Climate change, pollution, and the great civilizations of the past
11 responses | 0 likes
Started by GunterK - Sept. 28, 2019, 9:34 p.m.

this  will put a new twist on what you learned in history class

great civilizations always flourished during warming periods

By metmike - Sept. 29, 2019, 7:46 a.m.
Like Reply

Thanks Gunter!

This was all understood clearly until the UN/IPCC hijacked climate science 30 years ago. 

They erased the Medieval Warm period that was this warm, 1,000 years ago .....when the Vikings were living in Greenland....and created new climate graphs that only went back to that, now much cooler....faked cooler period(which then only showed this current warm period as being the only warm period on the graph) and used those revised, cooler temperature graphs  in all their reports which became the centerpiece of the climate Bible for the new climate crisis religion.

Their rewritten climate history is evidence of the fraudulence that this warming is unprecedented and must be from humans.

When I’m at the computer later, I’ll show you exactly how they did it again, with over 100 studies that show the opposite of their rigged climate science historical account.

By metmike - Sept. 29, 2019, 4:44 p.m.
Like Reply

Here are most of the studies(hundreds on the map below), most of which, by a wide margin, show that the Medieval Warm Period was this warm or warmer than this. Most of them done before climate science was hijacked(I'll show you the actually hijack below):

Over 100 studies from the Medieval Warm Period, most of which show the planet was this warm or warmer 1,000 years ago. It was also this warm 2,000 years ago during the Roman Warm Period and also just over 3,000 years ago, during the Minoan Warm period.

Medieval Warm Period Project:

MWP-CWP Qualitative Temperature Differentials - CO2 Science

Figure Description: The distribution of Level 2 Studies that allow one to determine whether peak Medieval Warm Period temperatures were warmer than (red), equivalent ...

Where did the data from the bar graphs above come from so that we know that this is the authentic science vs the one that the MSM and dems describe with the fake climate crisis(where they can't show the data to prove)?

List of Scientists Whose Work We Cite:

List of Research Institutions Associated With the Work We Cite


For the Medieval Warm Period compared to today below:

Red balloons showed it was warmer.

Blue was colder than today(in that study)

Green was wetter/more precip

Yellow was drier



If you go to the link below, you can hit those individual balloons and get each individual study:

By metmike - Sept. 29, 2019, 4:54 p.m.
Like Reply

And the Holocene Climate Optimum from 9,000-5,000 years ago was even warmer than the Medieval Warm a wide margin.

Holocene climatic optimum

"Out of 140 sites across the western Arctic, there is clear evidence for conditions warmer than now at 120 sites. At 16 sites, where quantitative estimates have been obtained, local HTM temperatures were on average 1.6±0.8 °C higher than now."

Temperature variations during the Holocene from a collection of different reconstructions and their average. The most recent period is on the right, but the recent warming is only seen in the inset.

By metmike - Sept. 29, 2019, 5:07 p.m.
Like Reply

This next story about how they hijacked climate science seems almost impossible..............but  with absolute certainty, it happened.

The United Nations is a wonderful organization in most realms.

Almost everything they ascribe to, uses great plans to make the world a better place for the billions of poor people. However, goal number 13 is a complete fraud  as I will describe.

The 17 sustainable development goals (SDGs) to transform our world:

GOAL 13: Climate Action

In the 1980's, the United Nations had already hatched their scheme and they had already manufactured the fake climate crisis and were busy trying to convince media sources to use it to scare people, as evidenced by this 1989 article:

U.N. Predicts Disaster if Global Warming Not Checked


   UNITED NATIONS (AP) _ A senior U.N. environmental official says entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000. 

   Coastal flooding and crop failures would create an exodus of ″eco- refugees,′ ′ threatening political chaos, said Noel Brown, director of the New York office of the U.N. Environment Program, or UNEP. 

   He said governments have a 10-year window of opportunity to solve the greenhouse effect before it goes beyond human control. 

   As the warming melts polar icecaps, ocean levels will rise by up to three feet, enough to cover the Maldives and other flat island nations, Brown told The Associated Press in an interview on Wednesday. 

   Coastal regions will be inundated; one-sixth of Bangladesh could be flooded, displacing a fourth of its 90 million people. A fifth of Egypt’s arable land in the Nile Delta would be flooded, cutting off its food supply, according to a joint UNEP and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency study. 

   ″Ecological refugees will become a major concern, and what’s worse is you may find that people can move to drier ground, but the soils and the natural resources may not support life. Africa doesn’t have to worry about land, but would you want to live in the Sahara?″ he said. 

   UNEP estimates it would cost the United States at least $100 billion to protect its east coast alone. 

   Shifting climate patterns would bring back 1930s Dust Bowl conditions to Canadian and U.S. wheatlands, while the Soviet Union could reap bumper crops if it adapts its agriculture in time, according to a study by UNEP and the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis. 

   Excess carbon dioxide is pouring into the atmosphere because of humanity’s use of fossil fuels and burning of rain forests, the study says. The atmosphere is retaining more heat than it radiates, much like a greenhouse. 

   The most conservative scientific estimate that the Earth’s temperature will rise 1 to 7 degrees in the next 30 years, said Brown. 

   The difference may seem slight, he said, but the planet is only 9 degrees warmer now than during the 8,000-year Ice Age that ended 10,000 years ago. 

   Brown said if the warming trend continues, ″the question is will we be able to reverse the process in time? We say that within the next 10 years, given the present loads that the atmosphere has to bear, we have an opportunity to start the stabilizing process.″ 

   He said even the most conservative scientists ″already tell us there’s nothing we can do now to stop a ... change″ of about 3 degrees. 

   ″Anything beyond that, and we have to start thinking about the significant rise of the sea levels ... we can expect more ferocious storms, hurricanes, wind shear, dust erosion.″ 

   He said there is time to act, but there is no time to waste. 

   UNEP is working toward forming a scientific plan of action by the end of 1990, and the adoption of a global climate treaty by 1992. In May, delegates from 103 nations met in Nairobi, Kenya - where UNEP is based - and decided to open negotiations on the treaty next year. 

   Nations will be asked to reduce the use of fossil fuels, cut the emission of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases such as methane and fluorocarbons, and preserve the rain forests. "

By metmike - Sept. 29, 2019, 5:09 p.m.
Like Reply

So the United Nations created the IPCC(Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) in the late 1980's. It was determined that this entity would be the worlds authority on human caused climate change and all governments and its scientists would follow their reports as their "climate bible" for what has turned into religious type beliefs about some of the information. Climate scientists around the world, use their reports and its assumptions..........many of which are very speculative. Their predictions have been too warm and wrong but are not being adjusted because what most people don't know, the IPCC is a political body, a governmental entity,  which uses their reports to recommend aggressive political actions. Brilliant scientists around the world, use these reports as a starting point without actually understanding how the models work (they are just computer output from programming to simulate the future climate based on a speculative theory with faulty equations that have created far too much warming) and very few are operational meteorologists, for instance that have been objectively tracking the actual weather/climate the past 30 years to see how badly the models have performed.

Does this make me smarter than these scientists that have it wrong?

Hell no! Most of them are smarter than me.  Many have PhD's and did better then me in college and can run circles around me using mathematical equations to represent the physics of the atmosphere. However, I've analyzed the global atmosphere for a living (using models to forecast) for over 3 decades, with a wonderful connection to what's been happening in the real atmosphere, while studying weather/climate history and .............. can judge objectively and accurately how well the simulations of the atmosphere have been doing......not so good in several areas but ok in others. 

The profound evidence that the IPCC was blatantly corrupted early on,  in a way that will be hard for you to comprehend..........but the proof is right here on the following pages.

One of the first things that the IPCC did was to erase the Medieval Warm Period from climate history.......because it showed temperatures warmer than this without humans causing it. Several corrupt climate scientists, especially Michael Mann and his tree ring study which led to the "hockey stick" graph played key roles. 

Seriously, since they were deemed the world's climate authority, wiping out the Medieval Warm Period was accepted by mainstream science despite 100 previous studies that showed it. Despite over 100 studies that contradicted this result(see my source above) they did it and everybody excepted it..........ok, the governments and many of their climate scientists and those who wanted the best opportunities for funding accepted it which is even easier to accept when 80% of you, belong to the same group that supports the political agenda of the climate science hijacking. 

Now, we had a new climate history graph that showed the current warming was unprecedented. 

Ministry Of Truth – Erasing The Medieval Warm Period.

How To Tell Who's Lying To You:  Climate Science Edition

By metmike - Sept. 29, 2019, 5:10 p.m.
Like Reply

The first graph was the one that was featured in the IPCC's first report,  in the 1990's, when they were using the 100+ climate history studies that are still valid today...............  before they wiped out the Medieval Warm Period. 

On the 2nd graph, look at the huge difference between the first one in the 1990's and  2001 in order to show that humans were causing all the more Medieval Warm Period!!!!

The 2nd graph is based on one study, from a set of tree rings, from one corrupt climate scientist, Michael Mann..........all the other ones were tossed out. 

Believe it or not, the majority of the liberal scientists decided to believe the 1 study(though most don't realize it's just based on 1 study) and all the science of the world authority on climate science,........the IPCC. 

First IPCC report below, 1990's concurs with all other paleoclimatology.............there WAS a Medieval Warm Period:

U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works

2001 IPCC report below, after hijacking climate science.  The Medieval Warm Period was completely wiped out(using one scientist's tree ring study) so that the Current Warm Period would appear to be unprecedented and caused by humans.

I will repeat this again because its the crux of what happened.

The IPCC was made the worlds authority on climate science. They then, took one set of tree rings from one scientist that showed no warming during the Medieval Warm Period(note the name WARM Period) which  contradicted the vast of majority(over 100) of the previous studies for that period and wiped out the Medieval Warm Period from climate history.

By metmike - Sept. 29, 2019, 5:11 p.m.
Like Reply

Climategate emails

There have been a select group of climate scientists who serve as the gatekeepers of weather/climate information in this field too.  Specifically at the Climate Research Unit in East Angola, England,  where all the global climate records are kept. Some of the scientists there, like Phil Jones,  also works with the IPCC .

In 2009, a whistle blower hacked years worth of emails busting them discussing how to "hide the decline"  and "use Mike's Nature Trick" a reference to the author of the fraudulent hockey stick graph that wiped out the Medieval Warm Period and one of his strategies to alter temperature graphs by manipulating data. 

They discussed ways to thwart attempts by skeptics to get their data in order to verify it and how they would use their  great influence in the peer review process. 

They also discussed plans to use media contacts in the US to destroy the credibility of a guy, Steve McIntyre,  that was posting data that contradicted their fraudulent stuff. 

He figured out how the corrupt Michael Mann and IPCC used 1 tree ring study to wipe out the Medieval Warm Period.

"You can see quite easily how by enhancing the weight of the bristlecones and reducing the weight of all the other proxies, you can “get” a hockey stick. You have to work pretty hard to “find” the bristlecones out of this pig’s breakfast of noise; that was Mann’s “new” statistical method. If you take the bristlecones out of this system, there is no Hockey Stick.

Figure: Spaghetti graph showing top- absolute contribution to MBH98 reconstruction (1400-1980 for AD1400 step proxies) by the following groups: Asian tree rings; Australia tree rings; European ice core; Bristlecones (and Gaspé); Greenland ice core; non-bristlecone North American tree rings; South American ice core; South American tree rings. Bottom – all 9 contributors standardized.

Climate change: this is the worst scientific scandal of our generation(climate gate)

The science community circled the wagons and ignored all or it. 

A couple of complete joke investigations took place and cleared them. A panel of like minded scientists said something like, they might not have been very professional but didn't do anything wrong. 

More emails popped up 2 years later with the same sort stuff:


By metmike - Sept. 29, 2019, 5:12 p.m.
Like Reply

Related to this:

Inconvenient stumps

We’ve been told it is warming so fast, we have only 12 years left!



Yet nature seems to not be paying attention to such pronouncements, as this discovery shows.



"This photo shows  a tree stump of White Spruce that was radiocarbon dated at 5000 years old. It was located 100 km north of the current tree line  in extreme Northwest Canada."

"The area is now frozen tundra, but it was once warm enough to support significant tree growth like this.


If climate was this warm in the past, how did that happen before we started using the fossil fuels that supposedly made our current climate unprecedentedly warm?"

By metmike - Sept. 29, 2019, 6:56 p.m.
Like Reply


You mentioned pollution in the title of this thread. 

CO2 is NOT pollution in any realm of science, where it's the beneficial gas your source identifies based on the irrefutable law of biology, agronomy, zoology, plant science and down the line.

Sunshine +H2O + Minerals + CO2  = O2 + Sugars(Food)


Sunshine +H2O + Minerals + POLLUTION = O2 +Sugars(Food)

The only field that identifies CO2 as pollution is...........politics.

This is obviously why the planet it greening up:

Carbon Dioxide Fertilization Greening Earth, Study Finds



From a quarter to half of Earth’s vegetated lands has shown significant greening over the last 35 years largely due to rising levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide, according to a new study published in the journal Nature Climate Change on April 25.

An international team of 32 authors from 24 institutions in eight countries led the effort, which involved using satellite data from NASA’s Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectrometer and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer instruments to help determine the leaf area index, or amount of leaf cover, over the planet’s vegetated regions. The greening represents an increase in leaves on plants and trees equivalent in area to two times the continental United States.

globe of Earth from North Pole perspectiveThis image shows the change in leaf area across the globe from 1982-2015.

By metmike - Sept. 29, 2019, 7:10 p.m.
Like Reply

This has clearly been a massive factor in increasing crop yields......for soybeans, the increase, in combination with the best weather/climate for life on this planet and growing crops in at least the last 1,000 years is responsible for AT LEAST 25% of the positive response.

Soybeans: Yield by Year, US

There obviously are other contributing factors with genetics and farming technology but the +CO2 and weather have been a big plus.

With Corn, it's a different picture because of the  introduction of nitrogen fertilizer causing corn yields to triple real fast and nothing to do with CO2 or weather during that initial tripling. However, recent decades have featured a steady increase, along with a steady increase in CO2 and beneficial weather.


By metmike - Sept. 29, 2019, 7:20 p.m.
Like Reply

If we would take the earth's atmosphere back to conditions of 150 years ago, with CO2 levels then, at dangerously low levels below 300 parts per million(they are up to a better but still very sub optimal 410 ppm) and the 1 deg. C cooler global temperature..... its likely that 1 billion people on this planet would starve to death within 3 years and the price of all crops would triple as we rationed the shortage of everything grown.

We rescued the planet and plant world from CO2 starvation.

Had levels dropped 120 ppm instead of increased beneficially by 120 ppm, plants would have continued to shut down from their already low output and very few of us would be here. 

Yeah, I know it's an almost impossible fact to process in your brain because it's the complete opposite of the brainwash in peoples heads from the fake science about the fake climate crisis/emergency. 

The authentic science proves it: