Mod+ 234. GLOBAL WARMING, CLIMATE CHANGE AND OUR ILLUSION OF CONTROL

To clarify my point of view I'll use some occult wisdom. There is little doubt that the elite include themselves as initiates of esoteric thought, while promoting exoteric thought for the masses such as institutionalized religion.

This is the mural at the UN conference room.
Phoenix-UN-700x413.jpg


It is the phoenix rising from the ashes, it is meant to represent how the UN came to be from the ashes of WWII. It also represents the elites doctrine on this issue as well. In the words of the godfather of climate policy Maurice Strong.

"Isn't the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn't it our responsibility to bring that about?"

From the ashes will emerge a new order. The phoenix will emerge with them in control. But it won't persist, there are greater forces at play.

What I say is that there is another esoteric solution. That is of the alchemical philosophy of transmutation.

What most needs attention is the part of us that we seek to avoid feeling. When we have tended to that, we are changed, and the world changes with us.”

– Dan Emmons

1*ZZ_EHYKX1L79XoFulyVbNQ.png


If we truly care we could make the change otherwise let them destroy it to begin again perhaps death and destruction is the easy way. They still won't hold back destiny, it is coming for them as well. The collapse of this materialistic and sick society will happen one way or another it is inevitable no need to rush it. Everything is as it should be. Simply be the change you want to see.
 
Last edited:
On a positive note, increased Co2 levels a are "Greening" the planet.

greening-earth-data.jpg


Plant life is the great healer and purifier of the planet. True to their form, climate activists in the usual Orwellian double speak, will claim how this is actually a bad thing. No positive things are allowed only doom and gloom. Up is down, black is white, hot is cold.
 
You seem to exclude yourself from the comfy middle class.
I don't disinclude myself. I know if the self-proclaimed elites plan to eliminate us, I and my kids don't stand a chance. Like most people I don't have any other option.
But I don't include myself with the climate sceptics who don't want to believe the majority of climate scientists and acknowledge that our modern culture is anomalous, unsustainable and selfish. Especially when so little effort or funding has been put into finding another way to live.
I also won't renege on an environmental cause, even while I know what little I do is futile unless we all do it, just because a group of manipulative murderers have laid false claim to it.
I do subscribe to the belief that self-improvement is an ongoing and necessary practice, but again, we all have to get there together.
You can't change people. You can only hope, and keep fighting.
 
Plant life is the great healer and purifier of the planet. True to their form, climate activists in the usual Orwellian double speak, will claim how this is actually a bad thing. No positive things are allowed only doom and gloom.
I have never said plant life is a "bad thing". And it's not all doom and gloom, it is driven by a positive thing, called hope of higher ideals.
 
True to their form, climate activists in the usual Orwellian double speak, will claim how this is actually a bad thing.

I think all that consensus climate scientists assert is that extra CO2 helps plants only up until a point, and then it becomes a problem. Just like drinking a little more water can be good for you, but drinking way too much will kill you. (OK, maybe not "just" like that - it's more complicated - but the analogy holds at a basic level).
 
No positive things are allowed only doom and gloom.

You realise that you, too, are preaching doom and gloom, right? We're all being played by the elites, and if we don't do anything, then they'll have us under their thumbs - that's your schtick when it comes to the climate, right?
 
You realise that you, too, are preaching doom and gloom, right? We're all being played by the elites, and if we don't do anything, then they'll have us under their thumbs - that's your schtick when it comes to the climate, right?

I have also said I don't care about their plans, that I doubt it will come to pass. My only stake in it is that I am free to make my own change. Pay attention.
 
I think all that consensus climate scientists assert is that extra CO2 helps plants only up until a point, and then it becomes a problem. Just like drinking a little more water can be good for you, but drinking way too much will kill you. (OK, maybe not "just" like that - it's more complicated - but the analogy holds at a basic level).
Ridiculous! It's just more double think. The Earth is greening run for the hills.
 
Last edited:
I don't disinclude myself. I know if the self-proclaimed elites plan to eliminate us, I and my kids don't stand a chance. Like most people I don't have any other option.
But I don't include myself with the climate sceptics who don't want to believe the majority of climate scientists and acknowledge that our modern culture is anomalous, unsustainable and selfish. Especially when so little effort or funding has been put into finding another way to live.
I also won't renege on an environmental cause, even while I know what little I do is futile unless we all do it, just because a group of manipulative murderers have laid false claim to it.
I do subscribe to the belief that self-improvement is an ongoing and necessary practice, but again, we all have to get there together.
You can't change people. You can only hope, and keep fighting.

So what are you going to do? Continue being part of the comfy middle class you abhor?
 
I have also said I don't care about their plans, that I doubt it will come to pass.

OK, so, what, exactly is your dog in this fight? Neither dangerous consequences from anthropogenic global warming nor a takeover by the elites are on the cards in your view, so why the intensely assertive posting to this thread? What exactly is your concern if it is neither of those?
 
OK, so, what, exactly is your dog in this fight? Neither dangerous consequences from anthropogenic global warming nor a takeover by the elites are on the cards in your view, so why the intensely assertive posting to this thread? What exactly is your concern if it is neither of those?

I made and edit to that post. If it were to pass (I refer to Agenda 2030 that Australia is currently signed up for) My only stake in it is that I am free to make my own change. Here's the thing, I am not concerned. I have no fight in this.

The only danger is in the models that are detached from reality.
 
If there is anything to be alarmed about it is the very real possibility of the grand solar minimum. Being prepared and learning to live self sufficiently eliminates fear.

Is it getting warmer? This is a case of models vs observations. This whole ridiculous thing has nothing at all to do with science, it is about government policy. Why not try watching.
 
Last edited:
I made and edit to that post.

Oh. Well, I see nothing new compared to that to which I responded. I simply didn't quote the latter part of your post for brevity. I see nothing that would inspire me to change my response.

If it were to pass (I refer to Agenda 2030 that Australia is currently signed up for)

I am not sure how you meant to end this sentence, but as it is, it is grammatically incomplete, and I am not sure how to understand it.

My only stake in it is that I am free to make my own change. Here's the thing, I am not concerned. I have no fight in this.

Why change if there is no problem in the first place?

The only danger is in the models that are detached from reality.

How is this a danger, and to whom is it a danger? (Allowing that the models are detached from reality, which I don't actually accept).
 
Oh. Well, I see nothing new compared to that to which I responded. I simply didn't quote the latter part of your post for brevity. I see nothing that would inspire me to change my response.



I am not sure how you meant to end this sentence, but as it is, it is grammatically incomplete, and I am not sure how to understand it.



Why change if there is no problem in the first place?



How is this a danger, and to whom is it a danger? (Allowing that the models are detached from reality, which I don't actually accept).

Let me try again, If agenda 2030 were come about I would not be free to make the change I am planning. I want to change not for anything but my own inner peace, health and to teach my children how to become truly free.

The danger only exists in the models. It is not real, it is illusory. They are using fear once again to drive a agenda.

Go back and watch the video I posted, for the second time. Observations contradict the models.
 
So what are you going to do? Continue being part of the comfy middle class you abhor?
I don't abhor the middle-class and I don't have much choice but to be middle class, tho that doesn't mean i'm wealthy so I live frugally. But the middle-class are not all bad, they like art, the environment, books, social change, ethics etc but still human, so I think liable to self-interested motives. Who is free of thinking they know best?
 
They are using fear once again to drive a agenda.

Who? Climate scientists?

Go back and watch the video I posted, for the second time. Observations contradict the models.

Nah. I don't trust your sources and the inferences they draw from any truth there actually is in their propositional assertions.

[ETA: to elaborate, it is not that I am not open to being wrong, it is that I do not have the expertise to assess claims in this area, and that it is so easy to be duped into believing "debunkings", only to later realise that the "debunking" was itself flawed. I am not prepared to venture down that time-wasting rabbit hole. Instead, I stick with the rule of thumb that a group of scientific experts who have closely researched a situation and who have come to a consensus are likely to be closest to the truth]
 
I don't abhor the middle-class and I don't have much choice but to be middle class, tho that doesn't mean i'm wealthy so I live frugally. But the middle-class are not all bad, they like art, the environment, books, social change, ethics etc but still human, so I think liable to self-interested motives. Who is free of thinking they know best?

Hey I agree, but it is the middle class who are the problem according to the arbiters of the so called solution. Forgive me Alice but you seem to on one hand agree with the solution that is proposed and on the other acknowledge the power grab at hand that will target the middle class for a phony redistribution of wealth.

You posted....
But there's the rub, we might have to give up our 'expensive' pleasant lifestyle. Self-interest is an abiding characteristic of humans, as apparent in Schnieder's sceptical audience. They are worried about losing their incomes and familiar economic condition. Some may resort to survivalist solutions such as 'running for the hills' which of course is everyone's right, although not everyone's option. But then one has 'opted-out' and can no longer claim to be truly participants in 'the cause' which for me has always been the well-being of the Earth, her species and lastly the innocent and good of the human race. I will do nothing to jeopardise a movement that has that at heart, for then I am truly being manipulated, by fear.

I am wrong in saying this cause you speak of Is the solution by the UN, as in Agenda 2030? Which will target the middle class?

Is it a case of ends justifying the means? Sacrificing the middle class for the Earth?

I am not trying to be condescending, I am just trying to work out where you stand, it is not clear to me.
 
Who? Climate scientists?

Governments

Nah. I don't trust your sources and the inferences they draw from any truth there actually is in their propositional assertions.

[ETA: to elaborate, it is not that I am not open to being wrong, it is that I do not have the expertise to assess claims in this area, and that it is so easy to be duped into believing "debunkings", only to later realise that the "debunking" was itself flawed. I am not prepared to venture down that time-wasting rabbit hole. Instead, I stick with the rule of thumb that a group of scientific experts who have closely researched a situation and who have come to a consensus are likely to be closest to the truth]

Yes, a closed mind has no room for more information. And of course you don't want to listen to other climate scientists who oppose this nonsense.
As for the video You can ignore all the scientific data. What the video also shows are multitudes of failed predictions from your revered climate experts. There is nothing to refute in this department, it is all there as part of history. They couldn't have been more wrong, they have been at every step of the way. It's quite comical actually. You don't have to have knowledge on that subject, just be able to read and listen.

You see, it is not about science at all, is it?
 
Last edited:
ANOTHER CLIMATE SCIENTIST WITH IMPECCABLE CREDENTIALS BREAKS RANKS: “OUR MODELS ARE MICKEY-MOUSE MOCKERIES OF THE REAL WORLD”

Dr. Mototaka Nakamura received a Doctorate of Science from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), and for nearly 25 years specialized in abnormal weather and climate change at prestigious institutions that included MIT, Georgia Institute of Technology, NASA, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, JAMSTEC and Duke University.
“Global mean temperatures before 1980 are based on untrustworthy data,” writes Nakamura. “Before full planet surface observation by satellite began in 1980, only a small part of the Earth had been observed for temperatures with only a certain amount of accuracy and frequency. Across the globe, only North America and Western Europe have trustworthy temperature data dating back to the 19th century.”

Nakamura writes: “The global surface mean temperature-change data no longer have any scientific value and are nothing except a propaganda tool to the public.

“The real or realistically-simulated climate system is far more complex than an absurdly simple system simulated by the toys that have been used for climate predictions to date, and will be insurmountably difficult for those naive climate researchers who have zero or very limited understanding of geophysical fluid dynamics. The dynamics of the atmosphere and oceans are absolutely critical facets of the climate system if one hopes to ever make any meaningful prediction of climate variation.”

Solar input is modeled as a “never changing quantity,” which is absurd.

https://electroverse.net/another-climate-scientist-with-impeccable-credentials-breaks-ranks/
 
Back
Top