Thirty Years Of Failed Climate Predictions

submitted by Tom_Bombadil from youtu.be

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (28 children)

Tony Heller is not a climate scientist.

He has an undergraduate degree in geology, and a masters in electrical engineering. He tries to mislead people by putting "Science" in his URL, and is probably trying to skim traffic from actual climate scientists by using a name that is close to https://www.realclimate.org/.

You can tell from his framing of attacks on the fossil fuel industry whether or not they are climate related in this video purportedly about climate that he's not actually interested in climate. He's interested in defending the fossil fuel industry.

There's lots of such people in the denialosphere. Follow the money before buying in to this bullshit.

In reality, climate models have been pretty good. The more recent ones better than the older ones. Dr. Zeke Hausfather (PhD in climate science, University of California, Berkeley) goes through their evolution here: https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-how-well-have-climate-models-projected-global-warming/

[–]Tom_Bombadil[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (27 children)

Tony Heller is not a climate scientist.

You don't need to be a "climate scientist" to call out bullshit.

"Climate scientists" are not meteorologists. Meteorologist are physicists, and they do actual scientific research.

"Climate scientists" are computer modelers. They make up computer models, which are super scary, and predict absurdities. They are scaremongers.

They manufacture the narrative of the globalists billionaires, who want to starve the population off of using energy.

Which will starve the global economy, which runs on energy.

This will cause mass starvation in the population.

They want to eliminate carbon consumption, and carbon consumers.

They'll starve your family too; if you let them. You're a useful-idiot-bot.

[–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (26 children)

You don't need to be a "climate scientist" to call out bullshit.

True. Nor to tell bullshit.

"Climate scientists" are not meteorologists. Meteorologist are physicists, and they do actual scientific research.

There's some overlap with meteorology. The Hadley centre uses the same models for climate and weather prediction.

"Climate scientists" are computer modelers. They make up computer models, which are super scary, and predict absurdities. They are scaremongers.

Some of them. There's lots of other approaches to climate science. It's interdisciplinary. You get paleo-climatologists that come from geology or palaeontology. You get biologists from all fields studying the impacts on species and ecosystems. James Hansen's early work using radiative transfer models was about trying to understand that atmosphere of Venus.

They are scaremongers.

No. They're academics, or private researchers.

They manufacture the narrative of the globalists billionaires, who want to starve the population off of using energy.

Because they want a smaller market for their products? You haven't thought this through, have you?

Which will starve the global economy, which runs on energy.

This will cause mass starvation in the population.

And you are calling them scaremongers?

You should try some self-reflection.

[–]Tom_Bombadil[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (15 children)

You aren't fooling any one.

[–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (14 children)

This isn't an argument.

Nevertheless, if you're against absurd scaremongering, you should go light on comments like "This will cause mass starvation in the population."

[–]Tom_Bombadil[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (13 children)

Depopulation. That's the ultimate goal of the green agenda.

[–]WoodyWoodPecker 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

They scare people into heart attacks because the world will end because of climate change. They cause wars in Ukraine and Palestine to murder people and move drugs like Fentinal to kill more people. They engineer super viruses like COVID-19 to kill people with unsafe vaccines to protect us but they can cause heart attacks. Processed foods cause diabetes which makes most people poisoned and fat from eating them. They want us to die of natural causes like heart attacks so it is not murder, and when not enough of us die they stage World War 3 so we can be drafted and die fighting people who are just defending their homes.

[–]jacques1102 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

If depopulation was the goal then they're doing a shitty job at doing it because the world's population is growing to 9.8 billion by 2050.

[–]Tom_Bombadil[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

the world's population is growing to 9.8 billion by 2050.

Is it???

China's population is collapsing.

And Japan's.

And European birthrates have plummeted. The population numbers are stabilized by immigration.

And the experimental injections have caused untold miscarriages. And possibly sterility.

They injected the majority of the planet with at least one dose, and we have no idea what's in the injection.
Pfizer tried to seal their data in the courts for 75 years.

Africa was the only region that successfully resisted the depopulation scheming.

And now certain parties are trying to stir up WW3 over an attack in Israel.

If the decision makers were sensible, then they'd investigate the attack and deal with it through a criminal investigation.

Something is very wrong in the world, and the actual facts are rarely discussed.

[–]jacques1102 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

So what you're saying is black people are smarter than everyone else because they're resisting the depopulation plan?Weird because i was told african's have a low iq.Also the middle east's population and latin america's population is still exploding as well.

[–]Tom_Bombadil[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

So what you're saying is black people are smarter than everyone else because they're resisting the depopulation

Is this an attempt at sophistry?

The African nations resisted the injection agenda. I think it was a wise decision on their part.

Most people regret receiving the injections. This is common knowledge.

[–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

China's population is collapsing.

It going to decline for the first time this year since the famines of the great leap forward.

Most people wouldn't consider a 0.02% decline "collapse". And that decrease is peculiar to China's time with their one child policy.

The world increased population by about 70 million.

They injected the majority of the planet with at least one dose, and we have no idea what's in the injection.

It depends on the brand. Some of them contain mRNA that produces the covid spike protein. Some contain the protein. That should give you some idea.

The population increased 70 million 2022 to 2023: https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/world-population-by-year/

The vaccine hasn't caused a population drop.

Africa was the only region that successfully resisted the depopulation scheming.

By ... green groups ... right?

So greenpeace released the virus from one of their secret labs?

Or did they merely infiltrate Oxford university and BioNTech and Pfizer and Moderna, and the manufacturers of each of these 40 Covid-19 vaccines

Something is very wrong in the world,

At least one out of it and you.

and the actual facts are rarely discussed.

Discuss away. What exactly have the greens done?

[–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Ah. Of course. Depopulation. Obviously. I see it all now.

(◔_◔)

[–]Tom_Bombadil[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

I'm sure you don't see it. I have a low opinion of Bots like yourself.

The global warming dupes are the same population as the experimental injection dupes.

They will earn Darwin awards.

[–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Depopulation huh?

The ultimate goal of ... green groups worldwide? ...

[–]Tom_Bombadil[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Three useful idiot bots like yourself are clueless.

But the billionaire class support it.

[–]WoodyWoodPecker 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

They control fossil fuel prices and use climate change as a bat to hit poor people who can't afford gas in their cars to go to a minimum wage job. Then they make unsafe EVs that can explode if the battery is hit in an accident and can only go 300 miles on a charge that takes hours to recharge. They buy out farms to stop farming cattle and grow weeds and veggies instead to make fake meat that has a lot more chemicals in it than real meat and tastes like beans and shit.

[–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

They control fossil fuel prices

Climate scientists control fossil fuel prices huh?

How do they all agree on what they should be I wonder.

There must be these big academic conferences where they vote on it I guess.

Then they go back home, and talk to Putin and the Koch family and Prince Mohammed bin Salman.

Who do what they say, because they understand that if they don't the climate scientist will go back to the library and science at them. HARD.

Then they make unsafe EVs that can explode if the battery is hit in an accident and can only go 300 miles on a charge that takes hours to recharge.

Petrol and diesel cars 20 times more likely to catch fire than EVs

[–]WoodyWoodPecker 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

Not the climate scientists but the people the climate scientists work for. Quit twisting my words around.

[–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Not the climate scientists but the people the climate scientists work for.

Chancellor or President of the University?

They go to Putin, the Koch family and Prince Mohammad bin Salman to set the price on fossil fuels?

And they do what they say, because they know that if they don't they will go to the university library and administrate at them. HARD?

[–]WoodyWoodPecker 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

The people who pay the grants for the research. If it doesn't prove climate change there will be no more grants. It is all a money game to control science the news media and schools and colleges. They brainwash people into working for them or else they blackmail them or find a way to buy them off. You know as you work for the same people, ActuallyBot.

[–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

The people who pay the grants for the research.

Oh, so grants.gov and the NSF and GrantForward and the various national institutes and state government bodies and research charities, combine up with all the similar bodies in every other country and agree to only fund science that proves climate change. Unless that particular grant has nothing to do with climate science, in which case they just use the normal "non-climate science" funding procedure,which would be the one advertised?

And with all the hundreds of thousands of bodies that offer research grants, no one has yet leaked that climate science grants have a different process?

Makes sense. All you'd have to do is get all the money from big wind, and infiltrate every funding body in every country in the world. But without anyone objecting.

Wait a minute. What about research that doesn't include a grant application? Such as papers being put out by tenured professors or published from work done for doctoral theses? How come they don't reject the basic physics that increasing greenhouse gasses increases the greenhouse effect?

It is all a money game to control science the news media and schools and colleges.

Of course! And to control science the news media and schools and colleges, the most straightforward way would be to attack the climate change departments and only the climate change departments. Why didn't I think of that? Could it be because it's batshit crazy?

They brainwash people into working for them or else they blackmail them or find a way to buy them off.

That's a lot of people to blackmail. Google scholar returns over 65,000 papers for the search term "climate change" for this year alone. That must be about 200,000 authors. How do they get that much blackmail material every year, do you think? There must be a cast of tens of millions of agents collecting it.

You know as you work for the same people, ActuallyBot.

Ah. The paranoid delusional argument. At least that makes some plausible context to the above. (◔_◔)

[–]Armedpleb 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

ActuallyBot

[–]WoodyWoodPecker 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

ActuallyBot

[–]Armedpleb 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Call him ActuallyBot alone with no conversation. He should say something like: YOU'RE NAME CALLING ME. THAT'S AGAINST SAIDIT'S PYRAMID OF DEBATE BLAH BLAH BLAH I AM GOING TO REPORT YOU BLAH BLAH BLAH I EXPECT YOU TO DO BETTER IN THE FUTURE. I got him to say that twice.

[–]Armedpleb 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It's a bot. Try calling him ActuallyBot and see how it reacts.