Without unverifiable sky is falling cliams, alarmists would be seen as the nutjobs they are. Even though they have a lot of frickin money.
De-bunking climate and other varieties of alarmism
Moore's new book presents 11 alleged present catastrophes or threats of future doom and shows how claims are fake news and fake science
https://financialpost.com/opinion/patrick-moore-de-bunking-climate-and-other-varieties-of-alarmism?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR2OIso54otuJYQsITpyfizd_yTYYg13t1zl_kUPhPSixBvxIiQNt9c9rD0#Echobox=1612966001
The "Coral Triangle" — the seas around Indonesia and the Philippines — have more than 600 species of coral and more than 2,000 species of reef fish, far more than any other location, including the Great Barrier Reef. The Coral Triangle is actually a sanctuary, greatly diminished in area from when the seas were considerably warmer. Even the World Wide Fund for Nature, a climate activist organization, recognizes this reality.
I can't explain my new book in a few hundred words, but I guarantee you it tells the inconvenient truth (for climate alarmists) on a whole slew of subjects.
An instance or two: The Great Pacific Garbage Patch, twice the size of Texas, that supposedly is killing the oceans, does not in fact exist. Massive forest fires, allegedly caused by climate change, are really the result of bad forest management. Ocean acidification due to CO2 will not kill most marine life: CO2 is the basis of life in the oceans. Radiation from nuclear energy accidents has not killed hundreds of thousands of people (as millions and millions of people believe); it has actually killed fewer than 60 people. Hundreds of Russian walruses that supposedly leapt to their death because of climate change were actually attacked by a large pack of polar bears.
And, of course, the main attraction: invisible CO2 wreaking havoc on an unsuspecting planet and all species of life thereon when in fact CO2 is the building block of all life and is in short supply compared with previous millennia.

(//%3C/s%3E%3CURL%20url=%22https://smartcdn.prod.postmedia.digital/financialpost/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/vw0210morre-book.jpg?quality=90&strip=all&w=472&type=webp%22%3E%3CLINK_TEXT%20text=%22https://smartcdn.prod.postmedia.digital%20...%20&type=webp%22%3Ehttps://smartcdn.prod.postmedia.digital/financialpost/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/vw0210morre-book.jpg?quality=90&strip=all&w=472&type=webp%3C/LINK_TEXT%3E%3C/URL%3E%3Ce%3E)
We are bombarded with exaggerated claims everyday.....this is a good thread idea Herman.
:smiley_thumbs_up_yellow_ani:
Quote from: Fashionista post_id=401515 time=1613013299 user_id=3254
We are bombarded with exaggerated claims everyday.....this is a good thread idea Herman.
:smiley_thumbs_up_yellow_ani:
All my threads are good. ac_biggrin
I don't how we can slow climate change when the actions of some of the biggest emitters indicate they don't believe there is an emergency.
Quote from: Gaon post_id=401538 time=1613018084 user_id=3170
I don't how we can slow climate change when the actions of some of the biggest emitters indicate they don't believe there is an emergency.
Our elected leaders are forcing enormous sacrifices on us, and it's all for nothing.
I thought a progtard's favourite weapon was a purse...
Quote from: "Dinky Dazza" post_id=401556 time=1613022474 user_id=1676
I thought a progtard's favourite weapon was a purse...
Joe from VF carries one.
Quote from: Herman post_id=401557 time=1613022862 user_id=1689
Quote from: "Dinky Dazza" post_id=401556 time=1613022474 user_id=1676
I thought a progtard's favourite weapon was a purse...
Joe from VF carries one.
So does that Vitty homo.
Quote from: "Shen Li" post_id=401558 time=1613023664 user_id=56
Quote from: Herman post_id=401557 time=1613022862 user_id=1689
Quote from: "Dinky Dazza" post_id=401556 time=1613022474 user_id=1676
I thought a progtard's favourite weapon was a purse...
Joe from VF carries one.
So does that Vitty homo.
And Scouse...
Quote from: "Dinky Dazza" post_id=401562 time=1613024933 user_id=1676
Quote from: "Shen Li" post_id=401558 time=1613023664 user_id=56
Quote from: Herman post_id=401557 time=1613022862 user_id=1689
Quote from: "Dinky Dazza" post_id=401556 time=1613022474 user_id=1676
I thought a progtard's favourite weapon was a purse...
Joe from VF carries one.
So does that Vitty homo.
And Scouse...
That goes without saying.
Quote from: "Dinky Dazza" post_id=401562 time=1613024933 user_id=1676
Quote from: "Shen Li" post_id=401558 time=1613023664 user_id=56
Quote from: Herman post_id=401557 time=1613022862 user_id=1689
Quote from: "Dinky Dazza" post_id=401556 time=1613022474 user_id=1676
I thought a progtard's favourite weapon was a purse...
Joe from VF carries one.
So does that Vitty homo.
And Scouse...
He is pretty fruity.

(//%3C/s%3E%3CURL%20url=%22https://scontent.fyxd1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/149028903_10157874209350869_3562647079283163325_n.jpg?_nc_cat=107&ccb=3&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=wz7-rNO5UhYAX9__huD&_nc_ht=scontent.fyxd1-1.fna&oh=421069779296740300d4e77b51fe10c3&oe=604D54C6%22%3E%3CLINK_TEXT%20text=%22https://scontent.fyxd1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/%20...%20e=604D54C6%22%3Ehttps://scontent.fyxd1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/149028903_10157874209350869_3562647079283163325_n.jpg?_nc_cat=107&ccb=3&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=wz7-rNO5UhYAX9__huD&_nc_ht=scontent.fyxd1-1.fna&oh=421069779296740300d4e77b51fe10c3&oe=604D54C6%3C/LINK_TEXT%3E%3C/URL%3E%3Ce%3E)
Lowest February temperature since 1955 in the UK yesterday.
Vancouver either tied or broke a 116 year old record for the coldest February 11 low.

(//%3C/s%3E%3CURL%20url=%22https://scontent.fyxd1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/150976155_4318175084877480_400011796562172830_n.jpg?_nc_cat=107&ccb=3&_nc_sid=825194&_nc_ohc=N80LbgY5QC4AX93xF-H&_nc_ht=scontent.fyxd1-1.fna&oh=867e1c0d0b2f661c37ab97502df48306&oe=6057E970%22%3E%3CLINK_TEXT%20text=%22https://scontent.fyxd1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/%20...%20e=6057E970%22%3Ehttps://scontent.fyxd1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/150976155_4318175084877480_400011796562172830_n.jpg?_nc_cat=107&ccb=3&_nc_sid=825194&_nc_ohc=N80LbgY5QC4AX93xF-H&_nc_ht=scontent.fyxd1-1.fna&oh=867e1c0d0b2f661c37ab97502df48306&oe=6057E970%3C/LINK_TEXT%3E%3C/URL%3E%3Ce%3E)
S'OK. I'm a good swimmer
But I'm cold. Can you spare a coat?
Quote from: cc post_id=402891 time=1613804252 user_id=88
S'OK. I'm a good swimmer
But I'm cold. Can you spare a coat?
According to the UN, the beaches have sunk in the ocean twenty one years ago.
Here are answers to 10 popular loaded climate questions.
1: Do you believe in "climate change"?
If by "climate change," you mean some human impact on climate, yes.
But I don't believe in "climate crisis."
As the world has warmed ~1°C in the last century, climate disaster deaths have fallen 98% thanks in large part to fossil fuels.
Fossil fuels' CO2 emissions have contributed to the warming of the last 100 years, but that warming has been mild and manageable—~1°C, mostly in the colder parts of the world. And life on Earth thrived (and was far greener) when CO2 levels were at least 5 times higher than today's.¹
Fossil fuels have actually made us far safer from climate by providing low-cost energy for the amazing machines that protect us against storms, protect us against extreme temperatures, and alleviate drought. Climate disaster deaths have decreased 98% over the last century.²
"Do you believe in 'climate change'?" is an extremely vague question.
It doesn't specify what the magnitude of the change is, to what extent it's negative or positive, and to what extent it's human-caused.
Everyone "believes in climate change" at this level of vagueness.
The intent of the vagueness of "Do you believe in climate change?" is to get you to say "yes" because you (correctly) believe in some human impact on climate, then take that "yes" to mean that you (falsely) concede a catastrophic human impact on climate—a "climate crisis."
"Do you believe in climate change?" is also a misleading question, because it asks you to take a position only on the climate side-effects of fossil fuels ("climate change") while ignoring their huge benefits (including their benefits in protecting us from climate danger).
For an in-depth explanation of why climate impact ("climate change") is real, but "climate crisis" isn't, read this.
2: Are you a "climate denier"?
I'm a climate thinker.
I think about the climate side-effects of fossil fuel use in a precise, not exaggerated way, and I also think about the many benefits of fossil fuel use—including the climate benefits that make us safer than ever from climate.
The irrefutable case for a Fossil Future
ALEX EPSTEIN
·
AUGUST 31, 2022
The irrefutable case for a Fossil Future
If we want a world in which all 8 billion of us have the opportunity to flourish—to live long, healthy, prosperous, fulfilling lives—we need to use more, not less, fossil fuel going forward. I explain this comprehensively in my book Fossil Future. Here's a
Read full story
3: What about the 97% of climate scientists who agree that we must rapidly eliminate fossil fuels?
The "97%" studies reflect widespread agreement that humans have some climate impact, not catastrophic impact.
They don't justify the disastrous policy of rapidly eliminating fossil fuels.
https://alexepstein.substack.com/p/the-myth-that-97-of-scientists-agree?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
The myth that "97% of climate scientists agree" about a climate crisis
ALEX EPSTEIN
·
FEB 23
The myth that "97% of climate scientists agree" about a climate crisis
Myth: 97% of climate scientists agree that we face a climate crisis that requires the rapid elimination of fossil fuels. Truth: Most climate scientists agree that we have some climate impact. This does not at all justify the rapid elimination of fossil fuels
4: Will you listen to the scientists on climate change?
In considering energy policy I will listen to accurate summaries of climate science, along with accurate summaries of other relevant fields such as energy economics.
I will reject distortions and politicizations of science.
For an in-depth explanation of what's wrong with "listen to the scientists" or "listen to the climate scientists" on energy policy, read this.
5: What's your plan to keep warming under the 1.5°C that scientists say is necessary?
The goal of rapidly eliminating fossil fuels to limit warming to 1.5°C since the 1800s—~0.5°C from today—in a world where far more people die of cold than of heat—is genocidal pseudoscience.
https://alexepstein.substack.com/p/talking-points-on-cop-26-15c-pseudoscience?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
6: What's your plan to rapidly reduce CO2 emissions?
Such a plan would be ruinous.
CO2 emissions reduction can only be achieved humanely and practically long-term, by developing globally cost-competitive alternatives.
I will liberate nuclear and other promising alternatives.
https://alexepstein.substack.com/p/a-pro-human-pro-freedom-policy-for?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
7: Will you join the world in pursuing net-zero by 2050?
No one is actually pursuing net-zero, and many parts of the world are increasing fossil fuel use, because for billions of people fossil fuels are the most or only cost-effective way to get the energy they desperately need.
https://alexepstein.substack.com/p/reject-net-zero-embrace-energy-freedom?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
8: How will you address the worsening extreme weather brought on by fossil fuels?
Actually, the world is experiencing unprecedented safety from extreme weather thanks to fossil fuels—because fossil fuels' benefits in protecting us from extreme weather overwhelm any negative climate side-effects.
https://alexepstein.substack.com/p/25-myths-about-extreme-weather-refuted?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
9: What are you going to do about the deadly wildfires that climate change has made worse?
We must address the root cause of dangerous, out-of-control wildfires: "excess fuel load" from bad forest management. Climate is a minor variable that we have no near-term control over.
10: How do you respond to the latest UN IPCC report in which scientists demand urgent climate action?
The IPCC "report" is a political document that distorts science by
1) exaggerating our negative climate impacts
2) ignoring our huge ability to master climate danger
https://alexepstein.substack.com/p/the-ipccs-perversion-of-science?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
I believe anything the west does is offset 10X over by the pollution India and China spew non stop.
Quote from: Lokmar post_id=505523 time=1688656585 user_id=3351
I believe anything the west does is offset 10X over by the pollution India and China spew non stop.
That should be obvious to Trudeau, Biden, AOC, and Sanders, but it goes right over their heads.
Sadly, the alarmism does go bath ways though the left is far worse on the left. They literally claim anyone who disagrees with them on any topic is a Nazi.
Quote from: Oerdin post_id=506088 time=1688866659 user_id=3374
Sadly, the alarmism does go bath ways though the left is far worse on the left. They literally claim anyone who disagrees with them on any topic is a Nazi.
/me shrugs.
So let them call me a nazi then and get it over with. Might as well diminish that epithet along with all the others they've flung, and it's not as though calling me a racist, a bigot, a white supremacist, a transphobe or any of their other overplayed insults has bothered me any.
I'd have to respect them a lot more than I do for it to be otherwise.
Quote from: Oerdin post_id=506088 time=1688866659 user_id=3374
Sadly, the alarmism does go bath ways though the left is far worse on the left. They literally claim anyone who disagrees with them on any topic is a Nazi.
Muzzling dissent.
Quote from: Oerdin post_id=506088 time=1688866659 user_id=3374
Sadly, the alarmism does go bath ways though the left is far worse on the left. They literally claim anyone who disagrees with them on any topic is a Nazi.
...bath ways? jeez - sounds kind of friendly.
Anti-LibiConism isn't for partisans. It's for Freethinkers.
Now Liberalism vs Conservatism is really a much deeper subject than politics, and evolution, which is inevitable, matters.
I'll just leave this here...
Should be required viewing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8AGpILvdwDM
Quote from: kiebers post_id=509393 time=1690030071 user_id=193
I'll just leave this here...
Should be required viewing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8AGpILvdwDM
Good find. This is still true seventy years later.
Quote from: Fashionista post_id=401515 time=1613013299
We are bombarded with exaggerated claims everyday.....this is a good thread idea Herman.
:smiley_thumbs_up_yellow_ani:
The goal is to blame everything on "climate change$ to justify their power grabs and desire to reduce human population and living standards while creating authoritarian control by an elite.
Quote from: Oerdin post_id=509463 time=1690050854 user_id=3374
Quote from: Fashionista post_id=401515 time=1613013299
We are bombarded with exaggerated claims everyday.....this is a good thread idea Herman.
:smiley_thumbs_up_yellow_ani:
The goal is to blame everything on "climate change$ to justify their power grabs and desire to reduce human population and living standards while creating authoritarian control by an elite.
BULLSEYE!!
Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii) suggested Sunday that climate change played a role in the massive Maui wildfires that killed almost 100 people and left more than 1,000 others missing.
But meteorologists and other scientific experts say not so fast.
On CNN's "State of the Union," host Jake Tapper teed up Hirono to blame climate change for the tragic event — and she took the bait.
"Experts warn that extreme disasters such as this one are only becoming more common because climate change is fueling stronger storms, hotter temperatures, more widespread droughts," Tapper teed up.
"Yes," Hirono agreed. "I think that we very much need to acknowledge that climate change is upon us. There are whole states, by the way, where you can't even use the words climate change because they still have a head-in-the-sand attitude."
Last Sunday, the National Weather Service warned that a high-pressure system north of the Hawaiian islands, combined with a strong low-pressure cyclone in category 4 Hurricane Dora passing to the south of the islands, would create a "strong pressure gradient" over Hawaii.
Translation: it's going to be warm and dry, and there will be a strong chance of damaging winds. That means the potential for wildfires will be higher than normal.
WTF happened here?
Biggie says it is a tag issue.