One could wonder. I think it's more likely that Aaron is referring to people such as Chloe Swarbrick and James Cameron maybe. Not necessarily WEFrs as such but pretty much closely aligned one would think.
It's always all right to take things away from others. Never from yourself eh? Funny how these conversations always seem to revolve around that. Well, I didn't attend your stupid talk, so don't come knocking at my door.
The acres burned has not increased in the last dozen years. The graph of sea ice going back a hundred years shows that the ice has increased since 1937 and the stability of the Arctic sea ice and the cyclical nature of it is obvious in the record.
I can see that you are being irrational on the topic and I seem to be angering you.
That's the last thing I want and I don't think that I am going to continue to discuss the topic with you.
I am sure that we can find another topic where you don't think that I am stupid and naive.
Heller's cherry picking. He's using all the tropes of climate change denial. He's trying to kid his followers. Why would I pay him any attention? I know what he's doing. If I want to find someone to argue the other side then it isn't Heller.
Do I think that you're stupid and naive? No, but why are you supporting a cherry picker?
For you to assert that I am merely following a cherry picker and the information he provided was somehow tainted by an alleged association with some mystery individuals who have corrupted him is the same thing as "you are stupid and naive to believe what he presents "
Acres burned graph ends in 2006. I bet it goes up dramatically after 2006. Cherry picking.
Just like one day of hot weather in 2022 doesn’t make for climate change nor does one flood in 1936 negate it. Cherrypicking.
He picks sea ice extent in the middle of winter and says it’s the second highest. It’s probably also the 2nd thinnest as multi year sea ice has practically disappeared. And it’s the summer sea ice extent that we need to concentrate on. Cherry picking again. He does it all the time.
He mentions 2007 and then picks out a day from then and compares it to a day from 2022 I guess. We’re not comparing apples to oranges here, winter 2007 to spring or summer 2022 I guess.
He says around that same time, it’s 15th August 2008 (summer) a year that was down on the record loss of ice in 2007. But it’s the year 2007 that he’s choosing which makes his claims bogus because of that record sea ice loss which wasn’t matched or exceeded until 2012. He knows this and is trying to bullshit the viewers.
I don’t like him at all. Give me real analysis if you’re going to claim that warming is not happening because Heller is as bogus as hell.
The evidence that this is going on every day is overwhelming.
I urge you to spend some time seeing the other videos he was produced. This video was about one claim. He factually addressed that claim. He's been doing this for all of the claims about the climate change global warming hoax. I note with interest that you found fault with the video because it didn't expound on the totality of the scam.
As I wrote before, I have been sceptical of this subject for decades. I wanted to find someone who has debunked the decade and a half of video he produced.
I tried to debunk his videos.
I was one of the original environmental supporters. I cheered the EPA for mandating the Positive Crankcase Ventilation system that ended the release of crankcase gasses into the air.
Unfortunately they went too far and every car produced for Americans in 1974 is a low performing gas guzzling mess under the hood (bonnet?). They claimed that R-12 was causing a hole in the ozone layer and replaced it with R134a which is similar to R12 and it is a less efficient way to make the air conditioner work.
I am not a rookie. I have been around the block. I was a certified emissions inspector for Arizona and Colorado. I was one of the first to show the dangers of MTBE.
You know that I respect you and your opinions.
I believe that if you find the time to make a deep dive into this, you will come to the conclusion that I have.
I've reached the conclusion that the likes of WEF are using climate change to install their dystopia. I've also become rather unhappy with the term 'climate change' as to me it's terribly compromised.
I still rather hold to what the real environmentalists state in the Moore and Gibson movie 'Planet of the Humans' that a lot of the big renewables projects are not renewable in any sense whatsoever. And I hate the idea of 'bio fuels'. Where I part with some of them is in thinking that the Earth is currently beyond its limits as far as # humans being carried.
What do I think about climate change itself? There is obviously warming going on in the Arctic. Elsewhere I'd like to do some research on temperature records away from heatsinks such as ashphalted up cities. I'd assume that there is some warming going on evident in such records but I'm not going to take it as gospel.
What do I think about Heller? He seems compromised by his own connections, whatever they may be.
You know, I have been interested in the different views of the warming/ ice age stories. What stands out most for me is the computer models. They have used them to bolster the government pretense that the planet is in danger. You mentioned that you believe that scientists like Heller are owned by big oil.
This has been a running joke for over a decade and Tony says that he's still waiting for the check from big oil. Often he says that he checks his mailbox every day to see if the check arrives.
Actually he will travel to a location just as he testified before Congress in Washington under oath. He backs it up.
Now there's plenty of doubt about the climate in North America warming. Just as there was doubt about the coming ice age.
I delivered three newspapers on weekends and two every other day. The newspapers had the stories of the coming ice age was the consensus of scientists.
There are a couple of papers that I want to chase down on CO2, one was by two Finnish physicists who dismiss the idea that CO2 could be an agent of warming. I should have done so about 3 years ago but that's the first one I want to read.
The Arctic though is definitely warming currently. Just that the causative factor might be different. And warming or cooling is not going to be consistent everywhere. For example something that I saw a while ago suggested that Mongolia and parts of China would cool on some of the current warming models.
Weather is not proof of a change in climate. Only a change in climate (long term weather stats) is that. Britain barely edged 40º C when mid 40s were predicted. It's probably done it before but hasn't been recorded.
OTOH the Arctic is melting, multi year ice is now one year ice, one summer storm will practically destroy it, temperatures that formerly were lucky to get to 23º c now do high 30s fairly easily. Svalbard's snow cover is receding, bears are out looking for human interaction etc etc. Cannot be denied in my view. Question is what is doing that? If not CO2 then I'd point my finger at industrial pollution. Also feedback loops are arctic, or nearby, forest fires. And the resulting ash that settles on snow.
Sorry I don't know where you're reading but the lowest extents of ice are all in the last 20 years or so. 2007 was an outlier but then it got beaten by just about every year in the 2010s. 10th lowest in 45 years is probably also 10th lowest since 2010.
I can allow that the bankers have been exaggerating climate change due to their plans for Central Bank Digital Coins (i.e. tying your ability to spend to your emissions). But the Arctic is still losing ice.
I have not visited his site for several years. But the old 'won't debate me' schtick is familiar around here from Kirsch who says nobody will debate him but it's pretty much him that does not want to debate and he puts unreasonable demands on his 'terms' to bring that about.
That there is warming in the north of the Northern Hemisphere seems beyond doubt. The questions I guess are how much does CO2 have a part to play in that? How much is down to other man-made pollutants of our industrial civilization. How much of it is being exaggerated by the woke end of town to justify their eugenics model (which likely includes themselves but I guess they're not bright enough to figure that out).
I tend to concentrate on things we can fix such as transport, cycling, trams, trains for cities, building materials reuse (around here in Dunedin right now there is none and quite a lot of perfectly good buildings are getting destroyed), local food. These are all lower drags on resources, and not just oil, than 1.5 to 5 tonnes of metal, plastic and electronics to get you from point A to point B which is often only a few kms.
That's very poor in my view. Singling out a day (UK recently) or a month (US a century or so ago) no matter how much exaggeration might go into it (I agree that one day over 40ºC does not make for proof of climate change) is not scientific in the least.
Thanks, will have a look. It's not out of the realms of possibility that both sides of the climate debate are being played. It is certainly my experience that a lot on the 'warming is not happening' side are very clearly connected to the energy industry the Kochs being the biggest of them but not the only ones. For example Malcolm Roberts in Australia was using a freecall number given to him by the minerals giant BHP. That doesn't mean that they're wrong but it does mean that they're more likely to be as they already have their conclusion and are just searching for its justification. But I admit that this may also be the case on the 'warming is happening' side.
Scary. Are these WEFers.
One could wonder. I think it's more likely that Aaron is referring to people such as Chloe Swarbrick and James Cameron maybe. Not necessarily WEFrs as such but pretty much closely aligned one would think.
These people at the meeting were in October 2019 anticipating depop.
They will have known not to take the injections and also have known to promote them.
You could say that they have been awake for ages. In the know and smugly so.
Some of them were by my analysis. But it's not always so easy to see that.
One can see how the PM and Chloe etc appear smart.
Because they are party to the Globalists' agenda.
We who are not part of the Cabal get caught on the back foot.
They have been prepped, a bit like Biden with his teleprompter.
It's always all right to take things away from others. Never from yourself eh? Funny how these conversations always seem to revolve around that. Well, I didn't attend your stupid talk, so don't come knocking at my door.
Wow.
The acres burned has not increased in the last dozen years. The graph of sea ice going back a hundred years shows that the ice has increased since 1937 and the stability of the Arctic sea ice and the cyclical nature of it is obvious in the record.
I can see that you are being irrational on the topic and I seem to be angering you.
That's the last thing I want and I don't think that I am going to continue to discuss the topic with you.
I am sure that we can find another topic where you don't think that I am stupid and naive.
Heller's cherry picking. He's using all the tropes of climate change denial. He's trying to kid his followers. Why would I pay him any attention? I know what he's doing. If I want to find someone to argue the other side then it isn't Heller.
Do I think that you're stupid and naive? No, but why are you supporting a cherry picker?
As I wrote before, I have done the research.
For you to assert that I am merely following a cherry picker and the information he provided was somehow tainted by an alleged association with some mystery individuals who have corrupted him is the same thing as "you are stupid and naive to believe what he presents "
As I wrote before, we have to find another topic.
I don't like being disrespected.
I don't understand your animus toward Tony Heller. I don't know what connections you are referring to.
Regarding the arctic, please consider this
https://rumble.com/vro34g-experts-discuss-the-arctic.html?mref=6zof&mc=dgip3&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=tonyheller&ep=2
Thanks
Acres burned graph ends in 2006. I bet it goes up dramatically after 2006. Cherry picking.
Just like one day of hot weather in 2022 doesn’t make for climate change nor does one flood in 1936 negate it. Cherrypicking.
He picks sea ice extent in the middle of winter and says it’s the second highest. It’s probably also the 2nd thinnest as multi year sea ice has practically disappeared. And it’s the summer sea ice extent that we need to concentrate on. Cherry picking again. He does it all the time.
He mentions 2007 and then picks out a day from then and compares it to a day from 2022 I guess. We’re not comparing apples to oranges here, winter 2007 to spring or summer 2022 I guess.
He says around that same time, it’s 15th August 2008 (summer) a year that was down on the record loss of ice in 2007. But it’s the year 2007 that he’s choosing which makes his claims bogus because of that record sea ice loss which wasn’t matched or exceeded until 2012. He knows this and is trying to bullshit the viewers.
I don’t like him at all. Give me real analysis if you’re going to claim that warming is not happening because Heller is as bogus as hell.
Taken singularly you are right.
The evidence that this is going on every day is overwhelming.
I urge you to spend some time seeing the other videos he was produced. This video was about one claim. He factually addressed that claim. He's been doing this for all of the claims about the climate change global warming hoax. I note with interest that you found fault with the video because it didn't expound on the totality of the scam.
As I wrote before, I have been sceptical of this subject for decades. I wanted to find someone who has debunked the decade and a half of video he produced.
I tried to debunk his videos.
I was one of the original environmental supporters. I cheered the EPA for mandating the Positive Crankcase Ventilation system that ended the release of crankcase gasses into the air.
Unfortunately they went too far and every car produced for Americans in 1974 is a low performing gas guzzling mess under the hood (bonnet?). They claimed that R-12 was causing a hole in the ozone layer and replaced it with R134a which is similar to R12 and it is a less efficient way to make the air conditioner work.
I am not a rookie. I have been around the block. I was a certified emissions inspector for Arizona and Colorado. I was one of the first to show the dangers of MTBE.
You know that I respect you and your opinions.
I believe that if you find the time to make a deep dive into this, you will come to the conclusion that I have.
I've reached the conclusion that the likes of WEF are using climate change to install their dystopia. I've also become rather unhappy with the term 'climate change' as to me it's terribly compromised.
I still rather hold to what the real environmentalists state in the Moore and Gibson movie 'Planet of the Humans' that a lot of the big renewables projects are not renewable in any sense whatsoever. And I hate the idea of 'bio fuels'. Where I part with some of them is in thinking that the Earth is currently beyond its limits as far as # humans being carried.
What do I think about climate change itself? There is obviously warming going on in the Arctic. Elsewhere I'd like to do some research on temperature records away from heatsinks such as ashphalted up cities. I'd assume that there is some warming going on evident in such records but I'm not going to take it as gospel.
What do I think about Heller? He seems compromised by his own connections, whatever they may be.
You know, I have been interested in the different views of the warming/ ice age stories. What stands out most for me is the computer models. They have used them to bolster the government pretense that the planet is in danger. You mentioned that you believe that scientists like Heller are owned by big oil.
This has been a running joke for over a decade and Tony says that he's still waiting for the check from big oil. Often he says that he checks his mailbox every day to see if the check arrives.
I believe him to be genuine.
I am pretty jaded and not easily fooled.
I appreciate our conversations.
I don't know about Heller but I did chase down several on his side of the argument a few years ago and there were definitely those connections there.
Not sure if my post made it.
Regarding the north American climate https://rumble.com/v1ecev6-fake-heatwave-news.html
Actually he will travel to a location just as he testified before Congress in Washington under oath. He backs it up.
Now there's plenty of doubt about the climate in North America warming. Just as there was doubt about the coming ice age.
I delivered three newspapers on weekends and two every other day. The newspapers had the stories of the coming ice age was the consensus of scientists.
Science is not consensus.
Consensus is not science
Totally agree with those last two sentences.
There are a couple of papers that I want to chase down on CO2, one was by two Finnish physicists who dismiss the idea that CO2 could be an agent of warming. I should have done so about 3 years ago but that's the first one I want to read.
The Arctic though is definitely warming currently. Just that the causative factor might be different. And warming or cooling is not going to be consistent everywhere. For example something that I saw a while ago suggested that Mongolia and parts of China would cool on some of the current warming models.
Lost in Space?
Weather is not proof of a change in climate. Only a change in climate (long term weather stats) is that. Britain barely edged 40º C when mid 40s were predicted. It's probably done it before but hasn't been recorded.
OTOH the Arctic is melting, multi year ice is now one year ice, one summer storm will practically destroy it, temperatures that formerly were lucky to get to 23º c now do high 30s fairly easily. Svalbard's snow cover is receding, bears are out looking for human interaction etc etc. Cannot be denied in my view. Question is what is doing that? If not CO2 then I'd point my finger at industrial pollution. Also feedback loops are arctic, or nearby, forest fires. And the resulting ash that settles on snow.
Sorry I don't know where you're reading but the lowest extents of ice are all in the last 20 years or so. 2007 was an outlier but then it got beaten by just about every year in the 2010s. 10th lowest in 45 years is probably also 10th lowest since 2010.
I can allow that the bankers have been exaggerating climate change due to their plans for Central Bank Digital Coins (i.e. tying your ability to spend to your emissions). But the Arctic is still losing ice.
I delivered the papers in the 70's.
I remember the way they framed it. They were planning to drop coal dust on the arctic to try to prevent it.
The ice age was real.
All of the newspapers said so.
The scientists said so.
I was young and impressionable.
I have seen too much to fall for the global warming hoax.
Please visit his site with an open mind.
realclimatescience.com
You must have been at the politics presentation that I just went to.
I noticed a split on gender (m, f) lines at the presentation that I went to tonight.
What gets me is that none of the climate change global warming hoaxters will debate Tony Heller.
At his site he has completely debunked the climate change global warming hoax.
There's no crisis.
There's no evidence that humans have the power to change the climate.
Tony Heller is a scientist who is also a researcher.
They called him a DENIER but it is they who are in denial
I have not visited his site for several years. But the old 'won't debate me' schtick is familiar around here from Kirsch who says nobody will debate him but it's pretty much him that does not want to debate and he puts unreasonable demands on his 'terms' to bring that about.
That there is warming in the north of the Northern Hemisphere seems beyond doubt. The questions I guess are how much does CO2 have a part to play in that? How much is down to other man-made pollutants of our industrial civilization. How much of it is being exaggerated by the woke end of town to justify their eugenics model (which likely includes themselves but I guess they're not bright enough to figure that out).
I tend to concentrate on things we can fix such as transport, cycling, trams, trains for cities, building materials reuse (around here in Dunedin right now there is none and quite a lot of perfectly good buildings are getting destroyed), local food. These are all lower drags on resources, and not just oil, than 1.5 to 5 tonnes of metal, plastic and electronics to get you from point A to point B which is often only a few kms.
Here's one you might like
https://rumble.com/v1ecev6-fake-heatwave-news.html
That's very poor in my view. Singling out a day (UK recently) or a month (US a century or so ago) no matter how much exaggeration might go into it (I agree that one day over 40ºC does not make for proof of climate change) is not scientific in the least.
Thanks, will have a look. It's not out of the realms of possibility that both sides of the climate debate are being played. It is certainly my experience that a lot on the 'warming is not happening' side are very clearly connected to the energy industry the Kochs being the biggest of them but not the only ones. For example Malcolm Roberts in Australia was using a freecall number given to him by the minerals giant BHP. That doesn't mean that they're wrong but it does mean that they're more likely to be as they already have their conclusion and are just searching for its justification. But I admit that this may also be the case on the 'warming is happening' side.