Nature retracts study predicting catastrophic climate change costs.

Bartelby said:
Trump is not using tariffs in the classic sense to build up domestic industry. He is using tariffs as sanctions to punish other nations and extort their wealth and resources.
Click to expand...
He is doing it to break up the new world order you sicko’s want to push on the free citizens of the world:
 
Energy is not an either/or situation. It's more both/and. It would be useful, however, if coal were phased out gradually and the BEV introduced rapidly.

Crocodile said:
Coal and oil are proven energy sources that create prosperity.
If solar and wind did it better then coal and oil then if would have been gone long time ago but that’s simply not the case.
The suggestion that governments are not unnaturally distorting markets is to be downright deceptive. The governments are doing these things but not explaining these things in a way that people understand what is going on and it’s done in stages just like the Fabian socialists conduct their agenda.
People like yourself also understand what’s going on but you come on forums like this to agitate and disseminate the lies. Lot of your types even get funding from groups like the search light institute to push leftist and pro CCP propaganda,
Click to expand...
 
Bartelby said:
Energy is not an either/or situation. It's more both/and. It would be useful, however, if coal were phased out gradually and the BEV introduced rapidly.
Click to expand...
They worked out who and what they want to gradually phase out and it’s you - and you are helping them - well done done
1850 - 1.25 B
1950 - 2.5 B
2026 - 8.3B
Most of the 125ppm to 480ppm happened in the first 100 years right when the population maxed out at 2.5B. So now it’s 8.3B so whst do you expect - an adverse reaction ?
 
Lobb made a half-decent attempt to fashion some sort of alternative climate science before collapsing into the completely political position that you've always occupied.

Crocodile said:
They worked out who and what they want to gradually phase out and it’s you - and you are helping them - well done done
1850 - 1.25 B
1950 - 2.5 B
2026 - 8.3B
Most of the 125ppm to 480ppm happened in the first 100 years right when the population maxed out at 2.5B. So now it’s 8.3B so whst do you expect - an adverse reaction ?
Click to expand...
 
Bartelby said:
People normally make these "lost control of the narrative" claims when they've run out of arguments and evidence.
Click to expand...
You have to refer or as leftists would say, circle back, to your previous accusation to refresh yourself as to why you got the subsequent response, it’s just a natural observation.
Weak men tend to be harmless and can be controlled while competent men have the potential to be dangerous because they can’t be controlled. Communists want western men to be weak so they can be controlled.
 
Bartelby said:
Lobb made a half-decent attempt to fashion some sort of alternative climate science before collapsing into the completely political position that you've always occupied.
Click to expand...
Comments like these are a deflection of ones true intentions ( meaning you are political all the way though ) so you accuse others of the things you do - true ?
My previous comment was based on claims that the climate cult makes all the time so I just put the claim into a perspective that asks for clarification - it’s called critical thinking and thinking for oneself and you still haven’t addressed the matter. I guess you can always hide under the skirt of mummy in the form of Gemini.
 
Thank you for that, Clint Eastwood, you've made my day.

Crocodile said:
You have to refer or as leftists would say, circle back, to your previous accusation to refresh yourself as to why you got the subsequent response, it’s just a natural observation.
Weak men tend to be harmless and can be controlled while competent men have the potential to be dangerous because they can’t be controlled. Communists want western men to be weak so they can be controlled.
Click to expand...
 
Conspiracy thinking is the opposite of critical thinking!

Crocodile said:
Comments like these are a deflection of ones true intentions ( meaning you are political all the way though ) so you accuse others of the things you do - true ?
My previous comment was based on claims that the climate cult makes all the time so I just put the claim into a perspective that asks for clarification - it’s called critical thinking and thinking for oneself and you still haven’t addressed the matter. I guess you can always hide under the skirt of mummy in the form of Gemini.
Click to expand...
 
The climate cabal who trade under the alias of ‘science ‘ and ‘follow the science ‘ make the point that humans having added extra carbon dioxide since industrialisation began since 1851. They also empathise that this is ‘added carbon dioxide ‘ which natural atmosphere processes cannot absorb or neutralise and that this added carbon stays in the atmosphere for centuries.
Therefore the claim is that humans have added and increased carbon dioxide levels from say 120ppm in 1851 to say now in 2026 which is 480ppm causing the planet to warm,
It has to be noted that since the carbon dioxide stays in the atmosphere for 100’s of years that the current warming situation was caused when:
In 1850 when there was 1.25 B people on the planet and then in 1950 when they was 2.5 billion people living on this planet. So the 2.5 billion people including their two world wars and various volcano eruptions caused this 480ppm,
Well now we have 8.3 billion people living here so what does the climate cabal expect the ppm to be by 2050 and what metric will they most want to reduce to reach net zero by then, Do they think they 8.3 billion people will emit less carbon than 1.25billiion or 2.5 billion people,
These science which is based on future projections and modeling is based on BS,
 
Do you also need an electrical engineering degree to turn on a light?

Crocodile said:
The climate cabal who trade under the alias of ‘science ‘ and ‘follow the science ‘ make the point that humans having added extra carbon dioxide since industrialisation began since 1851. They also empathise that this is ‘added carbon dioxide ‘ which natural atmosphere processes cannot absorb or neutralise and that this added carbon stays in the atmosphere for centuries.
Therefore the claim is that humans have added and increased carbon dioxide levels from say 120ppm in 1851 to say now in 2026 which is 480ppm causing the planet to warm,
It has to be noted that since the carbon dioxide stays in the atmosphere for 100’s of years that the current warming situation was caused when:
In 1850 when there was 1.25 B people on the planet and then in 1950 when they was 2.5 billion people living on this planet. So the 2.5 billion people including their two world wars and various volcano eruptions caused this 480ppm,
Well now we have 8.3 billion people living here so what does the climate cabal expect the ppm to be by 2050 and what metric will they most want to reduce to reach net zero by then, Do they think they 8.3 billion people will emit less carbon than 1.25billiion or 2.5 billion people,
These science which is based on future projections and modeling is based on BS,
Click to expand...
 
Bartelby said:
You're a hardcore Christian, so who is more likely to be theologically-inclined when it comes to politics?
Click to expand...
That’s your analysis - I have a different view about spirituality as spirituality comes from the highest form of evaluation and thinking ( blocks taxonomy) which is wisdom. Climate change has no spiritual value is a lower form of socially constructed narrative as is the functionality of AI. that you will soon embrace ad your new hardcore religion.
The climate cabal is not in good company right now:
 
Bartelby said:
Reactionaries like you have discordant tastes in music, apart from Lobb of course whose taste in music is conservative. I prefer Lobb on that "score".
Click to expand...
You try to label and box people but you keep missing the mark. Freedom people are not wedded to the same things collectivists are.
We could put a tent over you guys and you are covered just like that but it’s not for me to point this out:
The other thing is that eventually collectivists eat their own and this is coming just as night follows day.
 
Last edited:
"Freedom People": how many medals have they won at the Winter Olympics?

Crocodile said:
You try to label and box people but you keep missing the mark. Freedom people are not wedded to the same things collectivists are.
We could put a tent over you guys and you are covered just like that but it’s not for me to point this out:
The other thing is that eventually collectivists eat their own and this is coming just as night follows day.
Click to expand...
 
Wisdom is a pagan Greek philosophical concept that was imported into Christianity.

Climate change analysis belongs to (climate) science, not belief and spiritual value.

Crocodile said:
That’s your analysis - I have a different view about spirituality as spirituality comes from the highest form of evaluation and thinking ( blocks taxonomy) which is wisdom. Climate change has no spiritual value is a lower form of socially constructed narrative as is the functionality of AI. that you will soon embrace ad your new hardcore religion.
The climate cabal is not in good company right now:
Click to expand...
 
Bartelby said:
Western science is our biggest achievement.
Click to expand...
Both science and culture go through periods of enlightenment and periods of darkness both in part and/or as a whole,
Institutionalist junior scientific departments in universities occupy the dark when it comes to climate projections especially when paired with human control narratives.
Those who are aware of this understand what this means. Those who don’t keep repeating the same orthodoxy snd dogma and this I believe will fail.
 
It seems that each generation has to defeat anew fascists like you.

Crocodile said:
Im just observing of how things are moving. Since you think these things are all fairytales there is nothing you can do accept revolve around yourself
Click to expand...
Crocodile said:
Both science and culture go through periods of enlightenment and periods of darkness both in part and/or as a whole,
Institutionalist junior scientific departments in universities occupy the dark when it comes to climate projections especially when paired with human control narratives.
Those who are aware of this understand what this means. Those who don’t keep repeating the same orthodoxy snd dogma and this I believe will fail.
Click to expand...
 
The climate people are suggesting that between 1.25 billion people and 2.5 billion people added 480ppm of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. How does this work with 8.3 billion people on the planet now?
What will they try to reduce now to reach net zero ?
 
Bartelby said:
It seems that each generation has to defeat anew fascists like you.
Click to expand...
Since everyone who is right of Stalin and Mao is a fascist in your opinion there will be a lot of fascists you will have to defeat.
Must be a lot of Napoleons out there driving their Fords and Holden’s out there this morning.
 
Political science defines those to the far-right as authoritarian populists and in America that movement has already abandoned the rule of law.

Crocodile said:
Since everyone who is right of Stalin and Mao is a fascist in your opinion there will be a lot of fascists you will have to defeat.
Must be a lot of Napoleons out there driving their Fords and Holden’s out there this morning.
Click to expand...
 
Bhagi Katbamna said:
DGDBR6U.jpeg


I know most normal people don't read the NYT but this tells me their own editors don't read it either.
Click to expand...
If there is an extended period of cold weather, at some point there must be a conclusion that the earth is into a cold phase.

That might irritate some diehard climate alarmists, but the truth must be told.
 
Bartelby said:
No one proposed abolishing ICE vehicles and very few will be voting for Trump again, which is why he won't be giving them any chance to do so.
Click to expand...
No, you are wrong again, the emissions mandated by US law ensured that fossil fuel cars could not be continued with, the major manufacturers had decided to terminate their production.

And, of course, the Biden people were well aware of that, and were outspoken about eliminating fossil fuel vehicles.
 
You have to define what an "extended period" means or you are just whistling Dixie.

Dan Lobb said:
If there is an extended period of cold weather, at some point there must be a conclusion that the earth is into a cold phase.

That might irritate some diehard climate alarmists, but the truth must be told.
Click to expand...
 
So Biden was the very brightest of bright Green? You have no credibility left.

Dan Lobb said:
No, you are wrong again, the emissions mandated by US law ensured that fossil fuel cars could not be continued with, the major manufacturers had decided to terminate their production.

And, of course, the Biden people were well aware of that, and were outspoken about eliminating fossil fuel vehicles.
Click to expand...
 
Even our dear Prime Minister Carney considers BEVs to be a security threat which is why Carney is allowing only a few thousand to be imported.
:unsure:


PM Carney folds under pressure.
No BEV mandate. Bart inconsolable.
:(

www.facebook.com

1.2K views | Canada drops EV sales mandate following pressure from automotive industry says Carney #Canada #EVs #AutoIndustry #ClimatePolicy #ElectricVehicles | Asian News International (ANI)

Canada drops EV sales mandate following pressure from automotive industry says Carney #Canada #EVs #AutoIndustry #ClimatePolicy #ElectricVehicles
www.facebook.com www.facebook.com
 
Last edited:
Carney looks an awful lot like Ford in your video. BEVs are a question of availability, not mandates.

If Carney stops Chinese BEVs then his exports to China will not be sailing anytime soon.

Better_Call_Raul said:
Even our dear Prime Minister Carney considers BEVs to be a security threat which is why Carney is allowing only a few thousand to be imported.
:unsure:


PM Carney folds under pressure.
No BEV mandate. Bart inconsolable.
:(

www.facebook.com

1.2K views | Canada drops EV sales mandate following pressure from automotive industry says Carney #Canada #EVs #AutoIndustry #ClimatePolicy #ElectricVehicles | Asian News International (ANI)

Canada drops EV sales mandate following pressure from automotive industry says Carney #Canada #EVs #AutoIndustry #ClimatePolicy #ElectricVehicles
www.facebook.com www.facebook.com
Click to expand...
 
Bartelby said:
Political science defines those to the far-right as authoritarian populists and in America that movement has already abandoned the rule of law.
Click to expand...
Leftists repeat this all day every day so you are no different from one leftist to the next with all this nonsense. Frankly I couldn’t care what you call people as that’s all you people have to utter which is pretty said.
When the left works out whether a biological male can get pregnant or not and what a women is then maybe a conversation about what’s far right or left can occur because at this rate you guys are a long way behind and what’s worse you think you know the science.
 
You just run one propaganda line after another with little regard to the truth.

Crocodile said:
Leftists repeat this all day every day so you are no different from one leftist to the next with all this nonsense. Frankly I couldn’t care what you call people as that’s all you people have to utter which is pretty said.
When the left works out whether a biological male can get pregnant or not and what a women is then maybe a conversation about what’s far right or left can occur because at this rate you guys are a long way behind and what’s worse you think you know the science.
Click to expand...
 
Bartelby said:
You have to define what an "extended period" means or you are just whistling Dixie.
Click to expand...
A period of several months at least, there is no need for the climate alarmists to panic yet over the cold temperatures.
But if the current cold trend persists, there must be a frank rejection of the failed climate models, which have once again predicted wrongly.
 
Last edited:
Bartelby said:
Changing the law is what governments are elected to do, so how is that insidious?
Click to expand...
It is insidious to pretend that you are merely changing the emissions levels, when in fact the law is designed to eliminate fossil fuel cars. That is also called "disingenuous" or "pretence".
 
The fevered climate alarmists have sought to instill widespread panic among the populations in order to create the political pre-conditions for extreme government policies to effectively destroy the energy system.

Here is an analysis by AI of this program of mass panic, deliberately pursued as a political tool.

"Whether climate change requires "panic" is a subject of active debate among scientists, psychologists, and communicators, with the answer often depending on how one defines panic versus urgent concern.

1. The Argument for "Productive" Alarm
Some experts and climate authors argue that because the threat is existential and the window for action is rapidly closing, a state of "panic" or high alarm is a rational and necessary response.
  • A "Smoke Alarm" for Humanity: The IPCC has described its findings as a "piercing smoke alarm," indicating that the facts themselves demand an urgent, almost panicked global response to overhaul energy and food systems.
  • Breaking Complacency: Proponents of this view suggest that "catastrophic thinking" can be valuable to break through human cognitive biases toward complacency and the belief that the future will simply look like a slightly warmer version of the present.
  • Historical Precedent: High fear campaigns have historically worked in other areas, such as the fight against pesticides (Silent Spring) or nuclear proliferation.

  • 2. The Case Against Panic
    Many psychologists and communication experts warn that panic can be counterproductive, leading to paralysis rather than action.
    • The "Goldilocks Zone": Research suggests there is an optimal level of worry; if anxiety becomes too high (panic), it can lead to "maladaptive" responses like denial, avoidance, or emotional paralysis.
    • Efficacy vs. Fear: Fear-based messages often backfire if they aren't paired with clear, actionable solutions. Without a sense of "self-efficacy" (the belief that one's actions matter), high fear often leads to a feeling of hopelessness.
    • Polarization: Extreme, fear-based rhetoric can increase social polarization, leading some to double down on denial as a defense mechanism against a perceived threat to their freedom or worldview.
    • 3. "Climate Anxiety" as a Motivator
      Recent studies show that for many, a moderate level of "climate distress" is actually a healthy, rational response that leads to increased engagement.
      • Action as the Antidote: Research from the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication found that Americans who feel at least some anxiety or depression about climate change are significantly more likely to take collective action, such as volunteering or contacting officials.
      • Community and Resilience: Engaging in group activities or social movements has been shown to buffer against the debilitating effects of anxiety, turning fear into a sense of agency and solidarity.
    • In summary, while the scientific reality is dire and requires unprecedented urgency, most experts suggest replacing "panic" (which can be debilitating) with "constructive worry"—a state of high concern that drives collective action rather than despair.
    • If you are feeling overwhelmed, I can provide practical steps for collective action or resources for managing climate-related anxiety."

The last statement above seems to be a sop for those poor innocents who have swallowed the panic narrative promoted by some climate activists. You can see that the panic being promoted is expected to help with political action. Not hard to see that.
 
Last edited:
This is just a rehearsal of appropriate communication strategies when faced with perceived crises. However, ...

I can't see any climate change panic or alarm commensurable with Trump's rantings about either Canada or Iran.

Trump has a target of his deranged foreign policy so he mobilizes unproductive alarm about a nonexistent threat.

Dan Lobb said:
The fevered climate alarmists have sought to instill widespread panic among the populations in order to create the political pre-conditions for extreme government policies to effectively destroy the energy system.

Here is an analysis by AI of this program of mass panic, deliberately pursued as a political tool.

"Whether climate change requires "panic" is a subject of active debate among scientists, psychologists, and communicators, with the answer often depending on how one defines panic versus urgent concern.

1. The Argument for "Productive" Alarm
Some experts and climate authors argue that because the threat is existential and the window for action is rapidly closing, a state of "panic" or high alarm is a rational and necessary response.
  • A "Smoke Alarm" for Humanity: The IPCC has described its findings as a "piercing smoke alarm," indicating that the facts themselves demand an urgent, almost panicked global response to overhaul energy and food systems.
  • Breaking Complacency: Proponents of this view suggest that "catastrophic thinking" can be valuable to break through human cognitive biases toward complacency and the belief that the future will simply look like a slightly warmer version of the present.
  • Historical Precedent: High-fear campaigns have historically worked in other areas, such as the fight against pesticides (Silent Spring) or nuclear proliferation.

  • 2. The Case Against Panic
    Many psychologists and communication experts warn that panic can be counterproductive, leading to paralysis rather than action.
    • The "Goldilocks Zone": Research suggests there is an optimal level of worry; if anxiety becomes too high (panic), it can lead to "maladaptive" responses like denial, avoidance, or emotional paralysis.
    • Efficacy vs. Fear: Fear-based messages often backfire if they aren't paired with clear, actionable solutions. Without a sense of "self-efficacy" (the belief that one's actions matter), high fear often leads to a feeling of hopelessness.
    • Polarization: Extreme, fear-based rhetoric can increase social polarization, leading some to double down on denial as a defense mechanism against a perceived threat to their freedom or worldview.
    • 3. "Climate Anxiety" as a Motivator
      Recent studies show that for many, a moderate level of "climate distress" is actually a healthy, rational response that leads to increased engagement.
      • Action as the Antidote: Research from the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication found that Americans who feel at least some anxiety or depression about climate change are significantly more likely to take collective action, such as volunteering or contacting officials.
      • Community and Resilience: Engaging in group activities or social movements has been shown to buffer against the debilitating effects of anxiety, turning fear into a sense of agency and solidarity.
    • In summary, while the scientific reality is dire and requires unprecedented urgency, most experts suggest replacing "panic" (which can be debilitating) with "constructive worry"—a state of high concern that drives collective action rather than despair.
    • If you are feeling overwhelmed, I can provide practical steps for collective action or resources for managing climate-related anxiety."

The last statement above seems to be a sop for those poor innocents who have swallowed the panic narrative promoted by some climate activists. You can see that the panic being promoted is expected to help with political action. Not hard to see that.
Click to expand...
 
Bartelby said:
This is just a rehearsal of appropriate communication strategies when faced with perceived crises. However, ...

I can't see any climate change panic or alarm commensurable with Trump's rantings about either Canada or Iran.

Trump has a target of his deranged foreign policy so he mobilizes unproductive alarm about a nonexistent threat.
Click to expand...
I highlighted the relevant phrases above, so there can be no doubt that the failed climate alarmists have been attempting to panic the population into a meek acceptance of unnecessary government measures.

This explains why the climate models of the climate panic promoters have always been so false in their predictions.

These climate models are not legitimate attempts to scientifically model the climate, they are deliberate political instruments designed to panic the population, and they deserve to be called out.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top