If climate change were real, the rich and powerful would be selling their oceanfront property at liquidation rates, not buying more and building new homes there.
New here?
Create an account to submit posts, participate in discussions and chat with people.
You must log in or sign up to comment
27 comments:
If global warming was real then the world would have ended already. I don't think "muh CO2" retards realize *just how much CO2 modern civilization spews out every single day.* If CO2 warmed things the way they claim we should have had runaway warming decades ago.
The CO2 thing was to reduce plant and cause food scarcity, which make it easier for them to control people. The hot weather is just due to the solar cycle, which soon we will go into colder time
If you look at any historical chart of glacial/interglacial periods you will see that we're right at the peak of warming and could start cooling down again any year. I'm convinced it has to do with the warm peak of each cycle causing the collapse of the gulf stream, so it's possible any amount of warming we have caused is actually bringing the next glacial period closer.
The same retards that firmly believed having zero symptoms of a cold was a telltale sign that you had covid.
u/TallestSkil
“The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.” **~ George Orwell**; *1984*
It’s the strangest thing how you can be so close with someone and you can know everything about them, and they know almost everything about you, yet they’ll trust a complete stranger who an “authority/expert” on the TV box, over you’re first hand experience, and knowledge, and even their own. It scares the living fuck out of me. iTs AlL aNeCdOtAl
During winter, north gets cold and the south gets warm. Once we reach the summer it goes the opposite way. This planet has a tendency to freeze and melt several times over a whole year.
Most of the ice at the north pole is already in the water. Ice takes up less space than water. The sea level won't change, no matter how much the ice melts and freeze back again over time.
Besides, the worst affected areas would be places that already has plenty of tide, and they should be used to rising sea levels already as it happens twice every day, by several meters.
Most of the ice at the north pole is already in the water. Ice takes up less space than water. The sea level won't change, no matter how much the ice melts and freeze back again over time.
Besides, the worst affected areas would be places that already has plenty of tide, and they should be used to rising sea levels already as it happens twice every day, by several meters.
science is about making observations, collecting that data, and then proposing a theory that fits that data best and makes useful predictions of future events. continue collecting data, update the theory as it fails to predict, actively look for events and data that invalidate the theory (this is where new science happens!)
science is not reading government and NGO-sponsored papers full of unverified theories that conveniently confirm the wishes and desires of the ruling elite. we don't call this science. we call this believing lies.
science is not reading government and NGO-sponsored papers full of unverified theories that conveniently confirm the wishes and desires of the ruling elite. we don't call this science. we call this believing lies.
You're only partially right on what science actually is.
Science is really philosophy. It's an effort to understand reality the way it is.
I'll first go through the beliefs you have to hold, without evidence, before you can even do science, then I'll correct your model on what science actually is.
To understand WHY the beliefs are important, you must think ONLY of this one idea: What set of beliefs would cause someone to actively experiment and theorize about the universe? What set of beliefs would cause someone to never do such a thing? This is the key. If a person holds the "wrong" beliefs, then they cannot do science.
In short, if the beliefs lead people to think that experimentation and theorizing is a pointless exercise, then it is not good enough to do science. Only a set of beliefs that would compel people to do such a thing are valid.
Core beliefs:
* The universe exists.
* The universe is governed by a set of rules or laws that are consistent.
* Humans (our minds, rather) are not part of the universe and exempt from the laws that govern the universe. We can think and act free from the constraints of the universe.
* There is a mind (God) that comprehends all the laws that govern the universe.
* We have the ability to comprehend the universe like this mind does. (We can become like God.)
* God is communicating with us the ideas about how the universe works.
* We are also being manipulated by other minds who do not understand the universe or intend to deceive us. (demons, other gods, the devil, whatever you want to call them. But this also includes other people.)
* There is a way to discern truth from deception, and that way is to ask the universe what is real and what is not (experimentation) as well as realizing that the universe must make sense (rational thought).
* Even though we think we are rational, we are not. We must allow others to correct our wrong ideas by sharing those ideas with others. We must become aware of confounding ideas and biases, and actively try to eliminate them.
* We are morally compelled to investigate claims about the universe from any source, discern truth from error, and obtain for ourselves more information about the universe from God.
All of these beliefs are necessary. Anyone who does not hold all of these beliefs cannot be considered a scientist.
Now, the process of science works like this:
* Observe.
* COMMUNICATE YOUR OBSERVATIONS.
* Develop tools to measure and compare and categorize things you see.
* COMMUNICATE THE TOOLS AND CONCEPTS WITH OTHERS TO COMPARE!
* Obtain ideas about how things relate to each other, from ANY source, including prayer, dreams, the Bible, other religions, or anything. Literally, "I saw it in a dream" is a perfectly good place to start a new theory.
* COMMUNICATE YOUR STRANGE IDEAS!
* Propose experiments to test those ideas. Since we cannot prove a theory true, we must experiment to prove it false. (Anyone who says "X proves Y true" knows nothing about what "prove" and "true" mean.)
* COMMUNICATE THE PROPOSED EXPERIMENTS!
* Actually perform experiments. Many times. By different people in different places at different times and in different circumstances.
* COMMUNICATE THE OBSERVATIONS OF THE EXPERIMENTS!
* Use actual observed evidence to contradict ideas people have about the universe.
* TELL PEOPLE THEY ARE WRONG AND STUPID AND THEIR IDEAS ARE BAD!
* Repeat forever.
Notice -- the COMMUNICATION part is what makes science different. You can do all the experimentation and theorizing you want on your own, but it's not "real" science until you start communicating with others and allow others to attack your ideas. Only then can you BEGIN to hope that your ideas are correct!
Science is really philosophy. It's an effort to understand reality the way it is.
I'll first go through the beliefs you have to hold, without evidence, before you can even do science, then I'll correct your model on what science actually is.
To understand WHY the beliefs are important, you must think ONLY of this one idea: What set of beliefs would cause someone to actively experiment and theorize about the universe? What set of beliefs would cause someone to never do such a thing? This is the key. If a person holds the "wrong" beliefs, then they cannot do science.
In short, if the beliefs lead people to think that experimentation and theorizing is a pointless exercise, then it is not good enough to do science. Only a set of beliefs that would compel people to do such a thing are valid.
Core beliefs:
* The universe exists.
* The universe is governed by a set of rules or laws that are consistent.
* Humans (our minds, rather) are not part of the universe and exempt from the laws that govern the universe. We can think and act free from the constraints of the universe.
* There is a mind (God) that comprehends all the laws that govern the universe.
* We have the ability to comprehend the universe like this mind does. (We can become like God.)
* God is communicating with us the ideas about how the universe works.
* We are also being manipulated by other minds who do not understand the universe or intend to deceive us. (demons, other gods, the devil, whatever you want to call them. But this also includes other people.)
* There is a way to discern truth from deception, and that way is to ask the universe what is real and what is not (experimentation) as well as realizing that the universe must make sense (rational thought).
* Even though we think we are rational, we are not. We must allow others to correct our wrong ideas by sharing those ideas with others. We must become aware of confounding ideas and biases, and actively try to eliminate them.
* We are morally compelled to investigate claims about the universe from any source, discern truth from error, and obtain for ourselves more information about the universe from God.
All of these beliefs are necessary. Anyone who does not hold all of these beliefs cannot be considered a scientist.
Now, the process of science works like this:
* Observe.
* COMMUNICATE YOUR OBSERVATIONS.
* Develop tools to measure and compare and categorize things you see.
* COMMUNICATE THE TOOLS AND CONCEPTS WITH OTHERS TO COMPARE!
* Obtain ideas about how things relate to each other, from ANY source, including prayer, dreams, the Bible, other religions, or anything. Literally, "I saw it in a dream" is a perfectly good place to start a new theory.
* COMMUNICATE YOUR STRANGE IDEAS!
* Propose experiments to test those ideas. Since we cannot prove a theory true, we must experiment to prove it false. (Anyone who says "X proves Y true" knows nothing about what "prove" and "true" mean.)
* COMMUNICATE THE PROPOSED EXPERIMENTS!
* Actually perform experiments. Many times. By different people in different places at different times and in different circumstances.
* COMMUNICATE THE OBSERVATIONS OF THE EXPERIMENTS!
* Use actual observed evidence to contradict ideas people have about the universe.
* TELL PEOPLE THEY ARE WRONG AND STUPID AND THEIR IDEAS ARE BAD!
* Repeat forever.
Notice -- the COMMUNICATION part is what makes science different. You can do all the experimentation and theorizing you want on your own, but it's not "real" science until you start communicating with others and allow others to attack your ideas. Only then can you BEGIN to hope that your ideas are correct!
religious nonsense
===
===
That's true. Modern science, at least what we are told is "science", is religious nonsense.
Meanwhile, all of the pioneers who laid the foundation for modern science despite 10k+ years of human history did so because of their devout faith in the real Christ, which is the exact opposite of religious nonsense.
People misread Descartes. He wasn't saying "I think therefore I am the center of the universe". He was saying, "Since my thoughts actually exist, the supernatural realm is very real. Since I am limited in my thoughts and often get things wrong, there must be a superior being who is always right (God.) Our mission, therefore, is to get information from the source of all information. This is the foundation of all knowledge and science."
And with those thoughts, he pioneered the way for others to discover true science via true religion. He solved the gordian knot that philosophers had gotten themselves tied up in debating about whether reality is real or an image of some other reality (Plato's cave) or whether we could even perceive reality (The Matrix, etc...)
He solved it by "I think therefore I am; I exist therefore God must exist."
Meanwhile, all of the pioneers who laid the foundation for modern science despite 10k+ years of human history did so because of their devout faith in the real Christ, which is the exact opposite of religious nonsense.
People misread Descartes. He wasn't saying "I think therefore I am the center of the universe". He was saying, "Since my thoughts actually exist, the supernatural realm is very real. Since I am limited in my thoughts and often get things wrong, there must be a superior being who is always right (God.) Our mission, therefore, is to get information from the source of all information. This is the foundation of all knowledge and science."
And with those thoughts, he pioneered the way for others to discover true science via true religion. He solved the gordian knot that philosophers had gotten themselves tied up in debating about whether reality is real or an image of some other reality (Plato's cave) or whether we could even perceive reality (The Matrix, etc...)
He solved it by "I think therefore I am; I exist therefore God must exist."
Toast message
The ones who preach "Climate change!" are known to be quacks.
They were caught fabricating data multiple times and admitting it to each other in private emails.
Even recently, it was discovered that HUNDREDS of weather stations in the UK **NEVER EXISTED**.
The climate change hoax is the hoax that just can't die, no matter how much proof that it is a hoax is produced.
I can sit down and teach a layman all they need to know about temperature and thermodynamics in about 2 hours, enough to know that none of the claims of so-called "climate scientists" make any sense at all.
I mean, what does "average temperature" even mean? If I have a thermometer in a pot of boiling water, and another in the freezer, does that mean that your kitchen is at 100 F? What does "temperature" even mean and how do you measure it, and what are the implications of "high temperature" and "low temperature"? What is "climate" and "Weather" anyway?
>The climate change hoax is the hoax that just can't die, no matter how much proof that it is a hoax is produced.
I mean, theres a massive amount of (((funding))) behind it, makes me wonder what other scientific theories have also been astroturfed despite having no basis in realtiy. *Cough* Most of Psychology *cough*.
He then got a job working for a kids science show in the 90s that was clearly propaganda. I thought that was pretty funny. It was like hiring a clown to ride bulls at the rodeo.
and when someone else posts their modeling that doesn't fit their chosen narrative-of-the-day, they'll act you're a scientific fool even though it's their data. like with the trump sharpie thing... the spaghetti model clearly shows multiple paths of the hurricane heading west into alabama, yet they fact checked him and said false. THEIR OWN MODELS said he was right. HE POSTED THEIR MODELS.
it's only ever been about money and power. they've been making these claims for almost a century now. and the year the UN founded the IPCC to save the world from global warming, their seminal prediction ended up being false.