Human CO2 emissions will reach net zero. However, not because the EU Commission calls for a 90% cut in emissions by 2040, but because it will slowly become physically impossible to maintain modernity — with or without fossil fuels. Something, which under current policies will end up in an unmitigated disaster; rather sooner than later. Why is this ever desperate push for hydrogen, wind and solar then? What useful could be done instead?
I would be interested in your feedback on this 2007 Channel 4 UK documentary called ' The Great Global Warming Swindle'. It features many prominent scientists. Were they all off their game?
It also comes from a time when investigative reporting was still a thing..
No, it comes from a time when some people still disputed the indisputable. Which part of "this was predicted by scientists more than a century ago" did you not understand?
Small correction here: it was Eunice Newton Foote in 1856 who first came to the conclusion that higher CO2 levels would lead to global warming.
The British Royal Society has published the results of the analysis, that the temperature on Earth began to rise before the increase in CO2 concentration in the atmosphere, and this is the very reason for the increase in CO2, and not the other way around as climate models suggested.
Two quotes come to mind when I read a reply such as yours :
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts…The experts who are leading you may be wrong… I think we live in an unscientific age in which almost all the buffeting of communications and television -- words, books, and so on -- are unscientific. As a result, there is a considerable amount of intellectual tyranny in the name of science."
Richard Feynman
"Science is generated by and devoted to free inquiry: the idea that any hypothesis, no matter how strange, deserves to be considered on its merits. The suppression of uncomfortable ideas may be common in religion and politics, but it is not the path to knowledge; it has no place in the endeavor of science. We do not know in advance who will discover fundamental new insights."
Sagan testified before Congress about the issue in 1985, almost 40 years ago, saying:
“here we are pouring enormous quantities of CO2 and these other gases into the atmosphere every year, with hardly any concern about its long-term and global consequences.”
So you're either extremely ignorant or a troll. Either way, you're uninteresting to me. Good day.
Scientism will have its "Jonestown Moment" with great weeping, misery and death to be quickly replaced by some kind of dystopian cargo cult. Sorcerers, honest hard workers and other kinds of salvage artists and tinkers will be in high demand again.
The lie of global warming serves a very important purpose.
We are into deep depletion on affordable fossil fuels. But the MORE-ONS cannot be told this otherwise they panic and BAU unravels.
Instead GW is trotted out - it vilifies fossil fuels. Creates the perception that they are a bad thing and we need to use less of them.... see the brilliance of this? As we peak there is no peak supply rather there is peak DEMAND... we don't need this dirty stuff anymore ...
We are transitioning to EVs and renewable energy.
Hurrah shout the MOREONS as some of them drink the koolaid and install solar on their roofs and buy EVs.
Sure the transition is not perfect... we've seen the stranded Teslas unable to charge in cold weather ... and the cost ... oh my ... crazy costs.... but it's a start... and it's picking up steam...
Before you know it EVS will be half the cost of ICE vehicles... it's just a matter of time...
Elon is the anointed Messiah in all of this ... he will save us from GW!!!
Obviously it's all bullshit ... to anyone with true intelligence... but to those who watch bbccnn ... and trust the msm ... this is all very real... they believe in GW... they believe oil is a nasty evil substance... they believe we are on the cusp of a great transition ...
This gives them hope in a bright green sustainable future... where billions can continue to Live Large... to pillage the planet....it is out god damn right to do so ...
No panic... no despair ... we are going green - get with the program!!!
Like I said -- the Global Warming con ... is crucial to keeping this train on the track for as long as possible... we need the MOREONs to buy into this lie....
If they get wind of The Truth about energy ... they will lose their minds... why would anyone study, invest, work... when they realize there is no future? And that would crash BAU prematurely.
Some warming is perfectly natural and there's nothing we can do about it unless you think blocking out the sun is a good idea. The narrative that human activity is behind the warming is just the wool being pulled over our eyes as FE laid out above. It all stems from the Catholic guilt system of penance and this is how you keep citizens in line. They need a belief, a creed, a religion to follow otherwise they become unruly and no one would believe the claptrap dished out from on high anymore.
Unless there's an energy/resources/economic miracle of some kind, then collapse is baked into the cake no matter how much people worship at the altar of climate change.
Actually. You are wrong. The climate has always been changing... Often over the course of a few decades there have been dramatic swings in climate throughout history.
Of course if you are not like me (I read endlessly about history and I listen to most of the Great Courses History lectures)... so you might not know that.
If you watch bbccnn .. of course you will believe whatever they tell you to believe. That's what most people do so you have company
BTW - if you believe this what actions are you specifically taking to do your part? Do you drive a car? Do you ever fly? Do you buy manufactured goods e.g. stoves fridges etc?
Of are you one of those who moans that nobody is doing anything about it ...
Given our intelligence, “disturbing” is a wild understatement about our aggressive denial of our own obvious overshoot predicament. It demands an explanation and Dr. Ajit Varki's Mind Over Reality Transition (MORT) theory is the best explanation I have found.
A lot of assumptions and predictions out to a hundred years based on flawed and biased computer driven mathematical models.
None of the claims have been proven to be correct until we reach that hundred year mark in the future. Anything can happen between now and then to upset the predictions made.
... increasing people’s ability to grow their own food, and looking for partnerships internationally ...
Well... if diesel becomes scarce good luck with any farming activities and maintaining those international partnerships!
If people hadn't been brainwashed by the CO2 cult we would be in a far better position right now chugging along until nature takes its course just like every other species that has come and gone on this planet. We didn't need to do anything. We didn't need to change our ways. All the CO2 flapping did was create a bunch of crazies that think they're saving the world by telling everyone we're all going to die unless we stop breathing.
As always, there is that elephant in the room: War.
We waste incalculable amounts of resources on war. If someone with sense could stop producing war materials in every country, that would probably help. Fertilizer does not have to come from chemicals. There is more than enough organic waste that could be used instead.
You seem to have attracted a number of trolls here.
Is there a way on SubStack to block people? I have not been able to discover it.
I enjoyed this column, and agree with it. Pay no attention to the trolls.
In answer to the troll who said AGW-deniers were being censored, and that "any hypothesis, no matter how strange, deserves to be considered on its merits," I'm assuming Sagan was quoted out-of-context, because that's not how science works at all.
Rather, science is like travelling down a funnel. Near the wide part of the funnel, it may be true that all alternative hypotheses deserve to be tested.
But scientific evidence is gathered and tested, which makes certain things irrefutable, and you move further down the funnel. The breadth of hypotheses that correspond with tested theory becomes less and less, the further down the tunnel you go. That's how "hypothesis" turns into "theory," which then turns into "law." At some point, there is enough tested evidence that one cannot be taken seriously when they shout, "There is no gravity! We stick to its surface because the Earth sucks!"
This is where we currently stand on greenhouse gases. There is so much tested evidence that "alternative" hypotheses just don't fit in the funnel any more. There is very little "wiggle room" against AGW. What there is, is mostly a matter of "when" and "how much."
The difference is that any fool can test gravity, but fairly bright people aren't smart enough to test the greenhouse effect. This opens the door to influence from untested — or even negatively-correlated — alternatives, a few touted innocently, but someone has something to gain from most such "alternatives."
I agree that quoting Carl Sagan in a way that makes it appear he would question the greenhouse effect is, at best, naive, but more likely, purposely manipulative.
And a heavily elided quote from the man known for saying "You're wrong!" is simply Feynman abuse. You can quote all you want, but elide the single word "not" and imply that your hidden agenda is somehow supported by someone who was vehemently against it.
Now, if I could only find out how to ignore people who don't understand and follow basic rules of rhetoric…
I would be interested in your feedback on this 2007 Channel 4 UK documentary called ' The Great Global Warming Swindle'. It features many prominent scientists. Were they all off their game?
It also comes from a time when investigative reporting was still a thing..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYhCQv5tNsQ
No, it comes from a time when some people still disputed the indisputable. Which part of "this was predicted by scientists more than a century ago" did you not understand?
Small correction here: it was Eunice Newton Foote in 1856 who first came to the conclusion that higher CO2 levels would lead to global warming.
The British Royal Society has published the results of the analysis, that the temperature on Earth began to rise before the increase in CO2 concentration in the atmosphere, and this is the very reason for the increase in CO2, and not the other way around as climate models suggested.
https://t.co/u93FzuJ0H6
Two quotes come to mind when I read a reply such as yours :
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts…The experts who are leading you may be wrong… I think we live in an unscientific age in which almost all the buffeting of communications and television -- words, books, and so on -- are unscientific. As a result, there is a considerable amount of intellectual tyranny in the name of science."
Richard Feynman
"Science is generated by and devoted to free inquiry: the idea that any hypothesis, no matter how strange, deserves to be considered on its merits. The suppression of uncomfortable ideas may be common in religion and politics, but it is not the path to knowledge; it has no place in the endeavor of science. We do not know in advance who will discover fundamental new insights."
Carl Sagan
It takes a special kind of person to quote Carl Sagan as a climate change denier. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wp-WiNXH6hI
Sagan testified before Congress about the issue in 1985, almost 40 years ago, saying:
“here we are pouring enormous quantities of CO2 and these other gases into the atmosphere every year, with hardly any concern about its long-term and global consequences.”
So you're either extremely ignorant or a troll. Either way, you're uninteresting to me. Good day.
Some other quotes I like
"Don't try and teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time and it irritates the pig."
Anthony de Mello
"Whenever dissent is censored you know you've got a scam. "
Nick Hudson (PANDA)
So we're considering climate denial on its merits...
The use of the term 'climate denier' is a thought terminating cliché which impedes critical thinking.
I'm neither denying nor advocating anything. I simply asked for B's feedback on a thought provoking documentary.
Scientism will have its "Jonestown Moment" with great weeping, misery and death to be quickly replaced by some kind of dystopian cargo cult. Sorcerers, honest hard workers and other kinds of salvage artists and tinkers will be in high demand again.
The lie of global warming serves a very important purpose.
We are into deep depletion on affordable fossil fuels. But the MORE-ONS cannot be told this otherwise they panic and BAU unravels.
Instead GW is trotted out - it vilifies fossil fuels. Creates the perception that they are a bad thing and we need to use less of them.... see the brilliance of this? As we peak there is no peak supply rather there is peak DEMAND... we don't need this dirty stuff anymore ...
We are transitioning to EVs and renewable energy.
Hurrah shout the MOREONS as some of them drink the koolaid and install solar on their roofs and buy EVs.
Sure the transition is not perfect... we've seen the stranded Teslas unable to charge in cold weather ... and the cost ... oh my ... crazy costs.... but it's a start... and it's picking up steam...
Before you know it EVS will be half the cost of ICE vehicles... it's just a matter of time...
Elon is the anointed Messiah in all of this ... he will save us from GW!!!
Obviously it's all bullshit ... to anyone with true intelligence... but to those who watch bbccnn ... and trust the msm ... this is all very real... they believe in GW... they believe oil is a nasty evil substance... they believe we are on the cusp of a great transition ...
This gives them hope in a bright green sustainable future... where billions can continue to Live Large... to pillage the planet....it is out god damn right to do so ...
No panic... no despair ... we are going green - get with the program!!!
Like I said -- the Global Warming con ... is crucial to keeping this train on the track for as long as possible... we need the MOREONs to buy into this lie....
If they get wind of The Truth about energy ... they will lose their minds... why would anyone study, invest, work... when they realize there is no future? And that would crash BAU prematurely.
I think you're wrong. At least partly.
I agree with you that global warming is being used as a tool to deal with energy shortages, that's a fact.
But that global warming is for real is also a fact.
And that, given the inertia of the global ecological system and the human economic one, we can't do much to reverse the trend is also a fact.
Such is the predicament of our times...
Some warming is perfectly natural and there's nothing we can do about it unless you think blocking out the sun is a good idea. The narrative that human activity is behind the warming is just the wool being pulled over our eyes as FE laid out above. It all stems from the Catholic guilt system of penance and this is how you keep citizens in line. They need a belief, a creed, a religion to follow otherwise they become unruly and no one would believe the claptrap dished out from on high anymore.
Unless there's an energy/resources/economic miracle of some kind, then collapse is baked into the cake no matter how much people worship at the altar of climate change.
Actually. You are wrong. The climate has always been changing... Often over the course of a few decades there have been dramatic swings in climate throughout history.
Of course if you are not like me (I read endlessly about history and I listen to most of the Great Courses History lectures)... so you might not know that.
If you watch bbccnn .. of course you will believe whatever they tell you to believe. That's what most people do so you have company
BTW - if you believe this what actions are you specifically taking to do your part? Do you drive a car? Do you ever fly? Do you buy manufactured goods e.g. stoves fridges etc?
Of are you one of those who moans that nobody is doing anything about it ...
Thank you B🙏
Excellent as always B.
Given our intelligence, “disturbing” is a wild understatement about our aggressive denial of our own obvious overshoot predicament. It demands an explanation and Dr. Ajit Varki's Mind Over Reality Transition (MORT) theory is the best explanation I have found.
https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-25466-7_6
FWIW:
'Psychoanalysis is the study of how we maintain
not knowing what we know.'...(Matthew Steinfeld)...
I did some more spring vegetable planting this morning, as I have in both vegetable gardens in recent weeks. Time to go for a bike ride.
What is your mother tongue, B?
Where did you grow up, and approximately when?
You speak of German-English, and that broken TV is a Grundig. Germany? Nearby?
:-)
Co2 as the ultimate demon that has to be vanquished.
Conflating carbon and carbon emissions and carbon credits and net zero carbon with CO2.
Why not Net Zero oxygen? Or nitrogen?
The end goal appears to be to end life as we know it by limiting one or another element that life depends on.
... a 90% cut in greenhouse gas emissions is very much needed ...
Nature itself which we are a product of is the main source of gas emissions. So what.
Svante Arrhenius - great granfather of Greta Thunberg (communist)
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/svante-arrhenius-greta-thunbergs-great-grandfather-max-sevenhans
A lot of assumptions and predictions out to a hundred years based on flawed and biased computer driven mathematical models.
None of the claims have been proven to be correct until we reach that hundred year mark in the future. Anything can happen between now and then to upset the predictions made.
... increasing people’s ability to grow their own food, and looking for partnerships internationally ...
Well... if diesel becomes scarce good luck with any farming activities and maintaining those international partnerships!
If people hadn't been brainwashed by the CO2 cult we would be in a far better position right now chugging along until nature takes its course just like every other species that has come and gone on this planet. We didn't need to do anything. We didn't need to change our ways. All the CO2 flapping did was create a bunch of crazies that think they're saving the world by telling everyone we're all going to die unless we stop breathing.
Ironic to say the least.
I wish we were more like animals.
As always, there is that elephant in the room: War.
We waste incalculable amounts of resources on war. If someone with sense could stop producing war materials in every country, that would probably help. Fertilizer does not have to come from chemicals. There is more than enough organic waste that could be used instead.
You seem to have attracted a number of trolls here.
Is there a way on SubStack to block people? I have not been able to discover it.
I enjoyed this column, and agree with it. Pay no attention to the trolls.
In answer to the troll who said AGW-deniers were being censored, and that "any hypothesis, no matter how strange, deserves to be considered on its merits," I'm assuming Sagan was quoted out-of-context, because that's not how science works at all.
Rather, science is like travelling down a funnel. Near the wide part of the funnel, it may be true that all alternative hypotheses deserve to be tested.
But scientific evidence is gathered and tested, which makes certain things irrefutable, and you move further down the funnel. The breadth of hypotheses that correspond with tested theory becomes less and less, the further down the tunnel you go. That's how "hypothesis" turns into "theory," which then turns into "law." At some point, there is enough tested evidence that one cannot be taken seriously when they shout, "There is no gravity! We stick to its surface because the Earth sucks!"
This is where we currently stand on greenhouse gases. There is so much tested evidence that "alternative" hypotheses just don't fit in the funnel any more. There is very little "wiggle room" against AGW. What there is, is mostly a matter of "when" and "how much."
The difference is that any fool can test gravity, but fairly bright people aren't smart enough to test the greenhouse effect. This opens the door to influence from untested — or even negatively-correlated — alternatives, a few touted innocently, but someone has something to gain from most such "alternatives."
I agree that quoting Carl Sagan in a way that makes it appear he would question the greenhouse effect is, at best, naive, but more likely, purposely manipulative.
And a heavily elided quote from the man known for saying "You're wrong!" is simply Feynman abuse. You can quote all you want, but elide the single word "not" and imply that your hidden agenda is somehow supported by someone who was vehemently against it.
Now, if I could only find out how to ignore people who don't understand and follow basic rules of rhetoric…