Rather than discussing this in a thread about another topic, it's best to move it here:
Middle East 7-20-25
22 responses |
Started by commodityman - July 20, 2025, 9:18 a.m.
By metmike - July 23, 2025, 3:49 p.m.
With regards to Obama. I may disagree with much of that, however there is actually a great point in there that relates to the fake climate crisis.
1. Obama was awarded the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize. The world was like.........WTF, he just got elected and didn't do anything yet. It was meant as a bribe by the very political members of the committee to influence Obama towards global socialism agenda, including the FAKE climate crisis scheme to spread the wealth from rich to poor countries.
https://thehill.com/opinion/columnists/david-keene/52226-nobel-committee-is-a-fraud/
++++++++++++++++
Re: Re: Re: US Climate Is Getting Less Extreme, Not More
By metmike - Jan. 20, 2023, 2:48 p.m.
2. The EPA, under Obama ruled that CO2 is a pollutant so that they could regulate it to save the planet. CO2 is a beneficial gas and at 430 parts per million, is less than half the optimal level for life. The planet was having an extremely low, CO2 drought over 100 years ago with levels below 300 ppm. Plants were shutting down. We rescued the planet from a near crisis low level of beneficial CO2. That's why the planet has GREENED UP by 30% in the last CENTURY. How are we killing the planet from "carbon" pollution that is massively greening it up??? We aren't because this is a climate optimum.
3. This side, constantly referring to CO2 as "carbon pollution" is using retarded, junk science. CO2 is a beneficial gas and the building block of life. Like hundreds of other MOLECULES/ things, it just happens to have an atom of C in it. This would be exactly like calling H2O, Hydrogen pollution because there is an atom of hydrogen in that MOLECULE.
Re: Re: Re: The Beauty of Earth
By metmike - March 3, 2025, 5:18 p.m.
4. The 2015 Paris Climate Accord is the biggest, fraudulent global joke in history, especially Obama's role, claiming that they had China on board. Twisting all the authentic facts about China that was exactly NOT on board.
https://www.obama.org/stories/paris-climate-agreement/
+++++++++++++
Re: Re: US Climate Is Getting Less Extreme, Not More
By metmike - Jan. 20, 2023, 2:34 p.m.
++++++++++
Re: Re: Re: US Climate Is Getting Less Extreme, Not More
By metmike - Jan. 20, 2023, 2:48 p.m.
I'm a practicing environmentalist. If we wanted to help the planet to survive, we would be adding even MORE beneficial CO2 to green it up and feed life. CO2 is the building block of life.
Therealenvironmental crisis's
31 responses |
Started by metmike - April 10, 2019, 7:11 p.m.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/27498/
+++++++++++++
This is the authentic science:
DeathbyGREENING!
Started bymetmike - May 11, 2021, 2:31 p.m.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/69258/
++++++++
CO2 IS in fact a greenhouse gas that has warmed the planet beneficially by almost 2 deg. F, mostly the coldest places of the higher latitudes of the Northern Hemisphere. It's also increased rains by 7% because the warmer air can hold more moisture. Also increases the intensity of some hurricanes from rapid intensification over water that is 1 Deg C warmer. Also, increases the intensity of heat waves slightly over deserts and some drier continental areas. In humid areas, the radiation absorption bands are already saturated from H2O and there is less increase in heat waves.
However, the benefits outweigh the negatives to THE PLANET by over 10 times. Our REAL pollution and unsustainable OVER consumption of natural resources IS hurting the planet badly.
However, our releasing CO2 from burning fossil fuels back into the atmosphere where it was originally before getting sequestered via photosynthesis, then mass decay well below the surface as fossils is treating the planet to the best thing that humans have ever done for the planet..........increase beneficial CO2, the building block of life.
That's why we are living in an authentic, scientific climate OPTIMUM not a CRISIS for life.
Humans on the other hand, especially those that live along coasts or in certain areas have more detrimental impacts but even there, the benefits are at least as great as the negatives.
+++++++++++++++++++++++
Re: Re: Re: Middle East 7-20-25
By metmike - July 23, 2025, 4:36 p.m
https://www.newsweek.com/trump-withdrew-paris-climate-accord-hallelujah-opinion-2018851
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
By WxFollower - July 23, 2025, 9:24 p.m.
Mike said:
“Humans on the other hand, especially those that live along coasts or in certain areas have more detrimental impacts but even there, the benefits are at least as great as the negatives.”
—————-
Hey Mike,
That’s highly debatable. How do the benefits of GW outweigh areas along and near the coasts and certain other areas being submerged as the sea level encroaches on them?
Also, I posted this at a wx bb today:
“I don’t think it’s accurate to say there’s no climate crisis from GW. The combo of the melting of land based ice flowing into the oceans as well as expansion of ocean water has been causing an accelerating rise of sea level. Also, higher dewpoint air being able to hold more moisture as well as a slight reduction of avg steering flow due to a reduced temp. contrast between the rapidly warming Arctic and the significantly slower warming of the tropics have combined to cause a notable increase in flooding rainfall events.
That being said, not everything about GW has been bad. One great thing is that global food supply has increased markedly due to larger crops. This is due to longer growing seasons (longer period between freezes) accompanied by increased moisture and the ability to grow crops further north. In addition, plants have more CO2 to take in for photosynthesis. I’ll reiterate that had we instead of GW had the same amount of cooling, global food supply would be much, much smaller thus likely leading to starvation of at least hundreds of millions. Another mini-ice age would have been terrible.”
++++++++++++++++++++=
By metmike - July 23, 2025, 10:55 p.m.
Thanks Larry,
I disagree with part of that.
The oceans are rising at just over an inch/decade. Just over a foot/century. Though that rate is accelerating a bit the increase will likely be less than 2 feet the next century. NOT the 10 feet that some people claim.
And much of this is a continuation of the NATURAL sea level increase since the last Ice Age ended.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Past_sea_level
Many higher latitudes are actually seeing glacier rebound, so the land is rising faster than the oceans.
With regards to hurricanes.
Last time I checked, people along the coasts eat food too. 30% more food and cheaper food. You mentioned this already.
Going back to the "old" climate of the 1800s and the lower CO2 levels below 300 ppm would reduce food production by at least 30% and cause food prices to triple.........for people along the coasts too.
Cutting food production by 30% to world of 8 billion people? I think more than 1 billion people would die, maybe even 2 billion which is 25% of the population. Poor people wouldn't be able to afford food.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Death by GREENING!
Larry,
I would agree with you if you narrowed your statement down to Americans that live near the coasts in hurricane alley (GOM or Southeast), which is a minority in the US and an even smaller minority in the world.
They have a slightly higher risk of receiving more damage from a hurricane and more flooding because of 7% more moisture in the air.
Not so along the West Coast. Not so in most of the world along the coasts.
Mainly in the subtropics of the Northern Hemisphere and a narrow strip of the subtropics in the Southern Hemisphere.
Mainly with regards to property damage in those areas that might see a slightly stronger/wetter hurricane every 10 years or so.
So ~80% of the worlds coasts are NOT being impacted except for extremely rare events and the slight acceleration of the sea level increase above the natural increase the past ~20,000 years.
https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/climo/
NOT because the hurricanes are taking more lives. The complete opposite has been happening.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
By WxFollower - July 24, 2025, 2:04 p.m.
Hey Mike,
From you and some others’ (like the person I was responding to at that wx bb) perspective, there is no climate crisis. For others, there is. There’s no one answer as it is also a matter of perspective and also degree. It’s not black and white. For me, it is a crisis for the reasons I gave (mainly due to rising sea level as well as increased frequency of inland flooding rain events). I’ve felt that way for years. However, I also see the great side of GW, larger crop sizes. That’s something most believing it is a crisis would never admit.
+++++++++++++++++++++++
By metmike - July 24, 2025, 3:34 p.m.
Thanks, Larry!
This is what I call an indisputable climate crisis, caused by the exact opposite conditions that we have now.
In the 1800's, before the Industrial Revolution enriched the planet with beneficial CO2 and when global temperatures were 2 degrees cooler than now from the green house gas warming this is what our world was like:
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/69258/#109795
Global cooling and LOW CO2 levels are what cause widespread, extremely long lasting droughts with catastrophic global and huge regional famines!
Here in 2025, we are living in a climate optimum with absolute, scientific certainty!!
Causes and consequences of nineteenth century droughts in North America
https://ocp.ldeo.columbia.edu/res/div/ocp/drought/nineteenth.shtml
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
You want a REAL climate CRISIS?
This is what it looks like:
Can you imagine if this below happened today? It's less likely because climate change and the current climate OPTIMUM is helping to PROTECT US!
The planet had a REAL climate crisis between 1876 and 1878.
50 million people died. 3% of the global population died from that real climate crisis!
https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2017/12/15/causes-great-famine-drought/
https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017AGUFMGC51F..04S/abstract
The 1876-1878 Great Famine impacted multiple regions across the globe including parts of Asia, Nordeste Brazil, and northern and southern Africa, with total human fatalities exceeding 50 million people, arguably the worst environmental disaster to befall humanity.
NASA EXPLAINS THE DUST BOWL DROUGHT
https://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/news/topstory/2004/0319dustbowl.html
++++++++++++++++++
Climate change in the United States, with 100% certainty is helping to protect us from widespread severe droughts.
Summer Climate Change in the Midwest and Great Plains due to Agricultural Development during the Twentieth Century
https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/clim/32/17/jcli-d-19-0096.1.xml
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
We are indisputably living in a climate optimum for most life on this planet(that would still prefer a bit more warmth and a lot more CO2) and for growing crops in the United States!
++++++++++++++++++++
50 million people globally died from the Great GLOBAL Famine. from 1876-1878 FROM THE CLIMATE!
Compare that to what THIS CURRENT CLIMATE OPTIMUM (with technology) is doing:
Its not ALL technology. If we had the same climate of 1876-78 or any of the other 3 Dust Bowls in the 1800s, technology could not save us from millions of people starving because of the lack of food.
So how many people die each year in hurricanes?
It's not like we didn't have major hurricanes before the oceans warmed up 1 deg C over the last century.
This only goes out to 2008 but I'm short on time.
https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/outreach/history/
++++++++++++++++
So anybody can call anything a climate crisis if they want to move the goal posts to frame it to be a crisis locally or regionally.
However, a climate crisis is generally accepted to mean a GLOBAL condition.
++++++++++++++++++
It's indisputable that this current climate (optimum) is PROTECTING US from these widespread, long lasting droughts. You agree that there is 7% MORE water vapor in the air, correct?
That there is much more transpiration from plants across the planet because it’s massively greening up from the increase in CO2..........which also make plants more water efficient/drought tolerant and heat tolerant.
++++++
Now if we went from no hurricanes to these currents hurricanes it would be a crisis. Instead its some hurricanes slightly stronger and wetter in the places that have hurricanes.
The benefits are across the entire planet and a 30% greening and increase in food production for, not just humans but most of the creatures on this planet that eat plants or something that ate plants.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++=
Re: Re: Re: Middle East 7-20-25
By metmike - July 25, 2025, 9:02 a.m.
Larry,
I appreciate your objectively more than most on this topic very much.
The majority of climate scientists with 7 year doctorates would side with you and not me on this, so the consensus is on YOUR side not mine.
And in the 1990's, my opinion on this was quite a bit different and even stronger than yours about sea levels and hurricanes being a crisis that justified cutting CO2.
So what has changed?
Several things actually.
1. Up to and thru most of the 1980's, climate science, over all was honest. The Medieval Warm Period, 1,000 years ago was widely recognized as significant and similar to the current warm period. The Holocene Climate Optimum from 9,500 to 5,500 years ago was WARMER THAN THIS, especially in the higher latitudes of the Northern Hemisphere where the current warming was the greatest and it was universally called a climate OPTIMUM because of that warmth in some of the same places where today's, still cooler climate is a CRISIS because of, supposedly being too warm.
2. In the 1990's, the field of climate science became blatantly corrupted by the IPCC. What has happened seems almost impossible but I observed it happening and will explain further, Initially I was sucked in with trust and naivety, until the internet opened up opportunities for me to do independent study in order to obtain data, do objective analysis and generate comprehensive discernment independent of the hopelessly corrupted field of climate science.
3. A science cesspool of sorts where the VAST majority of climate science, suddenly insisted that these current conditions are BAD for all the GOOD life on the planet but GOOD for all the BAD life on the planet.
A climate crisis for all the good life, that includes humans in study after study. A climate CRISIS but somehow, the exact same conditions are a climate OPTIMUM for almost every form of the bad life. That defies logic when you see how the same principles were/are being applied completely differently(abused), violating the scientific method and open mindedness.
And photosynthesis, the source for almost all life on this planet has been downgraded to earning a very tiny weighting. CO2, the building block for all of life and currently, less than half of the optimal level at a very LOW 430 parts per million(the planet was in near CO2 starvation before the Industrial Revolution rescued it) is now a pollutant and is killing the planet, which is greening up because of the massive benefits from CO2.
If mainstream climate science had any objectivity or practiced the scientific method, then at the very least we would be seeing both sides. However, mainstream climate science has become hopeless corrupted.
4. The gatekeepers, the IPCC(Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) took control of climate science in the 1990's and since then, their reports have served as the bible for global climate crisis religion that the world's climate scientists follow with the same fervor and faith that followers of the Christian New Testament, Jewish Tankh and Islamic Qur'an use to follow their religions.
I spent THOUSANDS of hours, objectively and independently studying and analyzing the dynamics which caused this and the results and will share some of those threads/posts again which present the information.
There are several elements involved.
1. The one which defines the ulterior but altruistic motives that were the key for the IPCC and UN's agenda to make the world a better place is the objective to use the money and resources gained from extracting many billions(trillions over time) from rich countries and transferring that wealth to poor countries. I am REALLY good with this principle but not by hijacking and corrupting climate science. Even completely REWRITING climate history!!! It may be more effective than honestly compelling people to follow their hearts/empathy and generosity but the wonderful ends objective DOES NOT justify the blatantly corrupt means to generate the results. I would even be ok with the concept of global socialism, which this is if it was sold honestly as a way to help the billions of less fortunate people on this planet.
2. Crony Capitalism. Global governments following the INTERGOVERNMENTAL Panel on Climate Change have made trillions of dollars in funding available in subsidies and tax benefits to entities that invest in non fossil fuel investments.
3. Political Agenda. The D party in our country and liberal affiliated parties globally align with these objectives, that include helping those less fortunate and endorsing the concept of climate justice because, supposedly the climate crisis will punish the less fortunate people the most. Ironically, its the diametrically opposed polar opposite. It's the rich people taking advantage of the governmental scams and funding, 100s of billions in just the FAKE inflation reduction act alone. Poor people just getting by are impacted the most by the price of energy and the price of food, which fossil fuels and increasing CO2 helps to lower.
4. Scientific funding and peer review process. These have also been taken over by the gatekeepers so that it rewards scientists that follow the fake climate crisis narratives with almost unlimited grant money(for studies that have negative impacts on climate in them and nothing for those that would tell the truth about the climate optimum). Papers that find a climate crisis and ways to respond to the crisis are quickly approved for funding. Studies, intended to purely educate us about the authentic science of CO2 and its role as a beneficial gas???? HA! They are out there of course but need to find different funding sources, sometimes those in the fossil fuel industry and their results are vigorously attacked by mainstream science which defends junk science.
Unfortunately, a significant number of those that disagree with the mainstream, fake climate crisis narratives REALLY ARE DENIERS! They completely deny warming or insist that its all natural. Or that excessive rainfall events and stronger hurricanes will not happen from a slightly warmer climate. They make it exceptionally easy to vilify anybody that disagrees with the mainstream, fake climate crisis mentality by lumping EVERYBODY that disagrees with them into the DENIER category.
5. Teaching institutions. Starting from elementary school to higher education, our young people have been indoctrinated with JUNK climate science. 8 years ago, I spoke to 3 classrooms of students that were studying the weather/climate in their science class at a local elementary school. 5th graders. I discussed this topic, while not mentioning any of the science corruption because kids that age would be confused and it wasn't my place, as a guest speaker to contradict what the teachers that invited me there were telling them. However, I did discuss photosynthesis and the key role that CO2 plays and the positive contribution that CO2 was having to our planet that was greening up because of it. When I first hit them with this point, that the planet was greening up because of the increase in CO2, the main teacher that invited me said out loud for all of us to hear "Wow, I never thought about that!!"
And this was/is a good school, Oak Hill Elementary in Evansville, Indiana with dedicated, wonderful teachers.
She never thought about that because the school curriculum that she and the other teachers are teaching is indoctrinating our young people with fake climate crisis science. This was just 1 tiny example. Multiply that by 10s of millions of students and we now have an entire generation of young adults(working on the 2nd generation) that are completely indoctrinated in fake climate crisis religion by 3 decades of being taught junk climate science and junk biology/agronomy/plant science as it applies to this field.
This sounds like science fiction but it really has happened and the science fiction part is what they are teaching our young people about climate science that leaves out ALL the benefits, while greatly exaggerating or misleading on the negatives and completely leaving out AUTHENTIC climate history that proves this indisputably to be a climate OPTIMUM.
What teacher, teaches about the weather/climate of the 1800's (with much lower CO2 and temperatures)??
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/113338/#113418
NOBODY DOES! Not even in college. Not even future scientists working on their PhD's. If they did, we/they would all know the secret being hidden from us....... that this climate and these conditions are indisputably a climate optimum for most life on earth based on authentic science.
Instead of killing the planet from too much CO2, the planet is begging us for MORE CO2, since the level is less than half of what life would prefer(closer to 900 ppm).
This only sounds/reads nuts because we've HAD OUR AUTHENTIC CLIMATE SCIENCE INTELLIGENCE STOLEN!
By metmike - June 7, 2025, 4:56 p.m.
Human emissions of CO2 have rescued the planet from CO2 starvation!
The current level of 430 parts per million is still LESS THAN HALF of the optimal level of life.
https://co2coalition.org/facts/140-million-year-trend-of-dangerously-decreasing-co2/
Explore our extensive library of facts and detailed data to empower yourself with knowledge, educate friends and family, and join us in our love for CO2.
https://co2coalition.org/facts/
Here's an accurate description with the evidence of how they hijacked climate science then REWROTE CLIMATE HISTORY for their agenda. Seriously, they completely eliminated the Medieval Warm Period, (proven by 100 studies and long accepted by climate scientists) from climate history!!
Re: Poisoning the minds of young people
By metmike - Aug. 14, 2023, 9:34 p.m.
++++++++++++
Science corruption (IPCC)
Started by metmike - March 20, 2023, 5:50 p.m.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/93926/
+++++++++++++++++++++++++