NASA admits climate change occurs because of changes in Earth's solar orbit...

[TwitchySeal]

People are just crazy. They’ll swear to anything if it fits with their beliefs. Most liberals probably think Mars is cooler than the Earth because there isn’t any pollution on Mars. It really isn’t brain surgery. The farther from the giant flaming ball we’re circling in space you get, the cooler the temperature. That’s the main factor.

Really milking your sig campaign eh?

[Hispo]

I can’t believe that the idea our temperature is determined by how far we are from the sun is considered controversial today.

Is anybody going to talk about the eco-friendly straws people in certain places were forced to use being toxic? Are we really going to continue to let governments poison their citizenry in the name of climate change?

Actually, Earth mantains an almost constant distance from the Sun, because its eccentricity is very close to zero.
Its value is actually 0.016708.

So that means that unlike other celestial objects which have a very high value, we do not experiment extreme changes of temperature because of the distance between us and our Sun is almost the constant. Mostly the change during seasons is due to the inclination of the axis of Earth, which makes the north to receive less sunlight during certain months, while the south receives most solar radiation, and viceversa for the rest of the trajectory around the sun.

In astrodynamics, the orbital eccentricity of an astronomical object is a dimensionless parameter that determines the amount by which its orbit around another body deviates from a perfect circle. A value of 0 is a circular orbit, values between 0 and 1 form an elliptic orbit, 1 is a parabolic escape orbit (or capture orbit), and greater than 1 is a hyperbola.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbital_eccentricity

Source:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbital_eccentricity

[Biodom]

People are just crazy. They’ll swear to anything if it fits with their beliefs. Most liberals probably think Mars is cooler than the Earth because there isn’t any pollution on Mars. It really isn’t brain surgery. The farther from the giant flaming ball we’re circling in space you get, the cooler the temperature. That’s the main factor.

Not entirely. The temperature on the surface of Venus is much higher than it should have been due to it's distance from the Sun.
The cause: currently Venus has an atmosphere with 96.5% CO₂, 93 bars (~93X of earth) atm pressure and the temperature on the surface is a "balmy" 467^oC (872F).
None of this could be "easily" explained by it's distance from the Sun.

Equally, Sun's luminosity increased 30% in the last 4 bil years or so, yet the temperature on the surface remained largely stable, periodic glaciation and warming notwithstanding.
The most common explanation is the presence of life.
Biosphere, so far, was able to buffer the increase in Sun's luminosity, but it is predicted that this buffering capacity will run out in about 1 bil years as the Sun's luminosity continues to increase.
The cause: relative short duration of the lifespan of G-type stars, like our Sun, and its eventual transformation into a red giant.

[BADecker]

People are just crazy. They’ll swear to anything if it fits with their beliefs. Most liberals probably think Mars is cooler than the Earth because there isn’t any pollution on Mars. It really isn’t brain surgery. The farther from the giant flaming ball we’re circling in space you get, the cooler the temperature. That’s the main factor.

Not entirely. The temperature on the surface of Venus is much higher than it should have been due to it's distance from the Sun.
The cause: currently Venus has an atmosphere with 96.5% CO₂, 93 bars (~93X of earth) atm pressure and the temperature on the surface is a "balmy" 467^oC (872F).
None of this could be "easily" explained by it's distance from the Sun.

When considering Venus, there are a lot of things to take into account. There aren't any plants to turn the CO2 into plant fiber and oxygen. The literal distance from the sun could easily make this kind of heat to happen without something like plants.

The earth is outside the Venus heat zone. And, it has plants to use up any excess CO2. And the more the plants, the more the earth can hold people. We need more people for the geniuses among them. They will help us find and terraform other planets. We are killing off our future with abortions.

Equally, Sun's luminosity increased 30% in the last 4 bil years or so, yet the temperature on the surface remained largely stable, periodic glaciation and warming notwithstanding.
The most common explanation is the presence of life.
Biosphere, so far, was able to buffer the increase in Sun's luminosity, but it is predicted that this buffering capacity will run out in about 1 bil years as the Sun's luminosity continues to increase.
The cause: relative short duration of the lifespan of G-type stars, like our Sun, and its eventual transformation into a red giant.

I love it when people are looking into the future like a billion years. If I could look that far, I'd be rich off the stock market long ago.

[tvbcof]

I can’t believe that the idea our temperature is determined by how far we are from the sun is considered controversial today.

Is anybody going to talk about the eco-friendly straws people in certain places were forced to use being toxic? Are we really going to continue to let governments poison their citizenry in the name of climate change?

One of the central dogmas inculcated into the minds of the climate-cultists by their controllers is that there are too many people on the planet.  Toxic soda straws are not a bug but a feature.  I didn't read about the straw thing but there have been many other such instances.  Very often the toxicity is associated with damage to the reproductive system.

The funny thing about the climate cultists (and other cultists) is that they are very tolerant of assaults against themselves.  This is especially the case the climate cultists in particular; they have been heavily programmed to blame themselves so in some weird unconscious way they justify such assaults and are thankful for them.  Kinda reminds me of the people who whip and beat themselves.

The roots of the population dogma can be traced back to Malthus and on through the 'elite' who have the resources to build and sustain the cult.  The 'Club of Rome' from the mid 1960's is where the strategy of the modern and widespread incantation of the cult originated.  Basically the principle that 'The enemy of man is man.'

What's in it for 'the elite'?  They already had locked up ownership and control of the earth's resources so there is little more real need to share 'their' resources with the 'useless eaters.'  Another element is that the smaller number of people who need to be controlled, the cheaper, easier, and less risky the job is.

[OgNasty]

What I don’t understand is the sudden uptick in fires being started around the world by climate activists. I’m old enough to remember when climate activists were against the destruction of trees. Now they burn entire forests around the world to push their manmade climate change agenda. It’s disgusting and when liberals start showing CO2 numbers from the atmosphere next year to scare people, know it’s clearly been orchestrated.

[BADecker]

^^^ Maybe burning trees and stuff, is the only way they can get enough CO2 into the atmosphere to make it look like we need climate-change control.

[promise444c5]

Is NASA saying human activities are not the reason for climate change ? I doubt that humans don't contribute hugely to the change in the environment, although there are natural occurrence that could affect the climate like.carbon dioxide which is emission from vehicles, there is nitrous oxide, vapour from boiling water other substances and there are more that are human activities causing change. The issue is most of the causes of climate change is human factor, smoking is also part of it.

Let's just get it straight  the real problem always come from us so far it's based on all our activities  you are right Gozie51 . Imagine all our toxic emissions  which causes some depletion  ,let's just take a look at the percentage countries which still embraces grey Economy  compared to those with green economy it's far comparable even those who claim to be using green economy still make use of grey  and you expect no climate change. Let's use  Africa as case study 90% of Africa relies on grey economy  the climate is still even fair for now seriously

[tvbcof]

^^^ Maybe burning trees and stuff, is the only way they can get enough CO2 into the atmosphere to make it look like we need climate-change control.

That would not do it either, but these eco-clowns wouldn't know that anyway.

CO2 is only a minor component of 'greenhouse gasses.'  H2O is the primary one.  Natural seasonal processes are the main driving force behind CO2 on a annual basis where the burning of fossil fuels by humans is way way behind anything nature does.  Maybe if these climate-cultists light everything they see on fire it would have a non-inconsequential impact on the CO2 budget for a year or two, and probably next to nothing on 'climate' except for the unburnt carbon soot element of their games.

Did you know that every lump of coal, drop of oil, and cubic meter of methane in the earth is dwarfed by the amount of carbon simply desolved in the ocean?

Did you know that on geological time-scales, planet earth is suffering from a fairly extreme LACK of CO2 and plants are suffering for it?  One of the problems is that carbon is being sequestered in the form of carbonates from shelled creatures. (Think, White Cliffs of Dover.)  Some people hypothesize that 'Mother Gaia' evolved humans to try to get some carbon back to the surface.  If so, we humans have a LONG way to go to have much of an effect.

The whole 'eco' thing is mainly political.  Wouldn't be too far off base to say 'communist' as it is this group who are more prone to the 'ends justify the means' mindset and also to the mindset of 'creating worlds/realities'.  Typical Kabbalist/Lucifarian stuff.  Of course the vast majority of people who are active in the 'eco' movement really are in it for the right reasons insofar as they really did fall for the 'saving the earth' storyline/spell and cannot see the scam because they don't understand how science works.  Their thing is scientism.  The controllers who set the agenda, however, simply want something resembling Communism as a form of government.  That is to say, centralized control of resources since, of course, they expect (probably correctly) that they will be at the center.

[BADecker]

^^^ Well, of course. I took my car to the mechanic today. I have a place in the car where I keep a little emergency cash. It isn't out in the open. They stole $20 out of it. I know because directly before I took the car in, I counted it out, because they did it before. I wanted proof for myself.

In addition, as usual, they tried to sell me on a high$price job that could easily be fixed by changing a belt on the engine.

The point is, regular people and companies are ripping people off. So, why not government officials hiring the media to convince people of climate-change. It's not illegal to lie to the people... just unconscionable.

[TwitchySeal]

^^^ Maybe burning trees and stuff, is the only way they can get enough CO2 into the atmosphere to make it look like we need climate-change control.

That would not do it either, but these eco-clowns wouldn't know that anyway.

CO2 is only a minor component of 'greenhouse gasses.'  H2O is the primary one.  Natural seasonal processes are the main driving force behind CO2 on a annual basis where the burning of fossil fuels by humans is way way behind anything nature does.  Maybe if these climate-cultists light everything they see on fire it would have a non-inconsequential impact on the CO2 budget for a year or two, and probably next to nothing on 'climate' except for the unburnt carbon soot element of their games.

Did you know that every lump of coal, drop of oil, and cubic meter of methane in the earth is dwarfed by the amount of carbon simply devolved in the ocean?

Did you know that on geological time-scales, planet earth is suffering from a fairly extreme LACK of CO2 and plants are suffering for it?  One of the problems is that carbon is being sequestered in the form of carbonates from shelled creatures. (Think, White Cliffs of Dover.)  Some people hypothesize that 'Mother Gaia' evolved humans to try to get some carbon back to the surface.  If so, we humans have a LONG way to go to have much of an effect.

The whole 'eco' thing is mainly political.  Wouldn't be too far off base to say 'communist' as it is this group who are more prone to the 'ends justify the means' mindset and also to the mindset of 'creating worlds/realities'.  Typical Kabbalist/Lucifarian stuff.  Of course the vast majority of people who are active in the 'eco' movement really are in it for the right reasons insofar as they really did fall for the 'saving the earth' storyline/spell and cannot see the scam because they don't understand how science works.  Their thing is scientism.  The controllers who set the agenda, however, simply want something resembling Communism as a form of government.  That is to say, centralized control of resources since, of course, they expect (probably correctly) that they will be at the center.

NASA has done a great job at countering pretty much every common climate denier talking point - which all seem to follow the same formula: Include a bunch of factoids that can be easily verified as true, and then just ignore a few key facts, sneak in a lie or two and boom, you've pwned the libs!  BADecker did it with the sun, and now you're doing it with fossil fuels and CO2.

CO2 is only a minor component of 'greenhouse gasses.'  H2O is the primary one.

This is true!  Not really relevant, but you've found an elegant way to frame CO2 as really not that big and just something the sheeple are overreacting to.  

Natural seasonal processes are the main driving force behind CO2 on a annual basis where the burning of fossil fuels by humans is way way behind anything nature does.

Natural seasonal processes are a main driving force in changes to co2 levels, true!  But, it's only on a seasonal basis.  Here's what NASA says:

CO2 Through the Seasons
A closer look at the carbon dioxide measurements at Mauna Loa shows a series of wiggles in the data. Although total CO2 is increasing each year, there is also a short-term cycle visible within the larger trend.

This annual rise and fall of CO2 levels is caused by seasonal cycles in photosynthesis on a massive scale. In Northern Hemisphere spring, plants come to life and draw in CO2 to fuel their growth. This begins the process of lowering the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. In northern autumn, plant growth stops or slows down, and the whole process reverses itself. Much of the plant matter decomposes, releasing CO2 back to the atmosphere.

A similar but less intense pattern repeats in the Southern Hemisphere in opposite seasons. Spring growth starts in September and winter decomposition begins in March, so CO2 records in the Southern Hemisphere show the opposite pattern of that seen in Mauna Loa. However, because there is a lot more land and vegetation in the Northern Hemisphere than the southern, the global seasonal cycle more closely aligns with the northern pattern.

where the burning of fossil fuels by humans is way way behind anything nature does.

Nice and ambiguous.  I can't say you're wrong because you could easily make "way behind anything nature does" any two values and then argue about that instead of whether or not humans are responsible for a enough of an increase in CO2 levels that it's warming the planet.

Here's the key takeaway from NASAs page all about CO2:









Do you have a NASA conspiracy theory to explain their stance?  Or are they just bad at science?

But wait, it's not just NASA....here are a few Scientific organizations that have supported the argument that humans caused climate change.  (feel free to find one that's linked to George Soros or something so that you can dismiss the entire list.)

Academia Chilena de Ciencias, Chile
Academia das Ciencias de Lisboa, Portugal
Academia de Ciencias de la República Dominicana
Academia de Ciencias Físicas, Matemáticas y Naturales de Venezuela
Academia de Ciencias Medicas, Fisicas y Naturales de Guatemala
Academia Mexicana de Ciencias,Mexico
Academia Nacional de Ciencias de Bolivia
Academia Nacional de Ciencias del Peru
Académie des Sciences et Techniques du Sénégal
Académie des Sciences, France
Academies of Arts, Humanities and Sciences of Canada
Academy of Athens
Academy of Science of Mozambique
Academy of Science of South Africa
Academy of Sciences for the Developing World (TWAS)
Academy of Sciences Malaysia
Academy of Sciences of Moldova
Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic
Academy of Sciences of the Islamic Republic of Iran
Academy of Scientific Research and Technology, Egypt
Academy of the Royal Society of New Zealand
Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, Italy
Africa Centre for Climate and Earth Systems Science
African Academy of Sciences
Albanian Academy of Sciences
Amazon Environmental Research Institute
American Academy of Pediatrics
American Anthropological Association
American Association for the Advancement of Science
American Association of State Climatologists (AASC)
American Association of Wildlife Veterinarians
American Astronomical Society
American Chemical Society
American College of Preventive Medicine
American Fisheries Society
American Geophysical Union
American Institute of Biological Sciences
American Institute of Physics
American Meteorological Society
American Physical Society
American Public Health Association
American Quaternary Association
American Society for Microbiology
American Society of Agronomy
American Society of Civil Engineers
American Society of Plant Biologists
American Statistical Association
Association of Ecosystem Research Centers
Australian Academy of Science
Australian Bureau of Meteorology
Australian Coral Reef Society
Australian Institute of Marine Science
Australian Institute of Physics
Australian Marine Sciences Association
Australian Medical Association
Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society  
Bangladesh Academy of Sciences
Botanical Society of America
Brazilian Academy of Sciences
British Antarctic Survey
Bulgarian Academy of Sciences
California Academy of Sciences
Cameroon Academy of Sciences
Canadian Association of Physicists
Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences
Canadian Geophysical Union
Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
Canadian Society of Soil Science
Canadian Society of Zoologists
Caribbean Academy of Sciences views
Center for International Forestry Research
Chinese Academy of Sciences
Colombian Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences
Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO) (Australia)
Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research
Croatian Academy of Arts and Sciences
Crop Science Society of America
Cuban Academy of Sciences
Delegation of the Finnish Academies of Science and Letters
Ecological Society of America
Ecological Society of Australia
Environmental Protection Agency
European Academy of Sciences and Arts
European Federation of Geologists
European Geosciences Union
European Physical Society
European Science Foundation
Federation of American Scientists
French Academy of Sciences
Geological Society of America
Geological Society of Australia
Geological Society of London
Georgian Academy of Sciences
German Academy of Natural Scientists Leopoldina  
Ghana Academy of Arts and Sciences
Indian National Science Academy
Indonesian Academy of Sciences  
Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management
Institute of Marine Engineering, Science and Technology
Institute of Professional Engineers New Zealand
Institution of Mechanical Engineers, UK
InterAcademy Council
International Alliance of Research Universities
International Arctic Science Committee
International Association for Great Lakes Research
International Council for Science
International Council of Academies of Engineering and Technological Sciences
International Research Institute for Climate and Society
International Union for Quaternary Research
International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics
International Union of Pure and Applied Physics
Islamic World Academy of Sciences
Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities
Kenya National Academy of Sciences
Korean Academy of Science and Technology
Kosovo Academy of Sciences and Arts
l'Académie des Sciences et Techniques du Sénégal
Latin American Academy of Sciences
Latvian Academy of Sciences
Lithuanian Academy of Sciences
Madagascar National Academy of Arts, Letters, and Sciences
Mauritius Academy of Science and Technology
Montenegrin Academy of Sciences and Arts
National Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences, Argentina
National Academy of Sciences of Armenia
National Academy of Sciences of the Kyrgyz Republic
National Academy of Sciences, Sri Lanka
National Academy of Sciences, United States of America
National Aeronautics and Space Administration  
National Association of Geoscience Teachers
National Association of State Foresters
National Center for Atmospheric Research  
National Council of Engineers Australia
National Institute of Water & Atmospheric Research, New Zealand
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
National Research Council
National Science Foundation
Natural England
Natural Environment Research Council, UK
Natural Science Collections Alliance
Network of African Science Academies
New York Academy of Sciences
Nicaraguan Academy of Sciences
Nigerian Academy of Sciences
Norwegian Academy of Sciences and Letters
Oklahoma Climatological Survey
Organization of Biological Field Stations
Pakistan Academy of Sciences
Palestine Academy for Science and Technology
Pew Center on Global Climate Change
Polish Academy of Sciences
Romanian Academy
Royal Academies for Science and the Arts of Belgium
Royal Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences of Spain
Royal Astronomical Society, UK
Royal Danish Academy of Sciences and Letters
Royal Irish Academy
Royal Meteorological Society (UK)
Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences
Royal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research
Royal Scientific Society of Jordan
Royal Society of Canada
Royal Society of Chemistry, UK
Royal Society of the United Kingdom
Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences
Russian Academy of Sciences
Science and Technology, Australia  
Science Council of Japan
Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research
Scientific Committee on Solar-Terrestrial Physics
Scripps Institution of Oceanography
Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts
Slovak Academy of Sciences
Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts
Society for Ecological Restoration International
Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics
Society of American Foresters  
Society of Biology (UK)  
Society of Systematic Biologists
Soil Science Society of America
Sudan Academy of Sciences
Sudanese National Academy of Science
Tanzania Academy of Sciences
The Wildlife Society (international)
Turkish Academy of Sciences
Uganda National Academy of Sciences
Union of German Academies of Sciences and Humanities
United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
University Corporation for Atmospheric Research
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution
Woods Hole Research Center
World Association of Zoos and Aquariums
World Federation of Public Health Associations
World Forestry Congress
World Health Organization
World Meteorological Organization
Zambia Academy of Sciences
Zimbabwe Academy of Sciences


https://www.aaas.org/news/aaas-reaffirms-statements-climate-change-and-integrity
https://www.opr.ca.gov/facts/list-of-scientific-organizations.html
https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

[BADecker]

^^^ How soon you forget. Your chart at https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5409280.msg60845114#msg60845114 shows us that the temperature has risen less than 4 degrees F in 140 years. You also forget that the planet is finally getting back to normal like it was in the days of the mammoths.

All the harping about global warming is not going to affect anybody for hundreds of years, at the above rate of 4 degrees per 140 years. And when you consider the mammoths and the warmth that there was back thousands of years before then, by the time that kind of warmth gets back, the whole world will have adapted.

I didn't search for it, but I bet Russians like the idea of global warming. All we are trying to do is break Russia up. Come on. Give them their chance to live in warmth.

[TwitchySeal]

^^^ How soon you forget. Your chart at https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5409280.msg60845114#msg60845114 shows us that the temperature has risen less than 4 degrees F in 140 years.

Closer to 2 degrees actually.

Are you trying to argue that "I barely notice a 2* F change in temperature with my skin, therefore 2* is a very small amount and climate change is nothing to worry about" ?


Maybe you're right and and the consensus among scientists is wrong.  I think it's the other way around though.

I didn't search for it, but I bet Russians like the idea of global warming. All we are trying to do is break Russia up. Come on. Give them their chance to live in warmth.

Putin joined the Paris agreement in 2019 and signed a decree ordering companies to reduce their emissions.

Climate change is real.  It's so clear that it's real that nearly every country in the world has accepted it and is working to fight it.  It's really just conspiratards and fossil fuel companies that are trying to argue it's not.  And when it comes to the conspiratards all of the arguments look just like this very thread.

- Conspiritard cherry picks and misinterprets data to argue it's not.  (Like when you created the subject of this thread).  

- Someone completely disproves their claim entirely.  (like when I posted this link)  

- Conspiratard completely ignores all the evidence that disproves their previous argument and makes a new similarly idiotic argument and the cycle continues.

[tvbcof]

NASA and NOAA are both COMPLETELY political and fraudulent organizations.  All the others rely on funding from the major wealth pools, and most of them have promoted disproportionatly the useful-idiot types who think that scientific fraud is OK as long as it promotes and adgenda (often Communism.)  People who do have some respect for true science either keep their heads down or they are ejected from the industry and need to find new work.  Just like in the medical field, a tiny tiny fraction of them will speak up which is why I have some confidence in what I say about these things.

CO2 is a trace gas in the atmosphere thus significantly diminishing the meaning of percent changes.  A lot of the most agregious fraud promoted by the climate huxters revolved around making shit up about the historic records so that their graphs looked pretty.

On top of that, yes, efforts to 'dim the sun' via geoengineering very well could impact, or could have already impacted, the natural processes which largely dictate the CO2 levels in the atmosphere.  If they can starve off plants of the energy they need, less CO2 will be sucked out of the atmosphere and into the tissues of plants and the animals which eat them.

^^^ How soon you forget. Your chart at https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5409280.msg60845114#msg60845114 shows us that the temperature has risen less than 4 degrees F in 140 years. You also forget that the planet is finally getting back to normal like it was in the days of the mammoths.

All the harping about global warming is not going to affect anybody for hundreds of years, at the above rate of 4 degrees per 140 years. And when you consider the mammoths and the warmth that there was back thousands of years before then, by the time that kind of warmth gets back, the whole world will have adapted.

I didn't search for it, but I bet Russians like the idea of global warming. All we are trying to do is break Russia up. Come on. Give them their chance to live in warmth.

One story I heard was that the Russians were scratching their head about this new 'global warming' thing 2 or 3 decades ago.  Their intelligence agencies were tasked with figuring out what the hell it was all about.  Rather quickly the answer went back upstairs:  'It's a scam - Don't worry about it.'

It is noted that the same sorts of geo-engineering looking artifacts exist in the skys over Russia as exist in the West.  Could be that they play ball because ultimately Russia's lands will be a lot more productive if the surface warms up a bit more.

It's worth note that the first talk about 'Global Warming' was way back in the 1950's or there-abouts IIRC.  It was proposed as a way to lessen the Northern ice packs and make it easier to transport goods globally.  The question was how to engineer it.

[BADecker]

^^^ How soon you forget. Your chart at https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5409280.msg60845114#msg60845114 shows us that the temperature has risen less than 4 degrees F in 140 years.

Closer to 2 degrees actually.

Are you trying to argue that "I barely notice a 2* F change in temperature with my skin, therefore 2* is a very small amount and climate change is nothing to worry about" ?

~

What!? Now global warming depends on your skin? Looks like the climate change nuts really missed it.

NASA and NOAA are both COMPLETELY political and fraudulent organizations.  All the others rely on funding from the major wealth pools, and most of them have promoted disproportionatly the useful-idiot types who think that scientific fraud is OK as long as it promotes and adgenda (often Communism.)  People who do have some respect for true science either keep their heads down or they are ejected from the industry and need to find new work.  Just like in the medical field, a tiny tiny fraction of them will speak up which is why I have some confidence in what I say about these things.

CO2 is a trace gas in the atmosphere thus significantly diminishing the meaning of percent changes.  A lot of the most agregious fraud promoted by the climate huxters revolved around making shit up about the historic records so that their graphs looked pretty.

On top of that, yes, efforts to 'dim the sun' via geoengineering very well could impact, or could have already impacted, the natural processes which largely dictate the CO2 levels in the atmosphere.  If they can starve off plants of the energy they need, less CO2 will be sucked out of the atmosphere and into the tissues of plants and the animals which eat them.

^^^ How soon you forget. Your chart at https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5409280.msg60845114#msg60845114 shows us that the temperature has risen less than 4 degrees F in 140 years. You also forget that the planet is finally getting back to normal like it was in the days of the mammoths.

All the harping about global warming is not going to affect anybody for hundreds of years, at the above rate of 4 degrees per 140 years. And when you consider the mammoths and the warmth that there was back thousands of years before then, by the time that kind of warmth gets back, the whole world will have adapted.

I didn't search for it, but I bet Russians like the idea of global warming. All we are trying to do is break Russia up. Come on. Give them their chance to live in warmth.

One story I heard was that the Russians were scratching their head about this new 'global warming' thing 2 or 3 decades ago.  Their intelligence agencies were tasked with figuring out what the hell it was all about.  Rather quickly the answer went back upstairs:  'It's a scam - Don't worry about it.'

It is noted that the same sorts of geo-engineering looking artifacts exist in the skys over Russia as exist in the West.  Could be that they play ball because ultimately Russia's lands will be a lot more productive if the surface warms up a bit more.

It's worth note that the first talk about 'Global Warming' was way back in the 1950's or there-abouts IIRC.  It was proposed as a way to lessen the Northern ice packs and make it easier to transport goods globally.  The question was how to engineer it.

So that's how the US is going to take over Russia. Convince everybody that there is global warming, and that we need to do something about it. Cool the earth down until the top half of the Northern hemisphere freezes to death. With everybody frozen to death in Russia, Siberia - and Canada - simply claim the lands for America. Lol.

And throw in Maui, below.


We don't have a climate crisis...we have an arson crisis.


https://www.linkedin.com/posts/jose-david-m-50b08a240_greeces-minister-has-branded-those-responsible-activity-7101554188228141056-oMu4/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_ios
Greece's minister has branded those responsible "arson scum" after a staggering 79 people were arrested over the fires...
...

[BADecker]

There are simply too many climate and other items, NOT included in the 'stories' of promoters of climate change, to make those stories to be true.


Two Elephants in the Climate Change CO2 Production Room


https://mishtalk.com/economics/two-elephants-in-the-climate-change-carbon-dioxide-production-room/
Noah Smith has a question: What about per capita emissions? I have answers.



Our World in Data, Per Capita and Annual CO2 Emissions

bUT wHAT aBOut per cApITA

----------

Noah Smith 🐇🇺🇸🇺🇦
@Noahpinion
·
Follow
bUT wHAT aBOut per cApITA



----------

Per capita emissions in the US are the worlds highest, but they are also crashing. China per capita emissions are rising fast.
...

[arielbit]

if you really think about it, YOU are the carbon they want to reduce LOL!

[BenCodie]

if you really think about it, YOU are the carbon they want to reduce LOL!

If I had some merits this would be one of the posts I'd be meriting. Alongside the other very informative and factual posts here. Props to those who are pointing out the facts.

I have nothing else to add because this topic is very saturated for me. Climate change propaganda is a designed to confuse, divide and instill fear into people. I believe it's as simple as that.

[tvbcof]

if you really think about it, YOU are the carbon they want to reduce LOL!

If I had some merits this would be one of the posts I'd be meriting. Alongside the other very informative and factual posts here. Props to those who are pointing out the facts.

I did it for you.

I have nothing else to add because this topic is very saturated for me. Climate change propaganda is a designed to confuse, divide and instill fear into people. I believe it's as simple as that.

And a few for you also as this is a very astute observation and well stated.

I've got a ton of merit points to hand out since I don't pay much attention to the system.  The thing quickly devolved into a rigged joke by the 'influencers' and their various circle-jerk schemes.  Such a shame because it could have some usefulness if there were not so many sleazy assholes like the 'merit cycling club' yahoos.

[Hispo]

if you really think about it, YOU are the carbon they want to reduce LOL!

I am not into conspiracy theories, but it is likely some governments around the world realized Earth won't be longer sustainable if World population continues to grow, so they are trying to pull off a population control system without actually talking directly about it, because such thing would be unconstitutional in many of the western democracies, specially in the United States.

The strategy could be for people to let their fear for the future to do all the dirty job and convince them that bringing more people into this planet is not worth it or fair for them, because of how difficult life has become.

Even if we see it as a scientific matter and not as a conspiracy, it is obvious we are supposed to reach a point where population stabilizes and not longer growth through time.