How thieves steal in plain sight

Vigte · 2019-06-25T12:22:36+00:00

Human garbage.

magnora7 · 2019-06-25T03:26:14+00:00

Know the tricks, then you're less likely to fall for them.

XYY · 2019-06-20T01:35:23+00:00

Interesting, seems like he just had enough of it all

XYY · 2019-06-19T21:44:35+00:00

Which NFL team he played for and when?

trevmon · 2019-06-19T14:03:48+00:00

i think most would too, it seems we see this every few years or so, govt threatening to stop giving 9/11 responders money, a dog and pony show, then ending up giving the money. It reminds me of the bonus army or vietnam veterans with agent orange.

magnora7 · 2019-06-18T22:57:31+00:00

I'd rather my tax dollars go to that than to invading another foreign country for bank interests...

trevmon · 2019-06-18T20:42:37+00:00

a lot of repub voters wwould say there is no point and taxes should be abolished and they'd do without govt. And while it is too bad about what happened to these 9/11 responders, they knew the risks of their jobs, and have been given millions already, and this is them just trying to squeeze all the cash they can for their kids kids.

magnora7 · 2019-06-18T20:01:22+00:00

If our tax dollars don't go toward helping the people who helped America, then what's the point of tax dollars

trevmon · 2019-06-18T13:40:07+00:00

it's really a slush fund for paying off victims to not sue and ask for an investigation. I know mitch mcconnell and repubs don't really mind doing things like that, so I think the reason they at least pretended to do it is because their base is against it, they see it as a waste of taxpayer money for people from New York. This campaign with a famous comedian is designed to shame them and make then ok with endless payoffs to victims.

Jesus · 2019-06-18T05:56:28+00:00

The 9/11 compensation fund was headed by a signatory PNAC neoconservative. To get compensation victims wouldnhave to wavie their rights. Meaning, no lawyer, no investigation into the real perpetrators.

Jon Stewart propgated the lie for 10 plus years, ridiculing anyone who questioned the offical story.

magnora7 · 2019-06-18T00:35:55+00:00

It's a weird moment when Fox News and Jon Stewart are on the same side. I liked his last question, that was a great one.

magnora7 · 2019-06-16T02:35:34+00:00

Definitely fake, but funny

magnora7 · 2019-06-12T06:27:30+00:00

He's a much better person than Colbert at least, imo. That has become extremely evident over the last 10 years.

I used to love the Colbert Report. Now he is such a garbage sellout.

Jon Stewart is an honorable person, I think. He retired from tv and now lives on a huge farm with lots of rescued animals. He basically does that and this 9/11 respondents stuff. Really hard to hate the guy.

Even when he did the daily show I felt like he was pretty even-handed, even if he leaned left a bit he would still usually dish it out to the Democrats when they deserved it. Even watching old episodes now, they hold up. Especially compared to most political comedy shows being produced today, which are so partisan they're simply unwatchable.

Timmy · 2019-06-12T06:21:08+00:00

It really was. Stewart extremly eloquestnly expressed the need to help the first responders with great passion and sincerity. I no longer dislike the guy, for now.

magnora7 · 2019-06-12T04:37:01+00:00

This is really worth the watch. What an amazing plea to sanity.

happysmash27 · 2019-05-29T18:01:09+00:00

DUST, and many other YouTube channels, surprisingly make some of the best short films I have ever seen. YouTube may not have many movies, but my, it does have some good short films!

Zettelkittel · 2019-05-28T12:58:46+00:00

Right, we are apes, not monkeys. Because we have no tails. Apes do this things tho, since humans are apes. And pls don't bother to reply on that with "humans aren't animals" or whatever crap, they do eat, shit, sleep, fuck and die like every other animal on this planet, too.

Snow · 2019-05-28T12:54:03+00:00

But monkeys don't use Instagram to waste fossil fuel and don't use terrible photoshop bad skills.

That's the problem.

Zettelkittel · 2019-05-28T12:14:41+00:00

Well, in that case, you can't blame bitches for faking their looks on the internet, because in that case they only behave absolutely naturally with that.

Snow · 2019-05-28T11:51:20+00:00

Biology.

Zettelkittel · 2019-05-28T11:43:25+00:00

Your views on the behaviour of the female monkey speaks otherwise. What do you even think why the survival of the female monkey is mainly dependent on how other monkeys see them, hm?

Snow · 2019-05-28T11:12:41+00:00

I am not one of "sexist guys". And I don't use Instagram .

Zettelkittel · 2019-05-28T11:08:25+00:00

I'm not triggered by fat people. Nobody thinks that being obese is healthy, so why even care about people who want to believe it? Let them believe what the fuck they want. I don't fucking care if people are ugly, fat, skinny, whatever or faking their own photos for a faceless internet crowd to feel "pretty" or to release a little shot of dopamine in their brain for every "like" they can gain with that fake photos. Other people smoke crack for that high. Who cares? People can be whatever they want, I am not in the position to judge anyone that I don't even know irl. They want to get attention extremly, because they get it and it is easy to get. Sexist guys like you created it like this, now you are complaining about it, crying about those evil ugly chicks trying to trick you into finding them beautiful though they aren't and boohoohoo they blame muh society. Srsly? It is so ridiculous, it almost would be funny, if I would care enough, but I simply don't. I do not care for other peoples ape shit.

Snow · 2019-05-28T10:50:58+00:00

I think there are some gravity lens lead to light bending.............

What the hell I am talking about......

Snow · 2019-05-28T10:49:17+00:00

Sorry,but I have to point it out it sounds like the fat acceptance BS. Those activist of fat acceptance want no one think obesity is a problem. Attention whores NOT just PS their own photo only,they fake their person information on internet as well. They believe their needs of "getting likes" is supreme, and they do it unscrupulously. In the era of Photoshop didn't exist,they fake their person information to attention whoring. And they blame the society let them use their looking to attract attention(which is not effective for themselves) without self-reflection why they want to get attention extremely.

But the way ,in the society of monkeys ,the survival of female monkeys is all about how the other monkeys view her. The ones who look healthy would get more "likes",their status is relatively high,other monkeys would help her survive.

Zettelkittel · 2019-05-28T09:26:09+00:00

Society is creating those attention whores in the first place. If all people would just give zero fucks to whatever another person looks like there wouldn't be any attention whores at all. They only exist because people like the guy in the video do care about that cowdung a loony fuckin lot. Everyone is crazy, that's all. edit: I also think, what is so bad about people faking their looks on the internet? Who the fuck cares if some ugly chick wants to make herself "beautiful" on the web, it is probably her only chance to feel "pretty", so let her do this and move the fuck on if you don't like it. I don't see the problem.

hennaojisan · 2019-05-28T06:26:21+00:00

Thanks for clearing that up for us Sharyl.

"From 1990–1993, Attkisson was an anchor for CNN, and also served as a key anchor for CBS space exploration coverage in 1993. Attkisson left CNN in 1993, moving to CBS, where she anchored the television news broadcast CBS News Up to the Minute and became an investigative correspondent based in Washington, D.C." — wiki edited nonsense that is sometimes correct

She went from anchor to investigative reporter and hard-hitting expert on fake news. I do not believe a word she says.

Snow · 2019-05-28T00:21:11+00:00

I think he didn't pressure on those individuals,is those individuals photoshoped their own pictures. He didn't force someone to be PS attention whores. Don't you think it's a kind of lust for want to get tons of "likes"? This is their own problem.

And attention whores blaming the society force them to PS themselves.

magnora7 · 2019-05-27T23:14:29+00:00

I can see your point

Zettelkittel · 2019-05-27T23:09:32+00:00

The whole point of this guy is that people shouldn't try to fake their looks, because he wants to judge looks. That judging causes pressure on those individuals that then will try to fake their looks. The spiral continues.

HeyImSancho · 2019-05-27T20:57:35+00:00

Just my opinion: Yes, they steer, and control how, and what topics are allowed to be discussed. To discuss, debate, and simply argue their talking points back, and forth is great for 'them'.

'They', create the politically correct narrative demarcation lines, the defined boarders we may discuss within, but not outside.

If they control the narrative, then they control all amicable solutions. Usually their control of narratives is for continued subjugation of all people.

magnora7 · 2019-05-27T19:40:43+00:00

The whole point of the video is that he is anti-lookism, and that people should accept how they look instead of trying to tweak it with technology constantly

Zettelkittel · 2019-05-27T15:33:04+00:00

This guys heavily lookism is the very reason for all the things he complains about in this video. Too bad he will never understand that.

HeyImSancho · 2019-05-26T23:40:20+00:00

Good video; I say it's spot on. I really think people across the all walks of life, need to create a working dialogue of discussion, in regards to needs, and potential solutions; 'synthesis of comprehension, and understanding'.

It's the cabal that gives us 'teams' to root for, it's the cabal that creates the 'canned narrative responses' designed to shut down any meaningful open discussion that can create something beneficial.

Everyone screaming my way, or the highway, outwardly without real comprehension of why there carrying a party line, simply won't work.

This video leans towards showing this, the cabal, doesn't need a real 'war scenario' like 1984, they just need socio-conflict to point out how different we are, then subjugate different groups, .... oh wait, that's where we're at, it just won't work, and they know they win when we cannot overcome the obstacles they create.

d3rr · 2019-05-24T19:30:53+00:00

Daaamn, and I though I was cynical. He's mostly right, but none of the positive Reddit things were mentioned.

Zettelkittel · 2019-05-24T13:58:34+00:00

Reddit is merely a secret service tool since last american election.

sawboss · 2019-05-24T10:11:03+00:00

Every word is true, but Reddit is actually worse than he describes.

magnora7 · 2019-05-19T15:53:55+00:00

Eh probably a fake. We have no idea what he's eating.

Many many people have died from nuclear radiation poisoning in very provable and obvious ways, so there's about a zero percent chance it's a fake phenomenon.

HeyImSancho · 2019-05-15T17:00:55+00:00

I hear you, day, and age.

sawboss · 2019-05-15T09:46:26+00:00

Don't bother watching it. Americans have heard this story before.

HeyImSancho · 2019-05-15T04:58:25+00:00

What's the point? that's a very long video, that I'd normally be willing to listen to, but I'm on throttled service. So far, about 6 minutes in, the guy is just saying, he was accused. Is this you, or is their a pinnacle point to listen to?

34679 · 2019-05-14T15:14:44+00:00

Thanks

send_nasty_stuff · 2019-05-14T01:04:32+00:00

new one!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kR8UcnwLH24

send_nasty_stuff · 2019-05-11T15:02:58+00:00

I watched 17 minutes before I realized this was just the old interview. When is Joe going to have her back again??

hennaojisan · 2019-05-11T08:02:45+00:00

What is your position regarding Mossad influence on the US Congress and the media?

VantaFount · 2019-05-05T21:19:54+00:00

That, I am not entirely sure on.

Snow · 2019-05-05T16:41:53+00:00

It's well worth seeing the entire movie. It deserves the title of the World's Most Beautiful Film.

What's the meaning of this [email protected]@

VantaFount · 2019-05-05T03:26:49+00:00

It's well worth seeing the entire movie. It deserves the title of the World's Most Beautiful Film.

magnora7 · 2019-05-04T22:59:40+00:00

Very interesting movie. Nice post

endopassing · 2019-04-28T16:55:45+00:00

Islam law is woman are property, blacks are slaves, and Arabs are superior

So is Christian law, if you're referring to deeply conservative (i.e. right wing) interpretation of fundamental scriptures.

So you're pointing to yet another example of how destructive right wing people are - whether they call themselves Christians or Muslims or white supremacists.

happysmash27 · 2019-04-27T19:36:02+00:00

I wish there was a wiki for these things, so one could learn them on the go.

Administrator · 2019-04-27T17:32:50+00:00

I find his channel to be one of the most insightful on Youtube, and can't wait for the next video. And not a single word spoken.

Tom_Bombadil · 2019-04-27T14:12:32+00:00

These bricks are FIRED!!!

magnora7 · 2019-04-27T02:33:08+00:00

Oh nice, a new one! I love this channel and everything this guy does.

JasonCarswell · 2019-04-27T00:48:39+00:00

Reposted:

/s/Libertarian/comments/h4a/what_do_sex_workers_want_juno_mac_tedxeastend/

/s/videos/comments/h4b/what_do_sex_workers_want_juno_mac_tedxeastend/

/s/Sex/comments/li2/repost_what_do_sex_workers_want_juno_mac/

Orangutan · 2019-04-26T22:13:18+00:00

Make sure to use CC's on this or have them open. Whatever you call it. Closed Captioning ON.

sawboss · 2019-04-24T17:22:00+00:00

turkey pot-pie

HeyImSancho · 2019-04-24T16:12:49+00:00

hmmm, sammich?

useless_aether · 2019-04-24T07:42:13+00:00

oh man, i am next

:-)

Zombi · 2019-04-21T18:37:24+00:00

This was a great documentary on the competitive gaming community, weird how they kept showing some weird clear rock when talking about salt, though.

Teak · 2019-04-21T07:55:27+00:00

No playlist, sorry it wasn't n title.

Teak · 2019-04-21T07:40:57+00:00

Please continue All day TV with you own playlists, otherwise denote that no playlist, but a video page with tons of good content. Encourage each other to be the best they can be. Learning is fun, don't let school teach you that it isn't.

Teak · 2019-04-21T06:05:11+00:00

Ads suck? try brave browser https://brave.com/ use firefox? try ublock origin https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/ublock-origin/

Teak · 2019-04-21T06:03:19+00:00

His traveling friends playlist https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lmNk-Li7m2c&list=PLIvXbONfyd8s-K40MiJifSLRmNUJ36YJP

happysmash27 · 2019-04-20T05:39:22+00:00

Mirror on my own site: https://happysmash27.me/Upload/Mirror/YouTube/Mark%20LaGanga's%20WTC%209_11%20Video%20(Full%20HD%2060fps)-yDcyitIvfUI.mkv

thehighground · 2019-04-17T02:58:32+00:00

Ah thank you - been looking for this. Saidit is awesome af

Tom9152 · 2019-04-16T19:25:46+00:00

| people who are particularly derogative while promoting hate against women, poc, open racism etc.

Islam law is woman are property, blacks are slaves, and Arabs are superior. So you're an islamaphobe.

Also criticism isn't hate.

Tom_Bombadil · 2019-04-13T01:44:50+00:00

He has a badge on his shoulder, and a holster.

Tom_Bombadil · 2019-04-13T01:43:47+00:00

He did not murder these foolish thugs in self-defense; though others might have.

He was clearly roughed up, but walked it off.

That is self-defense done by a man.

DarkTrancer · 2019-04-12T23:53:50+00:00

This video is all over the sites with different titles,most others are saying he was a security guard for a fast food company.?

Tom_Bombadil · 2019-04-08T23:06:17+00:00

endopassing · 2019-04-08T22:33:12+00:00

Antiwaxxing or antiscience rather, is unfortunately prevalent. It's sad that a former scientist would fall so low. Yes, it bothers me that a Nobel prize holder would make such an unscientific show. But I guess he either needs the money or the attention he gets from easily conned laymen.

Tom_Bombadil · 2019-04-08T22:08:53+00:00

endopassing · 2019-04-08T22:02:22+00:00

I've clearly proven to you -by your own arguments - that you are being played for a fool by frauds.

Tom_Bombadil · 2019-04-08T21:36:50+00:00

Independent minds are waking up to the reality of this absurd hoax.

Don't be sad for me. I believed in this nonsense for the better part of 30 years, but now I'm on the vanguard of the awakening.

endopassing · 2019-04-08T19:52:54+00:00

Why did they stop calling it global warming?.

Because the fossil fuel lobby forced them to tone down the seriousness of climate change.

It saddens me when ordinary people like you are taken advantage of by a fraud like that Nobel laureate. He abuses his Nobel credentials for idk, money, easy fame in non-intelectual circles

Tom_Bombadil · 2019-04-08T12:05:42+00:00

Quit forum sliding:

Why did they stop calling it global warming?.

**Do you have the intellectual honestly to answer that one simple question?

endopassing · 2019-04-08T05:28:33+00:00

The cartels are pushing the global warming hoax.

No, they're pushing the anti-warming hoax. It's glaringly obvious, I've tried to explain that to you in several different ways, how can you not see it? You even posted a video of some Nobel laureate who clearly was presenting a lie and who was not very good at lying.

EDIT:

You've been emotional caught by their narrative just like the antivaxxers: They tell you an emotional sob-story of someone unjustly shunned by the community wrapped in a hilariously bad pseudo-scientific explanation and you've fallen for it hook, line and sinker.

I gave you a simple assignment: In the video you posted:

write down every single theory he presents as a climate theory
Identify how he derived at that theory
Identify how he decided that it was a valid expression of what climate scientists have to say

I think you will find that almost all of his "theories" are invented by him out of thin air so that he can "prove" the wrong and claim he is proving the climate scientists wrong while in fact just telling an irrelevant story exploiting the fact that he once was awarded the Nobel prize.

Tom_Bombadil · 2019-04-08T02:16:34+00:00

The cartels are pushing the global warming hoax.

If you oppose them, then they punish you.

If you believe in the hoax, then they lavish you with publishing your articles, and awarding grant money, and creating awards to give you.
They make those who truly internalize and believe in the hoax into celebrities.

endopassing · 2019-04-07T20:00:59+00:00

There publishing and Grant cartels punish independent thinkers.

The grant and publishing cartels have frightened the scientific community into silence.

If you want to keep that claim you also need to show why it doesn't have the exact opposite effect: The obvious conclusion to that argument is that climate researchers have consistently been intimidated to under-report and tone down the seriousness of global warming. Thus, you're in fact arguing that climate change likely is much worse than climate researchers have claimed.

endopassing · 2019-04-07T19:57:52+00:00

I selected the most relevant feild for comparison with bogus climate modeling nonsense.

Not following you completely, are you saying that the video you posted is an example of bogus climate research? I agree it's full of obvious bogus claims but it doesn't represent climate research.

Tom_Bombadil · 2019-04-07T19:46:44+00:00

I selected the most relevant feild for comparison with bogus climate modeling nonsense.

Meterology resides within the physics discipline.

Meteorologists are physicists.

Tom_Bombadil · 2019-04-07T19:44:38+00:00

There publishing and Grant cartels punish independent thinkers.

People lose their careers over voicing their disagreement. That is why the majority of public dissenters are retired, or will be soon.

The grant and publishing cartels have frightened the scientific community into silence.

endopassing · 2019-04-07T19:06:34+00:00

See my second reply.

This guy has stopped doing science and is instead cashing in on his "Nobel laureate" title doing pseudo science shows.

Tom_Bombadil · 2019-04-07T18:43:03+00:00

He makes the assumption that he is doing to an informed and educated audience. There's no reason for him to go into detail about absurdities.

It's not surprising that you didn't understand the facts.

endopassing · 2019-04-07T18:36:24+00:00

Now I watched it. While he sprinkles a few true statements his argumentation is simply not worthy of a scientist. It's really a shame that a scientist is willing to embarrass himself like that. I don't know what happens to some scientists when they stop being active. After this performance I would definitely question his research in general.

This video is full of ad hominem and strawman arguments: He holds a grudge against Obama, why would that be relevant to reiterate in a scientific talk? That alone is enough for me to totally dismiss him as relevant.

But more importantly: Notice how many times he makes up an ad hoc theory he then claims to be a global warming theory with specific expected consequences, which he then goes on to prove wrong. It should be obvious even to someone with a minimum of scientific experience that most of those strawman theories are totally bogus. This is why you shouldn't trust someone like him, and shouldn't take "Nobel laureate" as guarantee for quality.

I suggest you start by writing down every single theory he presents in his talk and figure out how he arrived at them and how he determined them as valid expressions of what climate researchers have to say.

It's easy enough to construct all kinds of far fetched theories which you can then prove wrong. If you ascribe those theories to someone else your aim is to prove them wrong on the basis of something they never claimed themselves. In this case his strawmen are even very simplistic and unsophisticated. I would have expected better from someone who's won a Nobel prize.

endopassing · 2019-04-07T17:59:13+00:00

I'm going to take a closer look. But a quick scan of the video got me this:

"global warming is a religion, like when the Catholic Church says the world is not round"

They never said that. Why would I believe a Nobel laureate if he not only gets such a basic fact wrong but goes on to use it as a polemic argument. I mean, he's a Nobel laureate and should know much better than being so sloppy.

I immediately assume he's just as sloppy with the rest of his arguments.

Tom_Bombadil · 2019-04-07T17:14:56+00:00

Exactly!!!

My man! ;-)

Edit: You hit it out of the park. Respect.

anescient · 2019-04-07T17:02:02+00:00

In other words.

Tom_Bombadil · 2019-04-07T16:37:02+00:00

Says who?

I see no one, literally not a single person with insight or relevant knowledge who would agree with you on that.

How about a Nobel Laureate in physics? A legit qualification. Feel free to attempt to pick his arguments apart.
Good luck.
Nobel Laureate in Physics; "Global Warming is Pseudoscience"

endopassing · 2019-04-07T08:24:37+00:00

their predictions were disgraceful failures..

Says who?

I see no one, literally not a single person with insight or relevant knowledge who would agree with you on that.

So, you picked some random scientific field and decided that you know more than every single scientist in that field.

Well done.

Tom_Bombadil · 2019-04-07T07:07:40+00:00

There's no way you could estimate a climate model on a desktop computer.

You are missing the point. I don't ever need to run their model. Ever.

The point I am making is the fact that their models aren't generating predictions that come remotely close to the climate that actually exists. That is easy to check. It is basic arithmetic. Anyone can do this.

You continue to change the terms of the conversation.

They the climate scientists need to prove that their models work. The onus is in them.

Man made global warming, was renamed to man made climate change, because the climate wasn't warming, and their predictions were disgraceful failures..

Can your explain why they changed the name form global warming? It's obvious. The game is up, but the fraud continues.

Next: I didn't invent any terms. Look them up. Climate science is not in the physics department.
Physics depts realize that this is a joke. It's propaganda.

They like to bandy the word physics around (theoretical physics, physics models, etc, but it's bogus).

endopassing · 2019-04-07T06:24:45+00:00

So basically, you randomly picked one specific field and chose to believe the fossil fuel industry's narrative over the scientists. And to defend this you invented some categories you call "the physics dept" and "hard science" whatever they mean.

They closely guard access to their "climate" models, and "climate" data

No they don't, a lot of it is even publicly available for download, in some cases you need to make agreements with the institution to get it or you may have to pay, but it is quite readily available. Don't trust people who say it isn't. The problem for someone like you is that the data is humongous (many Tb big) and very hard to analyze, that's why I wondered how you analyzed it. Unfortunately you mentioned a couple of small desktop statistics programs that are mostly used by students (used to be as they're not used much anymore). There's no way you could estimate a climate model on a desktop computer.

Stoner · 2019-04-07T05:51:50+00:00

Absolutely disgusting!

Tom_Bombadil · 2019-04-07T01:14:41+00:00

I have a significant degree of confidence in the hard sciences. Meterology resides under the umbrella of the hard science of the physics department.
Meterology is a hard science.

Climate science is it's own discipline; outside of the physics dept (where it belongs). Climate science does not fall under the umbrella of the physics department. Climate science deals with their own set of esoteric "climate models".

They closely guard access to their "climate" models, and "climate" data, to avoid academic scrutiny. This prevents academic review by interested parties in other hard science disciplines.

Climate science is a distant coisin of economics, or sociology.

Climate science is not a hard science.

endopassing · 2019-04-06T22:18:09+00:00

Please answer my question: is it only climate science you distrust or is it all science? If it's only climate science, in what way does it differ from other sciences?

Tom_Bombadil · 2019-04-06T21:07:13+00:00

It is, to me very clear that you have been tricked into promoting the agenda of a fossil fuel business alliance that feel seriously threatened by sustainable energy technologies.

You could not be more wrong. I'm completely in favor of renewable energy. Any, and all of it.

Renewable energy should be pursued for it's own axiomatic merits.

Bogus man made global warming science should have nothing at all to do with implementation of much needed renewable energy.

These topics are convoluted by the energy cartels.

endopassing · 2019-04-06T20:40:03+00:00

I know you answered, and you apparently misunderstood my question. What I'm getting at (and where my questioning started) is this: are climate scientists in your mind different from other scientists? Are their findings less trustworthy than the findings by scientists in other fields?

The reason for my asking is this, you seem to argue that there is a social gate keeping process in the scientific community that forces scientists to report things that are not true. I agree, from years of personal experience, that there are mechanisms at play leading to such things from time to time.

But what have me wondering about your arguments is this: What you describe is a general mechanism not specific to climate science and one that in my experience is much more prevalent in fields closer related to industry (when you cooperate with industry there is a lot of pressure to report results that will sell products).

So, from a logic standpoint: either all scientists are corrupted (unknowingly or otherwise) and are all equally untrustworthy - or you specifically picked climate science as a particularly corrupt field (unknowingly by scientists) for some reason.

And therefore the question: does climate science, in your mind, differ from other sciences? If so why? If not, why do you specifically not trust climate science if it's just like any other science.

To add: your argument about gate keeping does in my mind point in the exact opposite direction: strong industry interests have systematically intimidated climate scientists into under reporting the seriousness of climate change.

It is, to me very clear that you have been tricked into promoting the agenda of a fossil fuel business alliance that feel seriously threatened by sustainable energy technologies. Some of the strongest opponents to global action against climate change are Saudi Arabia, Russia and US, the biggest oil producers.

Tom_Bombadil · 2019-04-06T20:22:27+00:00

You may recall that man made climate change was once called man made global warming.

They changed the name to climate change, because the warming trend was bogus, and indefensible.

Tom_Bombadil · 2019-04-06T20:18:53+00:00

How did you do that?

I'd like to invite anyone interested in investigating these details to check the following:.

Pick a date and a range to evaluate. 1970, or 80, etc. 30 yrs, 40 yrs, etc.
Find a measurable factor to track:. sea level rise, temp, etc.
Find an original source document that can't be edited after the fact (newspaper, movie, book (revision, date publishing date is crucial).
Record the predicted factor: sea level rise, temp, etc.
Find current sources and document the actual factor: sea level rise, temp, etc.
Compare predicted vs. actual.
Done.

On a personal level I would also be very interested in what software you used in your analysis.

Fancy software like minitab or JMP to analyze the facts.

Simply review the historical record vs. predicted. It's basic arithmetic, with original sources.

One last note:. You may recall that man made climate change was one called man made global warming.

They changed the name, because the warming trend was bogus, and indefensible.