Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	50 years of dire and completely wrong predictions
Date:	9/24/2019 8:34:15 AM (updated 9/24/2019 8:35:23 AM)

Yep, Santanaya had it right when he said if we don't learn from history we are doomed to repeat it.  And the Climate Fascists sure do seem to love to repeat a long and sordid history of being completely wrong.

https://cei.org/blog/wrong-again-50-years-failed-eco-pocalyptic-predictions

So what we learn from all this is that two things never change.  First, they are always wrong in their dire predictions of imminent doom.  Second, their prescription for the latest faux crisis is more government control, higher taxes, lower standards of living and redistribution of wealth from functional and thriving first world countries to failed countries mired in bad government, kleptocracy and widespread poverty caused by ruinous govt policies.

But of course this one is different, right?  This time we really mean it!  We're not kidding........oh, oh, it's the wolf said the little boy far too often.

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	50 years of dire and completely wrong predictions
Date:	9/24/2019 11:43:50 AM

In the first place could it be that some of these disasters did not happen because the warnings were heeded and actions taken to avert the or lessen the impact and in the second place have you ever heard what the play by play announcers often say when a hitter that has gone 0 for 20 comes to the plate..."he's due"?

Name:	phil -	Reply
Subject:	50 years of dire and completely wrong predictions
Date:	9/24/2019 3:23:08 PM

Heard plenty of times that he was due, only for it to be followed up by maybe next time.

A broken analog watch is right at least twice a day, but would not bet my life or my future on it being correct at any given moment.

Name:	MAJ USA RET -	Reply
Subject:	Still hearing crickets
Date:	9/25/2019 5:09:22 PM (updated 9/25/2019 5:11:42 PM)

Okay… let’s just ASSUME … for the moment… that the alarmists’ science is correct.

The United States produces about 15% of the world’s non-natural carbon output. AND, assume with the “green new deal”, we could reduce our non-natural carbon output to 0%. Therefore we would reduce the amount of carbon contributed to the atmosphere as follows:

2.3 ppm/year global increase X 0.15% = 0.345 ppm/per year reduction by the U.S.

BUT… NO other country is required by the Paris Accord to reduce their carbon output. The burden is placed squarely on the United States. China (as with all other 3rd world counties) is even INCREASING their carbon output!

Therefore we would be abandoning our industrial output, thriving economy, and standard of living… INFORCED BY THE GOVERNMENT… to no benefit. Our reduction would be lost in the noise of international ambivalence.

All of this flies in the face of science, historical data, and current climate data output by our own NOAA Historical Climatology Network Stations (HCN).  DATA IS PUBLIC !

As a geophysicist, geologist, certified environmental specialist, and formally trained meteorological observer, I am offended by this blatant propaganda.

1 - CO2 IS NOT a “green house” gas… no matter how many times you are told it is.

2 - Humans and their industry are insignificant in the ever changing, historically documented, changing of Earth’s climate.

3 – please, look up solar cycles and Milankovitch Cycles https://skepticalscience.com/Milankovitch.html

* * * * *

NOTICE - - I will be pleased to publicly debate the Greenland Ice Core data (100,000 yrs BP) and the Vostok Ice Core data (350,000 yrs BP) with any of you anthropomorphic global warming (AGW) alarmists. )PS: I am a geophysicist, registered profession geologist, certified environmental specialist, and formally trained (93E20) meteorological observer.)

AGWs, the Vostok and Greenland data are public. Where’s yours?

Scientists and physicians have produced lists of substances (and radioactive isotopes) which are toxic or hazardous (NIOSH, ERG, EPA NPL, and LA-4400). These substances and isotopes produce specific and documented responses in living organisms at specified concentrations or exposures. They are backed up by validated and publicly peer reviewed research. AGW has been neither validated nor publically reviewed by peers.

I am one of 33,000+ credentialed scientists who petitioned to have AGW publically peer reviewed. Now, do you understand why we hear only crickets?

 AGWs may go first: Please, with respect to AGW, explain the origins of the Younger Dryas and the Medieval Warming Period. Please compare the Maunder Minimum to your observations.

As stipulated by the "Theory of Uniformitarianism," the laws of physics and chemistry are not changed or suspended by the history or presence of human beings.

Name:	GoneFishin -	Reply
Subject:	Still hearing crickets
Date:	9/25/2019 5:21:45 PM

Thanks for the information. I will sleep alot better tonight listening to the chirping of the crickets knowing that driving my 2005 F150 with 115,000 miles is not destroying the planet.

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Still hearing crickets
Date:	9/26/2019 8:18:09 AM

Of course you are because they have no desire for a scientific debate.  If they had one they would lose.  This is a religion for them and any lack of orthodoxy is not to be tolerated.  It would also expose how they manipulate the data to support their preconceived fantasy.  It would also allow alternative data and theories to be presented and debated.

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	50 years of dire and completely wrong predictions
Date:	9/26/2019 4:14:16 PM

I suppose that's possible but I frankly can't think of one thing on a worldwide basis that was done over the last 50 years to fix any of these instances of immanent doom.  The world is still pumping out CO2 and the climate has done its thing.  The worlds population is continuing to grow and no mass famines. Basically we have just gone about our business and none of these prognostications of doom have occurred. I'm open to what the entire planet did to fix even one of these issues.