The reaction to this is total brainwashed bonkers!
Here are the SCIENTIFIC facts stated from this objective, independent atmospheric scientist:
CO2 Finally Exonerated!!
17 responses |
Started by metmike - March 2, 2025, 8:56 p.m.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/110244/
Re: Re: CO2 Finally Exonerated!!
By metmike - Feb. 12, 2026, 3:36 p.m.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/110244/#117897
++++++++++++++++
Seriously????
The Clean Air Act and all of its major amendments that were responsible for cleaning up our country's air were not repealed! Not 1 iota!!
The absurd, scientific lie that CO2 is a pollutant to be regulated, not a beneficial gas was overturned.
They hijacked climate science, even rewrote climate history (to wipe out the Medieval Warm Period-1,000+ years ago and Holocene Climate Optimum-6,000+ years ago). They did it for political agenda, crony capitalism and scientific bias and prostitution to obtain billions in grants and funding.
And the majority got dragged along because they didn't sincerely practice the scientific method, use critical thinking and because of cognitive bias.
The authentic science in every atmospheric realm dealing with CO2 under 1,000 parts per million is crystal clear that CO2 is a beneficial gas.
In climate, meteorology, biology, agronomy/plant science, zoology, anthropology, environmentalism.........all of them. CO2 below 1,000 parts per million is a massively beneficial gas to almost all life on planet earth.
There is plenty of REAL pollution on this planet!
The real environmental crisis's
31 responses |
Started by metmike - April 10, 2019, 7:11 p.m.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/27498/
++++++++++++++++
Instead of fighting that as a #1 priority, crony capitalists are getting rich on really dumb, fake environmental projects like sequestering CO2 in the ground.
Dumbest idea in history
Started by metmike - Feb. 12, 2022, 2:53 a.m.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/81707/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clean_Air_Act_(United_States)
When I took over MarketForum in 2018, exposing the FAKE Climate Crisis was one of my top priorities.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/27794/
By metmike - April 14, 2019, 7:53 p.m.
We welcome all views about everything from everyone on our NTR(not trade related) forum. You can go there by hitting "NTR" on the left side of your screen.
Post something political or even better post something interesting to you about music, sports, science, history, gardening, religion............basket weaving.
You might be surprised at how many others also find it interesting.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/8383/
You might find authentic, objective views on climate change from our atmospheric scientist(41 years professionally) and practicing environmentalist to be of interest as they shine the light of truth on the fake climate crisis:
It feels great to know the truth.............even better to share it with others!
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/27864/
++++++++++++++
I stopped updating that thread directly above a few years ago but continued to make many hundreds of posts about the fake climate crisis, just not adding them to the thread anymore. Here are a few of the threads:
Death by GREENING!
52 responses |
Started by metmike - May 11, 2021, 2:31 p.m.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/69258/
++++++++++++++
Wind turbines killing whales too
36 responses |
Started by metmike - Jan. 13, 2023, 10:07 p.m.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/92174/
+++++++++++
Energy transition is a hoax
31 responses |
Started by metmike - April 15, 2023, 5:50 p.m.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/94557/
++++++++++++++
Life without petroleum-based products
Started by metmike - May 21, 2022, 10:46 p.m.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/84689/
https://www.aei.org/carpe-diem/video-of-the-day-life-without-petroleum-based-products/
++++++++++++
National Climate Emergency??????????!!!!!!!!!!!
37 responses |
Started by 12345 - April 24, 2024, 8:25 p.m.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/103492/
++++++++++++++
The Beauty of Earth
23 responses |
Started by metmike - Feb. 25, 2025, 10:20 a.m.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/110136/
I could literally, spend the next 24 hours posting fact checks to bust all the complete anti science nonsense being pushed by the vast majority of outlets right now around the US and world related in response to the overturning of the endangerment finding. Correcting them with authentic science.
Fortunately, I did all the diligent work with my independent studying of AUTHENTIC climate science and biology the past 3 decades. Showing the empirical data, analysis and reporting/posting previously, including the additions today at the links above.
Shared generously for the price of the few minutes of time that anybody wants to take to read it with an open mind. One that isn't captured by all the scary, false and exaggerated narratives which intentionally amplify the negatives by several orders of magnitude and completely ignore the positives which are actually an order of magnitude GREATER than the negatives for most life on this planet.
I could care less whether it's Donald Trump taking this position, Adolf Hitler or Jesus Christ.
The authentic science is the authentic science and in this particular case, repealing the endangerment finding overturned an egregious violation of the authentic science that was based on enriching crony capitalists, political agenda and blatantly corrupted and biased scientists.
It was ripping off American tax payers and worst of all, STEALING OUR SCIENTIFIC INTELLIGENCE.
Brainwashing us with junk ANTI science. Those are just words. They are backed up with solid, scientific gusto proof at the links above.
By metmike - March 20, 2023, 11:36 p.m.
With today's latest IPCC report, we can now update the IPCC's predictions. See the last year below.
World is ‘doomed’ without historic climate deal, UN chief warns ahead of Cop27
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
United Nations Predicts Disaster if Global Warming Not Checked
Associated Press – Jun 29, 1989
"A senior UN environmental official says entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000"
"Coastal flooding and crop failures would create an exodus of ‘eco- refugees,’ threatening political chaos"
"He said governments have a 10-year window of opportunity to solve the greenhouse effect before it goes beyond human control."
metmike: This prediction was made almost 37 years ago!
FULL TEXT:
https://www.apnews.com/bd45c372caf118ec99964ea547880cd0
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
United Nations/IPCC- 1989-The world is doomed without a climate deal with widespread, global crop failures.
United Nations/IPCC-1990-The world is doomed without a climate deal with widespread, global crop failures.
United Nations/IPCC- 1991-The world is doomed without a climate deal with widespread, global crop failures.
United Nations/IPCC-1992-The world is doomed without a climate deal with widespread, global crop failures.
United Nations/IPCC-1993-The world is doomed without a climate deal with widespread, global crop failures.
United Nations/IPCC-1994-The world is doomed without a climate deal with widespread, global crop failures.
United Nations/IPCC-1995-The world is doomed without a climate deal with widespread, global crop failures.
United Nations/IPCC-1996-The world is doomed without a climate deal with widespread, global crop failures.
United Nations/IPCC-1997-The world is doomed without a climate deal with widespread, global crop failures.
United Nations/IPCC-1998-The world is doomed without a climate deal with widespread, global crop failures.
United Nations/IPCC-1999-The world is doomed without a climate deal with widespread, global crop failures.
United Nations/IPCC- 2000-The world is doomed without a climate deal with widespread, global crop failures.
United Nations/IPCC- 2001-The world is doomed without a climate deal with widespread, global crop failures.
United Nations/IPCC-2002-The world is doomed without a climate deal with widespread, global crop failures.
United Nations/IPCC-2003-The world is doomed without a climate deal with widespread, global crop failures.
United Nations/IPCC- 2004-The world is doomed without a climate deal with widespread, global crop failures.
United Nations/IPCC- 2005-The world is doomed without a climate deal with widespread, global crop failures.
United Nations/IPCC- 2006-The world is doomed without a climate deal with widespread, global crop failures.
United Nations/IPCC- 2007-The world is doomed without a climate deal with widespread, global crop failures.
United Nations/IPCC- 2008-The world is doomed without a climate deal with widespread, global crop failures.
United Nations/IPCC- 2009-The world is doomed without a climate deal with widespread, global crop failures.
United Nations/IPCC- 2010-The world is doomed without a climate deal with widespread, global crop failures.
United Nations/IPCC- 2011-The world is doomed without a climate deal with widespread, global crop failures.
United Nations/IPCC- 2012-The world is doomed without a climate deal with widespread, global crop failures.
United Nations/IPCC- 2013-The world is doomed without a climate deal with widespread, global crop failures.
United Nations/IPCC- 2014-The world is doomed without a climate deal with widespread, global crop failures.
United Nations /IPCC-2015-The world is doomed without a climate deal with widespread, global crop failures.
United Nations/IPCC- 2016-The world is doomed without a climate deal with widespread, global crop failures.
United Nations/IPCC- 2017-The world is doomed without a climate deal with widespread, global crop failures.
United Nations/IPCC- 2018-The world is doomed without a climate deal with widespread, global crop failures.
United Nations/IPCC- 2019-The world is doomed without a climate deal with widespread, global crop failures.
United Nations/IPCC-2020-The world is doomed without a climate deal with widespread, global crop failures.
United Nations/IPCC-2021-The world is doomed without a climate deal with widespread, global crop failures.
United Nations/IPCC-2022-The world is doomed without a climate deal with widespread, global crop failures.
NEW: United Nations/IPCC-2023-The world is doomed without a climate deal
Planet Earth 2023- A Scientific Climate Optimum for most life-Booming Biosphere-Global Greening-Polar Bears +25%-Deaths from Extreme Weather Down-Increasing Crop yields-No Climate Crisis!
+++++++++++++++++=
Update February 2026: The world is doomed without EPA's endangerment finding that regulates CO2.
Mother Nature: The increase in CO2 is the best thing to happen to our world since humans walked the planet! Open your eyes and turn your brains on. Look at our greening planet!
https://www.fraserinstitute.org/commentary/doomsday-predictions-rely-flawed-climate-models
Three broad types of prospective models underpin the 10-year tipping point paradigm:
The outputs of these three types of modelling have varied since they first took the stage in the Second Assessment Report of the IPCC published in 1995, but it was not until the Third Assessment Report of the IPCC in 2001 that the triad of models would be assembled to create the new “tipping point” paradigm.
In the Third Assessment Report, three figures show the evolution of the separate model components. These figures show the 2001 estimated range of outputs for the three sets of models. One set of models (j) measures “radiative forcing,” (a surrogate term for the heat-retaining impact of the GHGs). The second graph (k) shows how much the global atmosphere would be expected to warm under a variety of futuristic scenarios. The spaghetti lines will be explained shortly. The chart on the right shows how impacts to the Earth’s various biologic, ecologic and social systems could increase as the climate warms.
The chart on the right is basically the origin of the maximum allowable warming targets defining the goals for global policies to control GHG emissions after 2000. The fourth bar from the left shows the point at which impacts from climate warming become “Net negative in all metrics,” which in 2001, was not predicted to be reached until the increase in global average temperature reached about 3.5°Celsius. That temperature point according to chart (k) was not predicted to be locked in by projected increases in greenhouse gas concentrations, as you can also see, until around the year 2100, and even then, only under extreme scenarios of future greenhouse gas emission levels. However, in chart (k), the IPCC has given us a drop-line at the intersection of the magic number of 2°C (the point where mid-range models of accumulated greenhouse gases assess that we’ll reach the tipping point into climate catastrophe). That point was scheduled to arrive in 2050.
This is how the “we have X years to avert Y disaster” scenarios evolved in subsequent IPCC reports. In the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (2007), the net-harm threshold drops to a range of from 1.5 to 2.5°C, locked in by greenhouse gas emission trends in 2020; In the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report (2014), the net-harm threshold drops to about 1.6°C, to become unavoidable in 2030; and in the IPCC Special Report Global Warming of 1.5C (2018), the net-harm threshold drops to 1.5°C, still estimated to be unavoidable by 2030. This carries through to the most recent draft report of the IPCC, the Sixth Assessment Report (2021).
But about those scenarios. As mentioned above, IPCC future scenarios are not based on actual real-world data for the last 20 years. They are speculative scenarios of the future, envisioned by special research groups within the IPCC research community. The full explication of this exercise in predicting the future can be found here. Critical caveats that often go undiscussed are important in understanding the scenarios and their utility. In the introduction to the IPCC Special Report on Emission Scenarios (2000) (SRES), for example, the IPCC explains that: “Future greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are the product of very complex dynamic systems, determined by driving forces such as demographic development, socio-economic development, and technological change. Their future evolution is highly uncertain.”
The IPCC further explains that a “set of scenarios was developed to represent the range of driving forces and emissions in the scenario literature… No judgment is offered in this report as to the preference for any of the scenarios and they are not assigned probabilities of occurrence, neither must they be interpreted as policy recommendations”
But there’s one glaring problem with these prognostications. They do not mesh with reality. In a research letter published in the journal Earth and Space Science, climate researchers Ross McKitrick and John Christy show that most of the models used to project climate warming as a result of increasing GHG concentrations exceed observations of the actual climate response of the last 35 years. The charts below represent different modelled estimates of warming that were expected to occur from 1980 to 2015, with the heavy black line representing the average of the estimated model warming. The blue line, however, shows the actual empirically measured temperature trend in the Earth’s troposphere. The discrepancy between predicted and observed temperatures post 2000 are plain to see.
The prevailing wisdom that underpins the sense of climate urgency in today’s policy debates—10 years to save the world!—stems from three sets of speculative models developed over the last 30 years by scientists working under the umbrella of the IPCC.
But empirical evidence taken from the real world suggests that the IPCC’s estimates of future warming are overstated, and what scientists have seen from looking at actual measurements of increased GHGs in the environment, and the recent rise in global average temperatures makes it clear that these “10 years to save the planet” invocations are based more on science fiction models and less on scientifically determined facts.
This topic is being updated more in the NTR forum, although topics that discuss fossil fuels are MAJOR trading forum topics.
CO2 Finally Exonerated!!
20 responses |
Started by metmike - March 2, 2025, 8:56 p.m.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/110244/
+++++++++++
By WxFollower - Feb. 15, 2026, 8:45 a.m.
Re: Re: CO2 Finally Exonerated!
By metmike - Feb. 15, 2026, 11:32 a.m.
I came back just to look, and WHOAH! Is this the same MetMike?
Found this thread, and yep, it is.
I moved out of the Boston metro, got a dog, and have just about made it through Fimbulwinter.
Back in Boston, they've done a massive development of the Seaport District. One of the worst decisions ever, as they did very little for access, the office and lab space markets cratered due to remote work and biotech overbuilding.
Ah, well. In 30 years the whole area will be underwater.
Now back to the main story, the oil markets finally realizing that Shirtless Pete & Brainless Don have created a mess that isn't going away.
This is a treat, seeing you back here, Patrick!
In 30 years, with the oceans up 4 inches, the area will be underwater?
I can tell by your nicknames that you must agree with me strongly on this current administration. I think that even people that strongly disagree on one thing(s) can find common ground on many things.
I'm swamped getting ready for my big chess tournament and will out much of the day Saturday and not posting as much as usual but this is awesome to see you again.
Mike
Chess tournament March 7, 2026
Started by metmike - Feb. 4, 2026, 2:38 p.m.
Fair enough, I might have been sloppy.
Boston, due to local factors (land sinking & the generally fast changes around the Gulf of Maine) & accelerating warming, is projected to have about a foot rise in the next 30 years. Tides there are very high - 8 to 12 feet, depending on moon phases and orbit. A Noreaster anywhere near a king tide, and a major flood near the Convention Center can happen with only that push.
Regular high tide flooding probably won't happen until the end of this century, absent major feedback loops or Antarctica/Greenland collapses.
https://www.bu.edu/articles/2024/city-leaders-need-to-protect-boston-from-sea-level-rise/
Thanks very much, Patrick!
From your source:
"If we don’t sharply curb emissions soon, Boston Harbor could rise between four feet and seven feet by the end of the century. In the worst-case scenarios—if the glaciers on much of Antarctica and Greenland collapse—we could be looking at as much as 15 feet of sea rise by the end of the century and an incomprehensible 55 feet by 2200, according to the most recent projections by scientists at UMass Boston."
I totally recognize the entire warming impact on the atmosphere from the physics of increasing CO2 as the result of humans burning fossil fuels.
For sure this is causing sea levels to increase. However, some of the forecasts don't line up with authentic science. Let me explain more below.
Mostly, this increase in beneficial CO2 has rescued life and the planet from near CO2 starvation. The planet massively greening up is telling us exactly what the response has been to life and the current 430 ppm is still less than half of the optimal level.
There is a near 100% chance that as beneficial CO2 increases(from humans burning fossil fuels), the planet will continue to green up between now and whatever year you want to pick because of the REAL law of photosynthesis.
For sure the warming is causing seal levels to increase, so coastal areas that have issues at high tides and with big storms will have EVEN BIGGER problems...........even as most of the planet and most life benefits greatly.
The biggest issue I have is with sources that greatly exaggerate all the bad things and never mention that massive benefits. And 55 feet by 2200? To even state such a ludicrous thing obliterates their scientific credibility.
One reason is that fossil fuels are finite. When they start running out, THEN planet earth will have the disaster.
You see, Patrick the greening planet needs more and more CO2 every year to maintain the demand base to sustain planetary photosynthesis. We can see this during the Northern Hemisphere's growing season. Every year, from May to October the planetary CO2 DROPS because there are so many plants, that come out of dormancy that they actually use up more than we're putting in for that 5 month period. The other 7 months, the CO2 goes up even more because our plants are dormant and the Southern Hemisphere is much more ocean vs plants.
Every year, those plants need more and more CO2, which gets sequestered via photosynthesis that converts radiation/heat energy into stored, potential/chemical energy.
this is what happened for millions of years which resulted in CO2 that used to be in the atmosphere being sequestered by plants/life naturally and stored in the ground as fossils. We are returning that CO2 into the atmosphere at a much faster rate than it was taken out by plants.
When we start running out of fossil fuels, which WILL happen, the rate going in will drop, even as the demand from plants/crops will stay elevated. Initially, the ambient level will stop going up(likely within 3 decades). Shortly after that, as the emissions continue to fall, they will not be able to keep up with the demand from plants and CO2 levels WILL drop. This is an absolute certainty based on math, ,physics, authentic science and common sense.
When CO2 starts dropping, it's only then when we appreciate how wonderful things were when CO2 was going up. Crops yields will DROP and with 10 billion people to feed, there will be widespread famine and starvation. The planet will gradually become LESS green. Less food for all life. The booming biosphere will suffer more and more.
So we should be cutting back on fossil fuels now.........in order to save them for our grandchildren so that they will be able to reduce the widespread, negative consequences of CO2 dropping too fast.
So these sources like the one you used project sea levels up 55 feet in 2200 are violating all the authentic science and truth. Not just exaggerating but telling a huge fairy tale that requires impossible assumptions that have no chance of every happening.
They are also never honest about the past.
Ignoring the Holocene climate OPTIMUM that was warmer than this. With less Arctic sea ice than this. Why do they never tell us about that?
Global mean sea level likely higher than present during the holocene
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11685612/
+++++++++++
I note that at this link below, that I've use 100 times in the last 10 years has removed some of the proven, scientific information(censored it) which defined the actual data and previous studies and rewrote the narrative to line up more with the current fake climate CRISIS narrative. I'm surprised they still left in the AUTHENTIC SCIENCE that I copied below.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocene_climatic_optimum
Temperatures during the HCO were higher than in the present by around 6 °C in Svalbard, near the North Pole.[10]
Of 140 sites across the western Arctic, there is clear evidence for conditions that were warmer than now at 120 sites. At 16 sites for which quantitative estimates have been obtained, local temperatures were on average 1.6±0.8 °C higher during the optimum than now. Northwestern North America reached peak warmth first, from 11,000 to 9,000 years ago, but the Laurentide Ice Sheet still chilled eastern Canada. Northeastern North America experienced peak warming 4,000 years later. Along the Arctic Coastal Plain in Alaska, there are indications of summer temperatures 2–3 °C warmer than now.[11] Research indicates that the Arctic had less sea ice than now.[12] The Greenland Ice Sheet thinned, particularly at its margins.[13] In addition to being warmer, Arctic Alaska also became wetter
+++++++++++++++++++
That was one heck of a Winter Storm you guys had!!!!
Nor'Easter
21 responses |
Started by mikempt - Feb. 22, 2026, 12:53 p.m.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/118086/