throughout history, the earth’s climate has…changed?

Now that phrase has also failed to sufficiently convince the bulk of the world’s people to surrender their liberty and their property and their money to the globalists. So it’s time to change it again — to “climate crisis.” Or “environmental collapse.” (Related: NASA declares carbon dioxide is GREENING the Earth… reveals how Green New Deal is a DEATH cult that would collapse global ecology.)

^^^ If you are going to recognize the scientific community, do it in the same way you would let someone into your house... only after he is bonded.

In other words, make the scientists take the oath or affirmation, get them on the stand, and let them make their statements there. Then, bond them so that if they have damaged anyone by lying, that there is monetary recourse for all who were damaged. And place them under contract for liability for what they said on the stand.

Why? Because there are tons of studies that show global warming is a farce. Certainly there is climate change. Temperatures go up and they go down. Then they go up, again, and down again. That's the standard understanding in science.

8)

^^^ Perhaps you are one of those who is a real scientist who has done the studies. If you are, have you considered all the implications of the observations you have made, from every angle? If you aren't, why are you relying on some studies, and not the others? How do you know that some studies are accurate and others aren't?

Get out there and take a look at the cold winters the northern part of the USA has been having for the last couple years. That's just one simple observation that shows that if there is any global warming at all, it's on the decline. But if you say that the Sahara was exceptionally hot the last couple of years, have you really balanced all the reports to see what is happening around the world?

8)

I can't understand if you're trolling. I'm just saying that every observation that you make in science must be shared with studies that prove it, all other observations are just meaningless. In science you have to prove your findings. When you say a number, you have to prove the calculation behind that number. You can't just say a number and wait for others to prove that the calculation behind it is wrong, that's completely crazy.

You can tell if a certain study is accurate and others aren't because of whether the majority of the scientific community agrees on it or not, that's how it works. You don't ask people on the street if a study is accurate. LOL

So, again, if you're trolling you're not funny, but if you go out of your house looking at the mountains and try to compare your observations with those of people that studied for their whole lives and are actually proving something with scientific studies, I'm afraid we're talking about bigger problems than not being funny, sorry.

The more fear the general public has, the more control the world's elite has over them.

Do you think that the global warming/climate change controversy is one of these instances?

I think it is arrogant to think we can affect climate change. The earth goes through various cycles which alter conditions. We do have some affect on what happens, but I the extent of our contribution is likely very limited.

I'm not saying something it's something that we shouldn't worry about. We have to come up with alternate living solutions to minimize deaths and other catastrophes, but I don't think it's all our fault.

Thoughts?

I can't tell if you are just being silly or what? Anybody can print out studies. Anybody can get cohorts to say the studies are real.

Nobody can tell if the studies are real except if he does them himself... or at least participates. But if he is honest, or if his studies matter, let him get on the stand under oath and testify, with penalties and imprisonment if he is lying.

In the case of global warming, there are so many studies that suggest the opposite, that GW isn't known to be factual, and that G-cooling seems more logical.

8)

Did the government or "world's elite" cause the terrible hurricanes or extreme heat? The oceans dying? If they are magicians or have a technology the same as the movie Geostorm, then sure, Global Warming is a scam. If the answer is no, then global warming is real. No world's elite can keep that from happening.

What will happen is this. We will use chemtrails and whatever we can think of to reduce global warming. It will seem to work for a while. Then nature will set about doing what nature does, and things will get so hot that we won't have any chance to cool her down. We will barely be able to remain alive in the great heat that nature will bring, just to thwart out global cooling attempts.

8)

The more fear the general public has, the more control the world's elite has over them.

Do you think that the global warming/climate change controversy is one of these instances?

I think it is arrogant to think we can affect climate change. The earth goes through various cycles which alter conditions. We do have some affect on what happens, but I the extent of our contribution is likely very limited.

I'm not saying something it's something that we shouldn't worry about. We have to come up with alternate living solutions to minimize deaths and other catastrophes, but I don't think it's all our fault.

Thoughts?

‘Bullet points’ proving CO2’s innocence.

Geologists know climate change unrelated to atmospheric CO2 occurred throughout Earth’s 4.5-billion-year history. Yet the IPCC has no geologists among the hundreds of appointed authors of its Fifth Assessment Report of 2014 and its Sixth Report due in 2022. Thus IPCC incredibly lacks both geological input and long-term perspective.
– Geologist Dr. Roger Higgs
___________________

25 simple bullet points proving CO2 does not cause global warming: by a geologist for a change

Dr Roger Higgs,
Geoclastica Ltd, Technical Note 2019-11,
6th April 2019, on ResearchGate
Not by Fire but by Ice... Robert W. Felix Best Price: $12.95 Buy New $89.71 (as of 09:15 EDT - Details)

We urgently need to expose the ‘CO2 = pollutant’ fallacy being forced upon your children, grandchildren, nephews and nieces by schools, universities, governments and mainstream media worldwide, and to denounce it in scrupulously truthful terms easily understood by the public, including those youngsters themselves.

Here are the 25 bullet points proving CO2’s innocence:

1) Geologists know climate change unrelated to atmospheric CO2 occurred throughout Earth’s 4.5-billion-year history. Yet the IPCC (United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) has no geologists among the hundreds of appointed authors of its Fifth Assessment Report of 2014 and its Sixth Report due in 2022 (see my Technical Note 2019-10). Thus IPCC incredibly lacks both geological input and long-term perspective.

2) IPCC’s very existence relies on public belief in manmade or ‘anthropogenic’ global warming (AGW) by CO2 emissions. Moreover its appointed authors, mostly government and university researchers, are nearly all biased by strong vested interests in AGW, i.e. reputations (publications, lectures) & continuance of salaries & research grants. Similarly, major universities have abandoned their scientific impartiality & integrity by hosting research institutes mandated to confirm & act on AGW, e.g. Grantham Institute (Imperial College), Tyndall Centre.

3) The often-repeated ‘97% consensus among scientists that global warming is man’s fault’ (CO2 emissions) is untrue. It refers in fact to surveys of just a relatively small group of ‘climate scientists’ (a fairly new type of scientist, with strong incentives for bias; see Bullets 2 & 15), moreover only those who are ‘actively publishing’.

4) ‘Climate change denier’ & ‘global warming denier’ are despicable & dishonest terms for ‘AGW doubters’. No educated person disputes global warming, as thermometers measured 1°C rise from 1850 to 2016 (with pauses).

5) The ‘Greenhouse Hypothesis’, on which IPCC’s belief in AGW is based, is that atmospheric gases trap heat. But this old (19th century) notion is merely an idea, not a hypothesis, because it is untestable, impossible to prove in a laboratory as no experimental container can imitate Earth’s uncontained, well-mixed atmosphere.

6) IPCC computer models are so full of assumptions as to be extremely unreliable, e.g. forecast warming for 1995 to 2015 turned out to be 2-3 times too high ! A likely reason is that the greenhouse idea is nonsense, as explained in recent publications by several scientists. See Bullet 19 for an equally drastic failure of IPCC models. See also here and here.

4 Letters : NOPE

It definitely is not a scam, it was a plan to melt the arctic ice for more oil etc. but the whole idea backfired..

The previous record of 85 degrees Fahrenheit was set in 1969. It also shattered the daily record of 77 degrees for the Fouth of July, which had stood since 1999. Records in Anchorage date back to 1952.

Several other places in Alaska set all-time or daily records on Thursday.

While it was well above normal in Anchorage, the 90-degree temperature is not a first for the state of Alaska.

According to records kept by the National Weather Service (NWS), Alaska is no stranger to the 90s. In fact, way back on July 28, 1919, Fairbanks made a run at 100 when the mercury topped out at 99. Fairbanks has experienced 90-degree heat on several other occasions, most recently on Aug. 5, 1994, when it recorded a 93-degree temperature.

The more fear the general public has, the more control the world's elite has over them.

Do you think that the global warming/climate change controversy is one of these instances?

I think it is arrogant to think we can affect climate change. The earth goes through various cycles which alter conditions. We do have some affect on what happens, but I the extent of our contribution is likely very limited.

I'm not saying something it's something that we shouldn't worry about. We have to come up with alternate living solutions to minimize deaths and other catastrophes, but I don't think it's all our fault.

Thoughts?