You know the guy!
metmike: Wonderful person. One of the richest and very altruistic. Extraordinarily generous and active in trying to make the world a better place.
However, VERY wrong in accepting extreme, computer simulated, catastrophic weather/climate for the next 100 years as gospel......and not thinking critically by using the actual world observations that prove we are having the best weather and climate in the last 1,000 years for almost all life on this greening planet......... and best CO2 since humans have existed.
He get's an F from metmike in meteorology/atmospheric science/climate science(and biology, agronomy, zoology) and for allowing his progressive activism to completely control his thoughts........disabling his mind to being open to be able to comprehend the reality............the current CLIMATE OPTIMUM!
Bill Gates provides no evidence of the climate crisis/emergency. He can't because it doesn't exist except on extreme global climate model simulations going out 100 years.........but that's not authentic evidence. Solutions from biased modelers programming a computer to run a million equations based on WHAT THEY THINK is only going to yield the results of what they think.
If I program a computer with 10+10=40, then have it add that sum a billion times,. the wrong result is still tied to the wrong assumption from the get go from the human being who programmed the computer.
So here is the problem. The modelers are not adjusting their climate assumptions in the models based on the real weather/climate. They are stuck in their world of climate theories, math and physics............convinced that it's all been settled, like gravity and can all be represented accurately with math that doesn't need to be changed.
Even when the evidence from observations BUSTING those model predictions is crystal clear, they don't want to change them. This train left the station over 30 years ago and there is no stopping it.
PETER JAMES SPIELMANN June 29, 1989
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."
Climate Change, Inequality, Poverty
It's estimated that 50% or more of the mainstream media are progressive activists, 6+ times higher than the general population. This makes sense. It's an ideal profession that allows them to accomplish their "change the world" objectives. Thanks to "freedom of the press" they are able to communicate their ideologies and impose their belief system on others with impunity, even when they go from reporting to distorting the news for political agenda.
Previous discussion on this:
HiddenTribes: America’s Polarized Landscape
12 responses |
Started by metmike - Sept. 27, 2019, 7 p.m.
Differences in Conservative and Liberal Brains
Interesting too, that almost all fields of science are dominated by people with an extreme liberal bias. Climate science is no exception. They are obviously well educated which is why progressive activists are twice as likely to have a higher education. They have a strong presence in many realms that provide opportunities for them to have the power to influence the belief system of others.
College professors for instance.............very VERY liberal.
In recent years, concern has grown over what many people see as a left-of-center political bias at colleges and universities. A few months ago, Mitchell Langbert, an associate professor of business at Brooklyn College, published a study of the political affiliations of faculty members at 51 of the 66 liberal-arts colleges ranked highest by U.S. News in 2017. The findings are eye-popping (even if they do not come as a great surprise to many people in academia).
Democrats dominate most fields. In religion, Langbert’s survey found that the ratio of Democrats to Republicans is 70 to 1. In music, it is 33 to 1. In biology, it is 21 to 1. In philosophy, history and psychology, it is 17 to 1. In political science, it is 8 to 1.
The gap is narrower in science and engineering. In physics, economics and mathematics, the ratio is about 6 to 1. In chemistry, it is 5 to 1, and in engineering, it is just 1.6 to 1. Still, Lambert found no field in which Republicans are more numerous than Democrats.
metmike: Our college campuses have become the perfect environment for indoctrination into far left ideologies via biased mentors that represent their 1 sided views only. This study quantifies the disparity with evidence in the form of actual numbers. WOW!
With the exception of engineering, they are mind boggling. Some teach in areas and ways that their political affiliation would never be a factor. However, sometimes it is and it's almost always pushing an extreme left agenda.
It's no surprise that those with a college education are twice as likely to be progressive activists.
Here are the results of that study below.
Figure 2 gives a picture of how the broad liberal arts fields compare with respect to political affiliation. The professional field has the least extreme (but still unbalanced) D:R ratio while ideologically rooted interdisciplinary studies has the most extreme. The hard sciences are more balanced than the social sciences and the humanities.
The letter below was signed by more than 1,000 British professors.
"Dear vice-chancellors, Universities UK and UK Research and Innovation,
Humanity stands at the brink of a precipice. If we do not urgently address climate breakdown and the ecological crisis, the very future of life on earth is in question. David Attenborough has said “We cannot be radical enough” in tackling the climate crisis, and the people are listening. Universities are the bastions of wisdom and knowledge that are urgently needed to combat the climate crisis. Now is the time to increase our efforts.
Support fellowships, placements and volunteering for mitigation, adaptation and ecological restoration
We ask you to support scientists, academics and students to help address the climate emergency through a series of new programmes, fellowships, sabbaticals and voluntary placements to help the critical efforts needed to save all life on our planet. These will be hosted by a large partnership between universities, companies and NGOs working on solutions.
We need to be leaders. We need to transform our universities into action-oriented institutions.
Please help us make this possible."
metmike: The message is clear. They want to spend much more time devoted to teaching students anti science about a climate crisis/emergency that does not exist during this climate optimum.
In essence, making them dumber. Feeding them misinformation about what is really happening. Teaching them.......not to be critical thinkers using logic or to be skeptical and question things that don't make sense but to fall in line and be indoctrinated into THEIR belief system. Their monumental extreme liberal bias has been well established. They are abusing their responsibility as educators of our youth in order to promote their personal ideology.
I used to give these people the benefit of the doubt as far as sincerity and many of them may be sincere. However, despite being an atmospheric scientist, you see how easy it is for me to pull up massive, massive amounts of data that shows we are in a climate optimum, life is doing wonderful and our planet is greening up. These are the cerebral elites in our world. There is no excuse for them to not know or to ignore all the proven benefits to the increase in CO2 and todays weather/climate...........then include that in their teaching.
Only telling students about the bad things, including the very bad things on speculative, busted climate models that will likely never happen but are the selling point of the entire scheme is closed minded and harmful to everybody they consider as targets.
They have made a committment to educating our youth. They owe it to those youth to educate them with authentic science and the objective truths.
Who could have imagined such a situation and probably you,. reading this probably still don't competely appreciate what has and is happening right now with this fake climate crisis.
Al Gore is still out there committed to brainwashing our children with junk science.
This is his latest effort:
Previous discussions on this brainwashing:
Ex-KGB on Ideological Subversion: How the UN/IPCC hijacked science/brainwashed the world. Previously warmer. Polar bear hoax. Sept. 2019
Living in the world of escalating brainwash- alarmist language-polar bears-why most research is false-May 2019
Global climate strike/brainwashing youth/catalytic convertors/deaths from climate catastrophes: March 2019
Does the media have too much power?: Time Magazine goes off the anti science deep end/97% of scientists agree on a climate crisis bs/31,487 American scientists disagree that there is a crisis. Sept 2019
Climate change, pollution, and the great civilizations of the past: Exactly how climate science was hijacked for the political agenda. September 2019
New: Teen Climate Activist Speaks To Congress: Blatant scientific fraudulence and child abuse used as the latest scheme to push the extreme propaganda. September 2019
Tens of thousands of scientists like metmike(an atmospheric scientist) know that there is no climate crisis/emergency. Of course the MSM will not report this.
Scientists coming out of the woodwork-no climate crisis! October 2019
You can get all the Climate Reality discussions here:
30 years ago, when the UN and others got this hoax started, we didn't have an internet or ability to research data and educate ourselves, just news sources reporting.
Those news sources have become much more biased and powerful........they only tell us one side. However we do have the internet now and man, can it be a powerful source of enlightenment for us to see hoaxes like this(if our brains are not previously captured with the anti science belief system of a climate crisis).
That's the only reason for this and other threads here.
Sharing authentic science and authentic facts that represent truth.
In all 20+ discussions on climate here, massive legit data sources(hundreds) from credible scientific institutions and scientists are the main part of most of them when they relate to actual climatic conditions.
I've been observing and analyzing global weather patterns on a daily basis for 37 years.
However, we opened this thread with a speech from a very uniformed Bill Gates, spreading misinformation about CO2 and climate.
Many more people will be affected(become dumber) from listening to his speeches on climate than will read the truth here..........by a wide margin.
That tells you who has been winning the battle.
But the longer that the climate optimum continues, the harder it will be to continue to spin it as a crisis/emergency..............but at the same time, they are going into overdrive on the brainwashing.........telling us its even worse(as it gets better).\
Once somebody is convinced of something, even if its false, their brain discards things that contradict what they have assumed is the truth and only believe things that reinforce that belief system.
We are being told the planet is dying............so a massively greening up planet in truth, does not compute with that belief system..........so, the massively greening up planet gets discarded.
Even by Bill Gates!!!!
Here is the last climate optimum on our planet, as defined by all science in every field....... until just over 30 years ago when climate science was hijacked by the United Nations for a political agenda(global socialism) using their Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
Now, the same conditions are being called a climate crisis/emergency. Add in the entirely beneficial increase in CO2, and life on this planet has not had it better since humans have existed. Not in spite of but because of humans. This is only applies to our climate/weather/CO2.
An enormous amount of life on this planet has it much worse because of humans for many other reasons(as an environmentalist, this is an outrage and blatant hypocrisy). Why is this not being addressed and only beneficial CO2 is..........the climate accord will do nothing except transfer money from rich to poor countries(by taking your money)??
We are going to spend tens of trillions "saving the planet" from something that is greening up the planet and good for all life and ignore all the other problems?? The reason this "cause" is getting all the attention are those tens of trillions of dollars. Spending that money will do ZERO to affect the weather/climate but 20,000,000,000,000 is alot of money and governments in some countries like Canada and states like California are already taking it from you with their carbon taxes which will be going MUCH higher. Not if but when and how much. (make no mistake. it WILL come from you) with the carbon taxes which will be widespread in all developed countries.
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.
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. Northwestern North America had peak warmth first, from 11,000 to 9,000 years ago, and the Laurentide Ice Sheet still chilled the continent. Northeastern North America experienced peak warming 4,000 years later. Along the Arctic Coastal Plain in Alaska, there are indications of summer temperatures 2–3 °C warmer than present. Research indicates that the Arctic had less sea ice than the present.
metmike: If you never heard about this climate optimum(other than here) ask yourself, "self, why are we not being told about an even warmer period 6,000 years ago that caused all life on this planet to flourish?"
Since it WAS warmer and we noted the benefits to life then........ not speculated or theoretical benefits(from models)..........real world benefits that really happened, why are we calling it a crisis/emergency now?
Is this a planet dying because of increasing CO2 and climate change?
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.This image shows the change in leaf area across the globe from 1982-2015.Credits: Boston University/R. Myneni
Green leaves use energy from sunlight through photosynthesis to chemically combine carbon dioxide drawn in from the air with water and nutrients tapped from the ground to produce sugars, which are the main source of food, fiber and fuel for life on Earth. Studies have shown that increased concentrations of carbon dioxide increase photosynthesis, spurring plant growth.
However, carbon dioxide fertilization isn’t the only cause of increased plant growth—nitrogen, land cover change and climate change by way of global temperature, precipitation and sunlight changes all contribute to the greening effect. To determine the extent of carbon dioxide’s contribution, researchers ran the data for carbon dioxide and each of the other variables in isolation through several computer models that mimic the plant growth observed in the satellite data.
Cult followers of the climate religion:
AOC: It’s only when we talk about acting on climate do some ask,“how are you going to pay for it?” As though climate inaction doesn’t have a price tag. As though the Midwest didn’t flood. As though California isn’t on fire. As though 1000s didn’t die in María.
metmike: Mentioning extreme events that have happened before in similar fashion (I have the records) and are part of normal weather........to people that don't have the weather records and are not atmospheric scientists to convince them that its unprecedented and because of a climate crisis is brainwashing for the political agenda.
Here's how we bust frauds:
Midwest floods: Over the last 3 decades, The Midwest has had the best crop growing weather in the last 1,000 years with only 1 widespread drought, 2012, when historically 3 to 4 droughts occurred during a similar time frame(the 1930's was a decade of drought). There were worse floods than that of 2019 before the "climate emergency" Why was this one from the climate crisis? Answer, it wasn't. A warmer atmosphere does hold more moisture- 5%-6% in this case(which is often a good thing) and it did likely increase rain amounts a bit but the benefits of climate change have outweighed the negatives by a factor of 10 to 1.
Good discussion on that here:
What if this weather is the new normal?: Wet Springs/delayed planting-drought-Food production-River flooding-US rain records-April 2019
California wild fires: Climate models actually forecast MORE rain in California. The increase in CO2 is causing more growth and fuel for these fires............but it's also feeding an additional 1 billion people on this planet. The solution? Adaptation that is absolutely available. California, get your act together. Stop blaming climate change and start managing the forest floors, cleaning up all the dead stuff that is like gasoline. No brainer. That way we can continue to green up the planet and feed more people because of the benefits of increasing CO2.
California projected to get wetter through this century
Hurricanes/Maria/Katrina: Every bad hurricane(or weather extreme), we are now told is from the climate crisis. They were quiet for over a decade from 2006 to 2016 when no major hurricanes hit the US, then when they were active again from a natural cycle/dynamic they are all caused by the climate crisis. The worst hurricane in history was during the Little Ice Age and global cooling, in 1780.
By Susan Jones | August 26, 2017
So Bill Gates, AOC and others can give compelling speeches and sound very convincing but one thing that they will never be able to show you, is the data to back up what they say.
That data shows the complete opposite of what they say, which is why I show it and they don't!