We must understand that what climate alarmism and climate “policy” is is a very cleverly crafted mental virus vector to hijack Meritocracy and other forms of political rationalism such as Propertarianism. It is a pseudoscientific invention with the intent and purpose to destroy national and/or regional sovereignty and rational local governance.
It is more than that too of course, including the erosion of the rational human mind with its in-built cognitive dissonance and negative dialectic of being based in flat Earth theory…but these things of course all feed in to the same underlying goal: to create an Idiocracy, a Sophistocracy, of globally-ruled unconscious humans who have no clue what planet they are on, etc.
In the book 1984, there is a remark about how the net productivity of society was “blasted into the stratosphere” by endless wars, etc.:
“There will be no curiosity, no enjoyment of the process of life. All competing pleasures will be destroyed. But always—do not forget this, Winston—always there will be the intoxication of power, constantly increasing and constantly growing subtler. Always, at every moment, there will be the thrill of victory, the sensation of trampling on an enemy who is helpless. If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face—forever. War is a way of shattering to pieces, or pouring into the stratosphere, or sinking into the depths of the sea, materials which might otherwise be used to make the masses too comfortable, and hence, in the long run, too intelligent.”
That is what climate alarm is, with its leftist lying intention to re-structure society around fighting the weather. That’s the goal of political pseudoscientific climate alarmism: to have the productivity of society wasted and poured out into the stratosphere in fighting the weather, and as long as the “rulers” have that, they will prevent the people from becoming too comfortable and too intelligent.
That’s the Democrats’ “Green New Deal” – to go into debt (of course borrowed and bearing interest…lol) spending multiples of more money than has ever existed in fighting the weather.
The weather…and climate change…which is actually caused by the Sun and galactic-level forces. That’s how sick the leftist mind and leftist lying is. The emotional climate alarm pseudoscientific effort is specifically designed to destroy nationalism and new rational forms of government such as Meritocracy and Propertarianism.
You are right. So many know you are right and yet so any others just have no clue. Clearly the masterminds behind this global socialism isn’t most of the Democrats in power they aren’t that smart. So it does beg the question who is controlling this movement? The stupidity of the “herd” democrats is alarmingly clear when a “journalist” asks a physicist if a meteor heading towards Earth is because of global warming? The physicist had to act like that was a valid question to ask!
It does beg that question indeed. It is one of the most important things to see through a situation for the questions which it begs on a level outside of the box.
Who directs and controls it, as far as I have been able to find out, are *think-tanks*. Ones that we typically do not hear about. Ones which are funded by groups and other entities which have endless, unlimited funds, and who have an interest in keeping people stupid and controlled in the way in which they want to control people. You have to go into the “woo-woo” to a certain extent.
But yes, once you know the facts, and you see the apparatti arranged against the facts, and that they act against the facts purposefully and knowingly, it begs the question but also establishes the fact that it is NOT conspiracy, but only another fact, that some such organizations exist to do that. Largely they use tools and morons, such as Anthony Watts, and out-of-touch academics, like Spencer, etc., to game their fraudulent position against real facts.
What if Obama’s plan (not his but what he was trained to do) wasn’t to destroy the US as I thought but to slit it in half beyond repair and make it end up as two complete nations. Thus literally destroying it from tearing it asunder, an East and West US will cripple this country for ever. The Democrats failed in the civil war but they aren’t losing this battle of sophistry.
The Green Really Bad Deal is a joke being paraded as though it were serious. And that’s dangerous, because the idiots parading it, (a) do not realize that they are idiots, and (b) have no capacity to realize how power guided by unphysical idealism can destroy society by eroding brains to the point that brains do not see a building crumbling until a large piece of concrete smashes their skulls.
Pardon my language…but yes to both of you…it’s really fucking fucked.
The situation is not good. Did you watch the videos? The guys makes a good point…that civil war may now be locked in.
And MSM is largely to blame for it.
I watched most of the first video. Frankly, the speaker’s manner of presentation annoyed me a little. My experience of the video was that the speaker uses language as a continual tease, sort of saying the same thing over and over, promising to get to something more substantial, which he barely ever does. The video, thus, could have been quite a bit shorter and still effective, in my opinion.
I guess, for people who are not as bright, maybe the redundancy and dragging on might be necessary to get even a smidgen of the point across.
He uses hyper-ism to provoke an emotional response it’s a very effective tool Liberals use it all the time. The possibility of civil war in the US has been brewing for decades. Now many on the Left are openly saying they want to take this country over or divide it.
An FBI agent went undercover in the Liberal movement that created Obama last century. He said that the ultimate goal of these “shadow kings” was to take the country over my any means necessary and if they had to kill half the US population to do it, so be it. The part that really disturbed him is how casually they commented on mass murder.
Since this has become a global movement now does that mean they are content with half the population of Earth being wiped out? Yes. The green plans almost guarantee the deaths of millions. The speaker is right about one thing you can’t debate these guys you have to defeat them.
My brother has been to many countries and one of them was Rwanda. You know how that whole thing was provoked? Constant propaganda over the radio, newspapers, word of mouth. Then in one night all of that hyper-ism exploded into a horrific blood bath. Little is told by our media but even embassies were getting in on the killing. My brother said a certain nation’s soldiers were taking pop shots at the Tutsi, killing them and laughing about it (the same ones associated with the Paris Agreement).
Now look at what the left is doing here? They are trying to provoke war.
A POLITICAL PYRAMID MARKETING CAMPAIGN
The global “climate change” pyramid marketing campaign is a political scheme devised by Maurice Strong, a Canadian millionaire with (self-admitted) communist ambitions for world government. Strong used his position with the UN Environment Program (UNEP) to set up the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UN FCCC) to promote his advocacy, recognising that there was a majority of potential supplicant nations in the UN who would favour receiving multi-billion dollar funding from the smaller number of ““rich” nations. He also recognised that those affluent nations would prefer to avoid alienating the potential beneficiary nations. The UN FCCC formalised Strong’s campaign as international obligations with the “precautionary principle” deliberately excluding the possibility of beneficial impacts.
HOW IT ALL BEGAN
Strong integrated the “greenhouse gas warming” theory proposed in 1896 by Swedish chemist Arrhenius into the UN Climate Change Convention wording as if it was a proven scientific climate-relevant fact. While many years and millions of dollars have been spent attempting to verify the UN FCCC “greenhouse gas wrming” assumption, it has never been proven as scientifically credible despite confident assertions by vested interest “consensus” academics and lobby groups.. Advocacy groups have invented alternative ploys and semantics to progress their marketing, such as “climate disruption,” “sea level rise,” “ocean acidification,” “clean energy,” “dirty fossil fuels,” and “carbon pollution,” none of which are true. Unprofessional advocacy by publicly funded institutions is a significant issue in Australia needing debate and exposure.
FOLLOW THE MONEY – WHO MIGHT BENEFIT?
Many politicians, academics and individuals perceiving personal and career advantages have become activists for the “Save the Planet” marketing campaign. Government-funded departments, agencies and institutions (such as universities and the education industry among others) also felt obliged to join the campaign in order to maintain their perceived credibility, influence and funding. Media interests joined to expand their influence and profits. Businesses were obliged to conform or face activist “social licence” vilification. The outcome has been a pyramid marketing campaign headed by the UN and our Government. The whole campaign in Australia at least has assumed the status of a religion, based on belief rather than informed understanding of the actual scientific evidence or lack thereof with “infidel” non-believers vilified as deviant “deniers.”
WHAT EVIDENCE OF GLOBAL WARMING?
The UN’s computer-based climate models have failed to predict the unchanged global average climate over the past 18 years. While many excuses have been advanced for this failure, they merely confirm the inadequacy of the modelling assumptions based on current scientific knowledge for predicting future climate.
HAS IT ALL BEEN WORTHWHILE?
Well over a trillion dollars have been wasted on research and projects associated with the “global warming/climate change” political campaign initiated by Maurice Strong. The “climate change” campaign is perceived as the greatest fraud in human history.
And some advice from Prof Arrhenius over 100 years ago:
He suggested that the human emission of CO2 would be strong enough to prevent the world from entering a new ice age, and that a warmer earth would be needed to feed the rapidly increasing population:
By the influence of the increasing percentage of carbonic acid in the atmosphere, we may hope to enjoy ages with more equable and better climates, especially as regards the colder regions of the earth, ages when the earth will bring forth much more abundant crops than at present, for the benefit of rapidly propagating mankind.”
Author: an experienced professional scientist with wide business and economic experience
Wow excellent Phil! I should make that a post.
Exactly Christopher. Not good. When it comes time….just remember they want to kill you because they believe in flat earth physics and fighting the weather. Hence, it will be up to us to do the needful.
Suggest delete specific reference to Australia if you propose to use my comment, Joe.
Yes it certainly applies to many governments and just leftist political parties in general.
Will be posting in a few minutes…with minor additions.
Pingback: The Mechanics of Climate Alarm | Climate of Sophistry
Pingback: The Purpose of Climate Alarm | PSI Intl
Phil do you have a source for the Arrhenius quote?
Read “why nations fail” (the cause of poverty and prosperity) and realize that history is a chain of elites that suppress the population. Suddenly solar and wind become rational choices as they cannot deliver energy for everyone and therefore will create a sub-class of poor : servants or worse. Nuclear energy is demonized because is may generate enough power for everyone.
So, we notice the revolt of a new (green) noble class !
I have a friend, a sharp cookie, Chartered Mechanical Engineer. He dismisses me with a hand wave when I challenge him to get back to Thermodynamics 101. When I point out the ontological difference between the behaviour of matter in the physical state v the quarter-powered sun & flat earth lit 24/7 simulacrum, he is deaf.
That perma-grinning twat, Professor (Kek) Brian Cox, won’t hear a word against the atmospheric radiative GHE (ARGHE). What are the logical possibilities for his taking this stance?
1. He truly believes the UNIPCC bullshit. In which case, how is he suitable to profess in physics?
2. He simply can’t see the conflation of 2 distinct physical processes: temperature gain by convection blocked by structure; cooling of something warmer by convection and radiation to the cooler, open atmosphere and the space sink.
3. In some other way, it is to his benefit that he promotes the ARGHE impossibility.
Joe – do you know anyone who could get you an intro to POTUS? Tim Ball? You need to be his Chief Scientific Adviser on Globy Warmy Climy Bollocks. You NEED a Twitter account.
“Their theory has been styled the hot-house theory, because they thought that the atmosphere acted after the manner of the glass panes of hot-houses.”
Such a great quote. I covered this in my book. They thought that the atmosphere could form solid impenetrable layers like glass! Those were the conditions they required to speculate the atmosphere to behave like a greenhouse! It’s all such fraud based on pure speculation which nowadays is known to be impossible.
Arrhenius 1908 : Worlds in the Making ) directed at a general audience, where he suggested that the human emission of CO2 would be strong enough to prevent the world from entering a new ice age, and that a warmer earth would be needed to feed the rapidly increasing population:
“To a certain extent the temperature of the earth’s surface, as we shall presently see, is conditioned by the properties of the atmosphere surrounding it, and particularly by the permeability of the latter for the rays of heat.” (p46)
“That the atmospheric envelopes limit the heat losses from the planets had been suggested about 1800 by the great French physicist Fourier. His ideas were further developed afterwards by Pouillet and Tyndall. Their theory has been styled the hot-house theory, because they thought that the atmosphere acted after the manner of the glass panes of hot-houses.” (p51)
“If the quantity of carbonic acid [ CO2 + H2O → H2CO3 (carbonic acid) ] in the air should sink to one-half its present percentage, the temperature would fall by about 4°; a diminution to one-quarter would reduce the temperature by 8°. On the other hand, any doubling of the percentage of carbon dioxide in the air would raise the temperature of the earth’s surface by 4°; and if the carbon dioxide were increased fourfold, the temperature would rise by 8°.” (p53)
“Although the sea, by absorbing carbonic acid, acts as a regulator of huge capacity, which takes up about five-sixths of the produced carbonic acid, we yet recognize that the slight percentage of carbonic acid in the atmosphere may by the advances of industry be changed to a noticeable degree in the course of a few centuries.” (p54)
“Since, now, warm ages have alternated with glacial periods, even after man appeared on the earth, we have to ask ourselves: Is it probable that we shall in the coming geological ages be visited by a new ice period that will drive us from our temperate countries into the hotter climates of Africa? There does not appear to be much ground for such an apprehension. The enormous combustion of coal by our industrial establishments suffices to increase the percentage of carbon dioxide in the air to a perceptible degree.” (p61)
“We often hear lamentations that the coal stored up in the earth is wasted by the present generation without any thought of the future, and we are terrified by the awful destruction of life and property which has followed the volcanic eruptions of our days. We may find a kind of consolation in the consideration that here, as in every other case, there is good mixed with the evil. By the influence of the increasing percentage of carbonic acid in the atmosphere, we may hope to enjoy ages with more equable and better climates, especially as regards the colder regions of the earth, ages when the earth will bring forth much more abundant crops than at present, for the benefit of rapidly propagating mankind.” (p63)
Pingback: The Mechanics of Climate Alarm | PSI Intl
The earth WILL get warmer because it will eventually become engulfed by an expanding, aging sun as it burns itself out and loses its own gravitational impaction which now holds it together; BUT the occurrence of that event will be measured in billions of years from now, a problem none of us will have to worry about. The global warming lobby, the left in general, Obama and other followers of George Soros need to worry about the pollution of our planet, it’s oceans and our air, pollution not from carbon dioxide but from other really poison gases and trash left by humans in our oceans and on land.
These people don’t realize the earth desperately needs carbon dioxide. They apparently don’t understand where the earth gets it replenishment of oxygen. It really would be a problem if we run out what we breathe! One has to wonder if they have a solution for new oxygen if we eliminate carbon dioxide. Why can’t we redirect the effort of attacking fossil fuels and save our trees, clean our oceans and get rid of really poisonous gases!
The people that make up the liberal left simply can’t think for themselves and suck up to any source of money that feeds their stupidity and their causes; and the wealthy political manipulators that have other agendas, who are making billions on currency transactions, and commodity trades as they cripple our country just quietly laugh at them as they pile on their riches. Stupid is as Stupid does.