Reddit’s science forum banned climate deniers.

[galdur]

Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump
It's really cold outside, they are calling it a major freeze, weeks ahead of normal. Man, we could use a big fat dose of global warming!
1:30 PM - 19 Oct 2015 · Manhattan, NY, United States

[1714865214]

1714865214

[1714865214]

1714865214

[1714865214]

1714865214

[1714865214]

1714865214

[1714865214]

1714865214

[MakingMoneyHoney]

...
"By now everyone has witnessed streaks of white trailing across the sky, stretching from horizon to horizon, ultimately turning the skies into a murky haze.

True!

We can no longer ignore the fact that our skies are being heavily polluted with aluminium, barium, lead, arsenic, chromium, cadmium, selenium, and silver. All of which attribute to a host of health problems including: neurological effects, heart damage, eyesight issues, reproduction failures, immune system damage, gastrointestinal disorders, damaged kidney, damaged liver, hormonal problems, and more.[/i]
...

Not so true.  These are hypothesis, and in my opinion some of them are fairly strong, but the statements are to general and the data is simply not available in a form which permits strong statements.  Doing so opens us up to attack.

One of the less mentioned activists on the subject, and one who I find effective and credible is a Jim Lee.  He (nearly alone) seems to have gotten off his ass and forced the EPA to have a hearing on some of this stuff associated with pollution from aircraft.  That made some of our concerns part of the congressional record and I respect him for that.

I mention Lee because he made a good point:  As you mentioned, it is undeniable that there are persistent trails which spread out into a haze.  The best 'denial' is that 'it has always happened'.  I don't remember it 'always happening', and I have been the kind of person who gazed at the sky and mused about things since childhood.  Even as a kid I had a better conceptualization about the phase changes of water and other simple atmospheric phenomenon than most because I was always interested in science.  Even if we grant that this persistent hazing from pure water vapor contrails is something that has 'always happened', it is pretty obvious that it has a strong likelihood of creating ecological changes due to solar flux changes.  If the 'environmental impacts' of this hazing phenomenon have ever been studied in detail I've run across very little information about it.  Logically, a battery of such studies on this topic would be a good starting point,  Tactically, such studies would necessarily root out information about other things which may be going on.

I find fault with some of the geoengineering crowd for proposing that Dr. Peterson's presentation to the U.N. somehow indicated that the U.N. was aware on conspiring on geoengineering and aware of certain negative effects of doing so.  I personally believe that they almost certainly are (big time!), but Peterson's presentation is in no way indicative of this which was the picture that I see as being invalidly painted.

I personally do not trust Wigington and his Geoengineeringwatch organization.  I cannot put my finger on just why.  My gut tells me that he is controlled opposition. I also find it irrational and suspicious that the most popular global warming skeptic site 'wattsupwiththat.com' strictly dis-allows any mention of geoengineering.  It is not scientific to dis-allow exploration of any hypothesis, and it seems to me that geoengineering is quite plausibly associated with some climate observations at this point in time.

I've not explored Rosalind Peterson's material which is supposed to be extensive (as is appropriate in scientific investigation.)  My sense from the minor exposure I have seen is that she is likely credible.

Lastly, I will (perhaps again) mention that I've been toying with the idea that one of the main reasons for the whole 'global warming' project is to justify geoengineering to be performed under the direction of the military, and for the primary purpose of the fairly mundane (but highly powerful) project of 'owning the weather.'  If the 1996 document https://archive.org/details/WeatherAsAForceMultiplier is not a hoax and the military (or corp/gov) is somewhat on target for '2025' then it would be expected that some of these ideas are fairly advanced here in 2015.

So your problem is not so much that we are being sprayed by things like aluminum, lithium, and barium, but that it's not affecting us the way they claim?

Because it's quite obvious our skies are being sprayed by chemicals. NASA admits to that on their website: Tracers - Clouds and Trails and a phone call: NASA employee admits chemtrails.

[Wilikon]

It's a thaarp!

Admiral Ackbar? Is that you?

[tvbcof]

...

So your problem is not so much that we are being sprayed by things like aluminum, lithium, and barium, but that it's not affecting us the way they claim?

Because it's quite obvious our skies are being sprayed by chemicals. NASA admits to that on their website: Tracers - Clouds and Trails and a phone call: NASA employee admits chemtrails.

My problem is that we have no way to know with anything resembling certainty what is being sprayed where, much less the impact it has.

My solution is to choose something which is undeniable and quite probably a big problem and demand that it be studied openly.  Again, that would be the stone cold fact that we are seeing persistent trails form a dense haze which is surely blocking out solar flux over broad areas.  An open and active study of this will provide a lot of threads to tug on.

I have no doubt that all manners of things are released from sounding rockets and that bothers me not one iota.  Sounding rockets are not a feasible delivery system for any systematic program.  I suspect that other elements in fact are being released into the atmosphere on a more broad scale and there could be a number of reasons to do so.  Among the more mundane would be the introduction of elements which would make remote sensing atmospheric monitoring more precise and effective.  Much more threatening reasons exist.  This is conjecture however.  Even when people provide pretty good evidence in the form of privately commissioned sample analysis it still falls on deaf ears and the majority of the population has been trained to ignore or ridicule such results.

The concern about sounding rocket experiments reminds me a lot of the story about gasses from the operating room acting as a greenhouse gas.  Utterly laughable to worry about it due to the concentrations, but many people on the global warming panic side were suckered into doing just that.  That leads into a whole other range of 'conspiracy theories' associated with our education systems (and one's which I find pretty compelling.)

[MakingMoneyHoney]

...

So your problem is not so much that we are being sprayed by things like aluminum, lithium, and barium, but that it's not affecting us the way they claim?

Because it's quite obvious our skies are being sprayed by chemicals. NASA admits to that on their website: Tracers - Clouds and Trails and a phone call: NASA employee admits chemtrails.

My problem is that we have no way to know with anything resembling certainty what is being sprayed where, much less the impact it has.

My solution is to choose something which is undeniable and quite probably a big problem and demand that it be studied openly.  Again, that would be the stone cold fact that we are seeing persistent trails form a dense haze which is surely blocking out solar flux over broad areas.  An open and active study of this will provide a lot of threads to tug on.

I have no doubt that all manners of things are released from sounding rockets and that bothers me not one iota.  Sounding rockets are not a feasible delivery system for any systematic program.  I suspect that other elements in fact are being released into the atmosphere on a more broad scale and there could be a number of reasons to do so.  Among the more mundane would be the introduction of elements which would make remote sensing atmospheric monitoring more precise and effective.  Much more threatening reasons exist.  This is conjecture however.  Even when people provide pretty good evidence in the form of privately commissioned sample analysis it still falls on deaf ears and the majority of the population has been trained to ignore or ridicule such results.

The concern about sounding rocket experiments reminds me a lot of the story about gasses from the operating room acting as a greenhouse gas.  Utterly laughable to worry about it due to the concentrations, but many people on the global warming panic side were suckered into doing just that.  That leads into a whole other range of 'conspiracy theories' associated with our education systems (and one's which I find pretty compelling.)

There will never be studies into what's above us, that will lead to the public knowing anything real, IMHO.

[Spendulus]

...

So your problem is not so much that we are being sprayed by things like aluminum, lithium, and barium, but that it's not affecting us the way they claim?

Because it's quite obvious our skies are being sprayed by chemicals. NASA admits to that on their website: Tracers - Clouds and Trails and a phone call: NASA employee admits chemtrails.

My problem is that we have no way to know with anything resembling certainty what is being sprayed where, much less the impact it has.

My solution is to choose something which is undeniable and quite probably a big problem and demand that it be studied openly.  Again, that would be the stone cold fact that we are seeing persistent trails form a dense haze which is surely blocking out solar flux over broad areas.  An open and active study of this will provide a lot of threads to tug on.

I have no doubt that all manners of things are released from sounding rockets and that bothers me not one iota.  Sounding rockets are not a feasible delivery system for any systematic program.  I suspect that other elements in fact are being released into the atmosphere on a more broad scale and there could be a number of reasons to do so.  Among the more mundane would be the introduction of elements which would make remote sensing atmospheric monitoring more precise and effective.  Much more threatening reasons exist.  This is conjecture however.  Even when people provide pretty good evidence in the form of privately commissioned sample analysis it still falls on deaf ears and the majority of the population has been trained to ignore or ridicule such results.

The concern about sounding rocket experiments reminds me a lot of the story about gasses from the operating room acting as a greenhouse gas.  Utterly laughable to worry about it due to the concentrations, but many people on the global warming panic side were suckered into doing just that.  That leads into a whole other range of 'conspiracy theories' associated with our education systems (and one's which I find pretty compelling.)

Yes, sounding rockets are just that - scientific experiments.  There is zero reason to be concerned about them.

There is no conspiracy there.  You can look up the research articles from the experiments.

[hdbuck]

...

So your problem is not so much that we are being sprayed by things like aluminum, lithium, and barium, but that it's not affecting us the way they claim?

Because it's quite obvious our skies are being sprayed by chemicals. NASA admits to that on their website: Tracers - Clouds and Trails and a phone call: NASA employee admits chemtrails.

My problem is that we have no way to know with anything resembling certainty what is being sprayed where, much less the impact it has.

My solution is to choose something which is undeniable and quite probably a big problem and demand that it be studied openly.  Again, that would be the stone cold fact that we are seeing persistent trails form a dense haze which is surely blocking out solar flux over broad areas.  An open and active study of this will provide a lot of threads to tug on.

I have no doubt that all manners of things are released from sounding rockets and that bothers me not one iota.  Sounding rockets are not a feasible delivery system for any systematic program.  I suspect that other elements in fact are being released into the atmosphere on a more broad scale and there could be a number of reasons to do so.  Among the more mundane would be the introduction of elements which would make remote sensing atmospheric monitoring more precise and effective.  Much more threatening reasons exist.  This is conjecture however.  Even when people provide pretty good evidence in the form of privately commissioned sample analysis it still falls on deaf ears and the majority of the population has been trained to ignore or ridicule such results.

The concern about sounding rocket experiments reminds me a lot of the story about gasses from the operating room acting as a greenhouse gas.  Utterly laughable to worry about it due to the concentrations, but many people on the global warming panic side were suckered into doing just that.  That leads into a whole other range of 'conspiracy theories' associated with our education systems (and one's which I find pretty compelling.)

There will never be studies into what's above us, that will lead to the public knowing anything real, IMHO.

knowledge is power.

[Spendulus]

...

So your problem is not so much that we are being sprayed by things like aluminum, lithium, and barium, but that it's not affecting us the way they claim?

Because it's quite obvious our skies are being sprayed by chemicals. NASA admits to that on their website: Tracers - Clouds and Trails and a phone call: NASA employee admits chemtrails.

My problem is that we have no way to know with anything resembling certainty what is being sprayed where, much less the impact it has.

My solution is to choose something which is undeniable and quite probably a big problem and demand that it be studied openly.  Again, that would be the stone cold fact that we are seeing persistent trails form a dense haze which is surely blocking out solar flux over broad areas.  An open and active study of this will provide a lot of threads to tug on.

I have no doubt that all manners of things are released from sounding rockets and that bothers me not one iota.  Sounding rockets are not a feasible delivery system for any systematic program.  I suspect that other elements in fact are being released into the atmosphere on a more broad scale and there could be a number of reasons to do so.  Among the more mundane would be the introduction of elements which would make remote sensing atmospheric monitoring more precise and effective.  Much more threatening reasons exist.  This is conjecture however.  Even when people provide pretty good evidence in the form of privately commissioned sample analysis it still falls on deaf ears and the majority of the population has been trained to ignore or ridicule such results.

The concern about sounding rocket experiments reminds me a lot of the story about gasses from the operating room acting as a greenhouse gas.  Utterly laughable to worry about it due to the concentrations, but many people on the global warming panic side were suckered into doing just that.  That leads into a whole other range of 'conspiracy theories' associated with our education systems (and one's which I find pretty compelling.)

There will never be studies into what's above us, that will lead to the public knowing anything real, IMHO.

An anti scientific, medieval, mystical claim made without any facts or basis whatsoever.  To boot, ignores the actual facts about rockets and their use since the very beginning of their use.

No more or less than one would expect from you though.

[MakingMoneyHoney]

...

So your problem is not so much that we are being sprayed by things like aluminum, lithium, and barium, but that it's not affecting us the way they claim?

Because it's quite obvious our skies are being sprayed by chemicals. NASA admits to that on their website: Tracers - Clouds and Trails and a phone call: NASA employee admits chemtrails.

My problem is that we have no way to know with anything resembling certainty what is being sprayed where, much less the impact it has.

My solution is to choose something which is undeniable and quite probably a big problem and demand that it be studied openly.  Again, that would be the stone cold fact that we are seeing persistent trails form a dense haze which is surely blocking out solar flux over broad areas.  An open and active study of this will provide a lot of threads to tug on.

I have no doubt that all manners of things are released from sounding rockets and that bothers me not one iota.  Sounding rockets are not a feasible delivery system for any systematic program.  I suspect that other elements in fact are being released into the atmosphere on a more broad scale and there could be a number of reasons to do so.  Among the more mundane would be the introduction of elements which would make remote sensing atmospheric monitoring more precise and effective.  Much more threatening reasons exist.  This is conjecture however.  Even when people provide pretty good evidence in the form of privately commissioned sample analysis it still falls on deaf ears and the majority of the population has been trained to ignore or ridicule such results.

The concern about sounding rocket experiments reminds me a lot of the story about gasses from the operating room acting as a greenhouse gas.  Utterly laughable to worry about it due to the concentrations, but many people on the global warming panic side were suckered into doing just that.  That leads into a whole other range of 'conspiracy theories' associated with our education systems (and one's which I find pretty compelling.)

There will never be studies into what's above us, that will lead to the public knowing anything real, IMHO.

An anti scientific, medieval, mystical claim made without any facts or basis whatsoever.  To boot, ignores the actual facts about rockets and their use since the very beginning of their use.

No more or less than one would expect from you though.

You're so funny. Do you know what IMHO means? It means "In My Humble Opinion", Do you know what an opinion is? I'll give you a jump start, it's not a "claim".

Claim = to assert or maintain as a fact:

opinion = a personal view, attitude, or appraisal or a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty.

They're pretty much opposites. But apparently you didn't learn these simple words growing up, and you could have asked me what IMHO meant before posting your opinion of my post. You do that a lot, wrongly think I said one thing (without asking for clarification) and then respond, instead of actually trying to understand what I said.

[Wilikon]

Gloria Steinem: Pope Causing Global Warming By “Forcing Women To Have Children”…


No matter his recent encyclical on the environment. Pope Francis himself is the cause of global warming, according to feminist activist Gloria Steinem.

Cosmopolitan writer Prachi Gupta revealed that her editor-in-chief, Joanna Coles, interviewed Steinem, “arguably the most influential women’s rights activist in the world today” for an hour on Wednesday. From that interview, Gupta recalled Steinem’s “serious wisdom” and “best quotes.”

One of those quotes came from when Coles spoke with Steinem about “rethinking the patriarchy.”

Steinem started off with a focus on economics. She argued, “All of our courses in economics should start with reproduction, not production.”

What do economics and the patriarchy have to do with each other? Steinem’s logic went something like this: Pope Francis and “other patriarchal religions” support “forcing women to have children” instead of abortion. There’s then a “human load” on the Earth. Thus, the pope causes global warming.

Cosmo published Steinem’s quote:

“I had this thought that we should have this massive education campaign pointing out that the Pope and all of the other patriarchal religions that dictate to women in this way, accusing them of global warming. Because the human load on this earth is the biggest cause of global warming, and that is because of forcing women to have children they would not on their own choose to have … I’m glad the Pope spoke out about global warming and it was very helpful, but does he know he’s causing it?”


http://newsbusters.org/blogs/culture/katie-yoder/2015/10/22/gloria-steinem-pope-causing-global-warming-forcing-women-have


------------------------------------------------
Had to chose between my "everyone hate feminists" thread or this one...

 

[galdur]

Global warming threatens iconic snow leopard: study

23 OCT 2015



(this above image with that AFP story isn´t of a snow leopard but a jaguar)

this is the real thing:



Melting ice in a warming world threatens to further shrink the habitat of the snow leopard, adding to illegal hunting woes that are pushing the iconic big cat to extinction, said a study released Friday.
As few as 4,000 of the mysterious animals could be left in their sole habitat in the high mountains of central Asia, the Swiss-based World Wildlife Fund said in its report.
Unless climate change is checked, more than a third of the habitat could vanish, with warmer temperatures pushing the tree line higher and farmers moving further up the mountains to plant crops and graze livestock, it added.
"Urgent action is needed to curb climate change and prevent further degradation of snow leopard habitat, otherwise the 'ghost of the mountains' could vanish," said Rishi Kumar Sharma, head of the fund's global snow leopard conservation initiative.
Sami Tornikoski, head of a separate project by the fund to protect the natural diversity of the Himalayas, which features some of the world's highest snowbound peaks, stressed climate change was only one of the problems.
Worsening habitat loss and degradation, poaching and conflict with communities saw a fifth of the snow leopard population vanish in the past 16 years, the fund said.
Unchecked, climate change will exacerbate these threats and could push the species over the edge, according to the study.
"Snow leopards won't survive for long unless we tackle climate change alongside other threats such as poaching, retaliatory killings by herders, declining prey species and poorly planned development," Tornikoski added.
"India, Nepal and Bhutan have proven that it's possible to increase the number of iconic species like tigers and rhinos. Together governments, conservationists and communities can achieve similar successes with snow leopards and drag them back from the brink."
WWF said the receding ice threatened not only the snow leopards but also more than 330 million people living near rivers flowing down from snow leopard territory.
Conservation group said it would continue to fund vital snow leopard research, including the use of camera traps and collars tracked by satellite to learn more about the mysterious big cat.
Just 14 percent of the animal's habitat has been covered by research or conservation activities, according to the study.
But as part of the new strategy, the fund will also focus on mitigating the threat from climate change, protecting people's livelihood, reducing conflict between the big cat and communities, and tackling poaching and trafficking, it added.

http://www.afp.com/en/news/global-warming-threatens-iconic-snow-leopard-study

[Spendulus]

Global warming threatens iconic snow leopard: study

23 OCT 2015



(this above image with that AFP story isn´t of a snow leopard but a jaguar)
...

Wait, so they are going to opine on about a snow leopard but don't even  know what it looks like and can't even produce the right picture of one?

Can we just stop right there and laugh?

[galdur]

Global warming threatens iconic snow leopard: study

23 OCT 2015



(this above image with that AFP story isn´t of a snow leopard but a jaguar)
...

Wait, so they are going to opine on about a snow leopard but don't even  know what it looks like and can't even produce the right picture of one?

Can we just stop right there and laugh?

Well, the idiots at AFP (a news service) don´t know what a snow leopard looks like but that doesn´t have to mean that the WWF (whose report and opinions they are quoting in that news story) are in the dark about that as well - I guess.

https://d2ouvy59p0dg6k.cloudfront.net/downloads/wwf_fragile_connections_report_1.pdf

[hdbuck]

Majority Of U.S. College Students Now Support "Regulating" Free Speech
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-10-25/death-first-amendement-majority-college-students-now-favor-regulation-free-speech

... By a margin of 51 percent to 36 percent, students favor their school having speech codes to regulate speech for students and faculty. Sixty-three percent favor requiring professors to employ “trigger warnings” to alert students to material that might be discomfiting. One-third of the students polled could not identify the First Amendment as the part of the Constitution that dealt with free speech. Thirty-five percent said that the First Amendment does not protect “hate speech,” while 30 percent of self-identified liberal students say the First Amendment is outdated. With the assault on free speech and the First Amendment proceeding apace in institutions once dedicated to robust intellectual debate, it is no wonder that there are more and more calls to criminalize speech that dissents from the party line on any number of issues, from climate change to race relations, to feminism and sex.
And when brainwashing wins over the minds of the young generation, whether due to relentless propaganda, due to constant Apple Store "99 cent" diversions, due to a generational case of Stockholm Syndrome, or simply because said "brightest" minds were never that bright to begin with (the WEF ranked the U.S. at 52nd among 139 nations in the quality of its university math and science instruction) brainwashing wins, period.

Because if a majority of young U.S. intelligentsia freely hands over its one, most valuable civil liberty, then the nation has far greater concerns for its future than just how overvalued the so-called "market" is.

[tvbcof]

Majority Of U.S. College Students Now Support "Regulating" Free Speech
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-10-25/death-first-amendement-majority-college-students-now-favor-regulation-free-speech

... By a margin of 51 percent to 36 percent, students favor their school having speech codes to regulate speech for students and faculty. ...

Gee, who could have seen that coming?

Probably the only workable strategy at this point is wait it out while the NWO folks implement a depopulation strategy on what they've cultivated over the last 3 decades.  'Wait it out' would be to understand and avoid their operations.  I think that it may be pretty much impossible to un-fuck at least those on the 'liberal' end of the spectrum who I have more exposure to.  I don't guess that things are any different on the 'conservative' side, especially since it seems that religion is being expertly subverted.

I've experimented around with seeing if I could understand what has happened to 'critical thinking' skills and have to conclude that it is unlikely to recoverable in even relatively intelligent people.  People can be snapped out of it, but mostly in extreme circumstances such as having an obviously vaccine damaged child.  Even then it only occurs in extreme circumstances and only part of the time.  I expect that technological improvements will make it less common for such traumatic events to happen to the 'wrong' people (e.g., senators, high intellect and independent souls, etc.)

[ridery99]

Earth is flat.

[galdur]

...calls to criminalize speech that dissents from the party line...

Sounds familiar. It has been a long process, still ongoing.

The History of Political Correctness

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

[Wilikon]

Earth is flat.

... Like your argument?

 

[Spendulus]

Gloria Steinem: Pope Causing Global Warming By “Forcing Women To Have Children”…


No matter his recent encyclical on the environment. Pope Francis himself is the cause of global warming, according to feminist activist Gloria Steinem.

Cosmopolitan writer Prachi Gupta revealed that her editor-in-chief, Joanna Coles, interviewed Steinem, “arguably the most influential women’s rights activist in the world today” for an hour on Wednesday. From that interview, Gupta recalled Steinem’s “serious wisdom” and “best quotes.”

One of those quotes came from when Coles spoke with Steinem about “rethinking the patriarchy.”

Steinem started off with a focus on economics. She argued, “All of our courses in economics should start with reproduction, not production.”

What do economics and the patriarchy have to do with each other? Steinem’s logic went something like this: Pope Francis and “other patriarchal religions” support “forcing women to have children” instead of abortion. There’s then a “human load” on the Earth. Thus, the pope causes global warming.

Cosmo published Steinem’s quote:

“I had this thought that we should have this massive education campaign pointing out that the Pope and all of the other patriarchal religions that dictate to women in this way, accusing them of global warming. Because the human load on this earth is the biggest cause of global warming, and that is because of forcing women to have children they would not on their own choose to have … I’m glad the Pope spoke out about global warming and it was very helpful, but does he know he’s causing it?”


http://newsbusters.org/blogs/culture/katie-yoder/2015/10/22/gloria-steinem-pope-causing-global-warming-forcing-women-have


------------------------------------------------
Had to chose between my "everyone hate feminists" thread or this one...

 

And Global Warming threatens iconic snow leopards.

Come on, just connect the dots and solve the problems.

Feed Glorious Steinen to the snow leopards.

[Spendulus]

Video: The Star of Bethlehem BACK! You would not believe what it means!

"Sign of Jesus Return or something Sinister? Tune in to find out!
During the coming week, if early morning skies are clear, you’ll be able to see a conjunction of planets that some folks think recreates the original “star of Bethlehem.”

This weekend’s conjunction is special, Schaaf said, because the apparent meeting of these three planets will be “for the last time in perhaps a thousand years.”

From Schaaf’s most recent column, here is a guide to seeing the brightly lit conjunction of planets that may have guided the Magi toward the baby Jesus in 2 B.C.

Before dawn on Oct. 23, three planets in the eastern sky — Venus, Jupiter and Mars — were stacked one on top of another, in that order, with about even spacing between them.

Over the next four days, Venus and Jupiter, which Schaaf said are “by far the brightest planets,” will be in conjunction, meeting within one degree of each other. This same conjunction of planets occurred in October of 2 B.C., which is said to be the last appearance of the “star of Bethlehem,” said Schaaf, a contributing editor to Sky and Telescope.

http://www.pressofatlanticcity.com/life/how-to-see-the-star-of-bethlehem/article_f94f784c-798c-11e5-beb9-7fdb61962b78.html"

Yawn.

Conjunctions are no big deal.

And they are totally predictable, and have no consequences.